Monaghan Mark
University of Leeds, Sociology and Social Policy, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom.
Int J Drug Policy. 2014 Sep;25(5):1025-30. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2014.02.001. Epub 2014 Feb 14.
Drugs policy is made in a politically charged atmosphere. This is often not seen to be conducive to the ideals of evidence-based policymaking. In the UK over recent years the efficacy of the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA) has been one of the most widely discussed and debated areas of UK drug policy. Since inception, the MDA 1971 has remained relatively stable with very few drugs moving up or down the scale and until recently, and with very few exceptions, there has been little public debate on the nature of the system. This changed in the run up to the cannabis reclassification in 2004 from class B to class C, through the reverse of this decision in 2009 and the fallout between the Government of the time and leading members of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.
Based on wide-ranging survey of the literature and secondary analysis of various official publications and academic commentaries, this paper considers what the cannabis episode can tell us about the current state of UK drug policy governance.
Previous research on drug policy governance has suggested that policy goals should be clearly articulated so as to avoid confusion over what constitutes evidence, decision-makers should be 'evidence-imbued' and there should be widespread consultation with, and transparency of, stakeholder engagement. The interpretation here is that recent changes to cannabis legislation reveal that these aspects of good governance were called into question although there were fleeting moments of good practice.
The use of evidence in drug policy formulation continues to be bedevilled by political stalemate and reluctance to countenance radical reform. Where evidence does play a role it tends to be at the margins. There are, however, potential lessons to be learned from other policy areas but this requires a more pragmatic attitude on behalf of decision-makers.
毒品政策是在充满政治色彩的氛围中制定的。人们通常认为这不利于循证决策的理想状态。近年来，1971年《毒品滥用法》（MDA）在英国的效力一直是英国毒品政策中讨论和辩论最为广泛的领域之一。自该法案颁布以来，其相对稳定，极少有毒品在分级上出现变动，直到最近，除了极少数例外情况，关于该体系本质的公开辩论很少。这种情况在2004年大麻从B级重新分类为C级之前发生了变化，随后在2009年该决定被推翻，以及当时的政府与毒品滥用咨询委员会主要成员之间产生了分歧。
基于对大量文献的广泛调查以及对各种官方出版物和学术评论的二次分析，本文探讨大麻事件能让我们了解到英国毒品政策治理的当前状况。
先前关于毒品政策治理的研究表明，政策目标应明确阐述，以避免对何为证据产生混淆，决策者应“充满证据意识”，并且应与利益相关者进行广泛协商并保持透明度。这里的解读是，尽管有短暂的良好实践时刻，但近期大麻立法的变化表明，善治的这些方面受到了质疑。
在毒品政策制定中，证据的使用仍然受到政治僵局和不愿支持激进改革的困扰。证据即便发挥作用，往往也处于边缘地位。然而，其他政策领域有一些潜在的经验教训可供借鉴，但这需要决策者采取更务实的态度。
