Conflict Management in Illicit Drug Cryptomarkets

Abstract

Illegal drug markets have been described as 'stateless' systems. Drug dealers, moreover, are commonly considered to have a predilection toward the use of violence to resolve disputes arising from dealing activities. While some studies have undermined this popular perception, new trends surrounding the distribution of illegal drugs via online channels (drug cryptomarkets) have shifted the transactional setting from the physical to virtual realm, thus decreasing the likelihood of violent resolution outcomes even further. This article examines conflict management strategies within cryptomarkets by coding discussion forums between vendors and buyers. Violence, as expected, is absent. Strategies more likely reflect alternatives that have been recognized in conflict management research within and beyond illegal market settings: tolerance; avoidance; ostracism; third party intervention; monetary sanctions; negotiation; and threats. The overall setting from which such resolutions emerge is clearly not subject to formal regulations, but our analyses illustrate the multitude of informal social control mechanisms that are consistently at play and which underlie the selfregulatory and communal processes that are firmly in place.

A Qualitative Evaluation of Two Different Law Enforcement Approaches on Dark Net Markets

“…Forum studies have been used to understand several aspects of the DNM ecosystem, including emerging drug trends [1], drug user experiences [1], [2], community values [3]- [5] and structure [6], and reactions to law enforcement interventions [7]. A range of approaches have also been utilised including quantitative analysis [1], [5]- [7] and qualitative analysis [2]- [5], [7]- [9], and active [1], [7] and passive engagement [2]- [5], [8], [9].…”

Will growth in cryptomarket drug buying increase the harms of illicit drugs?

“…The virtual location of drug cryptomarkets, combined with anonymity provided by hidden web location and use of cryptocurrencies for payment, should function to reduce possibilities for violent confrontation . Emerging evidence suggests that conflict resolution on cryptomarkets is primarily peaceable—typically, third‐party intervention by marketplace administrators—with threats of blackmail rare, and of violence even more rare . Interviews with cryptomarket buyers and sellers suggest that both are motivated by a desire to transact without the fear of violence associated with face‐to‐face trading .…”

Cryptomarkets, systemic violence and the ‘gentrification hypothesis’

“…Threats, intimidation, and acts of 'digital violence', such as doxxing, whereby identifying information about market participants is made public, do occur [10]. However, to date, not a single…”