National drug policy development is essential for effective drug policies, yet the process through which they emerge, the role of evidence and the theoretical basis for drug policy development are poorly understood. The present research adopted a cross-national analytical-descriptive approach to examine drug policy development between 1994 and 2006 in two nations: Portugal and Australia. Through contrasting atypical reforms - namely decriminalisation in Portugal and the Illicit Drug Diversion Initiative (IDDI) in Australia – with the preceding periods of typical reform, it provides a detailed examination of how atypical reforms are proposed, negotiated and adopted. Moreover, it critically analyses the application of three public policy theories – Multiple Streams, Advocacy Coalition and Punctuated Equilibrium – to identify common drivers and processes underpinning the developments. / Through a primarily qualitative approach involving interviews with 42 expert policy makers, supplemented with secondary sources and publicly available evaluations, this research demonstrates that the major drivers of atypical reform are policy advocates and their ability to convert opportunities into pragmatic responses. In Portugal policy entrepreneurs utilised the emergence of a problem opportunity, typified by a public health crisis in Casal Ventoso, to form an alliance between experts and politicians and adopt a paradigmatic change: decriminalisation. Policy entrepreneurs in Australia used the emergence of a highly politicised opportunity to convert what was initially a doctrinal solution of “zero tolerance” into a more humane response: drug diversion. / The research reveals that the process of policy formulation has critical impacts upon the mechanism, implementation and potential outcomes of reform, most notably whether there is evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence. It concludes by identifying practical and theoretical implications for more effective drug policy development, including the need for greater application of the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium. The current research asserts that policy makers must have realistic expectations over the role of evidence in policy making, but that the likelihood of pragmatic reform may be enhanced through expanding attention from “what works” to include alternative tools of persuasion. It further recommends that greater attention to the latter may increase the likelihood of effective reform. Due to the formation of an alliance between politicians and experts the Portuguese policy making process facilitated a more pragmatic reform. However, a paradigmatic change – and hence the potential for effective drug policy – would not have been possible without advocacy for a new vision of the drug user as a citizen.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/245594 |
| Creators | Hughes, Caitlin Elizabeth |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | Terms and Conditions: Copyright in works deposited in the University of Melbourne Eprints Repository (UMER) is retained by the copyright owner. The work may not be altered without permission from the copyright owner. Readers may only, download, print, and save electronic copies of whole works for their own personal non-commercial use. Any use that exceeds these limits requires permission from the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from these works., Open Access |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds