• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Drug Policy and Law
  • Harm Reduction
  • Activism

Drugreporter

News and Films from the Frontline of the War on Drugs

  • News
  • Café
  • Videos
  • About Us
  • EN
    • HU
    • RU

The Limits of Evidence-Based Drug Policy Making

July 17, 2018 | Author: Péter Sárosi

Tweet

We often speak about evidence-based drug policies – but presenting decision makers with the evidence rarely works in the way it is supposed to.

The EU Drug Strategy aims “to take a balanced, integrated and evidence-based approach to the drugs phenomenon.” We often use the mantra of “evidence-based” or “evidence-informed” policy making without clearly defining what we mean. Most of us think of an ideal system where decision makers consult experts with multidisciplinary professional backgrounds, review and assess the available scientific evidence, and create strategic responses to fill gaps and break barriers, to be monitored and evaluated thoroughly.

“Evidence-based policy making” signifies an optimal relationship, a symbiosis between policy makers and experts, where both sides know their roles and cooperate in harmony. Researchers collect, analyse, publish, and review scientific data – decision makers respond to the data and trends revealed by researchers.

In practice, this optimal system would look like this: experts collect data about trends of drug use, evaluate programs and show what works and what does not work in the field. Policy makers read their reports, map the gaps and barriers, prioritise some interventions over others, create a strategy and action plan, implement, monitor, and evaluate it. So if we see increasing HIV rates among drug users, for example, decision makers will scale up harm reduction programs. If we witness growing problems with mass incarceration, decision makers will reform criminal laws. Present decision makers with the “facts”, and they will make good decisions!

Unfortunately or not, this harmonious cooperation almost never exists in the real world. And not only because policy makers are cunning little bastards who care more about their approval ratings than about scientific evidence. Some decision makers really do care about evidence – but they also have to meet the demands of the people who elected them in an often embattled public arena where they compete for limited resources and public attention. Where opposition parties always try to undermine public trust in their decisions. This is called democracy, the worst form of government except all the others, as Churchill famously said.

In addition to competition and opposition, politics is often driven by events and trends perceived important by the public rather than by trends perceived important by researchers. Highly publicised events and stories shaking and worrying public opinion, such as new drugs or new forms of drug use, conflicts in local communities, abuse by the authorities, or overdoses by celebrities, often influence the public discourse on drugs and drug policies much more than reports.

I think we have to honestly acknowledge that this political and communicational reality is also part of the game – a reality on its own.

Still, you rarely find any reference to these public events in official drug reports and studies on drug policies. Do we read about highly publicised drug scandals in official drug reports? Do we read assessments about how they shape policy making? Almost never. It seems both decision makers and experts tend to pretend that these events are not important. They both pretend to work according to the ideal system described above, where decision making is mechanically fed by evidence. And I think this is where the real hypocrisy comes in.

Both experts and political decision makers pretend not to see the elephant in the room, be it overdose cases, murders on the streets, political debates about drug law reform, or false, sensationalist media reports about new drugs. Most professionals who work on creating the evidence-base for policy making, either working for academic institutions or government agencies, stick to their general research findings and avoid discussing anything concrete that is beyond that – everything that can be controversial or can divide the public opinion. They often don’t want to risk losing their “neutral” and “apolitical” expert status by taking a position in polarising debates. It is up to decision makers to ignore inconvenient data and to cherry pick data that seems to support the decisions that will make their voters feel secure and happy.

What I really would like to see is not only evidence-informed but also reality-based drug policy. Where there is no gap between the professional/scientific discourse on drugs and the public discourse on drugs – where they mutually influence, reinforce, and respond to each other. While we know that an overdose death at a youth festival in itself is not comparable to the results of epidemiological surveys, and the story of a single drug user failing drug treatment has not the same value as the findings of randomised controlled studies, they are still powerful realities that can be highly influential for how people conceive drugs and drug users. Instead of ignoring concrete emotional stories often sensationally presented by tabloid newspapers, we have to put them into context and use them as tools to communicate our own messages.

We have to do much more to study how drug policy is really made and shaped – how the process is affected by external factors that have nothing to do with scientific evidence. How media stories can distract and distort the public discourse on drugs. How decisions are often influenced by these stories. How decisions are affected by the competition of different stakeholders within the government administration. What messages and arguments work in changing public opinion and how to present them in the most effective way, and how experts and decision makers can cooperate to respond to new realities in a rapid but responsible way, showing leadership and guidance in public debates about drugs.

Peter Sarosi

Filed Under: Articles Topics: Drug Policy and Law, European Drug Policy

Access to this article is free - but to produce articles and videos is not. Drugreporter is a non-profit website that needs your support to provide you with high quality contents.

Become a supporter and make a donation of 5 $ today!

Kapcsolódó cikkek:

Decriminalisation in Portugal: Through the Lens of People who Use Drugs

December 5, 2022 - István Gábor Takács

Drugreporter News | 2022 November

November 24, 2022 - István Gábor Takács

THE BLACK INITIATIVE: Fighting Brazil’s Racist Drug War

November 9, 2022 - István Gábor Takács

Kapcsolódó videók:

Decriminalisation in Portugal: Through the Lens of People who Use Drugs

December 5, 2022 - István Gábor Takács

Drugreporter News | 2022 November

November 24, 2022 - István Gábor Takács

Harm Reduction in Athens – With the Eye of an Outsider

November 23, 2022 - Péter Sárosi

You can browse our topics here:

Activism COVID-19 Criminalisation Dose of Science Drug Consumption Rooms Drug Policy and Law European Drug Policy Harm Reduction Hepatitis HIV/AIDS Marijuana Policies Medical Marijuana Needle and syringe programs New Psychoactive Substances Opiate Substitution Overdose Prevention Psychedelic Medicines Regulation and Control Russian Drug Policy Sex Work United Nations Drug Policy US Drug Policy

Primary Sidebar

BECOME A SUPPORTER OF DRUGREPORTER! INVEST THE PRICE OF A COFFEE MONTHLY AND MAKE SURE DRUGREPORTER KEEPS RUNNING!
Subscribe to the Newsletter!

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Search

Drugreporter Video Database

Hundreds of videos on drug policy, harm reduction and human rights for streaming and download, also on a world map!

DRUGREPORTER NEWS

Monthly drug policy news from around the world

Drugreporter café

In our new online video show, we regularly discuss new developments in the world of drug policy with professionals, activists and decision makers. You can also listen to the Drugreporter Café in Podcast format on Spotify or Apple Podcasts!

COVID-19 Harm Reduction Update

On this info page Drugreporter provides regular updates about resources and news on how harm reduction service providers respond to the COVID-19 Epidemic.

Drugreporter Video Advocacy Network

Browse videos produced by members of our Drugreporter Video Advocacy Network, from all around the world!

DRUG USERS NEWS

Russian language videos on drug policy, harm reduction and human rights.

Our award winning animated documentary movie is based on the original audio recording of Kostya Proletarsky, a drug user and HIV activist who died as a result of mistreatment and torture at a Russian prison. Festival appearances, news and resources are available here!

Footer

Rights Reporter Foundation
Hungary, 1032 Budapest
San Marco Street 70.
Email: rightsreporter@rightsreporter.net

Search

Our other websites:

The Rights Reporter Foundation

The Autocracy Analyst

Room for Change Campaign

Room in the 8th District Campaign

A Day in the Life movie website

Drugreporter