Licit and illicit drug policies: a typology
Toby Citrin
Alexander C Wagenaar1990, Addiction
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
To foster comparison of policy interventions across the various categories of licit and illicit drugs, we develop a typology of policies intended to address drug abuse problems. The principal dimensions of the typology are policy type and intervention channel. While the typology has important limitations, as a mechanism to organize information and stimulate thought it holds the potential to improve understanding of commonalities and distinctions among policies applying to widely discrepant drug problems, both within and across cultures. As such, it could contribute to the development of more effective approaches to grappling with a diverse set of drug policy issues.
Related papers
Effective drug policy: a new approach demonstrated in the Drug Policy Modelling Program
Drug and Alcohol Review, 2007
The aim of this paper is to describe a new comprehensive approach to studying illicit drug policy -one that integrates evidence, disciplinary approaches, drug use behaviours and policy making processes. The methods described here include systematic reviews of the evidence, studies of the ways in which policy decision-making actually occurs, and the use of modelling approaches that can explicate the multi-dimensional nature of drug policy responses and their dynamic interactions. The approach described has the potential to facilitate new drug policy that would not have been possible or apparent through the sole study of one aspect of drug policy, such as the evidence-base or the political context or the economics of drug markets. We believe this approach may be more likely to produce strategic drug policy because it reflects the richness and complexity of the real world of drug use, and drug policy. The purpose of employing an integrative methodology is to create the potential for new drug policy insights, ideas and interventions -not restricted to one body of evidence, nor to accidental or fortuitous policy-making processes. [Ritter A, Bammer G, Hamilton M, Mazerolle L, The DPMP Team. Effective drug policy: a new approach demonstrated in the Drug Policy Modelling Program. Drug Alcohol Rev 2007;26:265 -271]
From Mountains to Molehills: A Comparative Analysis of Drug Policy
2 2 "Drug control" for the purposes of this paper is defined as the efforts of governments and legal institutions to address harms associated with drug use, production, and trade. "Drug policy" broadly refers to laws, regulations, and the behavior that governments and legal institutions can and have adopted towards drug control. As will be presented in this paper, drug policy at present is couched in a general policy of prohibition, whereby the use, production, and trade of drugs deemed illicit is met with criminal sanction. This paper takes the position that there are other viable policy options available and advocates the viability of these other options.
Drug Policy and the Public Good: a summary of the book
Addiction, 2010
Drug Policy and the Public Good was written by an international group of scientists from the fields of addiction, public health, criminology and policy studies to improve the linkages between drug research and drug policy. The book provides a conceptual basis for evidence-informed drug policy and describes epidemiological data on the global dimensions of drug misuse. The core of the book is a critical review of the cumulative scientific evidence in five general areas of drug policy: primary prevention programmes in schools and other settings; health and social services for drug users; attempts to control the supply of drugs, including the international treaty system; law enforcement and ventures into decriminalization; and control of the psychotropic substance market through prescription drug regimes. The final chapters discuss the current state of drug policies in different parts of the world and describe the need for future approaches to drug policy that are coordinated and informed by evidence.
Drug Problems: Cross‐cultural Policy and Program Development
Addiction, 2002
Drug-related policy encounters across the globe: How do they compare?
International Journal of Drug Policy, 2018
Background: Drug law enforcement subsumes the majority of drug policy expenditure across the
The Simple Analytics of Illicit Drug Policy
Australian Economic Review, 2008
The impact of alternative drug policy objectives, specifically harm reduction/harm minimisation or prohibition, is unclear. The literature is confusing. This article conceptualises the causal connection between drug consumption and health harm (or reduced health status) then clarifies the implication of 'drug related harm'. By applying some geometrical tools from economics, the choice of policy objective is analysed. The preferences of policy advocates are then incorporated. Policy advocates are conceived as arguing that decisionmakers and consumers should adopt their preferences between drugs and health harm. With this approach, the difference between alternative drug policies, in particular prohibition and harm minimisation/reduction, is demonstrated.
If supply-oriented drug policy is broken, can harm reduction help fix it? Melding disciplines and methods to advance international drug-control policy
The International journal on drug policy, 2012
Critics of the international drug-control regime contend that supply-oriented policy interventions are not just ineffective, but, in focusing almost exclusively on supply reduction, they also produce unintended adverse consequences. Evidence from the world heroin market supports their claims. The balance of the effects of policy is yet unknown, but the prospect of adverse consequences underlies a central paradox of contemporary supply-oriented policy. In this paper, we evaluate whether harm reduction, a subject of intense debate in the demand-oriented drug-policy community, can provide a unifying foundation for supply-oriented drug policy and speak more directly to policy goals. Our analysis rests on an extensive review of the literature on harm reduction and draws insight from other policy communities' disciplines and methods. First, we explore the paradoxes of supply-oriented policy that initially motivated our interest in harm reduction; second, we consider the conceptual and...
Drug Use and Policy: A Cross-Discipline Dialogue
2019
Author(s): Awasthi, Shevya; Colbert, Matthew; Das, Doyel; Harari, Emily; Hardin, Cassidy; Lee, Rosa; Lee, Michelle; Preosti, Elettra; Russo, Melanie; Shokraee, Saumi
Focusing on abuse, not use: A proposed new direction for US drug policy
Drugs: Education, Prevention, and Policy, 2012
How professionals and societies deal with drugs and drug consumption is premised on how abuse is defined. The ''War on Drugs'' approach promotes the belief that ''any use is abuse'' where the currently illicit drugs are concerned. Regrettably, any distinction between use and abuse has been notably absent from most public policy decisions on drug issues. Even a cursory review of both supply and demand reduction policies of the past century reveals a startling lack of awareness of this distinction. The failure of differentiation undermines prevention, treatment, and the criminal justice system. Treatment, thus, tends to show a bias toward ineffective models such as ''boot camps'' and ''tough love''. It has contributed to controversy over maintenance treatments, such as methadone, buprenorphine, and heroin, which have proven to be highly effective for some addicted persons. It leads to treatment options for the addictions being far more limited and constrained than is typical in other areas of health care. Admittedly, studying non-problematic drug use has been a challenge, but clearly the use of illegal drugs is often not harmful, any more than is moderate alcohol use. Addiction is a fatal disease for some and that disease should be the focus of our policies.
Analyzing drug policy
The Journal of Primary Prevention, 1997
Drug policy advocates must move beyond simplistic concepts of supply reduction and demand reduction. A realistic drug policy must differentiate between drug use and abuse and must avoid contributing to the harm done by drug use. A harm reduction approach requires a more refined model representing the interactions of the complex system of variables which influences the outcomes of the drug experience. This paper examines some of the elements that shouM go into such a model.
Illicit drugs policy through the lens of regulation
The International journal on drug policy, 2010
The application of regulatory theory to the problem of illicit drugs has generally been thought about only in terms of 'command and control'. The international treaties governing global illicit drug control and the use of law enforcement to dissuade and punish offenders have been primary strategies. In this paper I explore the application of other aspects of regulatory theory to illicit drugs-primarily self-regulation and market regulation. There has been an overreliance on strategies from the top of the regulatory pyramid. Two other regulatory strategies--self-regulation and market regulation--can be applied to illicit drugs. Self-regulation, driven by the proactive support of consumer groups may reduce drug-related harms. Market strategies such as pill-testing can change consumer preferences and encourage alternate seller behaviour. Regulatory theory is also concerned with partnerships between the state and third parties: strategies in these areas include partnerships betw...
A Decade in Drug Policy and Research: Evaluating Trends from 2010 to 2020 and Presenting Major Policy Developments
Policy Studies Yearbook, 2022
The War on Drugs still structures much of U.S. drug policy, but recent trends toward liberalization indicate a shifting policy landscape and a corresponding shift in drug policy research. Though 2020-21 will forever be remembered for the global COVID-19 pandemic, it has also been a significant time in the development of U.S. drug policy. Some developments are directly tied to the pandemic; others are part of larger trends that have predated it. Using a scoping review and reflexive thematic analysis, this article captures both the trajectory of research on drug policy over the past decade and substantial drug policy developments within the United States in 2020-2021. The results of our analysis indicate four major research areas of interest: drugs and substances, policy advocacy and appraisal, governance and regulation, as well as treatment and interventions. Within each area, emerging subthemes indicate research preferences that closely follow policy developments. The movement of st...
International Drug Policy in Context
2020
This chapter explores the norms and assumptions that frame and sustain international drug policy and the international drug control regime. Drug policy is conceptualised as a ‘policy fiasco’ that persists despite extensive evidence of goal failure. The absence of effective monitoring and evaluation, impact assessment, stakeholder participation and mainstreaming of rights-based approaches, conflict sensitivity and gender sensitivity is emphasised, substantiating the argument that drug policy is a case study of ‘institutional path dependence’. Drug policy has repeatedly missed targets for achievement of a ‘drug free world’. This is explained through reference to the counterproductive and ‘unintended consequences’ of a drug policy approach of criminalisation. The impacts of drug policy enforcement are shown to be negative, pernicious and disproportionately born by the poor, by vulnerable communities and those subject to discrimination on account of race, gender and class.
What is drug policy and why does it matter
Text of a talk given to the Canberra satellite of the 2016 conference of the International Society for the Study of Drug Policy, organised by ATODA at the National Portrait Gallery, Canberra, Australia on 20th May 2016.
An Alternative Public Health Vision for a National Drug Strategy: "Treatment Works
1991
See generally D. MusTo, THE AMERIcAN DISEASE ORIGINS OF NARCOTIC CONTROL (1987) (examining attempts by state and federal legislators and executives and the medical profession to curtail illegal drug use). 2. Id. 3. See US. OFFICE OF NAT'L DRUG POLICY, NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY 5-6 (1990) [hereinafter NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY 1990]. 4. The White House has been promoting a range of penalties for persons caught using or possessing even small amounts of drugs. Among them are: suspension of driver's licenses, suspension of state benefits such as student loans grants and contracts, and criminalization for solicitation without consummating a sale or purchase of drugs. U.S. OFFICE OF NAT'L DRUG POLICY, NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY 126 (1989) [hereinafter NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY 1989].
Investigation of the Drug Policy Narratives.pdf
This draft explores the persistent 'evolutionary analogy' narrative within drug policy that is guided by the 'precautionary principle'.
The Context of Drug Policy: An Economic Interpretation
Journal of Drug Issues, 1998
Economics can be used to analyze public sector decision making because individuals make these decisions within a framework of incentives and constraints that are a product ofindividual preferences and institutional structure. Considering the emphasis on law enforcement in u.s. drug policy in this context, this paper presents an analysis of the incentives and constraints affecting drug policy that explains a reluctance to change the policy even in the face of considerable evidence that some reforms could be cost effective. Two specific incentives for an emphasis on enforcement are presented. First. police agencies have an incentive to allocate more resources to drug enforcement due to the factors that determine police budgets. Second, asset forfeiture laws give police agencies a direct monetary rewardfor making drug arrests. We conclude that understanding drug policy requires an examination ofthe incentives and constraints that affect the behavior ofthose who are responsible for policy development. Important research on the efficacy of drug treatment, harm reduction programs, unintended consequences of excessive enforcement activities, and the properties of marijuana compared to both alcohol and harder illegal drugs, Suggest possible drug policy reforms that might be highly cost effective. Yet policy makers, particularly at the Federal level, appear to be reluctant to consider alternatives to the present emphasis on prohibition through criminalization. Most prominent examples of innovations in drug policy appear to be the result of statelevel popular referenda (e.g., as in allowances of expanded medical use of marijuana in California and Arizona) or local policy experiments such as drug Courts. Why are policy makers reluctant to adopt innovative drug policies in the face of considerable evidence in support of change and public referenda that
Related topics
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.