Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.

Date: November 22, 2024 Fri

Time: 12:24 pm

Results for drug abuse policy

41 results found

Author: New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform

Title: The Future of Sentencing in New York State: Recommendations for Reform

Summary: This report calls for reforms to New York State drug laws; determinate sentencing, graduated and sanctions for parole violators are among the other recommendations offered.

Details: Albany: New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform, 2009. 256p.

Source:

Year: 2009

Country: United States

URL:

Shelf Number: 113484

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Offenses
Parole
Sentencing

Author: Ormston, Rachel

Title: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey 2009: Public Attitudes to Drugs and Drug Use in Scotland

Summary: This report presents frindings from the 2009 Scottish Social Attitudes survey on public attitudes towards illegal drugs and drug misuse in Scotland. The report focuses in particular on attitudes towards opiate misuse and on views of potential policy responses to this. However, it also places such attitudes in the context of wider views and experiences of illegal drugs.

Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2010. 75p.

Source: Internet Resource

Year: 2010

Country: United Kingdom

URL:

Shelf Number: 118687

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drugs
Opiates
Public Opinion, Drugs (Scotland)

Author: Best, David

Title: Research for Recovery: A Review of the Drugs Evidence Base

Summary: The publication of The Road to Recovery: A New Approach to Tackling Scotland’s Drug Problem by the Scottish Government in 2008 signalled a fundamental shift in the way we think of problem drug use and in the approach to the types of interventions that are appropriate to address it. In particular, the switch to a recovery model represented the recognition that the resolution of addiction problems involves not only the drug user, but also their families and communities. It also recognises that recovery is a complex process likely to endure over a number of years after the point of stabilisation or abstinence, and that it is likely to involve fundamental changes in an individual’s social functioning and personal wellbeing, as well as in their place in their community and wider society. The aim of this review was to assess the current state of the evidence base that will help underpin the delivery of the Scottish Government’s drugs strategy – The Road to Recovery. The review examined both the published research base and also the policy context in which the strategy sits, – this provides the link between the evidence base on addictions and the wider context of social inclusion, public health and economic development.

Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2010. 207p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 13, 2010 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/321958/0103435.pdf

Year: 2010

Country: United Kingdom

URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/321958/0103435.pdf

Shelf Number: 119789

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Scotland)
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment

Author: Hughes, Caitlin

Title: Media Reporting on Illicit Drugs in Australia: Trends and Impacts on Youth Attitudes to Illicit Drug Use

Summary: This study starts to address the intersection between news media and illicit drug use. It examines two major aspects of news media: media production – as denoted by patterns and trends in Australian news media reporting on illicit drugs – and media effects – as denoted by impacts on youth attitudes to illicit drug use. The purpose of this study was fourfold: To identify the dominant media portrayals used to denote illicit drugs in Australian news media and dominant portrayals by drug type (cannabis, amphetamines, ecstasy, cocaine and heroin); To identify the extent to which media portrayals have changed over time (from 2003-2008): measured in terms of the number and type of media reports on illicit drugs; To explore the impacts of different media portrayals on youth attitudes to illicit drug use: namely their perceptions of the risks and acceptability of use and their likelihood of future use; and To determine if the media differentially affects sub-populations of youth, and if so, to identify the sub-populations of youth that are most responsive to media reporting on illicit drugs.

Details: Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, 2010. 138p.

Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Modelling Program, Monograph 19: Accessed October 8, 2010 at: http://www.dpmp.unsw.edu.au/DPMPWeb.nsf/resources/Monograph+16.pdf/$file/Mono+19.pdf

Year: 2010

Country: Australia

URL: http://www.dpmp.unsw.edu.au/DPMPWeb.nsf/resources/Monograph+16.pdf/$file/Mono+19.pdf

Shelf Number: 119888

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Media

Author: Bezlov, Tihomir

Title: Heroin Users in Bulgaria One Year After Outlawing the Dose for "Personal Use": Law Changes and New Risks

Summary: The report reveals the place of heroin use in Bulgaria and its development since the amendment to the Penal Code repealing Paragraph 3 of Art 354a and its provision. The revision gained public popularity as „the single dose law”. It renders criminal every drug substance possession, regardless of the type or quantity of the substance, or whether the individual in possession of the dose is dependent or not. Under the new regulation, the drug wholesalers, the small drug dealers, and those just using, not trading in drugs, are treated equally harshly. The change was carried out, despite keen objections on the part of experts and civil society organizations that it might lead to severe and unpredictable consequences. The research, however, revealed that the ban on the „single dose”, and its negative implications, are only part of a larger nationwide problem caused not only by the legislative framework, but also by the inadequate institutional response.

Details: Sofia, Bulgaria: Initiative for Health Foundation and the Open Society Institute Sofia, 2005. 24p.

Source: Internet Resource: http://www.csd.bg/fileSrc.php?id=1939

Year: 2005

Country: Bulgaria

URL: http://www.csd.bg/fileSrc.php?id=1939

Shelf Number: 119922

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Addiction and Abuse
Heroin

Author: Haynes, R.

Title: Drug Trends and Crime Tracking: Relationships Between Indices of Heroin, Amphetamine and Cannabis Use and Crime

Summary: Illicit drug use is associated with a range of harms to individuals, families and the wider community, and is a contributing factor to disability and death. In addition, illicit drug use is associated with crime. In 2004–05 it is estimated that drug related crime cost the Australian community $4 billion. Due to the wide range of harms associated with illicit drug use, it is important to examine the relationships between the prevalence of illicit drug use and health-related outcomes. However, as illicit drug use is also associated with crime and criminal behaviour it is also important to consider the effects of illicit drug use and availability on crime. This research was funded by the Office of Crime Prevention as a 'Crime Futures' research project. A primary objective was to investigate the potential for drug use indicators to be identified as a planning or 'early warning' tool for changing drug use trends. It was considered that the identification of reliable indicators would assist policy makers and service organisations in the health, welfare and justice sectors to plan in advance for changes in drug use patterns.

Details: Perth: Government of Western Australia, Drug and Alcohol Office, 2010. 54p.

Source: Internet Resource: Drug and Alcohol Office Monograph: No. 6: Accessed December 20, 2010 at: http://www.crimeprevention.wa.gov.au/uploads/file/Drug%20Trends%20and%20Crime%20Report.pdf

Year: 2010

Country: Australia

URL: http://www.crimeprevention.wa.gov.au/uploads/file/Drug%20Trends%20and%20Crime%20Report.pdf

Shelf Number: 120554

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse and Crime (Australia)
Drug Abuse Policy

Author: Donohue, John J., III

Title: Rethinking America's Illegal Drug Policy

Summary: This paper provides a critical review of the empirical and theoretical literatures on illegal drug policy, including cross-country comparisons, in order to evaluate three drug policy regimes: criminalization, legalization and “depenalization.” Drawing on the experiences of various states, as well as countries such as Portugal and the Netherlands, the paper attempts to identify cost-minimizing policies for marijuana and cocaine by assessing the differing ways in which the various drug regimes would likely change the magnitude and composition of the social costs of each drug. The paper updates and evaluates Jeffrey Miron’s 1999 national time series analysis of drug prohibition spending and the homicide rate, which underscores the lack of a solid empirical base for assessing the theoretically anticipated crime drop that would come from drug legalization. Nonetheless, the authors conclude that given the number of arrests for marijuana possession, and the costs of incarceration and crime systemic to cocaine criminalization, the current regime is unlikely to be cost-minimizing for either marijuana or cocaine.

Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011. 102p.

Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 16776: Accessed February 14, 2011 at: http://mfi.uchicago.edu/publications/papers/donohue_drugpolicy.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: United States

URL: http://mfi.uchicago.edu/publications/papers/donohue_drugpolicy.pdf

Shelf Number: 120757

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Drug Legalization
Drug Policy

Author: Flick, Peg

Title: HB10-1352 Savings Analysis Report: Review of Analysis Methodology. Pursuant to 24-33.5-503(1)(u), C.R.S.

Summary: In May 2010 the Colorado General Assembly passed House Bill 10‐1352 which substantially altered Article 18, Title 18 concerning Uniform Controlled Substances. These modifications are described in detail in this report. HB 10‐1352 lowered the penalties for drug use and possession and directs expected savings to the Drug Offender Treatment fund for substance abuse treatment of offenders. HB 10‐1352 also directs the Division of Criminal Justice (DCJ) to report annually on the savings generated by this bill (24‐33.5‐503(u), C.R.S.). This is the first report since the bill was signed into law. The statutory changes went into effect on August 11, 2010. This report describes the methodology used to analyze any savings and presents preliminary findings from an examination of the first 10 weeks following the bill’s effective date.

Details: Colorado Springs, CO: Colorado Department of Public Safety, Division of Criminal Justice, Office of Research and Statistics, 2011. 55p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 24, 2011 at: http://dcj.state.co.us/ors/pdf/docs/Final%201-14-11%20HB1352%20report.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: United States

URL: http://dcj.state.co.us/ors/pdf/docs/Final%201-14-11%20HB1352%20report.pdf

Shelf Number: 120868

Keywords:
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Drug Offenders (Colorado)

Author: Jelsma, Martin

Title: The Development of International Drug Control: Lessons Learned and Strategic Challenges for the Future

Summary: The emergence of more pragmatic and less punitive approaches to the drugs issue may represent the beginning of change in the current global drug control regime. The spread of HIV/AIDS among injecting drug users, the overcrowding of prisons, the reluctance in South America to remain a theatre for military anti-drug operations, and the ineffectiveness of repressive anti-drug efforts to reduce the illicit market have all contributed to the global erosion of support for the United States-style war on drugs. Over the last decade rapidly widening cracks have begun to split global drug control consensus. The zero-tolerance ideology is increasingly challenged by calls for decriminalisation, harm reduction and embedding human rights principles in drug control. And in recent years the merits of a regulated legal market for cannabis has been accepted as part of the mainstream debate about a more effective control model. This paper describes how the foundations for the global control system were established, the radicalization of the system toward more repressive implementation, consequently leading to soft defections and de-escalation efforts becoming more widespread; and in the last section projects a future for the ongoing reform process toward a modernization and humanization of the control system’s international legal framework as laid down in the UN drug control conventions.

Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2010. 16p.

Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper Prepared for the First Meeting of the Commission, Geneva, 24-25 January 2011: http://www.tni.org/paper/development-international-drug-control

Year: 2010

Country: International

URL: http://www.tni.org/paper/development-international-drug-control

Shelf Number: 120902

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Drug Policy

Author: Correctional Association of New York

Title: Treatment Behind Bars: Substance Abuse Treatment in New York Prisons

Summary: Substance abuse is a daunting problem for the majority of prison inmates nationally and more than three-quarters of those in New York State. The devastation that often accompanies substance abuse places notoriously heavy demands on the criminal justice, correctional and substance abuse treatment systems, as well as on inmates, their families and their communities. The prison system has the unique potential to provide effective drug treatment to this captive population, addressing not only the individual needs of inmates but public health and public safety as well. Not only is the prison system in a unique position to provide drug treatment, but a substantial body of research documents that treatment is, on the whole, more effective than incarceration alone in reducing drug abuse and criminal behavior among substance abusers and in increasing the likelihood that they will remain drug- and crime-free. The need to provide more comprehensive substance abuse treatment services in New York State prisons, similar to the increasing need to provide mental health services in prisons as a result of deinstitutionalization of mental hospital patients, has directly been impacted by the Rockefeller drug laws. With their rigid requirements of mandatory minimum sentencing, the Rockefeller drug laws of 1973 radically restricted judicial discretion in utilizing alternatives to incarceration as a response to drug offenses. The result: 11% of the total prison population in 1980 were individuals incarcerated for drug-related offenses; as of January, 2008, that figure was 33%. Though this past year brought significant reform to the Rockefeller Drug Laws, several mandatory minimum sentences are still on the books and a large number of individuals remain ineligible for alternative to incarceration programs. The considerable increase in this population illustrates one of the many factors that make provision of prison-based substance abuse treatment paramount, as the majority of incarcerated individuals will participate in treatment due to the nature of their offense. As of April 2010, the New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) operated 68 facilities, with 57,650 inmates under custody. Eighty-three percent of inmates were designated by DOCS as “in need of substance abuse treatment.” To address their needs, DOCS operates 119 substance abuse treatment programs in 60 of its facilities. As of April l, 2009, two of those programs were licensed as treatment programs by the State’s Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS); the remainder are operated solely under the aegis and oversight of DOCS. The 2009 reforms to the Rockefeller drug laws call for change, however, requiring OASAS to guide, monitor and report on DOCS substance abuse treatment programs. In 2007, the Correctional Association launched a project to evaluate the needs of inmates with substance abuse problems and the State’s response to their needs. The information presented in this report is a result of this effort and presents our findings and recommendations based on visits to 23 facilities, interviews with experts, prison officials and correction officers, more than 2,300 inmate surveys and systemwide data provided by the Department of Correctional Services.

Details: New York: Correctional Association of New York, 2011. 325p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2011 at: http://www.correctionalassociation.org/publications/download/pvp/issue_reports/satp_report_and_appendix_february_2011.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: United States

URL: http://www.correctionalassociation.org/publications/download/pvp/issue_reports/satp_report_and_appendix_february_2011.pdf

Shelf Number: 121107

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment (New York State)
Drug Offenders
Inmates
Prisoners
Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Bewley-Taylor, David: Jelsma, Martin

Title: Fifty Years of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs: A Reinterpretation

Summary: This year marks the 50th anniversary of the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, signed on 30 March 1961. 73 countries were represented at the conference that took place in New York from 24 January to 25 March 1961, which sought to lay a new solid foundation for drug control in the post-war United Nations era. The aim was to replace the multiple existing multilateral treaties in the field with a single instrument as well as to reduce the number of international treaty organs concerned with the control of narcotic drugs, and to make provisions for the control of the production of raw materials of narcotic drugs. The Single Convention entered into force on 13 December 1964, having met the requirement of forty state ratifications. Couched with the lofty aim of concern for “the health and welfare of mankind,” the guiding principle of the treaty was to limit the use of drugs exclusively to medical and scientific purposes, because, as the preamble continues, “addiction to narcotic drugs constitutes a serious evil for the individual and is fraught with social and economic danger to mankind.” At the same time, the Convention recognized “that the medical use of narcotic drugs continues to be indispensable for the relief of pain and suffering and that adequate provision must be made to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs for such purposes”. Fifty years on, it is time for a critical reflection on the validity of the Single Convention today: a reinterpretation of its historical significance and an assessment of its aims, its strengths and its weaknesses. Indeed, while there is often a tendency to interpret the treaty as part of an unbroken continuum dating back to the first decade of the last century, the Single Convention must rather be seen as a significant change in way the international community approached drug control. Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that the original ambition for the ‘Single’ Convention to become the ‘convention to end all conventions’ failed when the control regime developed further with conventions in 1971 and 1988 giving rise to new inconsistencies within the current global drug control treaty system. This policy briefing analyses the origins and negotiations of the Single Convention, examines the way it broke with the previous drug control system by introducing a more prohibitive ethos, penal obligations, controls on plants and abolition of traditional uses of plants like coca, and concludes that a revision of its outdated provisions is required.

Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2011. 20p.

Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies No. 12: Accessed April 8, 2011 at: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr12.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: International

URL: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr12.pdf

Shelf Number: 121285

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control Policy

Author: Open Society Institute. Public Health Program

Title: At What Cost? HIV and Human Rights Consequences of the Global "War on Drugs"

Summary: A decade after governments worldwide pledged to achieve a "drug-free world," there is little evidence that the supply or demand of illicit drugs has been reduced. Instead, aggressive drug control policies have led to increased incarceration for minor offenses, human rights violations, and disease. This book examines the descent of the global war on drugs into a war on people who use drugs. From Puerto Rico to Phnom Penh, Manipur to Moscow, the scars of this war are carried on the bodies and minds of drug users, their families, and the health and service providers who work with them. The following topics are included in this volume: •Police Abuse of Injection Drug Users in Indonesia •Arbitrary Detention and Police Abuse of Drug Users in Cambodia •Forced Drug Testing in China •Drug Control Policies and HIV Prevention and Care Among Injection Drug Users in Imphal, India •Effects of UN and Russian Influence on Drug Policy in Central Asia •The Impacts of the Drug War in Latin America and the Caribbean •Civil Society Reflections on 10 Years of Drug Control in Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam •Twin Epidemics–Drug Use and HIV/AIDS in Pakistan.

Details: New York: Open Society Institute, 2009. 196p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2011 at: http://www.soros.org/initiatives/health/focus/ihrd/articles_publications/publications/atwhatcost_20090302

Year: 2009

Country: International

URL: http://www.soros.org/initiatives/health/focus/ihrd/articles_publications/publications/atwhatcost_20090302

Shelf Number: 121408

Keywords:
AIDS (Disease)
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Drug Enforcement

Author: Thomson, Nick

Title: Detention as Treatment: Detention of Methamphetamine Users in Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand

Summary: This report examines the establishment and operation of centers to detain and “treat” methamphetamine users in Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos. It documents the increasing number of such compulsory drug treatment/detention centers (CDTDCs), examines the policies and practices that force people into them, and explores the implications for individual health, public health, and human rights. This approach to treating methamphetamine use is implemented without evidence of effectiveness, and it places people in environments where their basic health needs are unmet and abuse is pervasive. The core issue identified in this report is the use of law enforcement approaches to address health issues. Though drug policies in Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos have been amended in recent years to recognize that drug dependence is a health issue, the public security sectors in these three countries tend to trump the smaller and weaker health sectors. Illicit drug use remains a violation of criminal law in these countries, and people who use drugs are treated as criminals. CDTDCs are generally run by police or military personnel. Drug users are often detained using administrative rules rather than criminal laws, and in many cases, do not see a judge or have the ability to question or appeal internment. International actors, particularly agencies of the United Nations and donor states, face a policy conflict when confronted with CDTDCs. At the same time that they advocate for evidence-based treatment, they issue grants to agencies working with these centers or to the centers themselves. The steady growth in the construction of the CDTDCs, and the lack of HIV prevention or treatment, evidence-based and effective drug treatment, or any other medical treatment, reveal the limits of the approach. While opiate users comprise the majority of those detained in CDTDCs in countries like China and Vietnam, in many countries in Southeast Asia it is methamphetamine users who are the overwhelming majority of detainees. The production, trafficking, and use of methamphetamine in Thailand, Cambodia, and Laos pose significant challenges to both the law enforcement and health service sectors. As with other problems related to illicit drugs, finding an appropriate balance between the security needs of the community and the health needs and rights of methamphetamine users should be the ultimate goal. The current approach, however, is harmful to the health and rights of individuals, and to the health of the larger community.

Details: New York: Open Society Institute, International Harm Reduction Development Program, 2010. 81p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 22, 2011 at: http://www.soros.org/initiatives/health/focus/ihrd/articles_publications/publications/detention-as-treatment-20100301/Detention-as-Treatment-20100301.pdf

Year: 2010

Country: Asia

URL: http://www.soros.org/initiatives/health/focus/ihrd/articles_publications/publications/detention-as-treatment-20100301/Detention-as-Treatment-20100301.pdf

Shelf Number: 121474

Keywords:
Detention
Drug Abuse and Addition (Cambodia, Laos, Thailand)
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Drug Offenders
Human Rights

Author: Global Commission on Drug Policy

Title: War On Drugs: Report of the Global Commission on Drug Policy

Summary: The global war on drugs has failed. When the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs came into being 50 years ago, and when President Nixon launched the US government’s war on drugs 40 years ago, policymakers believed that harsh law enforcement action against those involved in drug production, distribution and use would lead to an ever-diminishing market in controlled drugs such as heroin, cocaine and cannabis, and the eventual achievement of a ‘drug free world’. In practice, the global scale of illegal drug markets – largely controlled by organized crime – has grown dramatically over this period. While accurate estimates of global consumption across the entire 50-year period are not available, an analysis of the last 10 years alone shows a large and growing market. In spite of the increasing evidence that current policies are not achieving their objectives, most policymaking bodies at the national and international level have tended to avoid open scrutiny or debate on alternatives. This lack of leadership on drug policy has prompted the establishment of our Commission, and leads us to our view that the time is now right for a serious, comprehensive and wide-ranging review of strategies to respond to the drug phenomenon. The starting point for this review is the recognition of the global drug problem as a set of interlinked health and social challenges to be managed, rather than a war to be won. Commission members have agreed on four core principles that should guide national and international drug policies and strategies, and have made eleven recommendations for action. The Commission’s recommendations include: ● End the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but who do no harm to others. ● Encourage experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs (especially cannabis) to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens. ● Ensure that a variety of treatment modalities are available – including not just methadone and buprenorphine treatment but also the heroin-assisted treatment programs that have proven successful in many European countries and Canada. ● Apply human rights and harm reduction principles and policies both to people who use drugs as well as those involved in the lower ends of illegal drug markets such as farmers, couriers and petty sellers.

Details: Rio de Janeiro: Global Commission on Drug Policy, 2011. 20p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2011 at: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Report

Year: 2011

Country: International

URL: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Report

Shelf Number: 121881

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Policy
Drug Regulation
Illegal Drug Markets

Author: Eisenbach-Stangl, Irmgard

Title: Two Worlds of Drug Consumption in Late Modern Societies

Summary: Europeans belong to the largest consumers of illicit drugs, absorbing about one fifth of the global heroin, cocaine and cannabis supply, as well as one third of ecstasy production (UNODC World Drug Report, 2008). However, the vast majority of Europeans have never tried any illicit substance. In popular perception, illicit drugs still represent alien cultures challenging traditional European patterns, including consumption of our favourite drugs – alcoholic beverages. Illicit drug-taking, no matter what type of drug and its amount, is considered an evil in itself; it is regarded as a serious transgression of social norms. This perception is perpetuated and reinforced by legal norms which – in most European countries – penalize a wide range of behaviours associated with illicit drugs. As a rule, this includes the possession and consumption of illegal drugs. Parallel to that, most European countries have established extended drug services dealing with drug-related problems in a more assimilative way. A crucial issue has been how many people transgress social and legal norms. Therefore, the general public, policy-makers, politicians and drug professionals alike demand, first of all, information on the prevalence of drug consumption. The question of what and how much they consume seems to be almost irrelevant. Only a few years ago the Global Workshop on Drug Information Systems (2002) identified the need for improved methods of estimating the quantities of illicit drugs consumed by users to complement the increasing sophistication and reliability of data on drug production and on drug seizure. Another important gap in the literature is the absence of reliable information on the costs of drug consumption at individual level. This knowledge is crucial to understanding the economic (and criminal) behaviour of individual consumers which includes not only drug purchasing but also continuous efforts to generate money to buy drugs. To fill these knowledge gaps, a project was carried out by the European Centre in collaboration with UNODC and financed by the Austrian federal ministry of European and international affairs. The European monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug addiction acted as observer. The overall goal of the project was to contribute to the development of useful and appropriate models of estimating drug consumption. The objectives were to assess consumption patterns of five main drugs – heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, ecstasy, cannabis – including the amounts consumed, and to assess consumption costs for each of the drugs. The study was based on data gathered from two different samples of drug users in six cities in six European union countries.

Details: Vienna: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, 2011. 17p.

Source: Internet Resource: Policiy Brief: Accessed July 8, 2011 at: http://www.euro.centre.org/data/1263572258_23948.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: Europe

URL: http://www.euro.centre.org/data/1263572258_23948.pdf

Shelf Number: 122014

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Europe)
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Policy

Author: Eisenbach-Stangl, Irmgard

Title: The Vienna Drug Policy 1970 to 2005: External and Internal Views

Summary: In the 60s of the last century, the international drug policy changed substantially: its focus shifted from supply control to demand control. Demand control was conceived as addiction control, and addiction was understood in psychological terms to be a problem of the individual. Accordingly, the drug policy instruments were altered and expanded. On the one hand, the “repressive, socially excluding penal measures now also aimed at individual drug users; on the other hand, new measures were introduced: “Early diagnosis, treatment, information, after-treatment, and social re-integration” are, for the first time, mentioned as drug policy measures in the Single Convention of 1961. By introducing measures of “integration” or “assimilation”, drug matters became the responsibility of not only national policy authorities but also – and this was the novelty – of regional authorities that had so far been in charge of health, social welfare, and education in Austria like in most European countries. Whether the local policy became active in drug issues and in what ways it became active and how it cooperated with the policy at national level, varied regionally.

Details: Vienna: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, 2008. 9p.

Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief: Accessed July 8, 2011 at: http://www.euro.centre.org/data/1219825741_32957.pdf

Year: 2008

Country: International

URL: http://www.euro.centre.org/data/1219825741_32957.pdf

Shelf Number: 122015

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy

Author: Harris, Genevieve

Title: Conviction by Numbers: Threshold Quantities for Drug Policy

Summary: Threshold quantities (TQs) for drug law and policy are being experimented with across many jurisdictions. States seem attracted to their apparent simplicity and use them to determine, for example, whether: a possession or supply offence is made out (e.g. Greece); a matter should be diverted away from the criminal justice system (e.g. Portugal); or a case should fall within a certain sentencing range (e.g. UK). Looking at examples from the EU and beyond, however, it is becoming clear that there are no ‘magic numbers’ in drug policy and that this tool brings its own complications and pit-falls. This briefing will therefore seek to provide an overview of the current discussion around TQs and will explore the mechanism of TQs including their benefits and drawbacks as a policy and legal tool.

Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2011. 12p.

Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 14: Accessed July 11, 2011 at: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr14.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: International

URL: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr14.pdf

Shelf Number: 122022

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Drug Offenses
Drug Policy
Drug Reform

Author: Domoslawski, Artur

Title: Drug Policy in Portugal: The Benefits of Decriminalizing Drug Use

Summary: In 2000, the Portuguese government responded to widespread public concern over drugs by rejecting a "war on drugs" approach and instead decriminalized drug possession and use. It further rebuffed convention by placing the responsibility for decreasing drug demand as well as managing dependence under the Ministry of Health, rather than the Ministry of Justice. With this, the official response toward drug-dependent persons shifted from viewing them as criminals, to treating them as patients. Drug Policy in Portugal: The Benefits of Decriminalizing Drug Use is the second in a series of reports by the Open Society Foundations' Global Drug Policy Program that documents positive examples of drug policy reform around the world (the first being From the Mountaintops: What the World Can Learn from Drug Policy Change in Switzerland). Drug Policy in Portugal describes the process, context, ideas, and values that enabled Portugal to make the transition to a public health response to drug use and possession. Now, with a decade of experience, Portugal provides a valuable case study of how decriminalization coupled with evidence-based strategies can reduce drug consumption, dependence, recidivism, and HIV infection, and create safer communities for all.

Details: Warsaw, Poland: Global Drug Policy Program, Open Society Foundations, 2011. 52p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 3, 2011 at: http://www.soros.org/initiatives/drugpolicy/articles_publications/publications/drug-policy-in-portugal-20110829/drug-policy-in-portugal-20110829.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: Portugal

URL: http://www.soros.org/initiatives/drugpolicy/articles_publications/publications/drug-policy-in-portugal-20110829/drug-policy-in-portugal-20110829.pdf

Shelf Number: 122963

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Drug Policy (Portugal)

Author: United States Government Accountability Office (GAO)

Title: Prescription Pain Reliever Abuse: Agencies Have Begun Coordinating Education Efforts, but Need to Access Effectiveness

Summary: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has declared that the United States is in the midst of an epidemic of prescription drug overdose deaths, with deaths associated with prescription pain relievers of particular concern. To address this issue, federal agencies are raising awareness by educating prescribers and the general public. In response to your request, GAO (1) described recent national trends in prescription pain reliever abuse and misuse, (2) described how federal agencies are educating prescribers, (3) assessed the extent to which federal agencies follow key practices for developing public education efforts, and (4) identified educational efforts that use similar strategies and assessed how agencies coordinate those efforts. GAO interviewed officials and reviewed documents and websites from seven agencies involved in federal drug control efforts and analyzed the most recent data from several data sources related to prescription pain reliever abuse and misuse. GAO also assessed the development of public education efforts and federal coordination efforts against key practices from prior GAO work. GAO recommends that the Director of ONDCP establish outcome metrics and implement a plan to evaluate proposed educational efforts, and ensure that agencies share lessons learned among similar efforts. ONDCP did not explicitly agree or disagree with GAO’s recommendations, but noted that it will continue to work for improved coordination of educational efforts and evaluation of outcomes.

Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office

Source: Report to Congressional Requesters: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 27, 2012 at http://atforum.com/addiction-resources/documents/GAOReport_000.pdf

Year: 0

Country: United States

URL: http://atforum.com/addiction-resources/documents/GAOReport_000.pdf

Shelf Number: 123839

Keywords:
Drug Abuse (U.S.)
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control Policy
Prescription Drugs

Author: Nicholas, Roger

Title: Responding to Pharmaceutical Drug Misuse Problems in Australia: A Matter of Balance

Summary: A National Pharmaceutical Drug Misuse Strategy (NPDMS) is being developed at the request of the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy (MCDS). This literature review was prepared as part of the development of the NPDMS. Its purpose is to inform and guide the development of the Strategy. Specifically, the review examines the extent and nature of the existing evidence base of relevance to the NPDMS. The literature review focuses primarily on opioids, benzodiazepines and codeine-containing analgesics as the Strategy, at the request of the MCDS, focus on these drugs. The review is structured in several parts, as follows. First some broader frameworks, strategies, policies, initiatives, perspectives and paradigms which impact upon the development of the Strategy are considered. This is followed by an examination of the Australian situation and then the international situation. The review then examines issues surrounding the quality use of opioids and benzodiazepines. Next issues surrounding medication shopping are considered. Finally, the review examines some of the potential responses to pharmaceutical misuse.

Details: Adelaide: National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA), Flinders University, 2011. 194p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 27, 2012 at: http://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/www.nceta.flinders.edu.au/ContentPages/2438891316.pdf

Year: 2011

Country: Australia

URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/www.nceta.flinders.edu.au/ContentPages/2438891316.pdf

Shelf Number: 124295

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Australia)
Drug Abuse Policy
Prescription Drugs

Author: Burrows, John

Title: Research into the nature and effectiveness of drugs throughcare

Summary: The aims of this study were to: describe the nature of throughcare procedures for prisoners with serious drug misuse problems; and gauge the impact of interventions on offenders’ drug taking, and offending behaviour, following their release from prison. A principal objective of the study was to establish what constitutes good practice in drugs throughcare, with a view to disseminating the lessons learnt. A range of different agencies and organisations share the responsibility for organising and delivering drug throughcare services for released prisoners, including the Prison Service, the Probation Service, Health Authorities, Social Service Departments, Drug Action Teams and – of course – both statutory and independent drug services. Indeed, in this complex network, knowing ‘where the buck stops’ is not clear in every case – particularly for those who are not released under statutory supervision (remand or short-term prisoners). Aside from the very real human costs to drug users themselves, the problem addressed by this research imposes substantial costs on the wider community. These are best viewed as ‘opportunity costs’, where substantial savings may be made as a result of appropriate intervention. It can be estimated that 8,000 sentenced offenders might be released from prisons in England and Wales each year with a significant drug dependency – if no action has been taken to break drug habits. However, if drug throughcare could effect a 40 per cent reduction in drug dependency amongst ex-prisoners, the number of crimes expected to be committed by these individuals each year would fall from some 5 million to 3 million. The costs incurred by victims of crime might reduce from some £250 million to about £150 million. There would, in addition, be many other savings realised in the criminal justice system, health service and elsewhere.

Details: London: Home Office, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2001. 64p.

Source: RDS Occasional Paper No. 68: Internet Resource: Accessed February 29, 2012 at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/occ68-dtc.pdf

Year: 2001

Country: United Kingdom

URL: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/occ68-dtc.pdf

Shelf Number: 124326

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (U.K.)
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Treatment (U.K.)
Ex-Offenders (U.K.)

Author: Merkinaite, Simona

Title: A War Against Peopole Who Use Drugs: The Costs

Summary: This report aims to assess whether national funding allocated for drug-related measures achieves the goals of slowing down or reversing drug epidemics and protecting society from drug-related harms. It is based on comparing costs associated with both – law enforcement activities and public health measures such as harm reduction and drug treatment. The report draws on country costs assessments done in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Romania and Russia as well as analysis of data from other countries of the region, including Ukraine and Tajikistan. Key findings: • Punishment for petty, non-violent drug crimes—mainly but not solely limited to criminalization of people who use drugs—results in stigma and discrimination, and creates a political climate in which human rights norms are not applied in relation to people who use drugs. • Such policies lead to police harassment, misuse of power and extortion of money from drug users and/or their relatives. • In most countries of Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA), governments’ unwillingness to allocate funds for harm reduction, opioid substitution therapy (OST), HIV and hepatitis C treatment is determined not by insufficiency of national funding, but by prioritization of enforcement over health approaches. • Such misguided priorities also have significant (and negative) financial consequences. For example: – The Kyrgyzstan government spends around $1.25 million per year to enforce Article 246 of the Criminal Code (regarding possession of drugs with no intent to supply). By comparison, the budget for OST programs is $500,000, and is currently covered exclusively by external donors. OST costs $500 per patient a year, while punishment costs at least $625 per each person convicted for drug possession. – In 2010 alone, the prosecution of drug offenders (for use and supply) cost at least $100 million in Russia. In comparison, under the Budget Law for 2011, HIV prevention programming is to receive less than 3% of the total $640 million to be allocated in 2012 through the Federal Budget Law for HIV, hepatitis B and C, and the government continues to prohibit internationally accepted drug treatment interventions such as OST. The government therefore will spend millions more treating people infected with HIV than it would have in protecting their health and reducing transmission. – Georgia spends around $10.5 million annually on random street drug testing and an additional $4.7 million on imprisonment of drug offenders. This not only fails to deter people from using drugs (as eventually the majority return to drug use) but also increases criminality, social isolation and stigma. Only about 10% of the estimated 40,000 people who inject drugs are currently receiving harm reduction services, yet even that small share means that up to 1,000 new HIV infections have been averted. • Despite vast investment in law enforcement interventions, neither drug use nor the HIV epidemic has been contained. Across EECA there are an estimated 3.4 million to 3.8 million people who inject drugs, which represents the highest regional prevalence of injecting drug use worldwide. One in four injectors is believed to be living with HIV in the region, accounting for 57% of all infections. • In countries where the drugs of the choice become unavailable, people are switching to other, potentially more harmful substances. Such developments indicate that punitive drug laws (prohibition of certain substances) have, at best, marginal impacts on the overall level of drug use, and have negative impacts on health. • Prosecution and incarceration for drug-related offences is one of the key reasons behind the increase in prison populations across the region. Yet maintaining prisons is expensive, and many prison systems are chronically underfunded. Among the consequences are increased HIV transmission—because drugs are easily available in most prisons, but preventive commodities such as clean needles are not—and an increase in involvement in criminal gangs as prisoners seek ways to improve their food and safety position in penitentiaries.

Details: Vilnius, Lithuania: Eurasian Harm Reduction Network (EHRN), 2012. 36p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2012 at: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64663568/library/a-war-against-people-who-use-drugs-the-costs.pdf

Year: 2012

Country: International

URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64663568/library/a-war-against-people-who-use-drugs-the-costs.pdf

Shelf Number: 124881

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Enforcement
Drug Treatment
War on Drugs (Europe and Asia)

Author: Jelsma, Martin

Title: A Breakthrough in the Making? Shifts in the Latin American Drug Policy Debate

Summary: Remarkable drug policy developments are taking place in Latin America. This is not only at the level of political debate, but is also reflected in actual legislative changes in a number of countries. All in all there is an undeniable regional trend of moving away from the ‘war on drugs’. This briefing explains the background to the opening of the drug policy debate in the region, summarises the most relevant aspects of the ongoing drug law reforms in some countries, and makes a series of recommendations that could help to move the debate forward in a productive manner. The high expectations of a high-level debate on current drug policy regimes in the Americas at the sixth Organization of American States (OAS) Summit in April 2012, in Cartagena, Colombia, were quickly tempered to a general approval that the topic had been discussed at this level at all. The summit's outcome can be called both a failure and a success: no alternatives to prohibition were discussed, but all agreed that the effectiveness of current strategies should be looked into. The OAS was mandated to undertake a study and discuss the gathered evidence for more effective alternative strategies in 2013. The International Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Heads of Specialized National Agencies against the World Drug Problem, in Lima on 25 and 26 of June, will be the next opportunity for high level policy makers to discuss both the content and form of this evaluation or study. Another opportunity arises concurrently on June 26, in New York, where there will be a thematic debate on 'Drugs and Crime as a Threat to Development' on the occasion of the UN International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, at the 66th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. It was due to the insistence and efforts of Presidents Otto Pérez Molina (Guatemala) and Juan Manuel Santos (Colombia), and the extensive media attention in the run-up to the April Summit in Cartagena, that the issue was present at all on the agenda of the Summit. At last, some of the frustrations with U.S.-promoted drug control policies were on the table at the highest political level in the American hemisphere: the “genie was freed from the bottle”. Behind closed doors and for Presidents and heads of delegations only, the “hot but hidden” issue was discussed on the Sunday afternoon, in “an open and frank manner”, according to the host President Santos. The emergence of an increasingly independent and assertive Latin America insisting on a change of direction in drug control policies reflects an important shift in its relationship with the United States. The demand for “democratization” of the debate and alternative policy options stems from the perception that Latin American societies pay a disproportionate price in lost lives, hijacked justice systems, abuses in overcrowded prisons, and displaced small farmers, because of the U.S.-led strategy that has prioritised stemming the supply of drugs over reducing its own demand. The U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control acknowledged as much in its latest report, saying that “the United States must do significantly more to reduce our country’s demand for illegal drugs. Ultimately, it is drug consumption in the United States that fuels violence throughout Latin America and the Caribbean.” This is not to say that U.S. society hasn’t also paid a high price for repressive domestic drug law enforcement, in terms of drug-related violence and overcrowded prisons. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS • Ensure that the OAS-mandated study on alternative drug policy options will be an honest and open-minded reflection on different models and strategies • Support moves towards the legal regulation of the cannabis market and explore with a coalition of like-minded countries how best to resolve the legal conflict with the UN conventions • Elaborate substance-specific proposals for managing different drug submarkets • Experiment with harm reduction policy measures to reduce the level of drug-related violence • Support the legal right to coca chewing and allow a licit coca market to develop in the whole region • Secure civil society participation in the debate on drug policy reform • Challenge provisions in the UN conventions that are obstacles to advancing with evidence-based reforms.

Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2012. 16p.

Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 21: Accessed July 20, 2012 at: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr21.pdf

Year: 2012

Country: Central America

URL: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr21.pdf

Shelf Number: 125697

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Policy (Latin America)
Drug Use and Abuse

Author: Kilmer, Beau

Title: The U.S. Drug Policy Landscape: Insights and Opportunities for Improving the View

Summary: Discussions about reducing the harms associated with drug use and antidrug policies are often politicized, infused with questionable data, and unproductive. This paper provides a nonpartisan primer that should be of interest to those who are new to the field of drug policy, as well as those who have been working in the trenches. It begins with an overview of problems and policies related to illegal drugs in the United States, including the nonmedical use of prescription drugs. It then discusses the efficacy of U.S. drug policies and programs, including long-standing issues that deserve additional attention. Next, the paper lists the major funders of research and analysis in the area and describes their priorities. By highlighting the issues that receive most of the funding, this discussion identifies where gaps remain. Comparing these needs, old and new, to the current funding patterns suggests eight opportunities to improve understanding of drug problems and drug policies in the United States: (1) sponsor young scholars and strengthen the infrastructure of the field, (2) accelerate the diffusion of good ideas and reliable information to decisionmakers, (3) replicate and evaluate cutting-edge programs in an expedited fashion, (4) support nonpartisan research on marijuana policy, (5) investigate ways to reduce drug-related violence in Mexico and Central America, (6) improve understanding of the markets for diverted pharmaceuticals, (7) help build and sustain comprehensive community prevention efforts, and (8) develop more sensible sentencing policies that reduce the excessive levels of incarceration for drug offenses and address the extreme racial disparities. The document offers some specific suggestions for researchers and potential research funders in each of the eight areas.

Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2012. 51p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 12, 2012 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP393.html

Year: 2012

Country: United States

URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP393.html

Shelf Number: 126300

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Enforcement
Drug Policy (U.S.)
Illegal Drugs

Author: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction

Title: Travel and Drug Use in Europe: A Short Review

Summary: Recent decades have seen a growth in travel and tourism abroad because of cheap air fares and holiday packages. This has been accompanied by a relaxation of border controls, especially within parts of Europe participating in the Schengen Agreement. As some people may be more inclined to use illicit substances during holiday periods and some may even choose to travel to destinations that are associated with drug use — a phenomenon sometimes referred to as ‘drug tourism’ — this means that from a European drug policy perspective the issue of drug use and travel has become more important. This Thematic paper examines travellers and drug use, with a focus on Europeans travelling within Europe, although some other relevant destinations are also included. For the purpose of this publication, a ‘traveller’ is defined as someone who goes abroad for reasons ranging from a weekend visit to a music festival or a short holiday, through to backpacking for longer periods. Using drugs in a foreign country can be associated with additional risks and consequences. For example, while drug use anywhere may lead to adverse health consequences, using drugs abroad can be associated with increased risks due to additional uncertainties regarding the composition and purity of the substances and the lack of knowledge of local health and social services. In addition, under the influence of drugs, tourists may also engage in behaviours that put them at risk of various medical conditions, accidents and risky sexual practices. They also risk arrest and imprisonment for possessing, using, selling or smuggling drugs into and out of a country. Local populations may also be negatively affected. While visitors bring income to the host countries, drug use by some may lead to antisocial behaviour and public nuisance, an increase in those requiring health and social services, and the presence of gangs controlling the drug trade, thus putting pressure on the local law enforcement, health and social services. Little is known about the issue of drug use by travellers. This Thematic paper seeks to increase the interest in this topic both in terms of research and of developing adequate responses to problems related to drugs and travel. The paper aims to shed some light on this topic by investigating the following five questions: What is the profile of those who travel and use drugs? Which destinations have been associated with drug use among travellers? What is the prevalence of drug use among travellers? What are the risks associated with using drugs while travelling? What is the potential for prevention interventions? Information for this publication was collected from online reference resources, such as PubMed and Scopus, and with the help of Internet search engines. In addition, six Reitox national focal points (1) provided information about drugs and travel in their countries and about drug use among their citizens while the latter are travelling. These countries are presented as examples in the following pages but they should not be considered as necessarily having more extensive travel and drug use problems than other European countries.

Details: Lisbon: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2012. 24p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 13, 2012 at: http://www.ofdt.fr/BDD/publications/docs/OEDT1209travellers.pdf

Year: 2012

Country: Europe

URL: http://www.ofdt.fr/BDD/publications/docs/OEDT1209travellers.pdf

Shelf Number: 126328

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Europe)
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Tourists

Author: Levine, Harry

Title: One Million Police Hours: Making 440,000 Marijuana Possession Arrests In New York City, 2002‐2012

Summary: A new report documents the astronomical number of hours the New York Police Department has spent arresting and processing hundreds of thousands of low-level misdemeanor marijuana possession arrests during Mayor Bloomberg’s tenure from 2002 to 2012. The report finds that NYPD used approximately one million hours of police officer time to make 440,000 marijuana possession arrests. Under Mayor Bloomberg, New York City has made more marijuana possession arrests than under mayors Koch, Dinkins and Giuliani combined.

Details: New York: Drug Policy Alliance and the Marijuana Arrest Research Project, 2013. 16p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 22, 2013 at: http://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/One_Million_Police_Hours_0.pdf

Year: 2013

Country: United States

URL: http://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/One_Million_Police_Hours_0.pdf

Shelf Number: 128078

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Arrests
Drug Law Enforcement
Drug Offenders
Marijuana (New York City)

Author: Collins, John, ed.

Title: Governing The Global Drug Wars

Summary: International drug control efforts began in 1909, with the aim of eradicating the abuse of certain drugs by controlling their supply. A complex international system of enforcement grew up based on this belief in supply control. A century on, the empirical data is available and overwhelming: the system has failed. Worse, it has become increasingly clear that the human cost of pursuing many of its policies renders them unjustifiable. From mass incarceration in the United States and Asia, to the HIV/AIDS epidemic flooding Russia and the waves of violence rippling through Latin America – current global drug policies are worsening current global drug problems. This is no longer a point of controversy, but as Joseph Spillane suggests, is something which ‘no serious scholar questions’. Nevertheless, driven by a mixture of bureaucratic and ideological inertia, the international drug control system, governed through the UN and enforced by a number of core states, continues to pursue many of the same failed policies. This report asks why the system evolved in the way that it did, and explores the potential for reform. Often, those seeking to understand the complex and opaque international drug control system look to the wording of its various conventions and governing treaties – both of which are open to wide interpretation. However, as William McAllister points out, the system evolved through complex diplomatic, bureaucratic, social and interpersonal forces. It is only through an understanding of these broader forces that we can properly explain how the system was constructed and why it continues to function in the way that it does. Building on this discussion of historical complexity, David Courtwright examines the reasons why some drugs have traditionally been the subjects of ‘war,’ while others have become deeply ingrained in the mainstream economy. This is a question expanded upon by James Mill’s survey of the questionable scientific evidence underpinning cannabis’ co-option into international controls. As Joseph Spillane’s analysis shows, in order to better understand current international drug policies we should focus more attention on the considerable harms that these policies create. In particular he suggests that researchers should concentrate on the wealth of evidence available from the daily experience of contemporary drug addicts, which reveals the, often-harrowing impacts of the various drug wars. Paul Gootenberg analyses the interaction between international policies and shifting cocaine ‘commodity chains’ in Latin America over the last century, culminating in the current Mexican crisis. In so doing, he highlights a seemingly inherent tendency of international drug policy makers to create larger and more violent problems than their interdictionist policies resolve. Former Swiss President Ruth Dreifuss and her colleague Diane Steber evaluate Switzerland’s interaction with the international system, highlighting the pressure exerted on states trying to pursue policies outside the traditional supply-centric paradigm. David Bewley-Taylor then examines ‘the UNGASS decade’ between 1998 and 2008, when the international community committed itself to achieving ‘a drug free world’. He argues that the consensus that characterised this period is now fracturing as nation states are more openly pursuing alternative approaches. In the final section of this report we look towards the future of the system and highlight specific areas in need of immediate reform. Damon Barrett shows that the current system is lacking in basic human rights oversight, and as a result is permitting systematic human rights abuses. Joanne Csete focuses on the International Narcotics Control Board’s (INCB) support for unscientific policies internationally and its refusal to endorse best practice public health policies, particularly around HIV/AIDS prevention. She argues that the INCB remains ‘the most closed and least transparent of any entity supported by the United Nations.’ The machinery of international drug control has solidified around outdated modes of thinking and failed policies. Despite this, it has proved remarkably successful at restricting policy experimentation worldwide and encouraging the continuation of counterproductive approaches. Two steps need to be taken. First, there need to be immediate measures to incorporate basic human rights standards and improve the level of oversight within the system. This is particularly urgent in the areas of international funding decisions and the operation of the INCB. Second, an independent root and branch review of the approach to, and apparatus governing, international drug control needs to be conducted with a view to long-term structural reforms. Such a review must begin with a deep understanding of the historical forces that have shaped and continue to underpin the current policies and system. This report should serve as a starting point.

Details: London: London School of Economics, 2012. 70p.

Source: Internet Resource: LSE Ideas; Special Report SR014: : Accessed March 25, 2013 at: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/SR014.aspx

Year: 2012

Country: International

URL: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/SR014.aspx

Shelf Number: 128121

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Drug Policy
Drug Regulation
Drug War (International)

Author: Flick, Peg

Title: H.B.10-1352 Savings Analysis Report: First Two Years of Implementation

Summary: In May 2010 the Colorado General Assembly passed House Bill 10-1352 which substantially altered Article 18, Title 18, concerning Uniform Controlled Substances. The intent of H.B.10-1352 as specified in its legislative declaration was to generate savings from reduced crime classifications and their resulting sentences, and direct those savings into substance abuse treatment. H.B.10-1352 created a distinction between drug use and possession, and the crimes of manufacturing and distribution. The bill lowered the crime classification for use and possession, and directed expected savings to the state’s Drug Offender Treatment Fund. H.B.10-1352 also increased the Drug Offender Surcharge for felony, misdemeanor, and petty offenses. H.B.10-1352 directed the Division of Criminal Justice (DCJ) to report annually on the savings generated by its modifications (24-33.5-503(u), C.R.S.). This final report analyzes the savings realized in the first two years after its implementation. This analysis measured the impact of H.B.10-1352 by comparing the cost of offenders sentenced in the initial two year period after the bill’s enactment to the cost of offenders sentenced in the two years prior. To be included in this analysis, an offender had to commit the offense on or after August 11, 2010 and be filed on, convicted, and sentenced on or before August 10, 2012. Cases meeting these same criteria from August 11, 2008 to August 10, 2010 were used as the comparison group. This analysis attempts to track the cost of all offender sentences. To do so, court records were obtained from the Judicial Branch and from Denver County Court. To supplement court records, sentence start and end dates were obtained from the Office of Community Corrections in the Division of Criminal Justice, and from the Department of Corrections. This information, combined with cost per day of each sentence placement, was used to determine the actual cost of offenders as they progressed through the system. In addition to actual cost, the cost of offender sentences if H.B.10-1352 had not passed was estimated. The savings generated by H.B.10-1352 presented in this report is the difference between the actual cost of sentences served and the estimated costs of the sentences they would have served had the bill not been enacted.

Details: Colorado Springs, CO: Office of Research and Statistics Division of Criminal Justice, Colorado Department of Public Safety, 2013. 34p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 13, 2013 at: http://www.colorado.gov/ccjjdir/Resources/Resources/Report/2013-03_HB1352Rpt.pdf

Year: 2013

Country: United States

URL: http://www.colorado.gov/ccjjdir/Resources/Resources/Report/2013-03_HB1352Rpt.pdf

Shelf Number: 128700

Keywords:
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Drug Offenders (Colorado)

Author: Global Commission on Drug Policy

Title: The Negative Impact Of The War On Drugs On Public Health: The Hidden Hepatitis C Epidemic

Summary: Hepatitis C is a highly prevalent chronic viral infection which poses major public health, economic and social crises, particularly in low and middle income countries. The global hepatitis C epidemic has been described by the World Health Organization as a ‘viral time bomb’, yet continues to receive little attention. Access to preventative services is far too low, while diagnosis and treatment are prohibitively expensive and remain inaccessible for most people in need. Public awareness and political will with regard to hepatitis C are also too low, and national hepatitis surveillance is often non-existent. The hepatitis C virus is highly infectious and is easily transmitted through blood-to-blood contact. It therefore disproportionately impacts upon people who inject drugs: of the 16 million people who inject drugs around the world, an estimated 10 million are living with hepatitis C. In some of the countries with the harshest drug policies, the majority of people who inject drugs are living with hepatitis C – more than 90 percent in places such as Thailand and parts of the Russian Federation. The hepatitis C virus causes debilitating and fatal disease in around a quarter of those who are chronically infected, and is an increasing cause of premature death among people who inject drugs. Globally, most HIV-infected people who inject drugs are also living with a hepatitis C infection. Harm reduction services – such as the provision of sterile needles and syringes and opioid substitution therapy – can effectively prevent hepatitis C transmission among people who inject drugs, provided they are accessible and delivered at the required scale. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Instead of investing in effective prevention and treatment programmes to achieve the required coverage, governments continue to waste billions of dollars each year on arresting and punishing drug users – a gross misallocation of limited resources that could be more efficiently used for public health and preventive approaches. At the same time, repressive drug policies have fuelled the stigmatisation, discrimination and mass incarceration of people who use drugs. As a result, there are very few countries that have reported significant declines in new infections of hepatitis C among this population. This failure of governments to prevent and control hepatitis disease has great significance for future costs to health and welfare budgets in many countries. In 2012 the Global Commission on Drug Policy released a report that outlined how the ‘war on drugs’ is driving the HIV epidemic among people who use drugs. The present report focuses on hepatitis C as it represents another massive and deadly epidemic for this population. It provides a brief overview of the hepatitis C virus, before exploring how the ‘war on drugs’ and repressive drug policies are failing to drive transmission down. The silence about the harms of repressive drug policies has been broken – they are ineffective, violate basic human rights, generate violence, and expose individuals and communities to unnecessary risks. Hepatitis C is one of these harms – yet it is both preventable and curable when public health is the focus of the drug response. Now is the time to reform.

Details: Rio de Janeiro – RJ – Brasil: The Commission, 2013. 24p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 7, 2013 at: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/hepatitis/gcdp_hepatitis_english.pdf

Year: 2013

Country: International

URL: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/hepatitis/gcdp_hepatitis_english.pdf

Shelf Number: 129005

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Hepatitis C
War on Drugs

Author: Ritter, Alison

Title: Government Drug Policy Expenditure in Australia – 2009/10.

Summary: In responding to illicit drugs, Australian governments expend resources in providing proactive responses, such as drug treatment or policing of drug-crimes. Governments also expend considerable resources on the indirect consequences of drug use, such as emergency department admissions for overdose, or crimes that are committed to obtain income to purchase drugs. This second category of indirect or reactive spending is generally known as the social cost approach. International experts have emphasised that drug budgets should concentrate on the direct, proactive spending by governments, and this approach is taken here. This study provides a new estimate of Australian governments’ direct or proactive spending on illicit drug policy for 2009/10. Four drug policy domains were examined: prevention, treatment, harm reduction and law enforcement. Federal and state/territory expenditure estimates were derived for each of the four domains. A top-down approach was adopted wherever possible and consistency in method across the four domains was of central concern. The results reveal that Australian governments spent approximately $1.7 billion in 2009/10 on illicit drugs. This included programs to prevent or delay the commencement of drug use in young people, drug treatment services including counselling and pharmacotherapy maintenance, harm reduction programs such as the needle syringe program, police detection and arrest in relation to drug crimes and policing the borders of Australia for illegal importation of drugs and their precursors.

Details: Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre., 2013. 58p.

Source: Internet Resource: DPMP Monograph Series: Monograph No. 24: Accessed June 25, 2013 at: http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/newsevents/events/Drug%20Budgets%20Mono%2024%20FINAL.pdf

Year: 2013

Country: Australia

URL: http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/newsevents/events/Drug%20Budgets%20Mono%2024%20FINAL.pdf

Shelf Number: 129153

Keywords:
Costs of Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice Expenditures
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Australia)
Drug Abuse Policy

Author: Khalifa, Najat

Title: Harm Reduction: Evidence, Impacts and Challenges

Summary: Harm reduction is now positioned as part of the mainstream policy response to drug use in Europe. However, this has not always been the case, and in reflecting on this fact we felt that the time was right to take stock of how we had arrived at this position, ask what it means for both policies and action, and begin to consider how harm reduction is likely to develop in the future. This monograph builds on other titles in the EMCDDA's Scientific monographs series, where we have taken an important and topical subject, assembled some of the best experts in the field, and allowed them to develop their ideas constrained only by the need to demonstrate scientific rigour and sound argument. Our Scientific monographs are intended to be both technically challenging and thought provoking. Unlike our other publications we take more of an editorial 'back seat' and we do not seek consensus or necessarily to produce a balanced view. Good science is best done when unconstrained, and best read with a critical eye. This volume includes a variety of perspectives on harm reduction approaches, together with an analysis of the concept's role within drug policies, both in Europe and beyond. Readers may not necessarily agree with all of the arguments made or the conclusion drawn, but we hope it is perceived as a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate on how to respond to contemporary drug problems in Europe. A number of contributors explore what harm reduction means and what policies it can encompass, as well as charting how the concept evolved. They reflect on the point we have now reached in terms of both harm reduction practice and the evidence base for its effectiveness. A major issue that many contributors touch on is the difficulty of assessing how complex interventions occurring in real world settings can be evaluated, and why conclusive evidence in such settings can be so elusive. With an eye to the future, we also asked our contributors to wrestle with the difficult issue of how harm reduction might be extended into new areas that are of particular relevance to the evolving European drug situation. Here the empirical base for grounding discussions is far less developed, and a more exploratory approach is necessary.

Details: Lisbon: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2010. 469p.

Source: Internet Resource: EMCDDA Monographs 10: Accessed March 28, 2014 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_101257_EN_EMCDDA-monograph10-harm%20reduction_final.pdf

Year: 2010

Country: Europe

URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_101257_EN_EMCDDA-monograph10-harm%20reduction_final.pdf

Shelf Number: 132020

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Drug Policy
Illicit Drugs

Author: Pew Research Center

Title: America's New Drug Policy Landscape: Two-Thirds Favor Treatment, Not Jail, for Use of Heroin, Cocaine

Summary: The public appears ready for a truce in the long-running war on drugs. A national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that 67% of Americans say that the government should focus more on providing treatment for those who use illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine. Just 26% think the government's focus should be on prosecuting users of such hard drugs. Support for a treatment-based approach to illegal drug use spans nearly all demographic groups. And while Republicans are less supportive of the treatment option than are Democrats or independents, about half of Republicans (51%) say the government should focus more on treatment than prosecution in dealing with illegal drug users. As a growing number of states ease penalties for drug possession, the public expresses increasingly positive views of the move away from mandatory sentences for non-violent drug crimes. By nearly two-to-one (63% to 32%), more say it is a good thing than a bad thing that some states have moved away from mandatory sentences for non-violent drug offenders. In 2001, Americans were evenly divided over the move by some states to abandon mandatory drug terms. The survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Feb. 14-23 among 1,821 adults, finds that support for the legalization of marijuana use continues to increase. And fully 75% of the public - including majorities of those who favor and oppose the legal use of marijuana - think that the sale and use of marijuana will eventually be legal nationwide.

Details: Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, 2014. 25p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 23, 2014 at: http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/04-02-14%20Drug%20Policy%20Release.pdf

Year: 2014

Country: United States

URL: http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/04-02-14%20Drug%20Policy%20Release.pdf

Shelf Number: 132147

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Enforcement
Drug Offenders
Drug Policy (U.S.)
Drug Treatment
Illegal Drugs
Public Opinion

Author: Bagalman, Erin

Title: Prescription Drug Abuse

Summary: An estimated 6.8 million individuals currently abuse prescription drugs in the United States. Unlike policy on street drugs, federal policy on prescription drug abuse is complicated by the need to maintain access to prescription controlled substances (PCS) for legitimate medical use. The federal government has several roles in reducing prescription drug abuse. Coordination. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) coordinates and tracks prescription drug abuse reduction efforts and funding of multiple federal agencies. Regulation. The primary federal statutes governing prescription drug regulation are the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, commonly called the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Law Enforcement. Federal law enforcement, primarily the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), aims to prevent, detect, and investigate the diversion of prescription drugs while regulating the supply for legitimate medical, commercial, and scientific purposes. Health. Federal agencies and programs involved in health may address prescription drug abuse through service delivery (e.g., the Veterans Health Administration), financing (e.g., Medicare), and research (e.g., the National Institute on Drug Abuse). The federal government, state and local governments, and various private entities (e.g., pharmacies) are currently undertaking a range of approaches to reducing prescription drug abuse. Scheduling of PCS. The scheduling status of a PCS (1) affects patient access to PCS (e.g., by limiting refills); (2) affects the degree of regulatory requirements (e.g., supply chain recordkeeping); and (3) determines the degree of criminal punishment for illegal traffickers. Safe Storage and Disposal. DEA regulates storage of PCS by registered entities (e.g., pharmacies); provides registered entities with options for proper disposal of PCS; and sponsors National Prescription Drug Take-Back Days to assist citizens in safe disposal of PCS. Enhancing Law Enforcement. Federal law enforcement efforts may focus on geographic areas with higher rates of prescription drug abuse or on High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) that experience a higher volume of illicit trafficking of PCS. Using Data to Identify Risk. Most states operate prescription drug monitoring programs - databases of prescriptions filled for PCS. Other public and private entities also have data that may be analyzed to identify high-risk behavior among prescribers, dispensers, or patients. Awareness and Education. Efforts to increase awareness and education about prescription drug abuse may focus on health care providers, patients, or the general public. Treatment. Some prescription drug abuse may be avoided in treating underlying conditions (e.g., pain) or may be treated with pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic interventions. New products may improve treatment for both underlying conditions and prescription drug abuse.

Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2014. 23p.

Source: Internet Resource: R43559: Accessed June 17, 2014 at: http://www.nacds.org/ceo/2014/0529/CRS_Drug_Abuse_Report.pdf

Year: 2014

Country: United States

URL: http://www.nacds.org/ceo/2014/0529/CRS_Drug_Abuse_Report.pdf

Shelf Number: 132480

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Prevention
Drug Enforcement
Drug Regulation
Prescription Drug Abuse

Author: Youngers, Coletta A.

Title: In Search of Rights: Drug Users and Government Responses in Latin America

Summary: This report presents the results of the most recent study by the Research Consortium on Drugs and the Law (Colectivo de Estudios Drogas y Derecho, CEDD). The study, entitled "In Search of Rights: Drug Users and State Responses in Latin America" analyzes States-- responses to the consumption of illicitly used drugs, focusing on two key areas; Criminal justice responses and health responses; Vin eight Latin American countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay. An international consensus appears to be emerging that drug use is not a criminal matter, but a health issue. Nevertheless, as shown by the country investigations that are part of this study, Latin American government responses to the use of illicit substances remain predominantly punitive and handled through the criminal justice system; it is through judicial, rather than healthcare, institutions that states address the illicit use of drugs and drug users. Even in countries in which drug use is not a crime, persistent criminalization of drug users is found. Treating drug use (and users) as a criminal matter is problematic for several reasons. First, as an earlier study by CEDD shows, responses that criminalize drug users are often ultimately more hazardous for the users; health than the drug use itself and do not help decrease levels of use (either problem or non-problem use).2 Second, as this report shows, the criminal justice response contributes to a climate of stigmatization of and discrimination against users, reducing the likelihood that police and the judicial system will take an impartial attitude toward them. Third, the criminalization of drug users is a poor use of public resources in both the public security and health sectors. Finally, this approach to drug use; through criminal justice institutions; violates various fundamental rights of users, including the rights to health, information, personal autonomy and self-determination. All of this violates various national and international human rights norms that States are obligated to uphold. The following is a summary of the studies; key findings: - Most public policies related to drug use in the countries studied take a punitive and prohibitionist approach that does not distinguish among different types of use and/or among substances or users; they are therefore inadequate for addressing the harm caused by problem drug use. - In all of the countries studied, there is strong discrimination against and stigmatization of drug users. Even in countries where use of those substances is not criminalized, we found that consumers are often treated as criminals. This leaves users outside the reach of health systems. - In all the countries studied, we found that drug users are criminally prosecuted. In Argentina, Ecuador, Mexico and Bolivia, drug use is not a crime. Nevertheless, according to the study in Argentina, in a sample from 2011, nearly 75 percent of the cases involving drug law violations that were initiated by security forces in the Federal Criminal Court in the city of Buenos Aires were for possession of drugs for personal use. In Ecuador, 5,103 people are presently incarcerated for possession of narcotic or psychotropic substances, of a total of 6,467 convicted on drug-related charges. In Mexico, 140,860 people nationwide were arrested for drug use between 2009 and May 2013, and investigations were opened in 53,769 cases in the federal system during that period. In Bolivia, 6,316 people were arrested for drug possession (mainly cannabis) between 2005 and 2011, although possession is not classified as a crime. - The criminal justice response puts drug users in a vulnerable position before the authorities, exposing them to corruption, extortion, physical abuse, sexual abuse, arbitrary detention and other violations of their fundamental rights. - Largely because of the stigmatization of drug use, users suffer constant violations of their fundamental rights, including the rights to health, self-determination and free personal development, the right not to suffer discrimination, and the right to information and due process. - The governments studied emphasize controlling the supply of illicitly used drugs over addressing drug use, or demand, which has a negative impact on the ability to provide adequate social and public-health responses to drug use and contributes to the violation of present and future users; rights to health. - There is a marked paucity of information about consumption and a lack of systematization of that information and, in some cases there are methodological and conceptual problems in the gathering of information about drug use. That often leads to an exaggeration of the problem of consumption of illicitly used drugs and hinders the formulation and development of informed policies based on empirical information. - By emphasizing a criminal justice approach over a health-related approach, governments have abdicated their responsibility to users who need treatment, leaving the private sector as the main provider of treatment and rehabilitation services. We found that States often do not regulate and/or oversee private centers, many of which operate informally, using treatments that have no scientific basis. Abstinence-based treatment models predominate in both the public and private sectors and there is little emphasis on harm reduction programs, which have proven more effective in mitigating the negative effects of illicit use of drugs. - Throughout the region, drug users; even when their use is not problematic; can be subjected to treatment involuntarily, forcibly or semi-forcibly. This means that scarce public-health resources that could be used for people who do want and need treatment are used for people who neither need nor want it. Given that situation, the proposal of drug courts offers an alternative to incarceration. One concern, however, is that this proposal is seen as a healthcare response, when its components are still of a criminal justice nature and risk reproducing all of the problems within the criminal justice system with regard to drug use.

Details: Mexico: Research Consortium on Drugs and the Law (CEDD), 170p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 10, 2014 at: http://drogasyderecho.org/assets/full-report-english.pdf

Year: 2014

Country: Latin America

URL: http://drogasyderecho.org/assets/full-report-english.pdf

Shelf Number: 132637

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Latin America)
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Treatment
Drug Enforcement
Drug Reform
Illicit Drugs
Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Males, Mike

Title: Reforming marijuana laws: Which approach best reduces the harms of criminalization? A Five-State Analysis

Summary: The War on Marijuana is losing steam. Policymakers, researchers, and law enforcement are beginning to recognize that arresting and incarcerating people for marijuana possession wastes billions of dollars, does not reduce the abuse of marijuana or other drugs, and results in grossly disproportionate harms to communities of color (ACLU, 2013; Ingram, 2014). Marijuana reforms are now gaining traction across the nation, generating debates over which strategies best reduce the harms of prohibition. Should marijuana be decriminalized or legalized? Should it be restricted to people 21 and older? Advocates of the latter strategy often argue their efforts are intended to protect youth (Newsom, 2014; Holder, 2013; Californians for Marijuana Legalization and Control, 2014). However, if the consequences of arrest for marijuana possession - including fines, jail time, community service, a criminal record, loss of student loans, and court costs - are more harmful than use of the drug (Marijuana Arrest Research Project, 2012), it is difficult to see how continued criminalization of marijuana use by persons under 21 protects the young. Currently, people under 21 make up less than one-third of marijuana users, yet half of all marijuana possession arrests (ACLU, 2013; Males, 2009). This analysis compares five states that implemented major marijuana reforms over the last five years, evaluating their effectiveness in reducing marijuana arrests and their impact on various health and safety outcomes. Two types of reforms are evaluated: all-ages decriminalization (California, Connecticut, and Massachusetts), and 21-and-older legalization (Colorado and Washington). The chief conclusions are: - All five states experienced substantial declines in marijuana possession arrests. The four states with available data also showed unexpected drops in marijuana felony arrests. - All-ages decriminalization more effectively reduced marijuana arrests and associated harms for people of all ages, particularly for young people. - Marijuana decriminalization in California has not resulted in harmful consequences for teenagers, such as increased crime, drug overdose, driving under the influence, or school dropout. In fact, California teenagers showed improvements in all risk areas after reform. - Staggering racial disparities remain - and in some cases are exacerbated - following marijuana reforms. African Americans are still more likely to be arrested for marijuana offenses after reform than all other races and ethnicities were before reform. - Further reforms are needed in all five states to move toward full legalization and to address racial disparities.

Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2014. 13p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 15, 2014 at: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/cjcj_marijuana_reform_comparison.pdf

Year: 2014

Country: United States

URL: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/cjcj_marijuana_reform_comparison.pdf

Shelf Number: 134092

Keywords:
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Policy
Drug Reform
Marijuana (U.S.)
War on Drugs

Author: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA)

Title: Drug use and its consequences in the Western Balkans: 2006-2014

Summary: This report focuses on Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo, Montenegro and Serbia - all current candidate and potential candidate countries to the European Union (EU) in the Western Balkans. This is a region that has been characterized by considerable political and social transition since the early 1990s, including armed conflicts, intraregional migration and the displacement of large populations. Such situations can generate conditions conducive to a 'risk environment' for illicit drug use, particularly problem drug use, and related health and social consequences. Over the last 10-15 years, cooperation with the EU has developed at bilateral and regional levels, with the support of specific EU programmes such as Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation (CARDS) between 2000 and 2006 and the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) from 2006 until today. As part of this process, closer cooperation and coordination have progressively been achieved in the area of drugs, and substantial progress has been made in recent years on the definition of national drug strategies and the setting up of national drug coordination mechanisms, including the establishment of national drug information systems and focal points. This report draws on those achievements and, in particular, on the data gathered and analysed in the national reports of Western Balkan countries to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). It aims to provide a regional overview of the dynamics of illicit drug use and associated health and social consequences.

Details: Lisbon: EMCDDA, 2015. 38p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 22, 2015 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_236339_EN_TD0215196ENN.pdf

Year: 2015

Country: Europe

URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_236339_EN_TD0215196ENN.pdf

Shelf Number: 135361

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Europe)
Drug Abuse Policy
Illegal Drugs

Author: Gotsis, Tom

Title: Illegal Drug Use and Possession: Current Policy and Debates

Summary: Government policy to address illegal drug use and possession is an ongoing topic of debate both in Australia and internationally. One part of the debate surrounding illegal drug use and possession involves the question of whether or not recreational drug use should be decriminalised, as has occurred in overseas jurisdictions such as Portugal. Another, and more immediate, part of the debate concerns the harms that have resulted from illegal drug use at music festivals. The NSW Government is reviewing the regulation of these events but has rejected options put forward by some stakeholders, including allowing pill testing and amnesty bins. The suggestion by drug law reform proponents that ice users be allowed to attend a medically supervised smoke inhalation room is also on the public agenda. An upcoming forum for discussing illegal drug use and possession is the Parliamentary Cross-Party Harm Minimisation Roundtable, to be held on 11 August at the NSW Parliament. This paper seeks to inform the current debate by discussing: - rates of illegal drug use and the harms of illegal drug use; - current Government policy and laws in relation to illegal drug use; - the use and effectiveness of harm reduction measures, such as the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre; - illegal drug use at music festivals; and - arguments for and against prohibition and decriminalisation, with examples and evidence from Australian and overseas jurisdictions

Details: Sydney: NSW Parliamentary Research Service, 2016. 96p.

Source: Internet Resource: Briefing Paper No. 4/2016: Accessed August 29, 2016 at: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/Illegal%20drug%20use%20and%20possession%20current%20policy%20and%20debates.pdf

Year: 2016

Country: Australia

URL: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/Illegal%20drug%20use%20and%20possession%20current%20policy%20and%20debates.pdf

Shelf Number: 140076

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Addicts
Drug Offenders
Illegal Drugs

Author: Alpert, Abby

Title: Supply-Side Drug Policy in the Presence of Substitutes: Evidence from the Introduction of Abuse-Deterrent Opioids

Summary: Overdose deaths from prescription opioid pain relievers nearly quadrupled between 1999 and 2010, making this the worst drug overdose epidemic in U.S. history. In response, numerous supply-side interventions have aimed to limit access to opioids. However, these supply disruptions may have the unintended consequence of increasing the use of substitute drugs, including heroin. We study the consequences of one of the largest supply disruptions to date to abusable opioids – the introduction of an abuse-deterrent version of OxyContin in 2010. Our analysis exploits across state variation in exposure to the OxyContin reformulation. Using data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), we show that states with higher pre-2010 rates of OxyContin misuse experienced larger reductions in OxyContin misuse, permitting us to isolate consumer substitution responses. We estimate large differential increases in heroin deaths immediately after reformulation in states with the highest initial rates of OxyContin misuse. We find less evidence of differential reductions in overall opioid-related deaths, potentially due to substitution towards other opioids, including more harmful synthetic opioids such as fentanyl. Our results imply that a substantial share of the dramatic increase in heroin deaths since 2010 can be attributed to the reformulation of OxyContin.

Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017. 59p.

Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series: Working paper 23031: Accessed January 26, 2017 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23031.pdf

Year: 2017

Country: United States

URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23031.pdf

Shelf Number: 145428

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Opioids
Opioids Epidemic
OxyContin
Prescription Drugs

Author: Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM)

Title: Lessons Learned After 4 Years of Marijuana Legalization

Summary: In the wake of multimillion-dollar political campaigns funded with out-of-state money, Colorado and Washington voted to legalize marijuana in November 2012. Though it would take more than a year to set up retail stores, personal use (in Colorado and Washington) and home cultivation (in Colorado, which includes giving away of up to six plants) were almost immediately legalized after the vote. Using marijuana in public, which remains illegal under these new laws, has increased conspicuously in both states. Also, a brand-new marijuana industry selling candies, cookies, waxes, sodas, and other marijuana items has exploded—and with it a powerful lobby to fight any sensible regulation. Though it is still early—the full effects on mental health and educational outcomes, for example, will take many more years to fully develop—these “experiments” in legalization and commercialization are not succeeding by any measure. Colorado now leads the country in past-month marijuana use by youth, with Washington not much further behind. Other states that have since legalized marijuana occupy 4th place (District of Columbia) and 5th place (Oregon). States with lax “medical marijuana” laws occupy 2nd and 3rd place (Vermont and Rhode Island, respectively). Additionally, as explained in greater detail below, the laws have had significant negative impacts on public health and safety, such as: • Rising rates of pot use by minors • Increasing arrest rates of minors, especially black and Hispanic children • Higher rates of traffic deaths from driving while high • More marijuana-related poisonings and hospitalizations • A persistent black market that may now involve increased Mexican cartel activity in Colorado The federal government, through the Department of Justice (DOJ), announced it would initially take a hands-off approach to state implementation of legalization, instead promising to track eight specific consequences—from youth marijuana use to use on public lands—and determine action later. So far, however, neither the federal nor state authorities have implemented a robust public tracking system for these criteria. This failure led the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) to criticize DOJ in 2016 for not appropriately monitoring and documenting legalization outcomes. As of the date of this publication, there has been no word from the Department of Justice about state marijuana program compliance with any of the eight criteria it identified. Quietly, however, state agencies such as the Colorado Department of Public Safety, have released very negative updates on marijuana data and other indicators. In the meantime, the promises of tax revenue windfalls and decreased crime have not materialized. Pot tax revenue comprises a tiny fraction of the Colorado state budget— less than one percent—and after costs of enforcement are subtracted, the remaining revenue is very limited. Some Colorado school districts, such as Denver's, have not seen a single dollar of new funding from state pot taxes. And in Washington, half of the marijuana tax money legalization advocates promised for prevention and schools has been siphoned off into the state's general fund.

Details: Alexandria, VA: SAM, 2016. 30p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 13, 2017 at: https://learnaboutsam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SAM-report-on-CO-and-WA-issued-31-Oct-2016.pdf

Year: 2016

Country: United States

URL: https://learnaboutsam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SAM-report-on-CO-and-WA-issued-31-Oct-2016.pdf

Shelf Number: 145017

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Legalization
Marijuana
Marijuana Legalization

Author: Sacco, Lisa N.

Title: Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs

Summary: In the midst of national concern over the opioid epidemic, federal and state officials are paying greater attention to the manner in which opioids are prescribed. Nearly all prescription drugs involved in overdoses are originally prescribed by a physician (rather than, for example, being stolen from pharmacies). Thus, attention has been directed toward better understanding how opioids are being prescribed and preventing the diversion of prescription drugs after the prescriptions are dispensed. Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) maintain statewide electronic databases of prescriptions dispensed for controlled substances (i.e., prescription drugs with a potential for abuse that are subject to stricter government regulation). Information collected by PDMPs may be used to educate and inform prescribers, pharmacists, and the public; identify or prevent drug abuse and diversion; facilitate the identification of prescription drug-addicted individuals and enable intervention and treatment; outline drug use and abuse trends to inform public health initiatives; or educate individuals about prescription drug use, abuse, diversion, and PDMPs themselves. As of February 2018, 50 states, the District of Columbia, and two territories (Guam and Puerto Rico) had operational PDMPs within their borders. How PDMPs are organized and operated varies among states. Each state determines which agency houses the PDMP; which controlled substances must be reported; which types of dispensers (e.g., pharmacies) are required to submit data; how often data are collected; who may access information in the PDMP database (e.g., prescribers, dispensers, or law enforcement); the circumstances under which the information may (or must) be accessed; and what enforcement mechanisms are in place for noncompliance. PDMP costs may vary widely, with startup costs that can range as high as $450,000 to over $1.5 million and annual operating costs ranging from $125,000 to nearly $1.0 million. States finance PDMPs using monies from a variety of sources including the state general fund, prescriber and pharmacy licensing fees, state controlled substance registration fees, health insurers' fees, directsupport organizations, state grants, and/or federal grants. The federal government supports state PDMPs through programs at the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Health and Human Services (HHS). Since FY2002, DOJ has administered the Harold Rogers Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, and in FY2017, DOJ incorporated this grant program into the new Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program. HHS programs include National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting (NASPER), State Demonstration Grants for Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Response, Opioid Prevention in States grants, State Targeted Response to the Opioid Crisis Grants, and various pilots and initiatives under the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC). Of note, NASPER last received appropriations (of $2.0 million) in FY2010. State PDMPs vary with respect to whether or how information contained in the database is shared with other states. Federal policymakers have repeatedly emphasized the importance of enhancing interstate information sharing and the interoperability of state PDMPs. In 2011, the Obama Administration included efforts to increase interstate data sharing in its action plan to counter prescription drug abuse. In 2017, a presidential commission recommended, among other things, that the Trump Administration support legislation to require DOJ to fund a "data-sharing hub" and require states receiving federal grant funds to share PDMP data.

Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2018. 34p.

Source: Internet Resource: R42593: Accessed May 25, 2018 at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42593.pdf

Year: 2018

Country: United States

URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42593.pdf

Shelf Number: 150372

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Abuse Prevention
Drug Regulation
Opioid Epidemic
Opioids
Prescription Drug Abuse

Author: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA)

Title: European Drug Report 2019: Trends and Developments

Summary: The Trends and Developments report presents a top-level overview of the drug phenomenon in Europe, covering drug supply, use and public health problems as well as drug policy and responses. Together with the online Statistical Bulletin and 30 Country Drug Reports, it makes up the 2019 European Drug Report package. Table of contents -- Preface - Introductory note and acknowledgements - Commentary - Chapter 1: Drug supply and the market Chapter 2: Drug use prevalence and trends Chapter 3: Drug-related harms and responses Annex: National data tables

Details: Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019. 95p.

Source: Internet Resource: accessed June 6, 2019 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/edr/trends-developments/2019_en

Year: 2019

Country: Europe

URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/edr/trends-developments/2019_en

Shelf Number: 156230

Keywords:
Drug Abuse and Addiction (Europe)
Drug Abuse and Crime
Drug Abuse Policy
Drug Control
Drug Offenders
Illicit Drugs

Rutgers - School of Law, Newark

Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.

Results for drug abuse policy