University of Twente Student Theses

Login

Dealen met drugs in je buurt: een onderzoek naar drugsproblematiek op buurtniveau in Enschede

Hoks, Astrid (2009) Dealen met drugs in je buurt: een onderzoek naar drugsproblematiek op buurtniveau in Enschede.

[img]
Preview
PDF
850kB
Abstract:Drugproblems occur everywhere in the Netherlands. More or less, temporary or during a long period, both visible as not directly visible. These problems haven’t been unnoticed by the police at district South-Twente. Drugproblems has been pointed out as main point for this district in 2007, mainly weedcultivation and harddrugproblems. Especially when there is a link with causing nuisance, the police find it important to act against it. The degree of drugproblems divers by neighbourhood. Why certain neighbourhoods have (much) more drugproblems then others, is not totally clear for the police. Therefore this will be the main question in this research which concentrates on Enschede. To answer this question, in first place the spread of the drugproblems in Enschede has been viewed at. Within this there has also been looked what type and appearance of drugproblems it concerns. Based on these data, some neighbourhoods have been selected for a deeping research. At this so called inventory drugproblems of the drugproblems at Enschede, there has been made a partition in a number of categories, namely production & supply, distribution, use and nuisance. Data about the period of one year of the Bedrijfsprocessensysteem (BPS) of the police and a file of the section Narcotics and Weapons have been used by this. This has produced 399 useful incidents, which took place spread across Enschede. The incidents concerning production & supply of drug, are almost in all cases a weedplantation. Most incidents in this category have occurred at the area East. Almost all cases concern a weedplantation here. The (sub)neighbourhoods with the highest numbers are ‘Stevenfenne’, ‘Velve-Lindenhof’ and ‘Wesselerbrink North-East’. The distribution of drugs concerns an amount larger than for personal use. For soft drug this means more than 5 gram or 5 hemps and for hard drug more than 0.5 gram. The distribution of drug concerns in the most cases hard drug. Most incidents have been registered at ‘Binnenstad’, it concerns here mainly hard drug. The distribution of soft drugs is mainly observed in the areas East and West. At Neighbourhoodlevel no striking numbers have been observed. Most suspected / involved persons of ‘distribution’ come from Enschede (64.5%). 22.3% comes from elsewhere from the Netherlands, only 8.1% comes from Germany. For the category ‘use of drug’ this means for soft drug the possession of maximal 5 gram drug or maximal 5 hemps. The limit for having in possession of hard drugs is maximal 0.5 gram. In total there are 38 incidents which belong within the category ‘use’. Of these there are 22 softdrug incidents and 17 harddrug incidents. The number of incidents concerning the use, is the highest at the ‘Binnenstad’. With a number of 3 incidents follows the neighbourhoods ‘Velve-Lindenhof’ en ‘Boswinkel’. Little less than half (44.1%) of the suspected / involved persons of the possession of drug for personal use comes from Enschede. 17.8% comes elsewhere from the Netherlands, and no less than 29.7% comes from Germany. What takes part is the position of Enschede near the border and the attraction it has on Germans from the city Gronau, just across the border. Within the category ‘Nuisance’ the nuisancereports have been divided across the links of the drugchain, namely production, distribution and use. Some of the cases of the nuisancereports belong to multiple parts of the chain, these have been placed under ‘several’. At this way it becomes more visible on which the nuisance is related. Most nuisancereports are related to the users of drug. There also have been experienced a lot of nuisance from distributors/dealers of drug. The nuisance of the users is the largest at area East. Area West shows the highest amount of nuisancereports concerning drugdealers. The highest total of nuisancereports has been registered in area East. The neighbourhood ‘De Bothoven’ with the highest number nuisancereports is also situated in area East. Based on this inventory of drugproblems, two neighbourhoods with a large degree of drugproblems have been selected, namely ‘De Bothoven’ and ‘Stevenfenne’. There also 9 have been selected two neighbourhoods without drugproblems, namely ‘Wooldrik’ and ‘Helmerhoek-Zuid’. These four neighbourhoods are used for a part of the deepening research. The deepening research is mainly based on neighbourhoodfeatures which are mentioned in researches of Skogan and Van der Torre as the causes of the existence of drugproblems at neighbourhoods. By testing whether the two neighbourhoods with and the two neighbourhoods without drugproblems meet the criteria of the theory, it is possible to find out whether the drugproblems are caused by the presence of certain neighbourhoodfeatures. These neighbourhoodfeatures are divided on three clusters, namely ‘Stability’, ‘Economic chances’ and ‘Drugspecific features’. For this, three expectations have been defined, namely: 1. When a neighbourhood has a high concentration of drugproblems, then the chance is large that is concerns an unstable neighbourhood. 2. When a neighbourhood has a high concentration of drugproblems, then the chance is large that this neighbourhood has a high degree of a lack of economic chances. 3. When a neighbourhood has a high concentration of drugproblems, than the chance is large that this neighbourhood contains drugspecific features. In the first place it has been investigated for all neighbourhoods whether there is a link between the amount drugincidents, and the presence of certain features in a neighbourhood. From this it appeared that as the neighbourhoods have negative scores at more features concerning the ‘stability’ and ‘economic chances’, the average amount of drugincidents is also higher. At last, the score of the four selected neighbourhoods on the neighbourhoodfeatures concerning the three clusters have been investigated. Neighbourhoods with drugproblems should have certain features according to the theory. Based on this analysis it has been identified that within the cluster ‘stability’ the influence on drugproblems of not all the features could be shown. Especially at the ‘average age’, ‘ethnic diversity’ and ‘the quality of the environment’, different scores have been found. In total it demonstrates that the neighbourhoods with drugproblems score worse than the neighbourhoods without drugproblems. The expectation ‘When a neighbourhood has a high concentration of drugproblems, then the chance is large that is concerns an unstable neighbourhood’ is supported. The expectation within the cluster ‘economic chances’ was also confirmed. Here too the influence on the degree of drugproblems of all features within this cluster couldn’t be shown. Especially concerning ‘the labour force’. However overall, concerning the ‘economic chances’, the neighbourhoods with drugproblems score worse than the neighbourhoods without drugproblems. This support the expectation: ‘When a neighbourhood has a high concentration of drugproblems, then the chance is large that this neighbourhood has a high degree of a lack of economic chances’. The third expectation, ‘When a neighbourhood has a high concentration of drugproblems, than the chance is large that this neighbourhood contains drugspecific features’ is less convincing supported by the research. In spite of the number not expected findings, in total it shows that in the neighbourhoods with drugproblems are more ‘drugspecific features’ presence then in the neighbourhoods without drugproblems. Although not all features scored as expected, for a part a good declaration can be given for these different scores. For this reason it is important not only to look at the numbers, but also to the meaning of these numbers and the story behind it. Based on the analysis it has been determined that the neighbourhoods with a high degree of drugproblems, score in more cases negative compared with the two neighbourhoods without drugproblems. The research shows that a large degree of drugproblems in certain neighbourhoods in Enschede is to blame to certain features of those neighbourhoods. It have also pointed out that probably some features have more influence than other features. 10 For this reason also, the recommendation is made to investigate the influence of certain combinations of features. There will also be recommended to be extra alert in neighbourhoods which have more ‘negative’ features present, because this research shows that this can lead to the existence of drugproblems. In this it is important to identify problems in an early stage and to solve them. Solving disorder must be well coordinated with the needs and expectations of the occupants. A good contact between the police and the occupants is important, because the police are dependent for a large part on them by identifying and solving problems at neighbourhoods. In neighbourhoods where this contact isn’t optimal, there should be invested more in it. This means that more time should be spend in being present and visible for the occupants. Occupants should be encouraged to get involved with their neighbourhood. By working together with occupants and other involved partners, the best result can be achieved.
Item Type:Essay (Master)
Clients:
Politie Twente, Bureau Management Ondersteuning
Faculty:BMS: Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences
Subject:88 social and public administration
Programme:Public Administration MSc (60020)
Link to this item:http://purl.utwente.nl/essays/60217
Export this item as:BibTeX
EndNote
HTML Citation
Reference Manager

 

Repository Staff Only: item control page