Global Methamphetamine Trends

• Published date: 01 June 2018
• Author: Matt B. Magness,Danielle M. Stoneberg,Rashi K. Shukla
• DOI: 10.1177/1057567717730104
• Date: 01 June 2018
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article
International Criminal Justice Review
2018, Vol. 28(2) 136-161
Global Methamphetamine
ª 2017 Georgia State University
Reprints and permission:
Trends: An Evolving Problem
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1057567717730104
journals.sagepub.com/home/icj
Danielle M. Stoneberg1, Rashi K. Shukla1,
and Matt B. Magness1
Abstract
The methamphetamine (meth) problem is increasing in regions around the world. As the most
widely manufactured amphetamine-type stimulant, it is the second most commonly used illicit drug
worldwide. Outside of governmental sources, few studies have examined international meth pat-
terns and trends. An analysis of secondary sources, including governmental and media reports, was
conducted to examine recent shifts occurring internationally. Meth serves as an example of a global
issue that continues to evolve and change over time. Recent indicators such as seizure statistics
suggest that the problem is becoming complex and expansive. Manufacturing and trafficking activities
are emerging in new areas and shifts in drug-related activities are occurring within and between
countries around the world. This review describes global trends and changes in the problem
internationally since 2010. The limitations of available sources of information are discussed.
Keywords
methamphetamine, trafficking, global, manufacturing, offender adaptations
Methamphetamine (meth) is a dynamic issue of global concern. It is the most commonly
manufactured amphetamine-type stimulant (ATS) in the world (Organization of American States
[OAS], n.d.; United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime [UNODC], 2014c, 2016) and ranks
second to marijuana in terms of use (Australian Crime Commission [ACC], 2015; UNODC,
2014c, 2016). Although the problem receives less attention than the opioid crisis, the threat it
poses remains prevalent (see Drug Enforcement Administration [DEA], 2016; Goldsmid et al.,
2017). According to the most recent annual questionnaire data submitted to the United Nations
(UN), ATS have outranked all other illicit drugs in terms of quantities of seizures worldwide from
1998 to 2014 (UNODC, 2016). ATS are synthetic drugs that do not require “the extraction of
active constituents from plants that have to be cultivated” (UNODC, 2016, p. 52; e.g., heroin,
cocaine) and therefore can be made almost anywhere (OAS, n.d.; UNODC, 2016).
1 School of Criminal Justice, University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, OK, USA
Corresponding Author:
Rashi K. Shukla, School of Criminal Justice, University of Central Oklahoma, 100 N. University Drive, Edmond, OK
73034, USA.
Email: rshukla@uco.edu

---

Stoneberg et al.
137
Similar to other drug problems, synthetic manufacture places meth at the intersection between
legitimate and illegitimate products. Many of the chemicals needed to produce the drug have
legitimate uses (e.g., cold medicine) but can be diverted or misused for illicit purposes (e.g.,
manufacturing). While the problem is comprised of three distinct but highly interrelated aspects
(i.e., use, trafficking, manufacture), this review focuses on the primary means of supply—trafficking
and manufacture. Limited references to trends on use are provided as needed but do not serve as the
focus. Because illicit drug supply can both create and meet demand, understanding ongoing changes
is critical. Evidence suggests the problem evolves as offenders respond and adapt to control efforts.
Data on trends in trafficking and production occurring globally and the challenges inherent in
tracking such international and dynamic crime problems are discussed.
This review of the global meth supply provides insight into the problem faced in diverse parts of
the world since 2010. The time frame was chosen because global indicators report increases in ATS
seizures beginning in 2009 (UNODC, 2016). Furthermore, 2009 represents the year when Member
States of the UN renewed their commitment to eliminate or reduce the global drug supply within 10
years (i.e., by 2019; UNODC, 2010). The UN represents one of the sole sources of information on
global drug trends, providing analyses of transnational drug markets and the impact of trafficking
activities on transit countries (UNODC, 2010, 2011, 2012c, 2013c, 2014c, 2015b, 2016).
The present analysis is aimed at examining meth supply activities occurring in regions around
the world as the problem continues and is expanding to new areas. Examining trends in supply is
important, given the severity of the problem. Despite numerous legislative efforts and significant
amounts of resources dedicated to stopping the supply, it endures. To the extent that trafficking
and production are increasing transnationally, an examination from a global perspective is war-
ranted. There is clearly a need for a more comprehensive picture of the issue. This review
represents a preliminary step towards meeting that goal through an analysis of information from
an array of sources.
Literature Review
Meth is a highly addictive central nervous system stimulant (National Institute on Drug Abuse
[NIDA], 2013). Long-lasting effects allow users to experience highs for hours. The drug can be
injected, ingested, snorted, smoked, and inserted. It is known by various street names including
crystal, meth, ice, crystal meth (NIDA, 2013), yaba (UNODC, 2012c), yama, shabu (European
Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction [EMCDDA], 2015), and tik (UNODC, 2014a).
Communities are supplied through production and trafficking. In the United States, declines in
production have been offset by increases in the trafficking of product made elsewhere (Shukla,
Crump, & Chrisco, 2012; Weisheit & White, 2009).
Meth is produced in clandestine laboratories via a multitude of recipes that change over time,
utilizing diverse types of ingredients and methods (see Scott & Dedel, 2006; Shukla, 2016; Weisheit,
2008). These can vary in terms of production processes and size. In general, three main types of labs1
have been identified: super labs, mom-and-pop, and shake-and-bake. Super labs, historically capable
of producing an average of 10 pounds each cycle (National Drug Intelligence Center [NDIC], 2011a;
Scott & Dedel, 2006), now have the capacity to produce signficantly larger quantities (see Associ-
ated Press, 2016; DEA, 2013; Wyler, 2013). Mom-and-pop labs, or small toxic laboratories, produce
smaller amounts, generally one to four ounces (see McBride, McElrath, Chriqui, O’Connor, &
VanderWaal, 2008; Scott & Dedel, 2006; Weisheit, 2008). Shake-and-bake labs, or the one pot
method, are the newest type and typically supply individual consumption (NDIC, 2008; Shukla
et al., 2012). Smaller labs differ from larger, more traditional clandestine labs; what once required an
extended period of time in a single location, can now be produced in a shorter time period in nearly

---

138
International Criminal Justice Review 28(2)
any setting (e.g., in a vehicle, outside, etc.) making detection more difficult (see Bland, 2012; NDIC,
n.d.; Shukla, 2016; U.S. Government Accountability Office [USGAO], 2013).
Because meth is synthetically manufactured, key chemicals—precursors—are required for pro-
duction. Historically, manufacturers utilized precursor chemicals such as phenyl-2-propanone
(P2P), ephedrine, and pseudoephedrine (Scott & Dedel, 2006; Weisheit, 2008). These precursors
have legitimate uses such as cold medicines (i.e., pseudoephdrine), agricultural fertilizer (i.e.,
anhydrous ammonia), and matches (i.e., red phosphorous; “Controlling Precursor Chemicals,”
n.d.). Despite legitimate uses, restrictions on access to precursors have increased over time.
Legislation
Efforts to respond to the meth supply have been enacted on various levels over the past several
decades. Internationally, Article 12 of the 1988 UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances served as the foundation of international efforts to curb pre-
cursor diversion (UN, 1988; U.S. Department of State [USDOS], 2014). This was followed by the
UN resolution strengthening systems for control of precursor chemicals used in the manufacture of
synthetic drugs, which passed with consensus in 2006 (UNODC, 2006). While both these directly
targeted ATS manufacture, in essence they remain unenforceable.
Precursor controls have also been enacted at regional, national, and state levels. The following
laws and regulations serve as examples to curb precursor production and trafficking. Regionally,
in 2013, the European Union (EU) strengthened controls on ephedrine and pseudoephredrine by
establishing clearer definitions and restricting the movement of these chemicals (USDOS, 2016).
At the national level, the United States enacted numerous pieces of legislation aimed at curtailing
manufacturing federally (see Shukla et al., 2012) and within the majority of states (see McBride
et al., 2008; USGAO, 2013). In 2008, Mexico banned pseudoephedrine and ephedrine, except for
medical use in hospitals (Cunningham et al., 2013). Australia has also developed multitiered
legislation at federal and state levels aimed at better controlling precursor chemicals. The Law
and Justice Legislation Amendement, enacted federally in Australia in 2005, placed the illegal
sale, manufacturing, and trafficking of precursors into the criminal code (Ransley et al., 2011).
Within Nigeria, the National Agency for the Food Drug Administration and Control has enacted
controls (i.e., authorization and permits) to better monitor precursor movements throughout the
country (USDOS, 2016).
Preprecursors
...