Abstract
The introduction sets the scene for the arguments that form the main body of the discussion. It argues that we are at an important moment for the future of global drug policy with increasing pressure for reform of the international drug control apparatus. It situates the discourse within the context of public criminology, aiming to provide an accessible and enriching contribution to relevant debates. Finally, it provides an outline of the overall structure of the book.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
ACMD. (2002). The classification of cannabis under the misuse of drugs act 1971. Home Office. https://www.gov.uk.
Bastos, F., & Strathdee, S. (2000). Evaluating effectiveness of syringe exchange programmes: Current issues and future projects. Social Science and Medicine, 51, 1771–1782.
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Beyers, J., Toumbourou, J., Catalano, R., Arthur, M., & Hawkins, J. (2004). A cross-national comparison of risk and protective factors for adolescent substance use: The United States and Australia. Journal of Adolescent Health, 35, 3–16.
Bowling, B. (2011). Transnational criminology and the globalisation of harm production. In M. Bosworth’s & C. Hoyle’s (Eds.), What is criminology? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burawoy, M. (2004). Public sociologies: Contradictions, dilemmas, and possibilities. Social Forces, 82, 1603–1618.
Burawoy, M. (2005). 2004 presidential address: For public sociology. American Sociological Review, 70, 4–28.
Burawoy, M., Gamson, W., Ryan, C., Pfohl, S., Vaughan, D., Derber, C., et al. (2004). Public sociologies: A symposium from Boston college. Social Problems, 51, 103–130.
Capoccia, G. (2016). Critical junctures. In O. Fioretos, G. Tulia & A. Sheingate (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical institutionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carrier, N. (2014). On some limits and paradoxes of academic orations on public criminology. Radical Criminology, 4, 85–115.
Crepault, D. (2016). The rise of partisan pedagogy: How stakeholders outside of the academy are answering the call to public criminology. British Journal of Criminology, 57, 789–807.
Cullen, F. T. (2011). Beyond adolescence-limited criminology. Choosing our future—The American Society of Criminology 2010 Sutherland address. Criminology, 49(2), 287–330.
Currie, E. (1993). Reckoning: Drugs, the cities and the American future. New York: Hill and Wang.
Currie, E. (2007). Against marginality: Arguments for a public criminology. Theoretical Criminology, 11, 175–190.
Fordham, A. (2016). The drugs consensus is not pretty—It’s been ripped apart at the seams. Huffington Post, 3 May 2016. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk.
Fordham, A., & Jelsma, M. (2016). Will UNGASS 2016 be the beginning of the end for the ‘war on drugs’? TNI. https://www.tni.org.
Global Commission on Drug Policy. (2011). War on drugs: Report of the global commission on drug policy. http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org.
Global Commission on Drug Policy. (2014). Taking control: Pathways to drug policies that work. http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org.
Gomis, B. (2016). US drug policy; Clinton vs. Trump. Global Drug Policy Observatory Situation Analysis, October 2016.
Hetzer, H. (2016). UNGASS outcome: Missed opportunity for UN, but global reform movement grows & continues to push for better drug policies. Drug Policy Alliance. www.drugpolicy.org/blog.
Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston, MA: Little Brown.
Lenton, S. (2004). P’ot, politics and the press—Reflections on cannabis law reform in Western Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, 23, 223–233.
Loader, I., & Sparks, R. (2010). What is to be done with public criminology? Criminology and Public Policy, 9, 771–781.
Lopez, G. (2017). How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs. Vox media. https://www.vox.com.
MacCoun, R., & Reuter, P. (2001). Drug war heresies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maher, L., & Dixon, D. (1999). Policing and public health: Law enforcement and harm minimisation in a street-level drug market. British Journal of Criminology, 39, 488–512.
Matthews, R. (2009). Beyond ‘so-what?’ criminology: Rediscovering realism. Theoretical Criminology, 13(3), 341–362.
Matthews, R. (Ed.). (2016). What is to be done about crime and punishment? Towards a ‘Public criminology’. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Moore, D., & Dietze, P. (2005). Enabling environments and the reduction of drug-related harm: Re-framing Australian policy and practice. Drug and Alcohol Review, 24, 275–284.
Organisation of American States. (2013). Scenarios for the drug problem in the Americas 2013–2025. https://www.oas.org.
Ritter, A., & Bammer, G. (2010). Models of policy-making and their relevance for drug research. Drug and Alcohol Review, 29, 352–357.
Robelo, D. (2013). Breaking the Taboo: Why the OAS report on alternatives to drug prohibition is such a big deal. Drug Policy Alliance. www.drugpolicy.org.
Room, R. (2013). Legalizing a market for cannabis for pleasure: Colorado, Washington, Uruguay and beyond. Addiction, 109, 345–351.
Shiner, M. (2003). Out of harm’s way? Illicit drug use, medicalisation and the law. British Journal of Criminology, 43, 772–796.
Small, W., Wood, E., Jurgens, R., & Kerr, T. (2005). Injection drug use HIV/AIDS and incarceration: Evidence from the Vancouver injection drug users study. HIV AIDS Policy Law Review, 10, 5–10.
TNI. (2016). UNGASS 2016: Watershed event or wasted opportunity? https://www.tni.org.
Transform. (2016). Diplomacy or denialism? The language that the UNGASS outcome document overlooked. www.tdpf.org.uk.
True, J. L., Jones, B. D. & Baumgartner, F. R. (2007). Punctuated-equilibrium theory: Explaining stability and change in public policymaking. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Uggen, C., & Inderbitzen, M. (2010). Public criminologies. Criminology and Public Policy, 9, 725–749.
UNODC. (2016). Outcome document of the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on the world drug problem. Our joint commitment to effectively addressing and countering the world drug problem. New York: United Nations. http://www.unodc.org/documents.
Wolfe, D., & Malinowska-Sempruch, K. (2004). Illicit drug policies and the global HIV epidemic. Effects on UN and national government approaches. New York: Open Society Institute, International Harm Reduction Development.
Zahariadis, N. (2007). The multiple streams framework: Structure, limitations, prospects. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chatwin, C. (2018). Introduction. In: Towards More Effective Global Drug Policies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92072-6_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92072-6_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-92071-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-92072-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)