IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0218011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping novel psychoactive substances policy in the EU: The case of Portugal, the Netherlands, Czech Republic, Poland, the United Kingdom and Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Neicun
  • Marthe Steenhuizen
  • Robin van Kessel
  • Justin C Yang
  • Attilio Negri
  • Katarzyna Czabanowska
  • Ornella Corazza
  • Andres Roman-Urrestarazu

Abstract

Introduction: The rapid rise in trade and use of NPS and the lack of information concerning their potential toxicity pose serious challenges to public health authorities across the world. Policy measures towards NPS taken so far have a special focus on their legal status, while the implementation of a public health strategy seems to be still missing. The aim of this study is to perform a general assessment of NPS-related policy (including regulatory measures and public health strategies) implemented by six European countries: Portugal, the Netherlands, Czech Republic, Poland, the United Kingdom and Sweden. Methods: Six EU countries were included in this scoping review study. Drug policies (including legal responses and public health strategies) were analysed. UNODC drug policy classification system was used as a benchmark, while path dependency approach was used for data analysis; a net of inter-dependencies between international, EU and national policies was highlighted. Results and discussion: The countries included in this study can be placed in a wide spectrum according to their formulation of drug policy, from Portugal and the UK that have specific legal responses to NPS but have differently focused on harm reduction strategies at one end, to Sweden whose drug-free society goal is not translated into a specific regulation of NPS at the other end. Conclusion: The findings of the study reveal limited development towards harmonisation of national drug policies–particularly with regard to NPS. To tackle the challenge presented by NPS, EU Member states have formulated legislation and public health strategies independently. National approaches to NPS are therefore in line with their already existing drug policies, reflecting cultural values towards substance abuse and national political interests, while the homogenization at an international level has so far mostly been focused on law enforcement and drugs use preventive strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Neicun & Marthe Steenhuizen & Robin van Kessel & Justin C Yang & Attilio Negri & Katarzyna Czabanowska & Ornella Corazza & Andres Roman-Urrestarazu, 2019. "Mapping novel psychoactive substances policy in the EU: The case of Portugal, the Netherlands, Czech Republic, Poland, the United Kingdom and Sweden," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-29, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0218011
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218011
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218011&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0218011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fu, Tong & Jian, Ze, 2020. "A developmental state: How to allocate electricity efficiently in a developing country," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    2. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/2b86iahfka8nib85jevjn10bsn is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    4. David P Carter & Christopher M Weible & Saba N Siddiki & Xavier Basurto, 2016. "Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 159-185, January.
    5. Giliberto Capano & Andrea Lippi, 2017. "How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 269-293, June.
    6. Carter, Michael & Morrow, John, 2014. "The political economy of inclusive rural growth," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60268, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Eriksson, Martin & Pettersson, Thomas, 2012. "Adapting to liberalization: government procurement of interregional passenger transports in Sweden, 1989–2008," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 182-188.
    8. Van Vliet, Olaf & Kaeding, Michael, 2007. "Globalisation, European Integration and Social Protection – Patterns of Change or Continuity?," MPRA Paper 20808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Nikolai, Rita & Helbig, Marcel, 2019. "Der (alte) Streit um die Grundschulzeit: Von Kontinuitäten und Brüchen der Kaiserzeit bis heute [The (old) battles on the lenght of primary schooling: stability and ruptures since the imperial peri," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 289-303.
    10. Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), 2013. "International Handbook on Mega-Projects," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14791.
    11. Ekaterina Domorenok & Paolo Graziano & Laura Polverari, 2021. "Policy integration, policy design and administrative capacities. Evidence from EU cohesion policy [Joined-up Government in the Western World in comparative perspective: A preliminary literature rev," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(1), pages 58-78.
    12. Kasper Ampe & Erik Paredis & Lotte Asveld & Patricia Osseweijer & Thomas Block, 2021. "Power struggles in policy feedback processes: incremental steps towards a circular economy within Dutch wastewater policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 579-607, September.
    13. Elizabeth Balbachevsky & Helena Sampaio & Cibele Yahn de Andrade, 2019. "Expanding Access to Higher Education and Its (Limited) Consequences for Social Inclusion: The Brazilian Experience," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(1), pages 7-17.
    14. Michael Mintrom & Jacqui True, 2022. "COVID-19 as a policy window: policy entrepreneurs responding to violence against women [The pandemic paradox: The consequences of COVID-19 on domestic violence]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(1), pages 143-154.
    15. Sabine Saurugger & Fabien Terpan, 2016. "Do crises lead to policy change? The multiple streams framework and the European Union’s economic governance instruments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(1), pages 35-53, March.
    16. Li, Aitong & Xu, Yuan & Shiroyama, Hideaki, 2019. "Solar lobby and energy transition in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    17. Odysseas Christou, 2021. "Energy Security in Turbulent Times Towards the European Green Deal," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(3), pages 360-369.
    18. FitzGerald Cathal & O’Malley Eoin & Broin Deiric Ó, 2019. "Policy success/policy failure: A framework for understanding policy choices," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 67(2), pages 1-24, May.
    19. Hermawan, Silvio & Karim, Moch Faisal & Rethel, Lena, 2023. "Institutional layering in climate policy: Insights from REDD+ governance in Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    20. Matteo Jessoula, 2018. "Pension multi-pillarisation in Italy: actors, ‘institutional gates’ and the ‘new politics’ of funded pensions," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 24(1), pages 73-89, February.
    21. André Sorensen & Anna-Katharina Brenner, 2021. "Cities, Urban Property Systems, and Sustainability Transitions: Contested Processes of Institutional Change and the Regulation of Urban Property Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-19, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0218011. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.