Interventions on the Supply Side of the Local Hard Drug Market: Towards a Regulated Hard Drug Trade? the Case of the City of Rotterdam

The aim of interventions on the supply side of the hard drug market is to diminish or regulate the unwanted effects of the hard drug trade, with respect to both public health and safety. However, initiatives for the regulation of the hard drug trade cannot be pursued at the international governmental level because the sale of hard drugs is forbidden by law. Therefore, what remains are initiatives at the local level. In a case study of the City of Rotterdam, an inventory is made of interventions on the supply side. It describes interventions initiated by both governmental and private organizations, including the closure of certain dealing addresses, public transport and other general regulations, reporting centers for drug-related nuisance (i.e., local government), and “self-regulation” of dealing addresses and drug consumption/selling rooms (i.e., private interventions). The argument here is for a different approach of (dosed) suppression and regulation (by public and private interventions). In this approach, the use of “quality criteria” for dealing addresses and the spread of dealing addresses are important instruments.

The Origins and Future of the Dutch Approach towards Drugs

This paper considers the roots of the Dutch approach towards drugs. It argues that the idiosyncratic nature of Dutch drug policies can be explained by taking into account the peculiar evolution of the Netherlands' political institutions. The distinctive character of Dutch policies is explained through the concept of gedogen. Gedogen refers to the practice of discriminatory enforcement. Gedogen can be defined as a regulatory system of organized toleration and targeted repression. Only those illegalities that are actually considered to cause social problems are targeted for repression. As such, the policy differs markedly from orthodox prohibitionist policy approaches. Policies towards ecstasy and cannabis are discussed to illustrate how gedogen works in practice. While it is argued that gedogen has functioned well for a number of years, doubts are expressed about the extent to which the Netherlands can be expected to continue to play the role of pioneer with respect to drug policies. After a revival of conservative politics, the country now seems ill equipped to develop alternative drug policies.

Street-level effects of local drug policy on marginalization and hardening: an ethnographic study among chronic drug users

This study focuses on the effects of increased enforcement on marginalization of and quality of relations between chronic drug users in the region of Parkstad Limburg (The Netherlands). Data were mainly gathered by ethnographic community fieldwork, verified by interviews with key informants and supported by a survey sample of 100 drug users. The results show direct effects of repression on stigmatization and marginalization of drug users, and on the availability of drugs. More indirect effects are the hectic reactions of drug users and dealers, greater visibility of drug users in public places, and increased tensions in and deterioration of relations between the drug users. The impact of the increased enforcement on reports of drug-related nuisance in general population surveys and on police control is also discussed.