Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

A new approach to formulating and appraising drug policy : a multi-criterion decision analysis applied to alcohol and cannabis regulation.

Rogeberg, O. and Bergsvik, D. and Phillips, L.D. and van Amsterdam, J. and Eastwood, N. and Henderson, G. and Lynskey, M. and Measham, F. and Ponton, R. and Rolles, S. and Schlag, A.K. and Taylor, P. and Nutt, D. (2018) 'A new approach to formulating and appraising drug policy : a multi-criterion decision analysis applied to alcohol and cannabis regulation.', International journal of drug policy., 56 . pp. 144-152.

Abstract

Background Drug policy, whether for legal or illegal substances, is a controversial field that encompasses many complex issues. Policies can have effects on a myriad of outcomes and stakeholders differ in the outcomes they consider and value, while relevant knowledge on policy effects is dispersed across multiple research disciplines making integrated judgements difficult. Methods Experts on drug harms, addiction, criminology and drug policy were invited to a decision conference to develop a multi-criterion decision analysis (MCDA) model for appraising alternative regulatory regimes. Participants collectively defined regulatory regimes and identified outcome criteria reflecting ethical and normative concerns. For cannabis and alcohol separately, participants evaluated each regulatory regime on each criterion and weighted the criteria to provide summary scores for comparing different regimes. Results Four generic regulatory regimes were defined: absolute prohibition, decriminalisation, state control and free market. Participants also identified 27 relevant criteria which were organised into seven thematically related clusters. State control was the preferred regime for both alcohol and cannabis. The ranking of the regimes was robust to variations in the criterion-specific weights. Conclusion The MCDA process allowed the participants to deconstruct complex drug policy issues into a set of simpler judgements that led to consensus about the results.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
First Live Deposit - 27 March 2018
Available under License - Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Download PDF
(417Kb)
Full text:(VoR) Version of Record
First Live Deposit - 27 March 2018
Available under License - Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Download PDF (Advance online version)
(2072Kb)
Full text:(VoR) Version of Record
Available under License - Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Download PDF (Final published version)
(2073Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.01.019
Publisher statement:© 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).
Record Created:27 Mar 2018 09:58
Last Modified:01 Jun 2018 16:00

Social bookmarking: del.icio.usConnoteaBibSonomyCiteULikeFacebookTwitterExport: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex
Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library