Drug Legalization, Harm Reduction, and Drug Policy

1996 ◽  
Vol 124 (8) ◽  
pp. 776
Author(s):  
Otto S. Baum
2001 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-25
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Bernard ◽  
Eric Hains

Efforts to impede the supply of illegal drugs and the laundering of illegal drug money have been expensive and largely ineffective. The authors propose that supply-reduction drug policy concentrate on impeding the reintroduction into the banking system of the large volumes of small-denomination paper currency (primarily $1, $5, $10, and $20 bills) generated in street-level drug sales. Such highly focused policy might better achieve the supply-reduction goals of the “war on drugs” advocates and the harm-reduction goals of drug legalization advocates.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aileen O’Gorman ◽  
Eberhard Schatz

Abstract Background A range of civil society organisations (CSOs) such as drug user groups, non-governmental/third sector organisations and networks of existing organisations, seek to shape the development of drugs policy at national and international levels. However, their capacity to do so is shaped by the contexts in which they operate nationally and internationally. The aim of this paper is to explore the lived experience of civil society participation in these contexts, both from the perspective of CSOs engaged in harm reduction advocacy, and the institutions they engage with, in order to inform future policy development. Methods This paper is based on the presentations and discussions from a workshop on ‘Civil Society Involvement in Drug Policy hosted by the Correlation - European Harm Reduction Network at the International Society for the Study of Drugs Policy (ISSDP) annual conference in Paris, 2019. In the aftermath of the workshop, the authors analysed the papers and discussions and identified the key themes arising to inform CSI in developing future harm reduction policy and practice. Results Civil society involvement (CSI) in policy decision-making and implementation is acknowledged as an important benefit to representative democracy. Yet, the accounts of CSOs demonstrate the challenges they experience in seeking to shape the contested field of drug policy. Negotiating the complex workings of political institutions, often in adversarial and heavily bureaucratic environments, proved difficult. Nonetheless, an increase in structures which formalised and resourced CSI enabled more meaningful participation at different levels and at different stages of policy making. Conclusions Civil society spaces are colonised by a broad range of civil society actors lobbying from different ideological standpoints including those advocating for a ‘drug free world’ and those advocating for harm reduction. In these competitive arena, it may be difficult for harm reduction orientated CSOs to influence the policy process. However, the current COVID-19 public health crisis clearly demonstrates the benefits of partnership between CSOs and political institutions to address the harm reduction needs of people who use drugs. The lessons drawn from our workshop serve to inform all partners on this pathway.


2020 ◽  
pp. 145507252096501
Author(s):  
Niklas Karlsson ◽  
Torsten Berglund ◽  
Anna Mia Ekström ◽  
Anders Hammarberg ◽  
Tuukka Tammi

Aims: To end the hepatitis and AIDS epidemics in the world by 2030, countries are encouraged to scale-up harm reduction services and target people who inject drugs (PWID). Blood-borne viruses (BBV) among PWID spread via unsterile injection equipment sharing and to combat this, many countries have introduced needle and syringe exchange programmes (NEP), though not without controversy. Sweden’s long, complicated harm reduction policy transition has been deviant compared to the Nordic countries. After launch in 1986, no NEP were started in Sweden for 23 years, the reasons for which are analysed in this study. Methods: Policy documents, grey literature and research mainly published in 2000–2017 were collected and analysed using a hierarchical framework, to understand how continuous build-up of evidence, decisions and key events, over time influenced NEP development. Results: Sweden’s first NEP opened in a repressive-control drug policy era with a drug-free society goal. Despite high prevalence of BBV among PWID with recurring outbreaks, growing research and key-actor support including a NEP law, no NEP were launched. Political disagreements, fluctuating actor-coalitions, questioning of research, and a municipality veto against NEP, played critical roles. With an individual-centred perspective being brought into the drug policy domain, the manifestation of a dual drug and health policy track, a revised NEP law in 2017 and removal of the veto, Sweden would see fast expansion of new NEP. Conclusions: Lessons from the Swedish case could provide valuable insight for countries about to scale-up harm reduction services including how to circumvent costly time- and resource-intensive obstacles and processes involving ideological and individual moral dimensions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document