Sweden - Sweden's Drug Policy: A reality check

[Lunar Loops]

This from the Transform Drug Policy Foundation website:

Swedish massage

The perception that low drug use levels in Sweden are a direct result of the country’s tough anti-drugs policy is finding considerable traction in the the UK. But, argues Steve Rolles, it is both simplistic and misleading.

Ian Duncan Smith is flagging up the success of Sweden’s drug policy in his new in his role as chairman of the Social Policy Review Group, currently overhauling Tory drug policy in the run up to the next General Election. David Cameron visited the country in February in an attempt to distance himself from his days of cannabis smoking. In the words of the Daily Mail he “praised the tougher approach in Sweden, which does not distinguish between cannabis and harder drugs such as heroin, and practices a zero-tolerance policy.”
In September last year the UN Office of Drugs and Crime produced a report titled 'Sweden's successful drug policy: a review of the evidence'. Launching the document, UNODC Director Antonio Costa repeated his catch phrase that 'societies have the drug problem that they deserve', noting specifically that “in the case of Sweden, the clear association between a restrictive drug policy and low levels of drug use, is striking”.
Sweden's 'successful' policy closely follows, in both letter and spirit, that espoused by the UNODC. Because Sweden has comparatively low European levels of drug use it is perhaps unsurprising that the UN’s drugs office chooses to proclaim the country as a model of good practice, especially given the backdrop of rising drug use globally. Sweden, perhaps not coincidentally, is the UNODC's third largest state funder (nine per cent) after the US (13 per cent) and Italy (11 per cent)*, and has the clearly stated and unambiguous aspiration to a 'drug free society'. This manifests in its tough zero-tolerance approach involving heavy handed policing, the widespread rejection of harm reduction principles, and a focus on coerced abstinence-based treatment.
However, by putting the emphasis so heavily on prevalence success, the UNODC conveniently brushes over some of the less positive aspects of Sweden’s drug policies. According to the country’s nascent user movement, the aversion to harm reduction (shared with the UNODC but notably not the WHO, and UNAIDS) has contributed to Sweden's drug death figures doubling from around 200 to 400 since 1990, placing it high in the Euro rankings. Problematic drug use has also almost doubled since 1980 to a level hovering around the European average.
Furthermore, Costa's suggestion that there is a obvious causal relationship between prevalence and UNODC-style drug control policy appears unsustainable. Various countries have comparable or lower levels of drug use than Sweden but have very different drug policies. Greece, for example, (according to the EMCDDA), has the lowest level of drug use in Europe but spends approximately one-fiftieth on per capita drug-related expenditure that Sweden does. Holland, also has well below the European average drug use, spends more than Sweden per capita, but has a tolerant / harm reduction-led policy that is the polar opposite of the Sweden UNODC model. Conversely, another repressively oriented country - third in the Euro drug-related expenditure tables - is the UK, which sits at the top of most European drug use prevalence tables. We have yet to see a UN report titled 'The UK’s unsuccessful drug policy: a review of the evidence', indeed if the UK Government buys into Costa's analysis they must be wondering what they have done to 'deserve' our high prevalence rates.
The alternative theory, one not based on the UNODC's public relations crisis and overtly political prerogatives, would be that levels of drug use are determined by a complex and highly localised interplay of multiple social, cultural, economic and demographic variables, and that government drug policies, specifically enforcement and prevention efforts, have, at best, only marginal impacts.
Dr Peter Cohen, Director of the Centre for Drugs Research at the University of Amsterdam, has argued that Sweden's low level of drug use and repressive drug policy, rather than being causally linked, are in fact both merely expressions of its historically temperance oriented culture, noting that Sweden also has historically low levels of alcohol, tobacco and prescription drug use. It is also worth pointing out that Sweden has low levels of social inequality, social deprivation, and unemployment, combined with a very high level of health and social welfare spending. There's a lot to admire about Sweden, but even they can play drug-war politics.

* since publication of this article a new UNODC annual report has been published with the UNODC funding rankings shifting slightly (see page 89). Creeping into the number one spot for individual state donors, coincidentally in the year the glowing Sweden report is published, is.....Sweden (9%). The US slips to number two (8%) and straight in at number three is.....The UK, at 7% - a shade under 11 million US dollars. Bargain.

Reputation Comments on this post:

good article

[FrankenChrist]

Originally Posted by shroomonger

This from the Transform Drug Policy Foundation

...It is also worth pointing out that Sweden has low levels of social inequality, social deprivation, and unemployment, combined with a very high level of health and social welfare spending.

I was already typing whilst reading the article, but I didn't need to continue since the author already said what I was going to. Hence my quoting.

[Pondlife]

the clear association between a restrictive drug policy and low levels of drug use

Repeat after me: correlation does not imply causation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correla...mply_causation

This is probably the most common logical falacy made by the press and politicians, and it is often deliberately made to further their chosen position.

[FrankenChrist]

I have to add one more note on the drinking culture.

Drinking may be looked down upon in Sweden, but when Swedes do drink, they often go binge drinking. I am talking drinking until they can't crawl out of the gutter anymore.

In another topic I already referred to Swedish friends who had an expression for it: ambulance drunk.

*puts on pretentious thinking cap*
Every culture has at least one drug, and the culture has adapted itself so it allows that drug and that drug alone, in order to keep things under control. The drug has become part of the culture. However, it's common to look down upon indulging, but every culture has a different approach to dealing with it.

[Triple7]

Scandinavians take pride when they puke and hangover. Does any oher European do that? Sweden also has the highest number of GHB deaths per capita (or should be say user?) in the world. Bet a little bit Dutch model could help.

[FrankenChrist]

By the way, today I read in the paper that a Swedish man had ordered wine on-line which was confiscated at customs, because Systembolaget, the Swedish state-run shops, have the monopoly for alcohol. The guy took it to the EU courts.
They ruled Sweden's national monopoly* is against EU free trade regulations.

w00t! XD

[bob_arctor]

frankenchrist: Here one is not so certain that it was a good thing. Of course, it is obvious that EU, globalization and internet trade poses new problems for Sweden's alcohol policy. The same old is untenable in the long run if one ignores that.

But one is also ignorant if the fact that alcohol is a drug which infers by far the highest social cost in form of increasing taxes, more resources in health care must be redirected to alcohol-related injuries - (ie. less resources for SWIM when in need).. those are costs which everyone must pay for. SWIM would drink more if liquor and strong beer was cheaper and available at the gas station.

The experience in Finland, where they recently raised taxes on spirits after an experiment with lowering it, says quite a lot about what happens. SWIM hopes that the systembolaget system can be fitted into the world of today, not because SWIM is a lover of the state, but because SWIM wants fellow humans to NOT get beaten up by drunken people, or driving themselves to a liquor death, as well as see SWIM's tax money get spent on more sensible things..

Can SWIY understand where SWIM is coming from?

[radiometer]

Does Sweden's relative naiveté regarding drugs account for the reckless behavior one reads about on Swedish drug discussion forums?

[bob_arctor]

radiometer: One train of thought would perhaps relate the early widespread computer literacy and Internet access among young people to the shocking and common displays of "Viking heroism"... a larger share of youth looking for kicks are online.

The lack of harm reduction culture might be another cause... for decades most youth have only got the swedish special treatment in school - monolithic non-realitybased "ANT-undervisning" (Alcohol, Narcotics, Tobacco-education) scare propaganda as a starting point (sometimes ending point) in their drug career.

It is a really interesting discussion, to try to understand why these people go over board... perhaps most of the more experienced psychonauts have left the fora which these misguided youths in frustration. A tidal wave of dubious marketing from legal highs/RC-vendors mixed with a strong culture of "if no effect at 200 mg, take 2 gm" can make anyone want to isolate themselves along with older and more responsible peers.

[anj0vis]

All of scandinavia has similar drug use patterns. Finnish though drink quite a lot of alcohol per capita, but they can also binge like russians and swedes.

.. I recently read from swedish newspapers that their estimate of cannabis consumption had been broadly off earlier, Dagens Nyheter (the biggest newspaper there) quoted new figures, which seemed quite large (was it 30 tons of cannabis per year compared to earlier less than 10 tons or so.. ). Perhaps the repressive policy just makes evaluating drug use less accurate when people don't want to tell their habit to anyone.