Situating Vulnerability and Exploitation in Street-Level Drug Markets: Cuckooing, Commuting, and the “County Lines” Drug Supply Model

• DOI: 10.1177/0022042619861938
• Published date: 01 October 2019
• Date: 01 October 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042619861938

Journal of Drug Issues

2019, Vol. 49(4) 739 –755

© The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0022042619861938

journals.sagepub.com/home/jod

Article

Situating Vulnerability and

Exploitation in Street-Level Drug

Markets: Cuckooing, Commuting,

and the “County Lines” Drug

Supply Model

Leah Moyle1

Abstract

The emergence of “county lines” drug dealing, a supply model which sees drug dealers travel

from urban hubs to provincial locations to retail heroin and crack cocaine, is now established in

the United Kingdom. This market trend has been associated with novel and evolving distribution

practices, yet arguably most problematic is its reliance on forms of exploitative labor undertaken

by vulnerable populations. Drawing principally on interviews with local drug-involved adults, this

article is the first to undertake in-depth analysis of their experience of risky street-level labor

in “host” towns. Findings suggest that despite violence and intimidation, many saw county lines

labor as preferable to other income generating activity, and contrary to popular enforcement

narratives, they often became involved though constrained choice. As such, it is argued that the

policy response might resemble one of building resilience through multiagency support, which

better equips “structurally vulnerable” populations to exit exploitative relationships.

Keywords

drug dealing, drug markets, vulnerability, exploitation, policing, heroin, county lines, addiction

Introduction

In 2018 the U.K. government launched its Serious Violence Strategy (HM Government, 2018),

setting out the various trends and drivers for increases in crimes of this category, along with its

proposed response. Framed on four key themes, the strategy incorporates some recognizable

policy aims including early intervention and prevention, supporting communities and partner-

ships, and implementing effective law enforcement and criminal justice response. Alongside

these traditional crime reduction approaches, however, there is an emphasis on a conspicuous

new priority, “tackling county lines.” While acknowledging the “important role” of drug markets

in driving serious violence, the document emphasizes the “exploitation of children and vulnera-

ble adults who are often groomed, coerced and subjected to threats of violence and intimidation

1Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK

Corresponding Author:

Leah Moyle, Lecturer in Criminology and Sociology, School of Law, Royal Holloway, University of London, Room

09A, Arts Building, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK.

Email: Leah.moyle@rhul.ac.uk

861938JODXXX10.1177/0022042619861938Journal of Drug IssuesMoyle

research-article2019

740 Journal of Drug Issues 49(4)

in order to support the county lines model” (HM Government, 2018, p. 47). So-called “county

lines” drug dealing represents an important development in the U.K. drug supply landscape. This

evolution is specifically concerned with the street-level supply of heroin and crack cocaine,

which is fast moving from a predominantly traditional “local” retail model, to a new “out-reach”

methodology where nonindigenous urban sellers expand their business by moving sales from

major urban supply hubs to new “satellite” markets in coastal and rural locations across England

and Wales (see Andell & Pitts, 2018; Coomber & Moyle, 2018; Densley, McLean, Deuchar, &

Harding, 2018; Robinson et al., 2019). Although drug markets have historically been widely

accepted as being characterized by adaptability, mobility, and connections between regional sup-

ply hubs and local market spaces (Hales & Hobbs, 2010; Matrix Knowledge Group, 2007; May

& Hough, 2004), the spread of migrating retail sellers that routinely control drug markets from

beyond local limits is a relatively new phenomenon, and one that renders it distinguishable from

traditional drug market structures for heroin and crack cocaine (for a full discussion see Coomber

& Moyle, 2018).

The colonization of distant drug market territories has also prompted the development and

routinization of novel and/or reengineered street-level distribution practices which enable out-of-

town dealers (hereafter “OTD”) to effectively connect the urban supply hub to coastal, commuter,

and market towns for regular retail supply (Coliandris, 2015). Emergent supply behaviors such as

“commuting” (Coomber & Moyle, 2012; Densley et al., 2018; Hales & Hobbs, 2010), for exam-

ple, allow OTD to travel to the new target market on a daily basis to sell drugs and then return to

the city hub location to restock product at the end of the day. For longer term stays, “cuckooing”

(see Spicer et al., 2019) refers to the practice of appropriating a local resident’s premises, provid-

ing the means to use the property as a local dealing base over an extended period. OTD habitually

target and recruit the labor of “vulnerable” populations to undertake these roles: dependent drug

users and adults with mental health and welfare needs (HM Government, 2018; National Crime

Agency [NCA], 2017) are commonly harnessed for cuckooing. These populations, along with

children and young people (Robinson et al., 2019)—often recruited from the hub city—are also

used as “runners”, transporting substances across county borders and undertaking high risk street-

level sales to end-users (Spicer, 2018; Windle & Briggs, 2015).

The NCA (2017) have labeled these emergent supply practices as a “national threat,” high-

lighting that 88% of police forces have reported established county lines activity in their force

boundaries, with 74% noting exploitation of vulnerable people. Much of the concern raised by

practitioners and through various media channels (e.g., The Independent, 2017) is, understand-

ably, elicited by the use of young people—typically looked after children, or those known to local

authorities—who are recruited by OTD in urban supply hubs to act as national couriers or “run-

ners” and face a number of risks including arrest, absenteeism, and sexual and physical assault

(Windle & Briggs, 2015). The machinations of county lines retail supply in host towns—which

are commonly reliant upon securing the labor and properties of vulnerable adults in host towns—

have, however, received comparatively less attention (Coomber & Moyle, 2018).

With a burgeoning array of media and policy narratives—including that of the HM Government

(2018)—coalescing to produce discourses surrounding the roles and relationships attached to the

county lines methodology, this article aims to add nuance to this literature base. Focusing specifi-

cally on the experiences of drug-involved local adults who are identified as undertaking the

majority of street-level labor for OTD in host towns (HM Government, 2018; NCA, 2017), it

aims to situate their experiences in the context of the local heroin and crack milieu in which they

operate, drawing attention to the structural constraints that shape the lives and choices of many

dependent drug users (Moyle & Coomber, 2015). While acknowledging the occurrence of coer-

cive control, serious episodes of violence, and the many devastating experiences of victimiza-

tion, this study seeks to go beyond the current saturation of intelligence assessments, Government

strategy, and prevailing media articles, exposing the voices of those who have experienced county