Interpreting dutch cannabis policy: Reasoning by analogy in the legalization debate

Science

Volumn 278, Issue 5335, 1997, Pages 47-52

  MacCoun, Robert ^a   Reuter, Peter ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANNABIS ADDICTION; DENMARK; DRUG LEGISLATION; GERMANY; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; NETHERLANDS; NORWAY; POLICY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CANNABIS; CHILD; DENMARK; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; GERMANY; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; NORWAY; PREVALENCE; STREET DRUGS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; UNITED STATES;

CANNABIS; CANNABIS SATIVA;

EID: 0030768101     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.278.5335.47     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Morbid. Mortal. Wkly Rep. 45, 392 (1997).
2. W. Rhodes, P. Scheiman, T. Pittyayuthinkhun, L. Collins, V. Tsarfaty, What America's Users Spend on Illicit Drugs, 1988-1993 (Office of National Drug Control Policy, Washington, DC, 1995).
3. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD, various years). See also http://www. health.org/pubs/95hhs/app5.htm.
4. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Drug Abuse Warning Network: Medical Examiner Data Statistical Series I, No. 14-B (SAMHSA, Rockville, MD, 1994).
5. Office of National Drug Control Policy, The National Drug Control Strategy, 1997: Budget Summary (Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC, 1997).
6. _, State and Local Spending on Drug Control (Washington, DC, 1993).
7. J. M. Brown, D. K. Gilliard, T. L. Snell, J. J. Stephan, D. J. Wilson, Correctional Population in the United States (Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, DC, 1996).
8. General Accounting Office (GAO), Drug Control, T-GGD-97-7 (GAO, Washington, DC, 1997).
9. Senator O. Hatch (sponsor), Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996, Public Law 104-237 (introduced 17 July 1996).
10. P. Reuter, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., in press.
11. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Illicit Drug Wholesale and Retail Price Report (DEA, Washington, DC, various years).
12. L. Johnston, P. M. O'Malley, G. Bachman, National Survey Results on Drug Use from the Monitoring the Future Study, 1975-1994 (National Institute on Drug Abuse, Rockville, MD, 1995). Estimates for 1991 through 1996 appear at http://www.isr.umich.edu/src/ mtf/
13. R. MacCoun, J. Kahan, J. Gillespie, J. Rhee, J. Drug Issues 23, 615 (1993).
14. E. Nadelmann, Science 245, 739 (1989).
15. S. Wisotsky, A Society of Suspects: The War on Drugs and Civil Liberties (Cato Institute, Washington, DC, 1992).
16. J. Q. Wilson, Commentary 89, 21 (1991).
17. S. B. Duke and A. Gross, The Longest Running War: Rethinking Our Tragic Crusade Against Drugs (Putnam, New York, 1993).
18. H. Kleber, N. Engl. J. Med. 330, 361 (1994).
19. R. MacCoun, Psychol. Bull. 113, 497 (1993).
20. A. Uchtenhagen, F. Gutzwiller, A. Dobler-Mikola, Eds., Programme for a Medical Prescription of Narcotics: Final Report of the Research Representatives (Swiss Federal Office of Public Health, Berne, Switzerland, 1997).
21. J. A. Miron and J. Zweibel, J. Econ. Perspect. 9, 175 (1995).
22. R. J. MacCoun, P. Reuter, J. Kahan, A. Saiger, in Psychoactive Drugs and Harm Reduction: From Faith to Science, N. Heather, A. Wodak, E. Nadelmann, P. O'Hare, Eds. (Whurr, London, 1993), p. 103.
23. Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport; Ministry of Justice; Ministry of the Interior, Drugs Policy in the Netherlands: Continuity and Change (Rijswijk, Netherlands, 1995). See also Ministry of Justice fact sheet, Dutch Drugs Policy (http://www.minjust.nl:8080/a_beleid/fact/cfact7.htm).
24. Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport; Ministry of Justice; Ministry of the Interior, Drugs Policy in the Netherlands: Continuity and Change (Rijswijk, Netherlands, 1995). See also Ministry of Justice fact sheet, Dutch Drugs Policy (http://www.minjust.nl:8080/a_beleid/fact/cfact7.htm).
25. E. Leuw, in Between Prohibition and Legalization: The Dutch Experiment in Drug Policy, E. Leuw and I. H. Marshall, Eds. (Kugler, Amsterdam, 1994), p. 23; P. Cohen and A. Sas, Cannabis Use in Amsterdam (CEDRO, Amsterdam, 1997).
26. E. Leuw, in Between Prohibition and Legalization: The Dutch Experiment in Drug Policy, E. Leuw and I. H. Marshall, Eds. (Kugler, Amsterdam, 1994), p. 23; P. Cohen and A. Sas, Cannabis Use in Amsterdam (CEDRO, Amsterdam, 1997).
27. The 1995 revisions to the policy were announced in a press release on 18 September 1996 by the Public Prosecution Service; see http://www.om.nl.com/ OM/engels/pressreleases/pres1809.htm.
28. L. Horstink-Von Meyenfeldt, in European Drug Policies and Enforcement, N. Dorn, J. Jepsen, E. Savona, Eds. (MacMillan, London, 1996), p. 97.
29. A. C. M. Jansen, Cannabis in Amsterdam: A Geography of Hashish and Marihuana (Coutinho, Muiderberg, Netherlands, 1991). Note that some locations may correspond to more than one coffeeshop.
30. D. J. Kraan, in (24), p. 283; P. Cohen, University of Amsterdam, personal communication.
31. D. J. Kraan, in (24), p. 283; P. Cohen, University of Amsterdam, personal communication.
32. M. P. S. Langemeijer, in Illicit Drugs in Europe, D. Korf and H. Riper, Eds. (SISWO, Amsterdam, in press).
33. Past month or past year prevalence estimates would be more informative but are scarce, especially before 1986.
34. W. M. de Zwart, H. Stam, S. B. M. Kuipers, Kerngegevens: Roken, Drinken, Drugsgebruik en Gokken Onder Scholieren vanaf 10 Jaar (Trimbos-instituut, Utrecht, Netherlands, 1997).
35. J. P. Sandwijk, P. D. A. Cohen, S. Musterd, M. P. S. Langemeijer, Licit and Illicit Drug Use in Amsterdam II (Instituut voor Sociale Geografie, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 1995).
36. J. P. Sandwijk, P. D. A. Cohen, S. Musterd, Licit and Illicit Drug Use in Amsterdam (lnstituut voor Sociale Geografie, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 1991).
37. D. J. Korf, Tijdschr. Alcohol Drugs Andere Psychotrope Stoffen 14, 81 (1988).
38. F. M. Driessen, G. Van Dam, B. Olsson, ibid. 15, 2 (1989).
39. This impression is attenuated rather than enhanced by the multivariate analysis that produced the trend line in Fig. 1. If anything, the individual survey points depict a more dramatic decline, apparently attributable in part to methodological differences across surveys over time.
40. In the Second United Nations Survey of Crime Trends, the Dutch government reported 2782 drug arrests in 1975, 3643 in 1976, and 3585 in 1977 (Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Branch, United Nations, Vienna, 1981). These figures do not distinguish among type of arrests (cannabis versus other drugs, possession versus distribution) and reflect both changes in enforcement and changes in drug prevalence.
41. Norwegian Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, New Trends in Drug Abuse in Norway (Norwegian Directorate for the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Problems, May 1997). See http://odin.dep.no/shd/publ/ drugs/drugs.html#1.
42. See D. B. Kandel, Milbank Q. 69, 365 (1991).
43. L. D. Johnston, P. M. O'Malley, J. G. Bachman, Marijuana Decriminalization: The Impact on Youth, 1975-1980 (Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI, 1981); E. Single, J. Public Health Policy 10, 456 (1989).
44. L. D. Johnston, P. M. O'Malley, J. G. Bachman, Marijuana Decriminalization: The Impact on Youth, 1975-1980 (Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI, 1981); E. Single, J. Public Health Policy 10, 456 (1989).
45. J. Kaplan, Marijuana: The New Prohibition (Meridian, New York, 1970).
46. P. Cohen and A. Sas, Cannabis Use, A Stepping Stone to Other Drugs? The Case of Amsterdam (Department of Human Geography, Univ. of Amsterdam, 1996). See http://www.frw.uva.nl/cedro/ library/ASC95/ASC95.html.
47. Unpublished estimate from analysis of the 1993 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, provided by S. Everingham and E. Chen of the RAND Corporation.
48. Specifically, P(cocaine|∼marijuana) = [P(cocaine) -P(cocaine|marijuana) × P(marijuana)]/P(∼marijuana) = (0.06 - 0.22 × 0.28)/0.72 = 0.00 within rounding error.
49. A. Goldstein, Addiction: From Biology to Drug Policy (Freeman, New York, 1994).
50. R. MacCoun and P. Reuter, Beyond the Drug War: Learning from Other Places, Times, and Vices (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, forthcoming).
51. T. Cook and D. Campbell, Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1979).
52. R. J. MacCoun, K. Model, H. Phillips-Shockley, P. Reuter, in Policies and Strategies to Combat Drugs in Europe, G. Estievenart, Ed. (Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 1995).
53. J. A. Miron and J. Zweibel, Am. Econ. Rev. 81, 242 (1991).
54. R. MacCoun, P. Reuter, T. Schelling, J. Policy Anal. Manag. 15, 330 (1996); M. A. R. Kleiman, Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic Books, New York, 1992).
55. R. MacCoun, P. Reuter, T. Schelling, J. Policy Anal. Manag. 15, 330 (1996); M. A. R. Kleiman, Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic Books, New York, 1992).
56. R. Hartnoll, Multi-City Study: Drug Misuse Trends in Thirteen European Cities (Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France, 1994).
57. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 1995 Annual Report on the State of the Drugs Problem in the European Union (European Communities, Lisbon, Portugal, 1996).
58. The research reported here was supported by a grant from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation to RAND's Drug Policy Research Center. Our arguments are developed in greater detail (46). We thank J. Caulkins, P. Cohen, P. Cook, M. Farrell, M. Feinleib, M. Kleiman, and F. Zimring for helpful comments, and B. Kilmer for research assistance.