Gap Analysis Of The Canadian Defence Policy Vs. Guidance Sample Essay

The Government of Canada fcouses on protecting the people inside and outside its boarders. The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has the mandate of protecting the country and defend its sovereignty. CAF conducts its operations to secure the country and its people based on the Canadian Defence Policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged (SSE) and the Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM) guidance, Beyond the Horizon that provides the framework for the growth of Command within the military (Sajjan, 2017). The policy and the provided guidance work closely in supplementing each other to ensure a strong CAF to protect the country. The two documents share some common trends in ensuring that CAF has strong relationships with other bodies in Canada and around the world, as well as facilitating agility, innovation, and risk management (Government of Canada, 2020). However, the application of these documents shows some variation regarding how strong CAF is at home, the security of North America, and engaging in world peacekeeping activities. Therefore, despite providing a similar framework for having a strongly related CAF with other organizations, SSE and CANSOFCOM guidance have gaps about being strong at home, providing North America with security, and keeping the world’s peace.


The Canadian Defence Policy and CANSOFCOM Guidance show the linkage regarding establishing strong relationships of CAF with allies and partners such as NATO. These relationships ensure seamless cooperation between CAF and its partners, including Five Eyes Plus and NATO, which facilitates the possible conduct of operations to provide protection (Sajjan, 2017). Canadian Defence Policy requires that Canada pursue leadership roles and its planning and capability development to prioritize interoperability. This prepares CAF to renew the strong commitment of Canada and facilitates seamless cooperation with NATO and NORAD among other allies and partners (Sajjan, 2017). These relationships have seen CAF act in various theatres as they bolster disaster relief, take part in search and rescue, contribute to peace operations, and build capacity. SSE delivers on the enduring commitment of Canada’s government to defend the country and its people while working with the US to defend North America and credibly engage the international actors.

Similarly, CANSOFCOM Guidance facilitates strong relationships of CAF with the partners globally to conduct training and operations and facilitate the broader contributions of Canada. Particularly, the relationship regarding Command with the Five Eyes Plus partners and many other nations around the world has been significant in training and conducting operations (Government of Canada, 2020). Military alliances, including NATO, help to enable the broader contributions of Canada to these coalitions. According to this guidance, the relationships offer the platform for creating language shares among actors to understand each other. The existing links promote communications, sense of common identity and reinforce the shared vision. By having these relationships, CAF and the partner agencies are able to understand the situation, improve processes and systems of interagency, and effectively use capabilities as bother complementary and stand-alone (Government of Canada, 2020). This allows the CAF and the partner agencies to have better solutions of how to counter adversaries. CAF also increases its available options to the Canadian government to have unique capabilities in conducting operations and support partners; activities in security. Through this guidance, CANSOFCOM, through provided opportunities, allows CAF and Canada to understand the situation and adopt beneficial protection.

The policy and CANSOFCOM Guidance advocate for CAF to be agile, innovative, and manage risks. The policy ensures that achieving Canada’s security objectives, defence, and strategic interests is not threatened by the new challenges occurring in cyber and space domains (Sajjan, 2017). The policy recognizes the reinvention of CAF through the transition process as they modernize command and control systems to have more agile and effective forces in complex operational theatres, including peace operations. This involves acquiring more advanced fighter aircraft to help support the sovereignty of Canada in its commitments (Sajjan, 2017). The anticipate, adapt, and active defence approach by Canada is critical in risk management such that threats are understood, harness new technologies, and take action to protect the country.

Similarly, CANSOFCOM Guidance supports the need for agility, innovation, and the management of risk by CAF. The guidance has prioritized the Gradient Ascent implementation as a new initiative supporting digitalization and data analytics (Sajjan, 2017). The design of this initiative is to link the competency level in the digital space with the kinetic space achievement to have enough information on the operations adversaries. The initiative significantly leverages the importance of digital technologies in achieving improvements in institutional effectiveness and efficiency (Government of Canada, 2020). The guidance requires the Command to commit to innovation concerning continued focusing on implementing and improving areas of operation. This should be facilitated by the adoption of new technologies to identify and manage risks.


Based on the two identified documents, significant gaps exist between the Canadian Defence Policy and the concrete CANSOFCOM Guidance. The policy requires CAF to ensure they achieve strong at home, secure in North America, and engage in the world activities; hence there is a need to adopt bridge the identified gaps (Everett & Yamashita, 2017). These requirement aspects create significant gaps in relation to the provisions of the guidance for CAF. The aspect of strong at home provides military support to civilian organizations where the key focus is areas that require effort and resources to be invested, including a vigorous liaison program. The program creates a tight network of CANSOFCOM with other intelligence agencies of Canada (Government of Canada, 2020). At the same time, the basis of strong at home aspect the improved mobility and reaches in Artic of Canada. This is emphasized on the need to focus on general Arctic training and equipment that allow operating infrequently and vast, inhospitable Arctic environment. This involves surveillance, control, requisite Command, and a robust sustainment system.

On being secure in North America, the gap exists where there is a need to improve aerospace awareness and response and enhance satellite communications. The approach is based on the presence of multi-role platforms that have employed capabilities within the same fleet of aircraft, providing numerous benefits for CANSOFCOM and RCAF objectives (Brown, 2013). On the requirement to be secure in North America, the multi-role adaptation is relevant to SOF as they offer significant benefits to SO in applying the effects of aerospace. The gap in the “engaged in the world” aspect requires prioritizing interoperability in developing capability and planning with Allies. This is based on strategic communication, which underpins the approach towards output delivery to align images, words, and action with the required influence (Everett & Yamashita, 2017). Since STRATCOM aligns civil-military operations, information operations, and key leader engagements, it is employed by SOF to promote the friendly narrative of force and discredit hostile narratives.


CAF has adopted policy and CANSOFCOM guidance to ensure the protection of the country. However, the application of policy and guidance has shown links and the existence of gaps that require appropriate approaches to bridge. The links involve establishing strong relationships of CAF with allies and partners such as NATO for seamless cooperation and possible conduct of operations to provide protection. Another significant link is based on agility, innovation, and risk management by CAF to achieve security objectives and reduce new challenges. Some approaches to bridging the gaps involve providing military support to civilian organizations while focusing on areas that require effort and resources. There is also a need to improve mobility and reaches in Artic of Canada by focusing on general Arctic training and equipment, which allow operating in inhospitable Arctic environment.


Brown A.L. (2013). JCSP 39 PCEMI 39 Master of Defence Studies Maîtrise en études de la défense.

Everett, K., & Yamashita, E. (2017). Whole of Government in the Canadian Arctic. Whole of Government through an Arctic Lens, 295.

Government of Canada. (2020) CANSOFCOM Guidance – Beyond the Horizon. Reports and Publications.

Sajjan, H. (2017). Strong, Secure and Engaged: Canada’s Defence Policy. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces.

Drug Policy Proposal Paper Free Sample

Executive Summary

The significant US population consumes psychoactive substances, with about 86% of adults having tried alcohol at a point in life and more than 9% of young Americans being illegal drug users. As a result, the US government advocated for the War on Drugs policy approach as drug abuse put more people at risk of harm. The adoption and implementation of this policy approach led to an increase in penalties, enforcement, and incarceration for drug offenders. Even with the need and the public support for harm reduction, this war on drugs did not provide an effective solution to the problem of drug sale and abuse. Though, to a great extent, the drug war led to reduced accessibility of drugs and lowered the potential drug abuse levels, there was still an escalation of police efforts and global military against drugs. The current approach has exhibited various shortcomings, including prevailing spending priorities that have seen the government spend millions of dollars, though the outcome is not worth it. Therefore, a preventive and treatment-based approach would be a more effective alternative solution. The approach extends to favoring many drug users, especially those that meet the diagnostic criteria for dependence on the substance.

Context and the Importance of the Problem

The United States is among the leading countries with the highest population consuming psychoactive substances. From the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism report, about 86% of adults have tried alcohol at a point in life (Earp et al., 2021). The report also indicates that more than 9% of Americans above 12 years abuse illegal drugs annually, with 6% having been diagnosed and undergoing treatment for alcohol-use disorder as shown in figure 1. As a result of the prevalent issue of substances abuse in America, the country’s authority adopted an effort to combat illegal drug use leading to a “war on drugs” (Caulkins et al., 2018). This followed the public support for strategies to reduce harm, considering that the white Americans became victims of the opioid epidemic while black communities were increasingly hit by the effects. The war on drugs which was formally launched by President Richard Nixon in the 1970s, saw a great increase in penalties, enforcement, and incarceration for drug offenders (Jelsma, 2019). The official implementation of the War on Drugs came following the declaration of drug abuse number one enemy of the public. At the same time, the government increased the federal funding for agencies controlling drugs. New developments came up, including the creation of the Drug Enforcement Administration as a result of the merger of various agencies to make a stronger one.

Figure 1: Drug use among young people

Drug use among young people

However, the modern war on drugs as launched by Nixon did not provide the alternatives for harm reduction, especially among the black American addicts. Instead, there was a steady escalation of police efforts and the global military against drugs. The situation was followed by the criminalization and strict regulation of drug use leading to unintended consequences (Earp et al., 2021). Even though the drug war reduced the accessibility of drugs and lowered the potential drug abuse levels, it led to proliferated violence around the world and mass incarceration in the US, especially among black Americans (Payan et al., 2013). Two-thirds of those jailed report regular alcohol use, while 69% include the illicit drugs users either found drinking or under the influence of drugs. Almost five decades later, the number of Americans behind bars has increased by 350%, with more than 2.2 million Americans in jail or prison by 2017, as shown in figure 2 (Earp et al., 2021). The majority of those incarcerated, at least 60%, were black or Latino, with 1 in 9 black and 1 in 28 Latino children having their parent incarcerated (Earp et al., 2021). Thus, the war on drugs disproportionately impacted communities of color.

Figure 2: US prison population

US prison population

For over decades now, the US has continued to fight a global war on drugs with limited positive outcomes. Instead, there has been an increase in financial costs and prison populations as well as the global drug-related violence (Brownstein et al., 2015). The War on Drugs policy held all government levels, which led to exponential incarceration growth with no discernible safety or health benefits. The impact of it all is that even with the increased incarceration, there is essentially no reduction in violent crime rates but only a marginal decrease in property crime (Rosino & Hughey, 2017). The criminalization of substance misuse has not been able to improve health outcomes. Additionally, a comparison between states showed that there were no reductions in the misuse of substances, fatalities due to overdose, or even drug arrests even as the incarceration for drug offenses increased.

Despite the fact that the US has spent over $1 trillion to fight the war on drugs, this policy has failed to produce the desired outcomes. Much of these resources were allocated to police to enforce the war on drugs considering that it targeted dealers. It was assumed that the domestic drug trade was exclusively an urban phenomenon hence committing resources towards street-level enforcement in inner-city neighborhoods (Rosino & Hughey, 2017). This led to many arrests that gradually saw the prison population balloon with longer prison sentences. Soon, as more people continued to be sent to prison, the construction could no longer keep pace leading to disorder and violence.

The conditions of confinement were also not good and became decrepit in violation of the Eighth Amendment, which prohibited cruel and unusual punishment. The American criminal justice system has significantly been strained that saw the emergence and rapid expansion of drug courts without considering their effectiveness (Jelsma, 2019). Even as drug courts became significant players in the fight against drugs, enforcement remains the focal point of policy efforts. Despite these efforts, the problem of drug use continues to affect the country, even with the lowered substance accessibility (Earp et al., 2021). This shows that the war in drugs policy agenda that fronts enforcement-based strategies is not effective. Drug courts have instead come out to emphasize the need for rehabilitation and problem-solving in the process of combating drug addiction.

Therefore, the overall effectiveness of the enforcement-based strategies embedded in the war on drugs policy is limited. Concerns have continued to be raised, especially regarding the effectiveness of this policy and the increased situation of racial disparity of the punishments meted out (McBride et al., 2013). Drug policy experts believe that the drug war does not entirely prevent the abuse of the drug. This is because the policy intends to reduce drug use by destroying and inhibiting the international drug trade. The ultimate outcome is to increase the cost of drugs and make it scarcer, hence unaffordable drug habits in the US (Brownstein et al., 2015). Instead, the prices of most drugs have continued to fall, with heroin dropping by about 93%, powder cocaine by about 87%, and crack cocaine by 54% (Earp et al., 2021). However, the prices of meth and Marijuana have remained stable over the period; it is all evidence that the policy of war on drugs has failed to achieve its goal of reducing the use of the drug. This follows the continued trend of drugs prices fall making it easier for drug users to access and abuse them.

In situations where prohibition has led to price increases for some hard drugs such as cocaine, it has only reduced their accessibility but not necessarily brought their abuse to an end. The trend can be explained by the balloon effect that cracking down on drugs in an area does not reduce the overall drugs supply (Rosino & Hughey, 2017); instead, once an area is cracked off, the drugs, the production, and trafficking shifts to another place. This is because the drug trade is such a lucrative business that dealers would always want to take part, especially in countries with drug trade as a major or only economic chance, and the governments may not be able to suppress such trade (Caulkins et al., 2018). Even with the war on drugs adopted as early as the 1970s, there have been many cases exhibiting the balloon effect.

Similarly, in many cases, the drug war has not been able to push production down. An example is told of the effort by the United States to crack down on opium in Afghanistan between 2002 and 2014. Afghanistan supplies heroin to the world in bulk, and attempts by the US were to suppress the production. However, despite the efforts and US spending of over $7.6 billion in the program, opium poppy crop cultivation in Afghanistan reached record levels in 2013 (Earp et al., 2021). A significantly essential problem with the enforcement-based strategies is that drug war is more punitive and has often increased the level of incarceration in the country.

Research shows over 2.2 million people having been incarcerated because of drug abuse is evident enough that the policy is only meant to punish the offenders rather than find a solution to the problem. Policy experts have found limited or no substantial evidence that having tougher punishments or harsher efforts such as incarcerating offenders can be a better way of reducing access to substance and drug abuse as compared to lighter measures. Instead, such punitive measures may only slow the flow of drugs (Jelsma, 2019). Additional, significant racial disparities in prison populations have been attributed to the war on drugs and accompanying determinant sentencing structures. The country also continued to spend more resources in the war on drugs, with over $1 trillion having been spent in the last five decades (Earp et al., 2021). Therefore, this proves that the war on drugs policy has significantly failed in addressing the problem of drug abuse in the US, and there is the need to develop more alternatives to solve the issue that continues to affect the country.

Pre-Exiting Policies, Policy Alternatives, and Research

Despite the US having fought a global war on drugs for decades, the policy fostering enforcement-based strategies has not proved a success in ending drug abuse in the country. Though the proponent of the war on drugs claim that the policy has helped reduce the crime related to drugs, lower the disease and overdose of drugs, and disrupted and dismantled organized criminal groups, it has proved ineffective in addressing the entire problem (Brownstein et al., 2015). Instead, the country has spent costly, crowded its prisons or jails, and seen a continuous increase in drug-related violence around the world.

Lawmakers and experts need to reconsider replacing the drug war policy as its potential benefits are really not worth its many drawbacks. A large focus being advocated for by many drug policy experts and historians is moving from enforcement-based efforts towards more prevention and treatment-based efforts (Earp et al., 2021). The newly advocated policy agenda entails the rehabilitation of the drug abusers, decriminalization of currently illicit substances, and to the extent of legalizing all drugs.

The need for alternatives for drug policy is because the current war on drugs that is based on enforcement strategies has proved incapable and failed to address the drug problem. The enforcement approach has exhibited various shortcomings to warrant the need for change. Critics of the current policy approach have emphasized its prevailing spending priorities (Caulkins et al., 2018). The increased spending has amounted to overfunding of the activities related to enforcing the war on drugs compared to other approaches. The enforcement policy approach has been unable to produce greater progress in achieving the drug policy goals for every dollar that is spent on it. For instance, in 1997, additional million dollars were estimated to have been spent on federal enforcement activities in the US (Csete et al., 2016). However, despite the million dollars spent earlier, the enforcement approach could not reduce total cocaine consumption by 53 to 98 kilograms as it was intended. Therefore, in terms of cost, enforcement is not effective as millions are spent yearly arresting, prosecuting, and sending people to prisons, especially the typical dealers. Large amounts of money are also used in rewards to help confiscate drugs loaded on ships that are worth billions of dollars.

The enforcement policy approach is limited by a varied collection of activities and significantly directed at the stages of drug production. These stages include control at the source country, interdiction when moving to the US, and enforcement domestically (Earp et al., 2021). However, the enforcement process faces challenges at every stage meant to prohibit drug production. The use of an enforcement approach disrupts the supply network where new tactics are introduced and new efforts intensified. The disruption has always resulted in increased use of resources and making the whole process of dealing with drug supply hard to achieve. The application of the enforcement policy approach has also proved ineffective since it affects the severity of consequences related to drug abuse for every consumed kilogram (Jelsma, 2019). When enforcement is selectively done against those dealers who are corrupt or violent, it reduces the consequences.

Similarly, the enforcement-based approach has failed to achieve the intended deterrence and incapacitation. The war on drugs was purposed to gain the positive impacts of deterrence, though little has been achieved considering that the approach gives no economic option to the people involved in the drugs (McBride et al., 2013). As a result, one opts to sell or make drugs for economic purposes, and they find it the best alternative and maybe the only means for survival. For instance, opium production in Afghanistan does well compared to other forms of farming, and many farmers would do opium in Afghanistan and send it to the US as a means to earn a living (Csete et al., 2016). Similarly, the sale of the drug in the street is fueled by poverty and a lack of employment opportunities. This, therefore, explains the failure by enforcement policy approach to offer alternative socioeconomic empowerment to facilitate reduced abuse and trade in drugs.

Similarly, the approach has not been able to incapacitate the supply of drugs even with massive arrests and long-term imprisonment of those perceived to be dealers of drugs in the streets. Even though markets were disrupted, the drug enforcement approach undermines the effort because the activities to enforce against drug sellers happen on the streets (Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, 2019). The dealers and sellers on the streets are only a smaller part of the drug trade despite being easily identified and captured. So, the approach is only effective at managing minor dealers, leaving out the real traffickers. This makes the whole idea of enforcement-based strategies ineffective in handling drug issues in America.

The implementation of the enforcement approach has seen more illnesses and deaths related to drug overdose in the US. The reason is that the continued use leads to poor information quality and the potency effects on the market part. For instance, there was an increase in the number of deaths related to drug overdose in the US from 1 to 3.4 deaths in every 100,000 people (Berryessa, 2021). As late as 2008, the country reported 12 deaths from a drug overdose in every 100,000 people. Over the years, these numbers continue to increase, with 2014 alone recording over 47,000 deaths due to overdose. All these deaths occurred despite the presence and application of the enforcement-based policy against the sale and abuse of the drug. Similarly, the country experienced drug-related violence despite the war on drugs, with researchers reporting that about 7.5% of murder crimes were associated with physical drug effects while 40% related to the illicit market system (Berryessa, 2021). The happenings related to drugs show that the enforcement policy approach is not effective and exhibits significant shortcomings that prevent its optimal.

Further, instead of ending the drug menace in the country, enforcing the war on drugs has seen the drug industry being cartelized. The prohibition of alcohol led to the American Mafia emerging, while Chinese drug gangs emerged when opium and other drugs were prohibited (Bretteville-Jensen et al., 2017). In the modern days, the war on drugs has promoted many violent cartels to be created and grow stronger. For instance, as drug sellers are frequently being cracked down in the US, the drug cartels in Mexico have gotten an opportunity to export hard drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Besides cartelization, the approach has led to the corruption level increase in the US, especially among law officers working on the border (Jelsma, 2019). Most of them have faced charges related to criminal corruption of aiding drug smugglers and immigrants smuggling drugs into the country. The war on drugs has also given rise to the racial biasness in the US as the majority of those groups affected are blacks and Latino who face incarceration. Black Americans have been unfairly targeted, and this has created racial tensions.

Therefore, since the enforcement policy approach has proved ineffective, prevention and treatment-based efforts would do well in holistically addressing the problem of the drug in the country. The prevention involves advancing more drug-prevention programs such as the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) that is commonly known that is offered mostly in schools as a curriculum. The curriculum, which has gone beyond the prohibition of drug use, includes an appeal against bullying and violence, among other antisocial behaviors (Berryessa, 2021). The prevention is purposed to keep people away from destructive or addictive substances to limit their risk of facing arrest or being incarcerated or subjected to treatment because of addiction. The approach of prevention presents social value utility that entails stopping people not to ever consuming drugs, thus reducing drug use in society (Bretteville-Jensen et al., 2017). Though it is not such a simple process, this makes drug-prevention programs have limited power in influencing youths that have been raised in an environment dominated by the use of drugs.

On the other hand, treatment-based efforts proposed by drug policy experts and other key stakeholders would be effective in managing the drug problem in the country. The treatment approach has provided a guiding rationale for the war on the drug since it began. Even as policymakers advocate for the harsh penalties for sellers, they have equally called for treating people suffering due to dependence on substances (McBride et al., 2013). The same perception has accorded with public opinion, with the majority proposing heroin and cocaine addicts to attend treatment programs instead of being subjected to prison or jail terms.

The lowest percentage only believes that the current enforcement-based approach is helping the government to win the drug war. However, this policy has been in existence over a lengthy period, and it is difficult to believe that it has helped win the war on the drug (Bretteville-Jensen et al., 2017). After the violation of the Eighth Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, the court orders prisons to find a solution to the problem. Even the drug courts have proposed to exhibit rehabilitation and seek for solution to the problem when combating drug addiction.

The treatment-based approach favors many drug users, though it is not well utilized, considering that many of these users fail to meet the diagnostic criteria for dependence on the substance. As a result, those who do not meet the formal diagnosis end up abusing drugs in a worrying manner which includes causing disruption to families and even being unable to work well or attend schools (Jelsma, 2019). Though, treatment is not sensical for those people using drugs occasionally and for recreational purposes. Therefore, treatment as an alternative for drug abuse needs to be reserved for the people who demonstrate to be in need.

The treatment-based efforts are less costly as compared to enforcement which could see limited spending on reducing the consumption of drugs. The advantage that is attached to the treatment option is that it attacks demand directly, unlike the case for enforcement which would lead to an increase in the cost of resources spent (McBride et al., 2013). Therefore, when used, treatment reduces the dollar value of the black market; hence its effects on black market revenue are likely to be greater compared to the use of the enforcement policy approach.

Ultimately, the effects of treatment on drug-related crime are greater than it is for enforcement options. Treatment would be more effective in the situation where enforcement is big enough that it acts as a deterrent (Minhee & Calandrillo, 2019). It is cheaper to treat heavy drug users compared to incarcerating the dealers for a longer period if at all the goal is to reduce the consumption of alcohol in totality by some amount. It is evident that the incarceration option through an enforcement-based approach wastes more money.

In 2016, the National Drug Control Policy Office in the White House embraced the treatment approach through rehabilitation. The agency planned to increase the rehabilitation funding programs in the future. Under the Obama administration, there were legal and regulatory reforms such as Obamacare that were approved to increase access to addiction treatment by offering drug users health insurance to access the service (Minhee & Calandrillo, 2019). The drug courts supported the rehabilitation-based approach instead of imprisoning the drug offenders. The courts have since stopped sending the abusers to jail but instead to rehabilitation programs that focus majorly on addiction treatment as a medical issue, not criminal.

The treatment approach is advantageous in the sense that it limits the number of deaths caused by drug addicts using an overdose of substances. This is because; medical attendants prescribe and administer heroin to some addicts under strict supervision, especially when they become resistant to other forms of treatments (Berryessa, 2021). The addicts are then able to achieve the satisfaction of depending on the drug without the risk of overdoing the use or committing other crimes that result in violence, such as robbery (Caulkins et al., 2018). Unlike it is in the case of enforcement that has led to many deaths due to overdose, the treatment-based approach monitors the intake of drugs if need be within the recovery process, which limits the deaths occurring from the usage (Jelsma, 2019).

Research has found that a heroin-assisted treatment program is effective in reducing crimes related to drugs and improve on social functioning, including stabilizing housing and employment. However, advocates of the war on drugs, including the International Task Force on Strategic Drug Policy, have argued against the treatment approach, indicating that it does not give a true picture of the drug habits but instead falsely implies the safe management of drug addiction (Berryessa, 2021). This leads to the weakening of the social stigma around the use of drugs and may influence more people to abuse even some of the most dangerous substances, especially if the patients fail to meet the criteria for diagnosis.


The US government advanced for War on Drugs policy approach following the risk of harm that drug abuse caused to the American people, including both adults and children. The policy approach saw an increase in penalties, enforcement under the DEA, and incarceration for drug offenders. The government’s decision was influenced by the need and the public support for harm reduction. The drug war, to a great extent, led to reduced accessibility of drugs and lowered the potential drug abuse levels. However, this war on drugs did not provide an effective solution to the problem of drug sale and abuse but instead saw an escalation of police efforts and the global military against drugs. It led to proliferated violence around the world and mass incarceration in the US, especially among the black Americans raising the racial notion conflict. The US has spent over $1 trillion to fight the war on drugs over almost the past five decades. Despite these efforts, including incarceration and financial resource commitment, the problem of drug use continues to affect the country fronting the war on drugs as an ineffective policy approach. This current approach has exhibited various shortcomings, including prevailing spending priorities that have seen the government spend millions of dollars, though the outcome is not worth it. The approach does not give the economical option to the people involved in the drugs who view it as the only source of living. More illness and deaths, violence related to drugs, and cartelization of the industry continued to be recorded due to this approach.

A preventive and treatment-based approach is considered an effective alternative solution to the problem of drug abuse in the country. Prevention extends to appeal against bullying and violence and is purposed to keep people away from destructive or addictive substances to limit their risk of arrest or being incarcerated. Treatment-based efforts focused on treating people suffering due to dependence on substances. This approach favors many drug users, especially those that meet the diagnostic criteria for dependence on the substance. When applied, a treatment-based approach reduces the cost of resources to be used, lowers the deaths and violence, and increases the health and wellbeing of victims. Therefore, treatment-based efforts should be prioritized over an enforcement-based approach to finding a suitable and cost-effective solution to the problem of drug sale and abuse.

Policy Recommendations

Research has established that the current enforcement-based policy approach has continued to experience failings that have rendered it almost ineffective in the fight against the drug problem in the US. However, the following recommendations would be helpful in improving the policy aspects to enhance its effects and the solution towards the problem:

Prior steps by some states to actively lessen the sharp sting of the drug policy have proved workable though these are but only a few successes. Therefore, the focus should be given to facilitating effective reforms requiring significant changes at the state level that will ultimately necessitate federal policies to shift domestically and internationally to improve on the effects of the policy approach to the drug problem in the country.

There is a need to reduce the level of violence and discrimination witnessed in policing, which extends to phasing the military forces in the process of drug policing, allowing syringes possession, and lowering the targeting of services based on harm reduction to lower the rate of arrests. Violence reduction will also see setting better targets of policing, especially on armed criminals that are most violent.

The positive effects of the policy can best be realized when minor and non-violent offenses are decriminalized, which include merely using, found in possession, or even petty sale. At the same time, resources should be committed to strengthening alternatives that support the health and social sector instead of only focusing on criminal sanctions.

The focus needs to shift towards facilitating easier access to harm reduction services by all those in need of them as a way to respond to drugs while scaling up and sustaining the involved services to ensure that cost-effectiveness is achieved. This means that services such as naloxone access and injection sites should be scaled up to reduce their demand.


Berryessa, C. M. (2021). “Second Chance” Mechanisms as a First Step to Ending the War on Drugs. The American Journal of Bioethics21(4), 54-56.

Bretteville-Jensen, A. L., Mikulic, S., Bem, P., Papamalis, F., Harel-Fisch, Y., Sieroslawski, J., & Costa Storti, C. (2017). Costs and unintended consequences of drug control policies. Report by the expert group on possible adverse effects and associated costs of drug control policies. Council of Europe.

Brownstein, H. H., Crossland, C., Anthony, J. C., Forman, V., MacCoun, R., Kilmer, B., … & Terry-McElrath, Y. M. (2015). Toward a drugs and crime research agenda for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, US Department of Justice.

Caulkins, J. P., Reuter, P., Chiesa, J., & Iguchi, M. (2018). How goes the” war on drugs”?: An assessment of US drug problems and policy (Vol. 121). Minnesota Historical Society.

Csete, J., Kamarulzaman, A., Kazatchkine, M., Altice, F., Balicki, M., Buxton, J., … & Beyrer, C. (2016). Public health and international drug policy. The Lancet387(10026), 1427-1480.

Earp, B. D., Lewis, J., Hart, C. L., & with Bioethicists and Allied Professionals for Drug Policy Reform. (2021). Racial justice requires ending the war on drugs. The American Journal of Bioethics21(4), 4-19.

Jelsma, M. (2019). UN Common Position on drug policy–Consolidating system-wide coherence. London: International Drug Policy Consortium, 1-36.

Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. (2019). Health, Rights and Drugs—Harm Reduction, Decriminalization and Zero Discrimination for People Who Use Drugs.

McBride, D. C., VanderWaal, C. J., & Terry-McElrath, Y. M. (2013). The drugs-crime wars: Past, present, and future directions in theory, policy, and program interventions. Toward a drugs and crime research agenda for the 21st century, 97-162.

Minhee, C., & Calandrillo, S. (2019). The Cure for America’s Opioid Crisis: End the War on Drugs. Harv. JL & Pub. Pol’y42, 547.

Payan, T., Staudt, K., & Kruszewski, Z. A. (Eds.). (2013). A war that can’t be won: Binational perspectives on the war on drugs. University of Arizona Press.

Rosino, M. L., & Hughey, M. W. (2017). Speaking through Silence: Racial discourse and identity construction in mass-mediated debates on the “War on Drugs”. Social Currents4(3), 246-264.

Managing Innovation In Business Free Sample

1. Executive Summary

The report is about the company’s innovation through its strategic measures to address multiple issues affecting Audi’s products and operation. The focus of the business includes its market, trends, and new and advanced technologies. The current study on the Audi utilizes the MVIS model of innovation, examining the three problems that identify various gaps exhibited by the company in its operations. The study also references the automotive industry concerning Audi, innovation requirements, capabilities, and innovation. Information about the market, customers, collection of data, and the choice of innovation is also analysed in this study.

2. Introduction: Purpose of the Report & Structure

The report is on the management of innovation in the Audi Company that conducts its business in the automotive industry. The report examines the current technological advances and their capabilities to implement future innovations. As one of the leading automobiles around the world, there is a need to examine its innovation and management processes. The report’s purpose is to identify the road map for the company’s innovation with the help of the MVIS model framework. The model provides two stages that focus on the company’s innovation gaps and how these gaps are addressed.

3. Stages of MVIS

3.1. MVIS Stage 1

The driver of innovation 1: Laws and regulations

Problem A: faulty backup camera on some of its 2022 model

Gap Identification

Recently, almost every Audi 2022 model sold by the company has a potential software issue. The problem is related to the multimedia system, such that the backup camera of this model is faulty (Steitz, 2021). The view of this camera may fail to display as the vehicle shifts into reverse. This happens such that the view captured by the rearview camera does not display. The problem increases the risk of collision when backing due to the driver’s limited rearward visibility (Rufiange, 2021). The faulty camera problem makes the display show a frozen image, and in some cases, it would go black. The problem has seen an estimation of over 2,800 vehicles that may have been affected by being recalled (Tucker, 2021). Due to the expected update to the infotainment unit systems to adhere to safety standards and the current faulty backup camera, Audi has an innovation gap to assure drivers their maximum safety.

Future Trend

In the future, it is expected that automobiles, including Audi, which engage in innovations, will do enough research, especially concerning the safety of the infotainment features. The innovation that saw the exterior mirrors replaced by an integrated small camera has since been embraced (Uhlar, 2021). However, with the occurrence of the problem leading to the inability of the Audi 2022 models to display the camera’s view in reverse, it shows that the company has failed the security test. The future will see Audi strictly consider and comply with the requirements of the Motor Vehicle Safety Standards on rear visibility. Adherence to safety measures will ensure that Audi displays the rearview image in a short period after shifting to the reverse to ensure maximum safety. Therefore, Audi looks forward to prioritising the security and safety of the drivers, especially in reverse shifts. Many new models coming beyond 2022 may not show any risk of collision to drivers even when backing up.

Solution: Bucket 1 Innovation

The solution for the Audi problem associated with the faulty backup camera on some of the company’s 2022 models will include updating the infotainment unit parameters to ensure that the maximum safety of the drivers is assured when shifting into reverse. The decision by Audi to contact owners of the affected 2022 models ensures that they take their vehicles to the dealers is to have the dealership update the parameters (Næss and Tjønndal, 2021). The updated infotainment system would be easier and faster for the backup camera to display the rearview image. This assures the drivers of their clear show of the image even when backing up or reversing to avoid any possible collision that would land them into trouble (Grupp, 2020). The fixing will be done free of charge considering the free software patch, and even those without the ability to accept updates will be brought to the dealership to ensure safety is guaranteed for drivers.

The driver of innovation 2: New technologies

Customers having problems in finding charging stations

Gap Identification

The major auto companies, including Audi, have massively invested in electric vehicles over the past five years. However, the EV charging structure has been a global problem, including having few charging stations, which are even far between in most cases (White, 2021). Even with many public charging networks for EVs offering national coverage, they are only found in some areas (Lambert, 2020). The variation has been experienced, especially in payment and access methods across networks (Lee and Clark, 2020). The majority of the rapid and fast chargers require payment despite having some EV charging stations that are free. Customers driving EV charging vehicles have at one point found issues of locating a charging station or waiting in a queue for each fill to complete for about 20 minutes (White, 2021). As customers struggle to find a charging station, the company produces more electric vehicles. Considering Audi’s improvement of experience in charging stations in the future, there is an innovation gap in handling new technologies even when there have been little or none.

Future Trend

A report from the representative of Audi shows that the future experience of charging electric vehicles acquired from the company will improve. The company looks forward to having alternative yet luxurious service provisions for the drivers of these luxury cars. People will no longer feel glamorous, awkward, or even pack longer periods, only waiting for their car batteries like it has been (White, 2021). It will be more than just waiting for the car to be charged, and drivers will have various options to do and even decide to leave or continue staying for some time. The focus of Audi would be giving clients high-class and modern design places to re-energize the car batteries in an attempt to influence faster transformation towards green production (Hertrich and Mayrhofer, 2021). The speed of charging will increase to the maximum capacity of about 270kW, though this will give the drivers enough time to have tea and some crumpets.

Solution: Bucket 2 Innovation

The solution would be to improve the experience of charging the increasing number of electric vehicles. As an auto manufacturer, Audi wants to achieve this through changes to recycle spent batteries in a concept called a charging hub (Nijhuis, 2021). Unlike the previous or current charging stations requiring charging, the charging hub will be composed of a modular and portable charging station with powercube modules consisting of second-life battery packs. One thing with these powercube charging locations is that their voltage DC power that is self-contained is high and does not require locally available power infrastructure (Nijhuis, 2021). Even as Audi goes digital and green to produce more electric vehicles, this new approach’s innovation gap is sealed. This is because the system holds enough power to charge up to 70 vehicles at a rate of 300Kw daily (White, 2021). Thus, it is considered a significant step towards finding the solution to achieve future trends of advanced experience.

The driver of innovation 3: Unthinkable events

Audi has a problem with the supply chains due to the shortages of semiconductor chips

Gap Identification

The global carmakers were faced with a worldwide crunch in chip supply which continued to it the production of cars worldwide. The automobile industry strongly suffered in terms of the sales of vehicles. Audi, the manufacturer of cars, had been unable to build cars amounting to a mid-five digit number in July during its first half of the year (Ronanki et al., 2021). The production and logistics spokesperson for Audi confirmed the existence of a highly volatile level of supply. This resulted in registering short-time work for about 10,000 employees at the sites in Germany, especially in June (Page, 2021). As the problem of semiconductors’ shortage continued, the industry became even more affected as the global production of vehicles went down by 2 million (Page, 2021). Considering the expected increase in the supply chains of cars, there is an innovation gap for Audi to improve its supply process following the global semiconductor chips shortage.

Future Trends

Efforts put in place by the automotive companies, including Audi, give hopes that the future of the supply chain of cars will improve compared to the current situation exhibited by the shortage of semiconductor chips (Williams, 2021). It is anticipated that the production of vehicles will again pick up to attain the production level of over 2 million cars that could not be manufactured as expected. The increase in the supply chain to normal and even surpass will see employees re-deployed back to work a long-time, unlike before. In the case of Audi, it is anticipated that all the 10,000 employees will get back their jobs (Page, 2021). The most important thing is that improved supply chains will help Audi maximize its profit like before or even perform much better. The company will depend on the supply situation to make up for the shortfall witnessed in production (Williams, 2021). Therefore, customers will have a variety of cars they anticipate buying with increased supply.

Solution: Bucket 1 Innovation

The supply chain issues solution illustrates how new approaches and strategies of the future will enhance the parameters around supply management possessed by Audi and enhance the expected performance. As Audi looks forwards to making up for the shortfall production experienced recently to improve the supply in the future significantly, the company is considering reducing the high order backlog (Matsuo, 2020). The company’s leadership has raised its outlook and become confident about business development in the whole year. Through the enhanced supply management consultation, Audi has sought closer ties with the makers of the semiconductors chips hence expectations that this would help the company emerge strongly from the problem (Page, 2021). In what appears a strategic move to fill the gap related to the supply of vehicles, Audi has embarked on ambitiously shifting to have battery-powered cars. With this in mind, the company will produce fully electric cars by 2026 hence finishing off the shortage of cars.

3.2. MVIS Stage 2

A). Target audience

For Audi, the target customers include those in the modern urban under the affluent class. This group of customers is often highly educated, modern, and tech-savvy who appreciate quality, style, and rider safety (Buck et al., 2021). The popular group attracted to these cars are both male and female riders. The tech-savvy millennial customers have become the latest targets of a range of cars introduced by the company (Ramey, 2021). The group likes sporty and adventurous life; hence Audi provides them the luxury and comfort needed. The prices attached to the company’s products are high hence appealing to the classy population and those earning large amounts.

b). Sample Size

Audi is among the major auto manufacturers worldwide, and the company has a strong base of customers. In 2020 along, statistics show that the company delivered up to 1.693 million new cars to its customers (Carlier, 2021). However, this was a drop from 2019, when the number of cars sold was higher at about 1.802 million (Carlier, 2021). Therefore, considering this strong customer base for Audi, a suitable sample size would be 500. The 500 settled on is convenient to reflect many people’s opinions with each year being represented by between 30 and 40 people. The number includes those who recently acquired Audi model vehicles and those who have had them before.

c) Sample size justification

The sample size considered is justified and most convenient to work within this case to find the actual picture of the Audi market, tastes, and need for improvement. The number selected depends on the base of customers, and it is not too high or too low because of the shortcomings associated with a poor sample size (Fonseca, 2021). For instance, if the sample size is too large, there is the likelihood that the number required or anticipated may not be attained. However, when it is too small, the information received may not be sufficient to conclude. Sometimes it may give a false impression that does not reflect on trends and patterns.

d). Conducting the survey

The sample size selected will be instrumental in helping provide information on the Audi and its products regarding the perceptions of customers and their experience. Therefore, the survey will be conducted through the questionnaires sent to them. However, Audi being a car company, the best procedure used to conduct a survey will be using dealerships considering that many customers are found far away and some in different regions (Dremel et al., 2017). Dealerships work best in the sales of cars, and using the same to get feedback can easily achieve reliable results in a less costly and limited time consumption since customers are given copies of surveys when they visit dealer shops.

e). Close-ended questions on innovations

In relation to innovation gap A

  1. Does your backup camera display clear rearview?
  2. Does it capture images as you expect?
  3. Do you feel you are safe with this backup camera?
  4. When compared to the initial exterior mirror?
  5. Do you feel it should be readjusted to give a better view?

In relation to innovation gap B

  1. Have you experienced a problem in finding a charging station?
  2. Do you feel making time to look for a charging station consumes much of your time?
  3. Is paid to charge better than free charging stations?
  4. Do you consider electric vehicles efficient regardless of the charging aspect?
  5. Do you find it convenient if Audi offers alternative charging services?

In relation to the innovation gap C

  1. Were you affected by the supply chain deficit?
  2. Do you think the drop in the supply chain was only due to semiconductor chips?
  3. Do you think this problem will be over soon?
  4. Does a low supply chain negatively affect the global economy?
  5. Is Audi making enough efforts to address the supply issue?

f). innovation to be chosen by the customers

It is predicted that customers would choose innovation gap A related to the faulty backup camera on some of the 2022 models. The choice of this option is influenced by the need for the company to take action towards ensuring the safety and security of the drivers. The failure by the backup camera to give a clear view of the images when in reverse means that drivers can easily cause a collision with other objects. This would lead to accidents or damage the vehicle that would require expensive repairs. Therefore, customers will point out this issue as a priority to them.

g). Innovation requirements


Since the major target for innovations by Audi include the tech-savvy millennial customers. The best marketing strategy to be employed is the use of online means such as social media platforms. Television advertisements and promotions would also do well in this business.


The recent months have seen a drop in the supply chain of cars due to the low semiconductors chips availability. The focus should shift to enhancing the supply of semiconductor chips to bring back the market.


The automobiles industry is competitive, and enough financial resources would be required to market the innovation to potential customers. More content would be required for the generation that gets attracted to this innovation.


Buck, C., Eder, D. M., & Brügmann, J. (2021). Case studies in business model innovation: a systematic literature network analysis. International Journal of Business Environment12(4), 301-320.

Carlier, M. (2021). Number of cars produced worldwide by Audi from FY 2005 to FY 2020. Audi – worldwide car production 2005-2020. Statista.

Dremel, C., Wulf, J., Herterich, M. M., Waizmann, J. C., & Brenner, W. (2017). How AUDI AG Established Big Data Analytics in Its Digital Transformation. MIS Quarterly Executive16(2).

Fonseca, T. F. C. L. (2021). How can premium automotive brands maintain their status, while sharing technology with their respective auto groups?-the case of Audi and the Volkswagen automotive group (Doctoral dissertation).

Grupp, J. (2020). Mobility solutions within the automotive industry. Development and positioning of’ Audi mobility hub´-a strategic business model innovation concept for future mobility under the lead of Audi business innovation Gmbh (Doctoral dissertation).

Hertrich, S., & Mayrhofer, U. (2021). Audi A1, a success story [Audi A1, une success story] (No. hal-01577649).

Lambert, F. (2020).Take a look at Audi’s crazy container electric car charging system with batteries.

Lee, H., & Clark, A. (2020). Charging the future: Challenges and opportunities for electric vehicle adoption.

Matsuo, H. (2020). Implications of the Tohoku earthquake for Toyota׳ s coordination mechanism: Supply chain disruption of automotive semiconductors. International Journal of Production Economics161, 217-227.

Næss, H. E., & Tjønndal, A. (2021). Innovation, Sustainability and Management in Motorsports: The Case of Formula E (p. 140). Springer Nature.

Nijhuis, C. (2021). Audi wants to build its own fast-charging infrastructure for e-cars.

Page, F (2021). Global chip shortage: Audi furloughs 10,000 staff as production slows.

Ramey, J. (2021). Audi Previews Luxurious Charging Hub for EVs.

Ronanki, D., Kelkar, A., & Williamson, S. S. (2021). Extreme fast charging technology—Prospects to enhance sustainable electric transportation. Energies12(19), 3721.

Rufiange, D. (2021). Audi is recalling nearly all its 2022 models over backup camera issue.

Steitz, c. (2021). Audi CEO sees chip shortage as ‘perfect storm’ but will get through it.

Tucker, S. (2021). Audi Recalls Almost Every 2022 Model to Fix Backup Camera.

Uhlar, S. (2021). Simulating and optimizing the dynamic chassis forces of the Audi e-tron. In 11th International Munich Chassis Symposium 2020 (pp. 253-262). Springer Vieweg, Berlin, Heidelberg.

White, T. (2021). Audi’s answer to the ‘uncomfortable’ problem of charging your electric car is the battery upcycling ‘Powercube’. Carsguide.

Williams, M. (2021). Audi cuts production again because of chip shortage. Automotive Logistics.

error: Content is protected !!