Shifts in geographical preference for illegal production and distribution of synthetic narcotics in Indonesia

Abstract

The escalating crime dynamics at global level related to the illegal production and distribution of synthetic narcotics also occurred in Indonesia with an average annual increase in illegal production of 0.2%, and 58.1% for illegal distribution. The selection of a location for these activities has become a great attraction for the development of this crime. The global assumption is that the selection of location for production and distribution of illegal synthetic narcotics has shifted. This assumption has definitely also become a problem in Indonesia. To conceive this problem, this study takes the theory of crime ecology, location theory, theory of structure and theory of rational choice in clarifying the perpetrator’s perception as is viewed from the social ecology aspect, on the characteristics of location to be selected for the production and distribution of illegal synthetic narcotics, through the process of interaction and rationalization related to location, techniques, as well as the target. Through the mixed method approach, data collection utilizes the technique of structured and unstructured interview to find the perceptual of the perpetrator, and utilizes the confirmatory technique to obtain a deeper understanding of the other variables that may contribute to the selection of location for the production and distribution of illegal synthetic narcotics. Lack of understanding from community and officials requires more exploration to understand determinants’ justification for shifting location characteristics for illicit synthetic production.

Keywords:

• Illicit production of synthetic narcotics
• illicit trafficking in synthetic narcotics
• clandestine narcotic laboratory
• synthetic narcotics

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Heng Choon (Oliver) Chan, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom

SUBJECT:

• Criminal Law & Practice; Criminology - Law; Policing & Police Law

Introduction

Each year, illicit production grows by 0.2% on average and trafficking is increasing by 58.1%. The choice of site for these activities has become a significant lure for their expansion. The surge in crime worldwide concerning the unauthorized manufacturing and trafficking of synthetic drugs has similarly affected Indonesia. The global assumption is that the selection of location for manufacturing and trafficking of unauthorized synthetic drugs has changed. This presumption has undoubtedly posed an issue in Indonesia.

To address this issue from a location perspective, this dissertation utilizes the Theory of Crime Ecology, Location Theory, Theory of Structure, and Theory of Rational Selection to elucidate on the actor’s perception as viewed through the lens of social ecology concerning the selection of suitable locations for illegal synthetic narcotics production and distribution. The study examines the decision-making processes related to location, techniques, and target with the objective of maximizing profits gained from these activities. The technical term abbreviations will be explained upon first use. Biased and emotive language is avoided, and a formal and value-neutral tone is maintained throughout. Additionally, consistent citation, footnote style, and formatting features are applied as per common academic conventions.

This study uses a mixed-method approach to collect data. Structured and unstructured interviews are utilized to obtain the actor’s perception, while confirmatory techniques are used to gain a deeper understanding of other variables that could influence the choice of location for the production and distribution of illicit synthetic drugs.

Numerous new factors were discovered in the study that describe the locations responsible for the production and distribution of illegal synthetic drugs over the past five years (2006–2011). While some of these determinants were previously identified, there has been a shift in the focus of the study with the addition of several explanations. The lack of understanding surrounding this phenomenon by the community and officials poses a constraint that necessitates further exploration to determine the justifications or trivialities behind the shift in the characteristics of the location for the production and distribution of illicit synthetic narcotics.

The illegal production and distribution of narcotics are a global threat, because they cause multidimensional effects. It also tends to escalate, as indicated by, among others, the increasing prevalence of narcotic abuse, and the progressive expansion of its illegal production and distribution networks, partially visible from successful law enforcement prosecutions of such cases.

Changes in distribution and production patterns also bring forth shifts in the operational areas of dealers and producers. Globally, the ecstasy market, which initially jump-started in developed European countries, became imminent in developing countries in many regions, including Asia. Narco-dealers adjust their production patterns after the supervision model for the production of synthetic narcotics. Although one region may serve as the origin of the synthetic narcotics precursors, processing operations may be carried out in other regions, in order to reach the potential market, because each region has its own challenges in terms of both its distribution and the type of narcotics being sought after.

The UNODC report released in 2011 (World Drugs Report, 2011) showed that assessment of illicit narcotic production should not be based on guessing work. To this end, UNODC developed a model of assumptions regarding narcotic production by utilizing three parameters: consumption, the amount of production, and the amount of precursor chemicals. However, this assumption limits the ability to answer the question regarding the increasing spread of illicit synthetic narcotics laboratories. This empirical fact encourages the idea of including sosio-ecological aspects of the illicit production and distribution of illegal narcotics, to look deeper into vulnerable regions with various patterns and trends that occur in the region, from the sociological dimensions of demography, economics, and geography, which may cause illicit production and distribution of synthetic narcotics.

In addition, it is interesting to study various trends related to motivation, interests, and goals of perpetrators (or producers) in committing crimes of illegal production and distribution in certain areas, vis-a-vis the social condition of the community in the area in question, which encourages the perpetrators/producers to carry out production and distribution activities in the area where the crime takes place. In terms of distribution, although one may observe the particular distribution mechanism chosen by the perpetrators involved, there are still many other sub-variables that one must explore related to how market access is established from suppliers to producers, as well as from producers to distributors.

Producers naturally constantly take into account the manufacture and illegal trafficking of synthetic drugs both globally and in Indonesia in order to escape authority as well as supervision. It is considered that, despite the fact that synthetic narcotics are produced all over the world, they are typically near to the regions where they are distributed. This area also avoids stringent oversight because it is not under the strict control of the authorities.

It is understood that the illegal production of synthetic narcotics occurs in locations with regional characteristics that are different from previous assumptions and moves closer to illegal distribution sites. However, it is important, to examine the prevailing coincidence where perpetrators in this dimension are also part of the local community residing in the area, in order to understand the circumstances surrounding the decision of the perpetrators (both as individual perpetrators or as part of this syndication) in relation to the pattern of location selection and targeted market of their products.

In parallel, the manner in which illegal distribution closely follows the location of production is, also applicable to the manner in which the place of production closely follows the consumer market. By exploring the pattern of distribution in several locations of the same event in the same time period as illegal production, this research is also directed at finding new trends in the mapping of illegal narcotic distribution areas.

The study of political issues in the field of research uses politics as a tool for analysis. It is crucial to employ the constructivist school of thinking while examining Indonesia’s challenges to drug criminality. Indonesia’s status as an ASEAN nation that participates in interstate politics can be understood using the constructivism method.

Constructivism has historically been one of the most prominent schools of thinking in the field of international relations. As a result of the failure of the main traditions in the study of international relations, such as liberalism and realism, this tradition emerged in America after the Cold War concluded (Britannica, 2023).

According to Taber (2019) constructivism is a key idea in sociology, particularly institutional sociology. Constructivism aims to enhance existing concepts. Earlier theories such as liberalism and neoliberalism, as well as realism and neo-realism, were unable to describe the end of the Cold War. Constructivism was developed to address a number of intriguing themes in international politics, including the dynamics of global change, nature of institutional practices, function of non-state organizations, and human rights concerns (Taber, 2019).

Narcotics, psychotropic drugs, and addictive substances are collectively referred to as ‘narkobas’. Law enforcement personnel, including the police (including the National Narcotics Agency), prosecutors, judges, and correction officials, all utilize a common drug language. These three chemicals are also referred to as drugs, narcotics, psychotropics, and addictive substances, or NAPZA. Practitioners in the fields of health and rehabilitation frequently use the name NAPZA. These two words broadly apply to the same three categories of chemicals.

Narcotics are defined as chemicals that predominantly have anesthetic effects or the potential to lower awareness of social disorders. However, Smith Kline and French Clinical describe narcotics as drugs that act on the central nervous system and can result in anesthesia or unconsciousness. In the definition of ‘narcotics’, this includes opium derivatives like meripidine and methodan as well as opium forms like morphine, cocaine, and heroin (Opioids, 2020).

According to the Research Corps, drugs are chemicals that alter composition and can lead to changes in sensations, observations, or vision. Loss of sensation, reduction in the intensity of pain, and potential for nerve dependency.

The larger body of literature on organized crime includes both published and unpublished works on top-level drug trafficking. Three conflicting viewpoints and sets of assumptions can be found in the literature, according to a newly published English-language summary and quo vadis on that subject (Regus, 2020).

A focus on security threats that are external to society at large, with these threats defined (a) for the US in the historical context of post-World War II worries about ‘foreign’ mafias (Paoli, 2020) for Western European countries by national and EU cooperation on crime and insecurity, for some developing regions of the world (Deridder et al., 2020).

Financial gain for personal enrichment is the priority, aim, motivation, or ‘driver’ that is most frequently mentioned in the English-language literature and in the literatures of all the languages surveyed. The market mechanism offers incentives to cross the licit/illicit spli. A comprehensive examination of crime includes drug trafficking (Ruggiero, 2017). In terms of higher-level trafficking, in particular, it refers to most as having no fundamental disagreement with the ‘social order that nurtures them’ and desiring ‘to prosper commercially without being disturbed’.

Among cocaine users and the general population, marijuana is the most prevalent illegal drug (Rabiee et al., 2020). Cannabis dependency is prevalent, with rates of usage among clinical samples of cocaine-dependent individuals ranging from 59 to 89% (Bahji et al., 2020). Marijuana usage is particularly relevant when discussing substance dependency, because it is common and can have unforeseen results when combined with other substances (Hawke et al., 2020).

Cocaine dependence is known to have ubiquitous and harmful consequences. The harmful effects of chronic marijuana use have been discovered recently. Frequent marijuana use alone can increase the likelihood of using other drugs and cause interpersonal problems, low motivation, cognitive decline, respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, and cognitive impairment (Fischer et al., 2022).

It’s unknown exactly how marijuana’s effects combine with the detrimental health and psychological impacts of chronic cocaine use, although there are data suggesting that the effects of taking both substances concurrently worsen (Kroon et al., 2022). For instance, Fischer et al. 2022 discovered that marijuana usage at intake was linked to more frequent cocaine and alcohol use, elevated depressive symptoms, and health-related outcomes among 186 cocaine-dependent people (Fischer et al., 2022).

Studies on how cocaine and marijuana interact in humans have revealed that doing so increases the amount of cocaine absorbed, while also increasing heart rate and blood pressure (Suen et al., 2023). In a laboratory experiment, Millar et al. found that administering marijuana to subjects before giving them cocaine significantly shortened the latency to cocaine effects and lengthened the duration of cocaine’s positive or ‘good’ effects while shortening the duration of its dysphoric or ‘bad’ effects (Millar et al., 2021). As a result, cocaine and marijuana users may take these drugs more frequently or at higher doses to obtain the desired behavioral and subjective effects.

The results of research addressing the effects of concurrent marijuana use on cocaine treatment outcomes are conflicting. In general, polydrug usage is linked to worse treatment outcomes than single-drug use (Bonfiglio et al., 2022). While two studies indicated a favorable correlation between concurrent marijuana use and treatment retention (Gharbi et al., 2023), two additional studies found a negative correlation between concurrent marijuana use and the likelihood of cocaine use or relapse (Daldegan-Bueno et al., 2021).

Others have been unable to link marijuana use to successful treatment outcomes for cocaine dependence (Rodas et al., 2023). Although most cocaine clinical studies do not exclude marijuana use or dependency, they may introduce a significant source of demographic variation. Therefore, a preliminary study is required to comprehend the possible significant variations between cocaine users who also use marijuana and those who do not (Rafiei et al., 2021).

Cocaine dependence is known to have ubiquitous and harmful consequences. The harmful effects of chronic marijuana use have been discovered recently. Regular marijuana use can cause respiratory and cardiovascular problems, interpersonal issues, diminished motivation, and cognitive impairment.

Many researchers share common arguments that the illegal narcotics market is usually located in socially disorganized areas. Yosias (2020) suggested that the illegal narcotic market would most likely be located in an economically low area. Hochstetler and Peters (2023) found that the illegal narcotic market is concentrated in demographically vulnerable areas, and the main element of vulnerability is the racial/ethnic composition of the population. Areas where minorities predominate in demographics are those where the arrest of illegal drug sales is the highest. The physical environment in this area is characterized by low formal income and low levels of educational attainment (Salvi et al., 2023).

Some researchers have also analyzed the location of the illegal narcotics market from a geographical perspective. Hochstetler and Peters (2023) concluded that the illegal narcotics market is usually clustered along arterial routes or around nodes from legitimate routine activities Fischer et al. (2022) conclude that the illegal narcotics market is spatially concentrated due to the ‘agglomeration economy’. He argued that the location of illegal narcotic markets, such as car sales locations,; is the most profitable option for its activities, and many illegal narcotic buyers are scattered in this typical location.

Goodman-Meza et al. (2021) sought to determine the spatial pattern of captured narcotic abuse, and identify the socioeconomic relationships of narcotic abuse centers in Mexico City. Spatial statistics were used to detect four points of marijuana abuse and three points of cocaine abuse (Ng & Chang, 2022). The statistical relationship and differences in the tests show that the main locations for marijuana abuse have better housing conditions, and more women are heads of households. Conversely, no socioeconomic relationship has been established regarding cocaine abuse (Gerra et al., 2020).

Why do narcotic activities focus on some areas in this study? To answer this question, there are two theoretical explanations. First, a modern formulation of the theory of social disorganization that explains the conditions of social violations, and public disinterest that triggers evil behavior. This is a new formulation of social disorganization theory because it excludes contemporary aspects of social diversity such as family structure, levels of social interaction, and policing approaches. Second, the broken window theory explains that abandoned houses, grafitti paintings on walls, and dirty pavements encourage evil behavior as they represent people’s ignorance of such delinquent behavior.

The results of this study may assist authorities in focusing on the core area of disturbance, custom-tailoring their plan according to community needs, and including the challenges in terms of violations in their planning process. It may also help local police authorities to pin-point targets more accurately and to more effectively prepare resources in the fight against narcotics and organized crime. The purpose of this study is to test hypotheses about spatial concentration in the context of narcotic crimes, to enable statistical interpretation to detect the location of potential centers connected to this crime, and to identify the relationship of socio-economic variables.

Ecological studies of crimes

Crime is an action or inaction punishable by law, resulting from the deviation of established social norms and legal prescriptions. Crime is an action or inaction punishable by law, resulting from the deviation of established social norms and legal prescriptions. Crime is an action or inaction punishable by law, resulting from the deviation of established social norms and legal prescriptions. Consequently, it is in the best interests of society to endeavor to prevent or decrease crime. The contemporary era is afflicted by a myriad of different types of crime. It is vital for criminologists and sociologists to identify the precise causes of crime while excluding subjective evaluations unless clearly indicated as such.

To promote clarity and logical structure in academic writing, it is important to use standard language with consistent technical terms, clear and concise sentences, and a logical flow of information with causal connections between statements. Various theories have been proposed over time to determine the factors associated with criminality. The biological theory examines genetic and biological explanations for crime while considering the notion of a ‘born criminal’ based on Darwinian atavism. Moreover, maintaining conventional structure is crucial, including common academic sections and regular author and institution formatting.

Citations and footnote style should be consistent with specific style guides, while hedging language and objective tone should be employed to avoid the utilization of biased, figurative, or ornamental language. Additionally, precision in vocabulary choice, grammatical correctness, and adherence to language-specific spellings and style should be ensured to avoid errors and inaccuracies. Meanwhile, the sociological theory posits that criminals are a product of society. Sociologists and criminologists have employed a multifactorial approach to explain the causation of crime. According to supporters of this approach, criminality results from the interplay of various factors, including culture, religion, political ideologies, family background, neighbourhood, economic conditions, topography, and media. Consequently, the study and analysis of the ecology of crime has gained significance in the field of criminology due to the widespread acceptance of this approach.

Ecology is the examination of the interactions between organisms and their physical and social environments. This entails investigating how living organisms affect and are affected by their surroundings. The objective of this scientific field is to comprehend the relationships between living things and their habitat, and to utilise this knowledge to promote environmental conservation and management.

Donald Taft suggests that the ‘ecology of crime’ may be investigated through the study of the location of criminal activity or the residences of delinquents, as well as through factors that are thought to influence crime, such as spatial distribution and topography. The ‘social ecology of crime’ (or ‘human ecology of crime’) can be defined as the exploration of the social and behavioural outcomes resulting from the interaction between human beings and their surroundings. It explores how exposure to diverse environments affects human development and behaviour.

The study centres on how the environment influences a person’s likelihood to engage in criminal activity, and their exposure to environments which are conducive to such acts. Ecological analysis of criminality includes the study of family background, neighbourhood, place of residence, values and socio-cultural patterns, topography, and other related factors. For the purpose of assessing the impact of these factors, the following theories have been proposed within the wider context of crime ecology.

In connection to the location of illegal narcotic production and its distribution, it may be argued by White (2022), who are fractions among the cohorts of environmental criminologists who have an interest in crime events, situations, and conditions that prevail over the area where the crime occurred. According to Abraham and Ceccato quoted by White (2022) environmental criminology states that crime must be understood as a set of Perpetrators related to space and time.

The crime of illegal production of synthetic narcotics, which is assumed to occur in a hidden location, is a reflection of environmental criminological thinking, in which the nature of the environment greatly influences the occurrence of the crime. The urban environment is conceptualized as a social organism in which there is a natural area, characterized by the presence of ethnic groups, people with equal income levels, and the growth of certain types of industry or trade. Communities in these areas are interdependent on meeting their needs. Industrial growth caused the three regions to develop rapidly, and formed what Park and Burgess called the concentric zone by mapping five regions, namely the central business area in Zone I, the transition zone in Zone II, the working class area in Zone III, the residential area in Zone IV, and Zone V is the area where the population changes frequently. The move from zone I to other zones due to changes in income and lifestyle has reduced community values and social control, which provides an opportunity for the growth of crime of production and the illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics. The emergent conditions of vulnerability are known as criminogenic.

With a level of micro analysis, where the ecology of evil views that individual organisms must be studied as part of a complete whole, producers and distributors are environmental prototypes that have the motivation to invade, dominate, or succeed as the migration patterns described by Burgess as a process of ecological change.

To investigate population patterns and juvenile offenders, also get the same conclusion that the causes of crime not only supported by individual perpetrators but also environmental perpetrators. Other findings suggest that it is not the welfare perpetrators that can lead to crime, but rather the lack of valid and long-lasting values, that encourage the tendency of evil characters, from people with irregular social conditions. It is important to explain the phenomenon of the rise of clandestine laboratories in modern residential areas that do not characterize the less prosperous/poor community. By considering the environment as an inseparable unit, it is possible to map the condition of social structures in the environment to identify and isolate the driving force behind the presence of a clandestine laboratory at any given time and place (Reiss et al., 2021).

Marketing geography in predicting illegal narcotics markets

The sale of illegal narcotics follows the same principle as the sale of legal products, to make a profit. Illegal operations also have the additional purpose of avoiding arrest. Sales location is a strong perpetrator in achieving these two goals Guan and Lo (2021) highlighting the importance of spatial location:

A well-designed location strategy is an integral and significant part of the company strategy for the sale of illegal goods, including narcotics. The choice of location is the most important decision for selling goods or services. Through the right location, goods and services are available to potential customers. Good location enables accessibility that is ready to attract a large number of customers, and increase sales potential.

Marketing geography has identified several strategies for determining the optimal location for companies, both of which sell legal and illegal products. One such strategy is the location-allocation model Guan and Lo (2021). The location-allocation marketing geography model consists of five basic elements: (1) the function of the objectives, (2) demand, (3) reasonable location, (4) distance matrix, and (5) allocation rules (Hinkle et al., 2020).

From various studies, it can be concluded that location is a determining factor in the occurrence of illegal production and distribution of synthetic narcotics. Place is interpreted as more than just a physical space, but with all the social dynamics that occur in that space, which become the rationale for perpetrators in considering various possibilities that can occur when committing a crime.

Various findings have led to the conclusion that a place with high social disorder can be chosen as a place of production and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics. Social disorders are characterized by a number of variables, such as low social interaction and participation, low social norms and control, being in a slum hidden area, and special locations that have adequate access. Various previous research findings are very useful in directing the focus of this research to the location and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics, which are assumed to have shifted to urban areas with different characteristics from these findings.

Crime ecology theory

Crime has been the subject of study by researchers since the inception of modern criminology. The Classical School of Criminology developed the first criminological theories in the 18th century and was followed by the Positivist School of Criminology in the 19th century. Various criminological theories employ biological, psychological, or sociological concepts to clarify the phenomenology and etiology of crime. Ecological theories of crime hold an important position among criminological theories that deal with the causes and nature of crime, as well as social reactions to it.

The development of these theories can be traced back to the emergence of the Cartographic School of Criminology in the 19th century, during which Adolphe Quetelet and Andre-Michel Guerry, the founders of criminal statistics, established the factual grounds for the advancement of positivist learning. The researchers analysed the initial criminal statistics from France in the first half of the 19th century. They investigated the influence of various natural, demographic, and social factors on the occurrence of crime. Based on their findings, they created the first criminal maps, which were used in different regions and nations. These studies are regarded as the forerunner to contemporary ecological crime theories, while the Cartographic School’s social causation perspective laid the foundation for sociological crime theories.

Crime is an inherently spatial phenomenon and crime mapping tends to be point-specific. Although some crimes, such as internet fraud, tax evasion, and some motoring offenses like driving without a license, are more challenging to map, the majority of criminal activity and day-to-day incidents that require police response can be analyzed spatially.

Two important concepts that emerge from this are: Geography of crime studies show that there is a concentration of crime in micro-places, as well as a pattern of offenders making shorter trips from their place of residence to commit crimes. These areas, known as hotspots, are created by aggregating raw crime data to identify the sites with the highest concentration of incidents. However, it should be noted that most hotspots never experience shootings or murders. Hot spots, as they are defined in this context, are small areas with a consistently high occurrence of crime that makes it highly predictable, at least for a year. It is evident from this definition that the hot spot phenomenon is extensive not only in the United States but also in other locations. It should also be acknowledged that the triangle of crime involves more than just motivated individuals who are prone to committing crimes. For a crime to occur, a victim and an offender must be present in the same place and time, without any external intervention.

Hypothesis about weak economic status, ethnic heterogeneity, population mobility, and family disunity can trigger social disorganization, leading to increased crime and delinquency rates. By using the ‘zonal model’ city development model in investigating the patterns of residence of juvenile offenders, Burgess’s research results show that:

The cause of crime does not lie in individual perpetrators but in environmental perpetrators. They explain that adolescents associate themselves with crime not because they are more bound by culture or lack of intellectual capacity to understand the violations of the law by their peers, but rather because of the presence of causes of crime in the structure and culture of the communities where they live.

For special reasons, criminals prefer to live in irregular communities that are characterized by an orderly population, against moral rules, and a culture that is backward and unstable. Areas with social disorganization like this are labeled ‘transition zones’ in the Burgess model – models that tend to be less prosperous than other urban zones, but that is not due to the welfare perpetrators themselves that drive crime, but rather because of the lack of inherent social values that lead to tendency of criminal characteristics of society with social disorganization.

The crimes occur where opportunities for committing crimes are linked to areas known to criminals cognitively. Public transportation creates certain spaces that bring them to different social groups, and trigger criminals, and create opportunities for crime. Locations that have socioeconomic structures above the standard, differ from the view of Crime Ecology and Place Theory, where crime is concentrated in certain parts of the metropolitan area with high levels of social irregularity due to low socioeconomic structures.

Place theory in crime mapping

Place Theory explains why a crime occurs in a specific place, focusing on a specific location, street corner, or the specific place where the crime occurred. Place Theory is suitable for mapping out crimes that occur in specific places, because it describes how criminals find their targets while the targets are doing their jobs normally.

Crimes within the scope of this theory are concentrated in locations where public activities occur. The originators of the crime are in the comfort zone. People who do not operate according to their role, or are close to the locations used by criminals, have a low risk of becoming victims. This is because, after all, the risk is always close to the area that is the route of criminals and the location of operations where people are at higher risk of becoming crime victims.

The rationale for this theory is that the zone closest to the city environment, which has a prevalence of social ills, especially unemployment, poverty, low social services, and high transmission of disease called social disorganization, is a concentric zone. Other thoughts explain natural areas with a mix of social and demographic characteristics. Areas with higher juvenile delinquency rates were defined as those with low community control and emphasized area characteristics, including physical deterioration, ethnic heterogeneity, and low rental costs (Chicago School). Based on this rationale, thinkers tend to explain or predict crime based on external perpetrators first, then on individuals, and individual interactions with the external environment.

Methods

This research was conducted using mixed methods by considering research problems and research questions, and by weighing them in light of quantitative and qualitative research. This method was used for both the collection and analysis of data. Quantitative data included questionnaires with closed models that were analyzed based on descriptive qualitative techniques and scoring. The qualitative data consisted of an open-ended questionnaire, which was used as a guide by researchers to conduct interviews with respondents.

The research design was carried out through multiple studies with the following stages: Documentary Study, which is a study of statistical reports in order to obtain information about the places where the production and distribution of illegal synthetic narcotics and the perpetrators involved. This will help to establish an initial profile of the place or environment in which most of the crimes and surveillance committed have taken place, as well as the profile of the perpetrators and victims. Criminologists began to focus on this matter in the 1970s.

A preliminary study (pre-pilot study) in the context of data verification of both the place and the perpetrator, recognizing the place of production and distribution of illegal synthetic narcotics, as well as studying access both to the place and to the respondent in the context of field studies. In this stage, the researcher raises unstructured questions to related parties, such as the Director General of Correctional Services, Police Officers and Government Law Officers, and the community. Questions revolved around the location and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics, the suitability of the data, the reasons for changes, and procedures for access to the place and respondent.

Field studies (field studies), in the form of surveys that ask questions in a structured way through questionnaires, and unstructured interviews related to a number of variables from the definition of what makes certain locations categorized as vulnerable (crime-prone), or safe, and observation.

In terms of data analysis, this study used multiple study techniques, where the data were analyzed in several stages. The first was statistical analysis using qualitative descriptive techniques to obtain data on respondents’ perceptual positions related to the selection of production sites and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics. Second, statistical analysis was performed using scoring techniques to obtain data about the level/category of each determinant variable on site selection.

Results

Ecological determinants

Social cohesion

(Table 1).

Table 1. Indications of social cohesion.

Indicator	Community		Social norm		Perception		Social Interaction		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Frq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	112	50	37	38.54	51	76.69	23	35.9	223	51
Do Not Know	80	35.71	35	36.46	8	12.5	10	15.6	133	25.1
Yes	32	14.29	24	25	5	7.81	31	48.4	92	23.9
Total	224	100	96	100	64	100	64	100	448	100

Source: Quantitative Research Results (BNN, 2011).

A total of 32 Research Respondents came from a group of victs serving their sentences. 51% percent of respondents, 51 group stated that social cohesion was not a determining variable for perpetrators in choosing a location. The remaining 25.1% stated, ‘Don’t Know’, and 23.9% stated, ‘Yes’. From several indicators of social cohesion variables, aspects of the population’s perception of the spatial environment are the dominant considerations for perpetrators. This is evident from a number of respondents there were around 79.69% who stated that the location was comfortable, had a good reputation, was public, and was easily accessible. And Only 7.81% answered ‘Yes’.

Regarding social cohesion, 4 dimensions were used to accommodate theoretical framework as indications of social cohesion namely social aspects, social norms, spatial environment, and social interaction. Regarding social aspects, only the religious sector had the highest score 42, with the highest score of 64. In terms of hidden location conditions, the perpetrator perceives that the location is not remot, has a good reputation, and the environment is comfortable. Of the five questions raised, the highest score only reached 38, where the score was included in the low category. As for the four other indicators related to the disguised activities of the perpetrators by masking themselves behind the activities of the population, the perpetrators fully grasp the benefit of having the activities of the population to disguise their production activities. This can be seen from the score of 45.0 in the medium category. In the aspect of the level of social interaction and concern for the population of the surrounding environment, 50% of respondents said no. It is also related to the absence of social norms that apply in that location, where around 38.54% of respondents stated no, which means there are no rules or norms that apply in that location.

Interviews conducted in an unstructured manner showed that perpetrators prefer comfortable and quiet locations, either enclave areas (closed/gated compound guarded by self-employed security elements), open public settlements. In any case, a social environment in which interactions between citizens are absent or minimal is preferable (Table 2).

Table 2. General Characteristics.

Indicator	Religions community		Population activity
	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	17	34	14	14
Do Not Know	11	0	16	0
Yes	4	8	2	4
Total	32	42	32	18

Source: Quantitative Research Results (BNN, 2010).

Respondents from community groups also generally explained that social cohesion at locations where illegal production of synthetic narcotics took place is usually very low. 61.7% of respondents said ‘No’ to questions related to the existence of social groups, social norms, people’s perceptions about the spatial environment, and social interaction in general. These aspects can affect the level of social interaction, awareness, attitudes, and attention of citizens toward the surrounding environment.

The above-mentioned data are obtained from locations with general characteristics of a closed location, where security and community affairs were handled by private management organizations rather than community ones, leading to a decrease in interactions among residents. In fact, residents in those typical locations dislike any form of interference to their personal privacy, which leaves little to be known in detail by management (Table 3).

Table 3. The Law Enforcement Apparatus Group.

Indicator	Community		Social norm		Perception		Social Interaction		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Frq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	114	60.32	28	34.57	52	96.3	30	55.56	224	51
Do Not Know	32	16.93	4	4.94	0	0	7	12.96	43	25.1
Yes	43	22.75	49	60.49	2	3.7	17	31.48	111	23.9
Total	189	100	81	100	54	100	54	100	378	100

Source: Quantitative Research Results (BNN, 2019).

Respondents from the Law Enforcement Apparatus group found that social cohesion in their location was sufficient. There are 60.49% of respondents who stated ‘Yes’ related to three aspects: social norms, people’s perceptions about the social environment, and social interaction. In an unstructured interview, Law Enforcement Officials explained that the location of illegal synthetic narcotic production sites was, on average, a closed area where Law Enforcement did not see any interaction between citizens. The authorities themselves have difficulty knowing the activities in detail, considering that the scope of management of residences’ authorities is generally confined to environmental cleanliness and safety aspects only.

Remote Area

(Table 4).

Table 4. Remote Area.

Indicator	Remote area		Population activity		Business activity		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	69	71.875	11	34.4	46	47.92	126	51
Do Not Know	6	6.25	4	12.5	11	11.46	21	25.1
Yes	21	21.88	17	53.1	39	40.63	77	23.9
Total	96	100	32	100	96	100	224	100

Source: Quantitative Research Results (Tempo, 2019).

From the research conducted on Respondents from the Convict group who were serving a sentence, data obtained that 71.875% of respondents stated ‘No’ to the 9 questions raised consisting of 3 aspects related to whether the location was hidden, unknown or not public, and easy to reach or not; 1 aspect related to whether the location is disguised with the activities of the population; and 3 other aspects related to whether the location is disguised with business/office activities. Among the three indicators, more than half the number of respondents, namely around 53.1%, agreed that the place they chose was a residential area so that it was disguised with the activities of the population, and almost half of the number of respondents was 40.63%), agreed that the location they chose more a business or office area.

Further, information obtained from unstructured interviews indicates that the preferred location is generally an area with a high level of privacy that can only be accessed by tenants. This statement reinforces the ecological theory that locations used as crime scenes are generally hidden, even though they have different physical environmental characteristics (Table 5).

Table 5. Physical environmental characteristics.

Indicator	Remote area		Environtment		Population activity		Business activity		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	79	97.5	59	54.6	4	14.8	22	20.4	164	46.8
Do Not Know	1	1.2	23	21.3	0	0	2	1.8	26	6.1
Yes	1	1.2	26	24.1	23	85.2	84	77.8	134	47.1
Total	81	99.9	108	100	27	100	108	100	324	100

Source: Quantitative Research Results (Kompas, 2023).

The results of the confirmation of respondents from community groups were not much different from the data from Respondents from the Convict group. 46.8% stated ‘No’ regarding the 12 questions given. From the 4 (four) open questions and the results of interviews with respondents from community groups, we obtained several explanations about the 4 (four) aspects that indicate remote areas where the location of an illegal production site is, on average, a quiet place with conditions including housing or shop-houses that are rarely inhabited/many are empty, houses with positions that are jutted into the alley or even a dead alley, or facing the wall, and even there are other business activities, that are used to mask illegal production activities. Whereas 50% of respondents from the official group stated that the illegal production location was a remote area, which on average was a residential and business area, and became an independent area that was closed in nature.

Chemical Hazard

(Table 6).

Table 6. Chemical Hazard.

Indicator	Smoke		Smell		Color Change		Medical Effects		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	19	70.4	21	77.8	57	70.37	17	63	114	70.4
Do Not Know	6	22.2	1	3.7	11	13.58	5	18.5	23	14.5
Yes	2	7.4	5	18.5	13	16.05	5	18.5	25	15.1
Total	27	100	27	100	81	100	27	100	162	100

Source: Quantitative Research Results (BNN, 2018).

The chemical hazard variable, which is indicated by 4 (four) aspects, namely smoke, odor, color change, and medical conditions and effects, is a confirmatory variable in which the research questions are asked to the public and officials. Of the 6 (six) questions asked to 27 respondents, 70.4% stated ‘No’, which means that most of the respondents did not know or see, or felt the symptoms mentioned in 4 (four) aspects of the research: smoke, odor, discoloration, medical conditions, and health effects.

From the following unstructured interviews, this variable is very important, because it causes the perpetrator’s activities to be known more quickly by surrounding residents or law enforcement agencies. However, the characteristics and indications of this variable are rarely known to the public. This is because, according to the perpetrators, the existing indicators can be minimized by using modern equipment, to reduce tell-tale signs of activities (i.e. the use of exhaust fans to disperse smoke).

Accessibility

(Table 7).

Table 7. Accessibility.

Indicator	Time & Space		Material		Distributor or Client		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	31	97.5	59	54.6	22	20.4	164	46.8
Do Not Know	20	1.2	23	21.3	2	1.8	26	6.1
Yes	45	1.2	26	24.1	84	77.8	134	47.1
Total	81	99.9	108	100	108	100	324	100

Source: Quantitative Research Results (BNN, 2020).

This variable is indicated by the distance and time used by the perpetrator to commute from the production location to the location of the availability of raw materials or vice versa, as well as the distance and time to link up with distributors and/or customers to distribute the products. From the research conducted, in which there were 13 questions raised by researchers to respondents, 47.1% stated ‘Yes’, meaning that almost half of the respondents stated that it was easy to obtain raw materials and reach distributors and/or customers.

Respondents explained in the unstructured interview session that distance and time were not the main considerations because the perpetrators already had a special network of raw material suppliers, distributors, and buyers, and the time and distance of purchasing raw materials had no effect on production time. Purchases are made in instalments to purchase gradually in small amounts – to facilitate easier transportation and reduce people’s suspicion.

Ecological determinant scoring

The results of the field research identified four common views shared by perpetrators, the public, and law enforcement officials in viewing the location of illegal production and distribution from an ecological perspective. This similarity is related to social cohesion and hidden locations. In terms of social cohesion, the three groups of respondents stated that social interaction was low, but the population’s perception of the spatial environment was good. While related to hidden locations, the three groups of respondents stated that the location was indeed disguised, either partially disguised by residents’ activities, or some other disguised by business/office activities. Ecological disorganization in these locations, supported by the absence of prevailing social norms, serves as the basis for perpetrators to choose those locations (Table 8).

Table 8. Ecological perspective.

Dimension	Determinant Variabel	Indicator	Aspect	Item	Category/Indicator	Category/Variabel
ECOLOGY	Social Cohession	Social Organization	Religion Community	High (42)	Modest (193)	Modest (425)
			PDD Meeting	Modest (31)
			Social Organization	Modest (37)
			Youth Organizaton	Modest (26)
			Civilization Groups	Low (21)
			Political Groups	Low (18)
			Activity	Low (18)
		Social Norm	Regulations	Modest (37)	Modest (85)
			Social sanctions	Modest (29)
			Sanctions	Low (19)
		People Perception	Bad Reputation	Modest (28)	Modest (61)
			Bad Environtmental	Modest (33)
		Social Interaction	Low interaction	High (43)	High (86)
			Low concern for environtmental	Modest (64)
	Remote Area	Remote Area	Hidden	Modest (37)	Modest (111)	Modest (280)
			Hard to reach	Modest (36)
			Unknown	Modest (38)
		Disguse	Disguise Population	High (45)	High (45)
		Disguise with business activity	Disguise business	Modest (31)	Modest (124)
			Hectic location	Hign (49)
			Near Police Office	Modest (42)
	Accessibility	Time & Space	Near Distributor	Low (19)	Modest (57)	Modest (449)
			Accessibility	Modest (38)
		Material	Near supplier material	Low (21)	Modest (217)
			Free to get	Modest (29)
			Seller with production places	Modest (24)
			Supplier network	Modest (35)
			From Overseas	Modest (28)
			Via Phonecall	Modest (41)
			Delivery	Modest (39)
		Customer	Specific Place	Modest (41)	High (175)
			Via phone call	High (50)
			Delivery	Modest (40)
			With Courier	High (44)

Source: Data (BNN, 2011).

Discussions

Non-ecological determinants

Rationalization of perpetrators

(Table 9).

Table 9. Rationalization of perpetrators as non-ecological.

Indicator	Probability to caught by police		Sanctions		Network Capaibility		Protif		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	10	31.3	8	25	72	45	182	51.7	272	38.3
Do Not Know	5	15.6	9	28.1	58	36.25	88	25	160	26.2
Yes	17	53.1	15	46.9	30	18.75	82	23.3	144	35.5
Total	32	100	32	100	160	100	352	100	576	100

Source: Data (BNN, 2010).

The rationalization of perpetrators as non-ecological dimensions involves 4 (four) aspects that affect the preferences of perpetrators in determining the illegal production location of synthetic narcotics. The four aspects are the risk of disclosure and arrest, severity of the punishment, possibility of expanding networks, and benefits the perpetrator may reap from the crime. The results show that some production perpetrators consider all four aspects, whereas others do not. 38.3% of 32 respondents stated ‘No’, and 35.5% stated ‘Yes’, and the remaining 26.2% stated ‘Don’t Know’. From the results of research on Respondents from the Convict group serving their sentence, 50% of respondents stated ‘Yes’. Whereas the next dominant consideration is the probability of arrest and the severity of the punishment, which is 53.1% Respondents from the Perpetrator group stated ‘Yes’ for the first aspect, and 46.9% for the second aspect.

Social control

(Table 10).

Table 10. Social control.

Indicator	Police concentration for criminal area		Corruption		Using symbol institution		Community policing		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	56	43.75	49	25.52	11	34.4	30	46.9	146	37.6
Do Not Know	48	37.5	89	46.35	16	50	15	23.4	168	39.3
Yes	24	18.75	54	28.11	5	15.6	19	29.7	102	23
Total	128	100	192	100	32	100	64	100	416	100

Source: Data (BNN, 2018).

Social control in this study is indicated by four factors the level of police presence in a certain area, vulnerability of law enforcement agencies to bribery, use of institutional symbols, especially anti-narcotics, and community policing. From these four indications, data obtained from Respondents from the Convict group serving their sentences, 37.6% of them stated ‘No’, meaning that social control in the form of supervision of Law Officers was not carried out properly and firmly. This reasoning can be explained from 4 (four) aspects: 43.75% of respondents from the Convict group stated that law enforcement is not focused on supervising crime, especially in areas with high crime rates, and 46.9% of respondents stated that the community was not involved in all surveillance/community policing activities.

From the interviews, it was revealed that social control represented by the consistent application of law enforcement measures by legal apparatus, was the main consideration that received more emphasis than other aspects. Considering that security is a major factor for perpetrators to sustain their business, perpetrators continuously collect information on their surroundings from the security elements of the premise, as well as from the surrounding community. Another safety criterion employed by perpetrators is whether or not there are any records of narcotic arrest in the vicinity of the location. This condition would lead to the location being marked off as unsafe; hence, other locations would be preferred instead. In other words, perpetrators will choose the location where the premise management imposes strict rules of access, to reduce the possibility of law enforcement in that particular location.

In line with the opinions of the Respondents from the Convict group serving their sentences, respondents from the community group also considered that the supervision conducted by the Law Enforcement authorities was from adequately strict. 53.9% Of respondents stated that the Law Enforcement authorities had arrested distributors and producers of synthetic narcotics, were firm in the surveillance and control, and actively patrolled the site. However, 51.11% of respondents also admitted that the Law Enforcement authorities in the location were deemed vulnerable to bribery. In addition to the survey data, from interviews with respondents who lived at the enclaved location, it was explained that supervision by the Security Apparatus was not too strict, in conjunction with the wishes of the residents who also disliked any inclination that may disturb their privacy. This opens up opportunities for narcotic production crimes that are not observed either by other tenants or by security elements (Table 11).

Table 11. The legal apparatus group.

Indicator	Police concentration for criminal area		Corruption		Using symbol institution		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	16	26.67	1	10	7	35	24	23.9
Do Not Know	5	8.33	1	10	0	0	6	6.1
Yes	39	65	8	80	13	65	60	70
Total	128	100	10	100	20	100	90	100

Source: Data (BNN, 2010).

Different from the two previous groups of respondents, the respondents from the Legal Apparatus group stated that the supervision they conducted was very focused, especially in locations with high crime rates. Seventy % of respondents stated ‘Yes’ to questions related to their control over their area of responsibility, as well as over crime groups, crime areas, and the security guard elements in their area of duty. 65% of respondents answered ‘Yes’ that they focus on crime areas, 26.67% answered ‘No’ on the grounds that they carry out surveillance throughout the region in turns, 80% answered ‘Yes’ that the use of anti-drug symbols as an indication of participation the community in the anti-narcotics program, which can also be marked that the location is under special attention towards a no-narcotics zone, and 65% answered ‘Yes’ that the authorities also involve residents in the development of order and security.

Lifestyle

(Table 12).

Table 12. Lifestyle.

Indicator	Night entertainment		Shopping malls		Crowd places		Total	400
	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%
No	9	28.1	8	25	7	21.9	24	25
Do Not Know	18	56.3	11	34.4	13	40.6	42	43.75
Yes	5	15.6	13	40.6	12	37.5	30	31.25
Total	32	100	32	100	32	100	96	100

Source: Data (BNN, 2011).

From the data obtained, the majority of Respondents from the Convict group stated ‘Do not Know’ about the intensity of the population at the production site visiting night entertainment venues (56.3%), shopping centers such as malls, restaurants (34.4%), as well as other crowded places such as restaurants, playgrounds, and communication centers (40.6%). Interviews conducted with Respondents from the Convict revealed that, they did not consider the lifestyle of residents in the production location. For them, the distributor is a more important component, considering that producers do not sell directly to consumers, but through distributors.

As for the data obtained from respondents of community groups, 71.60% of respondents stated ‘Yes’ which means that people in these locations have the habit of visiting entertainment venues, shopping centers, as well as crowd locations such as playgrounds and centers communication. The results of the interviews with respondents indicated that most of the population remained in the morning, and returned late at night. Some of them are workers who have the habit to ‘hang out’ to either nightclubs, shopping centers, or other entertainment centers. This condition was also justified by respondents from the legal apparatus group, where 53.57% of respondents stated ‘Yes’ related to 3 aspects that indicate the lifestyle of the population in the location where illegal synthetic narcotics is produced.

Non-ecological determinant scoring

From the research data, both from the perpetrators, the community, and officials, it was concluded that life-style is an important indicator of the symptoms of a location that may potentially harbor a place of production and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics. A number of locations are solely designed for sensual pleasures, which give rise to opportunities to sell synthetic narcotics. This activity has somewhat gained familiarity in urban public spaces. This trend serves as a primary consideration for producers and illegal distributors of synthetic narcotics to conduct their activities in locations with such characteristics (Table 13).

Table 13. Rationalization of perpetrators as non-ecological dimensions.

Dimension	Determinant variabel	Indicator	Aspect	Item	Category/Indicator	Category/Variabel
NON-ECOLOGY	Ratonalization of the offender	Risk Probability	Risk Probability	High (44)	High (44)	Modest (531)
		Serious Judgement	Serious Judgement	Modest (38)	Modest (38)
		Network Probability	Production Type	Modest (33)	Modest (132)
			Special of marketing	Modest (22)
			Potential nework	Modest (33)
			Customer target	Modest (28)
			Barriers from population	Modest (26)
		Profit Probability	Finance	Modest (42)	Modest (317)
			Design	Modest (38)
			Material	Modest (31)
			Manual Machine	Modest (39)
			Semi Auto Machine	Modest (30)
			Full Auto Machine	Modest (30)
			Good Production	Modest (23)
			QC	Modest (29)
			Expert	Modest (29)
			Competitor	Modest (27)
	Social Control	Police Concentration	Barriers from Police	Modest (34)	Modest (104)	Low (350)
			Active Patrol	Modest (31)
			Active Control	Low (10)
			Control Certain areas	Low (19)
		Corruption	Not Strict Punishment	Modest (25)	Modest (157)
			Not Consistent about Sanctions	Modest (25)
			Don’t care about violation	Modest (38)
			Corruption	Modest (28)
			Join with criminals	Low (21)
			Join with lawbreakers	Low (20)
		Symbol Say No To Drugs	Symbol misuse	Low (21)	Low (21)
		Community Policing	Active Population	Modest (34)	Modest (68)
			People Control	Modest (34)
	Lifestyle		Often to night entertainmnet	Low (19)	Modest (84)	Modest (84)
			Often to Shopping Malls	Modest (34)
			Often to Crowd Places	Modest (31)

Source: Data (BNN, 2018).

The rationalization of perpetrators as non-ecological dimensions show that some production perpetrators consider all four aspects, whereas others do not. Social control in this study is indicated by four factors. About the lifestyle of residents, they did not consider this is a problems. the distributor is a more important component.

Conclusion

This research using mixed methods resulted in several conclusions related to shifting locations of the production and distribution of illegal narcotics in the local context that occurred in Indonesia within five years, namely: the production and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics, ecologically have shifted from the interior to urban areas, both in global and local contexts; in terms of regional types, there are three typical regions of preference in this particular crime activity, namely residential areas, business/offices, and settlements that are close to crowded locations; residential areas with higher levels, such as apartments, residential areas, and housing with special clusters such as town houses, are used as places of production and illegal distribution of synthetic narcotics compared to the other two types. Research with the same theme should be conducted by exploring aspects of the accessibility of raw materials. In addition, synchronizing data between law enforcement on cases of illegal production and distribution of synthetic narcotics can be examined to understand effective and efficient narcotic crime control. Understanding regional social ecology needs to be viewed from the perspective of perpetrators, in terms of citizens’ activities. The existing mapping can be used to provide feedback to related institutions. This mapping can also be used as a basis for further studies related to community-based crime control policies, considering the spatial environment found in this research. Accordingly, the results of this study may also serve as a reference for establishing regional profiling, which in turn may be used as a basis for law enforcement tactical/operational maps to support a wide spectrum of law enforcement operations, be it in pre-emptive, preventive, or repressive modes, respectively. Social ecological issues are of paramount importance in Indonesia with regards to drug trafficking. The reason for this is that the impact of drug trafficking on people’s lives can be enormous. Furthermore, Indonesia is an archipelagic nation with people residing in various regions, and this makes it difficult to monitor drug distribution. Drug-related crimes can have a significant impact on social ecology. It is hoped that this research can assist the public in monitoring and serve as the primary point of access for addressing drug-related offences.

Author contributions

Sulistiana works as General Control Inspectorate of Indonesia National Police. Teddy Oswari studied at Faculty of Economic Gunadarma University, Indonesia.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Availability of data and materials

The data used in this study can be retrieved from the following websites: police.data.uk, crimesurvey.co.uk, ukdataservice.ac.uk, and ons.gov.uk, the R package to undertake the sensitivity analysis can be found here: https://github.com/RecountingCrime/rcme.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sulastiana Sulastiana

Police Commissioner. Dr. Sulastiana, SIP, S.H., M.Si was born in Situbondo, 10 October 1972, POLRI, Rank KOMBES and NRP 72100613, Position Kalemlatprofpol Bid Kermadianmas PTIK. Currently the position is at General Control Inspectorate of Indonesia National Police City South Jakarta Province DKI Jakarta Country Indonesia. My current article entitled "Shifts in Geographical Preference for Illegal Production and Distribution of Synthetic Narcotics in Indonesia" is a continuation of my previous article entitled "Ecology of Crime: A Theoretical Guide to Eradicating Illicit Narcotics Trafficking (published in Sinar BNN Magazine [National Narcotics Agency])". It is very important for this research to be published in a highly reputable international journal so that it is generally accessible and understandable to the entire wider community.