Search results
1 – 10 of over 12000In a recent article in the pages of this journal, the author outlined the hypothesis that, although there have been recent evolutions in European governance effected by the Lisbon…
Abstract
Purpose
In a recent article in the pages of this journal, the author outlined the hypothesis that, although there have been recent evolutions in European governance effected by the Lisbon treaty, these changes have not brought about any convergence in the national drug policies of European member states. The original article focused on developments in the national drug policies of key member states and based the assessment on their maintenance of key, and significantly different, national policy aims. Standring, in this edition, has offered a critique of that article suggesting that the author has been overly pessimistic in her understanding of the nature of drug policy integration at the European level and that soft integration tools have allowed a high degree of policy convergence in this controversial area. This paper aims to strengthen and confirm the author's position by examining the tools of European drug policy integration.
Design/methodology/approach
Key policy strategies (for example, the European Drug Strategy and Action Plans, European level anti‐drug trafficking frameworks and recent implementations on newly developed psychoactive substances at the European level) are examined here for indications of success or otherwise in the harmonisation (or convergence) of European national drug policies.
Findings
Ultimately, even under these new terms of reference, the paper finds that attempts to either harmonise or converge European national drug policies have done little more than scratch the surface.
Originality/value
The paper suggests that neither the top‐down regulation, here described, nor the soft convergence that Standring envisages are desirable for European drug policy making where they are implemented with the aim of making national drug policies more similar.
Details
Keywords
This chapter provides a critical exploration of the European Union’s impact on the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) proceedings and Outcome document…
Abstract
This chapter provides a critical exploration of the European Union’s impact on the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) proceedings and Outcome document. It demonstrates that the ability to produce a European ‘common position’ ahead of the UNGASS debates represents a significant step forward in the ability to ‘speak with one voice’ in the global illicit drug policy arena, and has played an important role in ensuring key issues such as human rights and public health remain on the agenda. In highlights, however, a European failure to engage with issues such as the continuing suitability of the international drug conventions to preside over the current climate of drug policy innovation and experimentation, and the unintended consequences of a ‘war on drugs’ approach. Ultimately, therefore, it argues that these failures will hamper the development of a more progressive and effective global drug policy.
Details
Keywords
A response to Chatwin's article (2010), which argues that European harmonisation of illicit drug policies remains far from realisation, this paper seeks to recommend developing a…
Abstract
Purpose
A response to Chatwin's article (2010), which argues that European harmonisation of illicit drug policies remains far from realisation, this paper seeks to recommend developing a more specific conceptualisation of European integration in the area of illicit drugs and argues that harmonisation was not a realistic aim of the European Union (EU).
Design/methodology/approach
This is a review paper which seeks to advocate the application of a more rigid analytical framework in drug policy analysis that takes into account the “soft” methods of governance used by the EU. The paper also uses secondary data sources to emphasise the argument.
Findings
Domestic convergence has been observed across a number of policy areas.
Research limitations/implications
The nature and level of convergence remains contested and more data are needed to clarify any trends. Future research would be necessary to demonstrate that convergence occurs as a result of EU action rather than other factors.
Originality/value
There remains little in the way of research on the processes of European integration and their specific impact on drug policy at the European and domestic level. This paper will be of value to scholars in the field of European integration who are seeking to expand their research into a new policy sector, as well as researchers in the drug field who are looking for a more formal analytical framework.
Details
Keywords
With the long awaited ratification of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, it appears that plans within Europe to achieve an ‘ever closer union’ are back on track, yet, in the…
Abstract
With the long awaited ratification of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, it appears that plans within Europe to achieve an ‘ever closer union’ are back on track, yet, in the field of illicit drug policy, harmonisation remains as elusive a goal as ever. Sweden and the Netherlands have long provided examples of the different paradigms of drug policy operating within Europe and this article seeks to examine whether, as European Union harmonisation moves forward, recent developments bring the two any closer to convergence on this contentious issue. In addition to changes in Swedish and Dutch drug policy, the progress of the drug policy of other European countries has been evaluated. The article concludes that the Swedes and the Dutch remain ultimately wedded to their national policies and that movement both towards increased repression of drug use and increased liberalisation of drug use can be observed among other European countries. Harmonisation of European drug policy therefore remains in a state of stalemate.
Details
Keywords
Thierry Charlois and Eberhard Schatz
This issue's Spotlight travels to Amsterdam with a look at EU drug and alcohol policy. Though it seems far away and at times irrelevant, EU policy is moving fast to raise the…
Abstract
This issue's Spotlight travels to Amsterdam with a look at EU drug and alcohol policy. Though it seems far away and at times irrelevant, EU policy is moving fast to raise the standards of intervention. It also influences funding and the types of services and policies for the coming decades. Here the EADPP discusses their pivotal role in driving user and public involvement to the centre of national drug and alcohol policy making.
This chapter looks at the past, present and future of international cannabis control required by the UN drug control conventions in the post-2016 United Nations General Assembly…
Abstract
This chapter looks at the past, present and future of international cannabis control required by the UN drug control conventions in the post-2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session era with an eye on the next High Level Ministerial Segment (HLMS) at the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in 2019, and beyond. From a policy analysis perspective, the author meanders through the increasing tendency to legally regulate recreational cannabis markets notwithstanding the obligation enshrined in the UN drug control conventions to limit cannabis exclusively for ‘medical and scientific’ purposes. Taking into account relevant national and international developments, the chapter describes how the growing discomfort with the status of cannabis and the prohibitive and punitive approach stemming from the international drug control regime went through a process from soft to hard defections of the treaty obligations. The case of the Netherlands demonstrates the difficulty faced by reform-minded states in reconciling their wish for a different cannabis control mechanism with their obligations under international law, resulting in an incomplete regulation of its coffee-shop system, where small amounts of cannabis are tolerated for sale, but where the illicit supply to the shops remained unregulated. Subsequent more wide-ranging reforms to regulate cannabis from seed to sale in Uruguay, several US States and – in 2018 – in Canada, are clearly violating the obligations of the UN drug control conventions. Nevertheless, the HLMS will likely leave the elephant in the room untouched. The emerging paradigm shift regarding cannabis shows that a modernisation of the UN drug control regime is long overdue. This chapter discusses some of the options available.
Details
Keywords
In the course of the 2000s Denmark has experienced a shift in drug policy in general and of cannabis policy in particular. Danish drug policy used to be known as liberal, but is…
Abstract
In the course of the 2000s Denmark has experienced a shift in drug policy in general and of cannabis policy in particular. Danish drug policy used to be known as liberal, but is now saturated with ‘zero‐tolerance’ and ‘tough on crimes’ rhetoric. What happened, and what have the consequences been? This article describes recent changes, focusing on the closing of Pusher Street in Christiania, Copenhagen, one of northern Europe's largest open cannabis markets. This most spectacular outcome can also be seen as a conquered symbol of a former liberal ‐ and for many too lenient ‐ drug policy.
Details
Keywords
Bernd Werse and Cornelia Morgenstern
This article aims to discuss the results on prevalence, patterns of use and motivations for the use of legal high products/new psychoactive substances (NPS) and possible…
Abstract
Purpose
This article aims to discuss the results on prevalence, patterns of use and motivations for the use of legal high products/new psychoactive substances (NPS) and possible consequences for drug policy.
Design/methodology/approach
The main results are derived from a non‐representative quantitative online survey in Germany, focused on persons with experience in legal highs use.
Findings
The general prevalence of legal highs varies considerably in different European countries; generally, it is much lower than the lifetime prevalence of illicit drugs. Almost every legal highs user has experience in the use of illicit drugs. Several types of (repeated) users can be identified. “Herbal incense” products are used by many persons in order to compensate for a limited availability of cannabis or to remain inconspicuous for law enforcement. Current research chemicals (RC) users are mainly experienced drug users who seek to expand the range of drugs being consumed with RCs. Repressive drug policy approaches seem to contribute to the use of legal highs as replacement drugs.
Social implications
Given that many NPS show side effects that are at least as serious as those associated with illicit drugs, and that long‐time risks are unpredictable, repressive drug policy enforcement may lead to increased public health risks regarding drug users.
Originality/value
The survey is the first published quantitative survey focusing on legal highs users. The results have not been published in English yet.
Details