EFFORTS TO MEASURE THE ECONOMIC COST OF CRIME HAVE FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF DRUG ABUSE AND THE COST OF CRIME ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG ABUSE, PARTICULARLY HEROIN ADDICTION. IN HIS WORK, BECKER NOT ONLY DEVELOPS A THEORY OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BASED ON THE THEORY OF RATIONAL CHOICE, BUT HE ALSO SUGGESTS THE FOLLOWING SOURCES OF THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF CRIME: (1) THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESOURCES DEVOTED TO CRIME PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND PUNISHMENT; (2) THE PRIVATE RESOURCES DEVOTED TO CRIMINAL ACTIVITY; AND (3) THE INJURY AND DEATH OF PERSONS AND DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY RESULTING FROM CRIMINAL ACTS. ON THESE PRINCIPLES THERE APPEARS TO BE GENERAL AGREEMENT, AND COLLECTIVELY THE THREE SOURCES MEASURE THE REDUCED CONSUMPTION OPPORTUNITIES DIRECTLY AND INDIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EXISTENCE OF CRIME. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES HAVE COMMISSIONED STUDIES BASED ON SUCH ECONOMICS OF CRIME METHODOLOGIES, USING THE RESULTS TO GUIDE (PERHAPS MISGUIDE) THE FORMULATION OF PUBLIC POLICIES. HOWEVER, ALTHOUGH SUCH CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS FOR MEASURING THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF CRIME HAVE BEEN GENERALLY ACCEPTED, SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO CONTAIN CONCEPTUAL ERRORS. IN THE DRUG ABUSE AREA WHERE THE GREATEST NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN COMMISSIONED, A CRITICAL ANALYSIS INDICATES SERIOUS MISAPPLICATIONS. BECAUSE OF THESE CONCEPTUAL FLAWS AND CARELESS EXTRAPOLATION OF ESTIMATES THAT ARE HARDLY MORE THAN GUESSES, THE TOTAL ECONOMIC COST OF DRUG-RELATED CRIME HAS BEEN GREATLY OVERESTIMATED. THE RESULT HAS BEEN TO REINFORCE THE POLICY EMPHASIS ON LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TO MISLEAD THE PUBLIC AS TO THE IMPORTANT SOURCES AND MAGNITUDE OF THE TOTAL ECONOMIC COST OF DRUG ABUSE. TABULAR DATA, REFERENCES, AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE ARE PROVIDED. (KBL)