AN ANALYSIS ON THE PROLIFERATION OF DRUGS IN BARANGAY 176 BAGONG SILANG CALOOCAN CITY
Keywords:
drug proliferation, socioeconomic factors, law enforcement, community intervention, barangay 176Abstract
Barangay 176 in Bagong Silang, Caloocan City, the Philippines’ most populous barangay, remains challenged by persistent illegal drug activities that undermine public security, health, and economic development. This study examines the root causes of drug proliferation in the community by investigating social, economic, and systemic determinants. The research aims to identify how these factors exacerbate the local drug problem and to propose targeted interventions to minimize or eradicate illicit drug influence. A descriptive quantitative design is employed, using a validated, pilot‑tested survey questionnaire administered to sixty respondents selected for their roles and experiences in the barangay: forty residents, ten barangay officials, and ten police officers. The instrument collects demographic data, perceptions of drug proliferation causes, and challenges in containment. Data are analyzed using weighted means to assess consensus on contributing factors and rank ordering to identify primary concerns. Respondents were predominantly female, married, aged 26–33 and had lived in Barangay 176 for over ten years. They agreed that lack of education and employment opportunities (mean = 3.27), weakened social norms (mean = 3.24), and low socioeconomic status (mean = 3.22) were major contributors to drug proliferation. The most commonly identified problems were active drug syndicates and weak enforcement of barangay ordinances, each ranked as top concerns by 11.53 percent of participants. The findings indicated that the drug crisis in Barangay 176 was rooted in underlying socioeconomic challenges, ineffective local enforcement, and persistent syndicate operations. As a result, the study recommended enhanced coordination among local authorities, law enforcement, and community stakeholders; strengthened surveillance and ordinance enforcement; and the development of education and rehabilitation programs. These measures were expected to curtail drug activity and improve overall community well‑being.