In the Americas the world drug problem manifests as an increasingly complex, dynamic and multi-causal phenomenon that has adverse effects on health, social cohesion, citizen security, the integrity of democratic institutions, development and economic activities in the countries of the region, with political, economic, social and environmental costs. This requires a comprehensive, balanced, multidisciplinary and evidence-based approach that takes into account the causes of the problem, in full respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In that regard, the Hemispheric Plan of Action on Drugs 2016-2020 is a supporting guide for continuing the implementation of the established guidelines in the Hemispheric Drug Strategy (2010) and the commitments undertaken by member states in the Declaration of Antigua, Guatemala, "For a comprehensive policy against the world drug problem in the Americas" (2013); in the Resolution of Guatemala, "Reflections and guidelines to formulate and follow up on comprehensive policies to address the world drug problem in the Americas" (2014); and in the outcome document of the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly on the world drug problem, held from April 19-21, 2016 in New York City, entitled, "Our joint commitment to effectively addressing and countering the world drug problem" (2016), among other relevant resolutions approved in this area during the past four years. Additionally, the Plan of Action acknowledges the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development and notes that the efforts made towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and to effectively address the world drug problem are complementary and mutually reinforcing.

Through this Plan of Action, member states reiterate their commitment to continue furthering progress in the Hemisphere, addressing the world drug problem, placing individuals at the core of drug policies and taking into account gender, age and cultural issues, as well as, when appropriate, inputs from civil society and other social actors, and addresses the new challenges faced by countries, within the framework of the three international drug control conventions and other relevant international instruments, in full respect of the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Keep up-to-date with drug policy developments by subscribing to the IDPC Monthly Alert.

Hemispheric Plan of Action on Drugs 2016-2020

Cannabis Social Clubs (CSCs) are a model of non-profit production and distribution of cannabis among a closed circuit of adult cannabis users. CSCs are now operating in several countries around the world, albeit under very different legal regimes and in different socio-political contexts.

In this paper we describe and compare the legal framework and the self-regulatory practices of Cannabis Social Clubs in three countries (Spain, Belgium, and Uruguay). The objective of our comparative analysis is to investigate how CSCs operate in each of these countries. To foster discussions about how one might regulate CSCs to promote public health objectives, we conclude this paper with a discussion on the balance between adequate governmental control and self-regulatory competences of CSCs.

We identified a number of similarities and differences among the CSCs’ practices in the three countries. Formal registration as non-profit association seems to be a common standard among CSCs. We found nevertheless great variation in terms of the size of these organisations. Generally, only adult nationals and/or residents are able to join the CSCs, upon the payment of a membership fee. While production seems to be guided by consumption estimates of the members (Spain and Belgium) or by the legal framework (Uruguay), the thresholds applied by the clubs vary significantly across countries. Quality control practices remain an issue in the three settings studied here. The CSCs have developed different arrangements with regards to the distribution of cannabis to their members.

By uncovering the current practices of CSCs in three key settings, this paper contributes to the understanding of the model, which has to some extent been shaped by the self-regulatory efforts of those involved on the ground. We suggest that some of these self-regulatory practices could be accommodated in future regulation in this area, while other aspects of the functioning of the CSCs may require more formal regulation and monitoring. Decisions on this model should also take into account the local context where the clubs have emerged. Finally, the integration of medical supply within this model warrants further attention.

Read the full article here (behind pay-wall)

Regulating cannabis social clubs: A comparative analysis of legal and self-regulatory practices in Spain, Belgium and Uruguay

Since you are reading this booklet, we assume you are looking for help for opioid dependence – addiction to heroin, fentanyl, oxycodone or any number of other pills. Or maybe someone close to you needs this help. This booklet talks about opioid substitution treatment (OST) – medication-assisted treatment with methadone or Suboxone (buprenorphine/naloxone). These medications are also opioids, but they provide stable, long-acting relief from withdrawal and cravings. They replace the heroin or fentanyl that is causing the problem with a regular dose of a medication that allows for a stable life.

This handbook has been written by a group of patients in British Columbia. We all have long experience with medication-assisted treatments for opioid dependence. The language about drug use is complex. The latest version of the manual that defines diseases and disorders (DSM-V) no longer refers to “dependence” and uses “addiction” instead. In this handbook, we continue to use “dependence” to refer to our experience of “needing the drug” and significant withdrawal symptoms when trying to quit or cut down on our use. Deciding to seek help is an important step in any process of recovery. You are making a wise decision to seek help now. People dependent on opioid drugs and not receiving opioid substitution treatment (OST) are many times more likely to die or be seriously harmed by problem drug use.

Patients helping patients understand opioid substitution treatment

Using drugs whilst sex working can be a dangerous combination. Involvement with controlled drugs increases the risk of getting involved in the criminal justice system and can dramatically increase the risks to your safety that are associated with sex work.

The most important way of minimising risks to your safety is to avoid using drugs while you are working.

In the following paragraphs, we set out basic information about the laws that are most likely to be relevant. If you want further information, you should contact your solicitor or call Release. The UK Network of Sex Projects has an excellent guide: ‘Keeping Safe: Safety Advice for Sex Workers in the UK’ ( or contact 0161 629 9861).

Sex workers and the law

This report details the findings of a survey conducted by the Scottish Trans Alliance into transgender inclusion in drug and alcohol services. The survey was open to any trans person living in Scotland. For the purpose of the survey, trans was identified as:

“an umbrella term for all people whose gender identity or gender expression is different to the one assigned to them at birth, including trans men, trans women, non-binary people, and cross-dressing people.”

The survey focused on three main areas; people’s use of alcohol or other drugs, the way in which their trans identity impacted on their use of alcohol or other drugs, and their concerns about approaching or experiences of using specialist services.

Transgender inclusion in drug and alcohol services

The idea of the survey is to get a snapshot in time of what is happening with UK street drug markets. Previous surveys were conducted as telephone interviews with local drugs workers, Drug Action Team staff and police officers with specialist knowledge e.g those working in drug squads. For this survey, drug workers and police officers again comprise the majority of informants excepting that the police input has come primarily from those officers designated as drug expert witnesses and members of the Drug Expert Witness and Valuation Association. Also this time, we have widened the net of respondents to include researchers, drug consultants and trainers and those with contacts at street level together with information culled from published academic papers and official reports. The survey was conducted during October-November 2016 with representatives from 32 organisations and officers from 13 constabularies mainly by telephone, but also email and face-to-face.

Drug scenes can vary enormously within one region or even one city so the survey can only take a broad sweep across the UK. Even so, we have tried to encompass a wide range of geographical areas and for this survey these include: Greater London, Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Swansea, Belfast, Bristol, Brighton, Blackpool, Bradford, Hartlepool, Sheffield, Lincolnshire, Newcastle and Tyneside, Stoke and the Staffordshire region, Essex and Kent (Southend, Thanet and the Medway towns); Somerset, Devon and Cornwall and East Anglia.

Unprecedented street purity levels for heroin, crack, powder cocaine and ecstasy.

Headline goals for Psychoactive Substances Act achieved but new forms of SCRA street dealing and distribution putting vulnerable groups at risk as rough sleeping numbers increase.

Some reports of young people using heroin to self-medicate from SCRA.

Extension of drug distribution system known as county or country lines.

Increasing numbers coming forward to agencies with cannabis as a primary problem.

Continued reporting of widespread non-medical use of prescription and OTC drugs not necessarily confined to traditional drug treatment service groups.

Highways and buyways: A snapshot of UK drug scenes 2016

This training resource has been designed to support stakeholders to put the UN Bangkok Rules on women offenders and prisoners into practice. It draws on global good practice and research findings to provide practical guidance, using exercises and case studies.

At the end of the ten modules, you will have the tools and knowledge to design gender-sensitive policies and practices
for women offenders and prisoners and apply them in your professional role.

10 modules, with clear learning objectives

case studies to help you apply international standards

good practices to inspire new thinking and provide solutions

additional resources to delve deeper into specific topics

end-of-module quizzes to assess your understanding.

While the Workbook has been designed as a self-learning tool, it can also be used as part of group training sessions. It is designed for prison staff, policy‑makers, healthcare practitioners, representatives of intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, and other interested stakeholders.

Workbook on women in detention: putting the UN Bangkok Rules on women prisoners into practice

While the adverse consequences of injecting drug use have increased significantly over the years, the services provided for drug users (including prevention, treatment and care) in addition to the advocacy and policy development efforts still remain far from adequate.

Drug use and HIV/AIDS are complex problems with political, social, economic, and cultural determinants. In the MENA region, the issue of drug use is even more complex and sensitive due to the effects of religion, insufficient knowledge on drugs and HR, repressive policies that stigmatize and punish drug users and the prevailing negative and judgmental attitudes towards PWUD. HR programs and services, including gender-sensitive services, are faced with multiple legal, political, financial, societal and cultural obstacles/challenges hindering their work. CSOs have an active role in advocating and promoting the HR approach, as well as delivering services to Key Populations (KPs). In countries of the region, where most services for PWID are driven and implemented by CSOs (MENAHRA, 2014), building the capacity and enhancing the knowledge and skills [of CSOs] to deliver services is a priority issue.

Guide on networking in harm reduction

In March 2015, the Department of Health commissioned Public Health England (PHE) to “review the evidence on: what can be expected of the drug treatment and recovery system and provide advice to inform future policy”.

PHE used a mixed methods approach to review the evidence, drawing on statistical information, engagement with stakeholders including experts by experience, and commissioning external reviews by academic experts.

The review begins with a brief summary of the current nature and prevalence of drug misuse, the history of drug treatment in England, and the outcomes it achieves. The international research literature on treatment effectiveness is then summarised, with comparisons made to effectiveness in England. Comparisons to treatment data from other countries are made where possible. The impact of housing problems, unemployment and social deprivation on treatment engagement and outcomes is reviewed. Finally, the review uses modelling to consider the likely size, characteristics and needs of the drug treatment population in the next four years, and reflects on the challenges for local treatment systems and recommends how treatment outcomes might be measured, maintained and improved.

An evidence review of the outcomes that can be expected of drug misuse treatment in England

Cannabis is a neglected drug in public health discourses, a reality which is at odds with the growing number of people in England who are now seeking support for problematic cannabis use. The disparity of how cannabis is prioritised by drug and alcohol service providers, wider community services, local authority commissioners and public health bodies has limited the amount of support available and impeded quality.

Among people experiencing problematic cannabis use, there is a perception that their needs will not be effectively met at treatment centres.

Some drug and alcohol service providers and commissioners are being attentive to cannabis but overall, cannabis has not been appropriately prioritised.

One to one interventions relating to cannabis are mostly confined to drug and alcohol treatment centres. Wider community services reported that they do not have the capacity or the ability to offer brief, initial interventions.

There are limited amounts of public resources available, some of which are lacking in levels of quality and accessibility.

A wider structural barrier is that the sector does not have a clear strategy for linking people experiencing problematic cannabis use into support and guidance. With the current illegal and unregulated market reducing the visibility of cannabis use, practitioners reported that ‘we’re just fumbling around in the dark trying to find them’.

Black Sheep: An investigation into existing support for problematic cannabis use

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) was given statutory (In 25-1.5-110, C.R.S.) responsibility to:

“... monitor changes in drug use patterns, broken down by county and race and ethnicity, and the emerging science and medical information relevant to the health effects associated with marijuana use.”

Patterns of drug use are typically determined by using population-based surveys that ask specific questions about substance use. Colorado has created and manages several population-based surveys to assess the prevalence of a variety of health conditions and behaviors of specific populations. In addition, there are a few national surveys that collect state level data on marijuana use. The data from these surveys are compiled here to meet the reporting requirements set forth in 25-1.5-110, C.R.S. These data also have been presented to the Retail Marijuana Public Health Advisory Committee, which was charged with the duties outlined in 25-1.5-110, C.R.S. to “...establish criteria for studies to be reviewed, reviewing studies and other data, and making recommendations, as appropriate, for policies intended to protect consumers of marijuana or marijuana products and the general public.”

Reviewing marijuana use patterns in Colorado provides important insight to the committee members as they consider public health recommendations.

Monitoring health concerns related to marijuana in Colorado: 2016

Drugs policy over the last two decades in the UK, and other countries, such as the US and Australia, has been very strongly influenced by the assumed link between drugs and crime (HM Government, 2010; Home Office, 2011, 2016) and the idea that tackling drug use will affect crime. Existing evidence suggests a strong link between illicit drug use and involvement in crime (Bennett, Holloway, & Farrington, 2008), especially incomegenerating, acquisitive crime (Bukten et al., 2011b). The association has been observed primarily among arrestees (Pierce et al.,2015b), prisoners (Johnson, 2006) and people entering drug treatment (Darke et al., 2009). However, these groups may not be representative of the wider drug-using population as offending rates can be atypical in the period immediately prior to arrest, imprisonment or treatment (McGlothlin, Anglin, & Wilson, 1978); and drug-using offenders may be more likely than non-using offenders to be apprehended (Bond & Sheridan, 2007).

The drug-crime link appears particularly compelling among individuals with frequent and problematic use of opiates, such as heroin (Kaye, Darke, & Finlay-Jones, 1998), and/or crack cocaine (Bennett et al., 2008; Comiskey, Stapleton, & Kelly, 2012). Evidence synthesis concludes that the odds of offending are six times greater for crack users than non-crack users and three times greater for heroin users than non-heroin users (Bennett et al., 2008). Opiate/ crack users comprise 81% of those in receipt of structured drugtreatment services in England and are the group predominantly targeted by policy initiatives to divert drug-using offenders into treatment (Home Office, 2011; PHE, 2014). For these reasons, our review focuses on opiate/crack users.

Publications