It's going to get pretty tippy”
Stakeholder perspectives on the (dys)function of a four pillars drug strategy
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 14907720 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Alissa Greer (0000-0002-8702-5694, Simon Fraser University, corresponding author), Naomi Zakimi (0000-0003-3582-3261, Simon Fraser University), A Ritter (0000-0001-9540-1920, UNSW Sydney) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 130 |
| Pages | 104538 |
| Publication date | 2024-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Drug Policy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0955-3959 • E-ISSN: 1873-4758 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104538 |
| PMID | 39033646 |
| OpenAlex | W4400841943 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 19 |
A 'drug strategy' is a policy document that structures the priorities and directions for interventions for drug related issues within a particular jurisdiction and/or context. A 'pillars' drug strategy concentrates efforts through clustering separated columns of activity, such as law enforcement, harm reduction, treatment, and prevention. In this study, we examined drug policy stakeholders' perspectives on the structure, function, and fit of a four pillar drug strategy framework in Vancouver, Canada. Utilizing qualitative interview data from fifteen drug policy stakeholders, we examine perspectives on Vancouver's four pillar drug strategy that was implemented over 20 years ago. Our findings are organized under three main themes: (1) the notion of 'balance' of efforts, resources, and attention across the pillars; (2) how the pillars function as a cohesive whole; (3) whether the pillars' architecture is still fit-for-purpose. The architecture of four discrete pillars did not enable a sense of cohesion and collaboration of efforts, and instead elicited a sense of competition, conflict, fragmentation, simplicity, and rigidity of the strategy as a whole. These findings suggest that, in practice, a four pillars framework may be structurally dysfunctional in working towards a common goal. Our study questions the effectiveness of a commonly used 'pillars' framework and whether it needs to be reenvisaged
Business · Cohesion (chemistry · Context (archaeology · Harm reduction · Jurisdiction · Law and economics · Law enforcement · Political science · Psychological intervention · Public relations · Sociology · Stakeholder · Community Health and Development · Health Policy Implementation Science · HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk · Law · Medicine
Three pillars of sustainability in the wake of Covid-19
If enforcement is not working, what are the alternatives
Impacts of intensified police activity on injection drug users
The impact of unregulated single room occupancy hotels on the health status of illicit drug users in Vancouver
As strong as the weakest pillar
Addiction treatment in Vancouver
Producing the ‘problem of drugs’
Examining the construction and representation of drugs as a policy problem in Australia's National Drug Strategy documents 1985–2010
The establishment of North America's first state sanctioned supervised injection facility
Coca cultivation and crop eradication in Colombia
The evolution of drug policy in Vancouver, Canada
What do you do when you hit rock bottom? Responding to drugs in the city of Vancouver
Three pillars of just transition labour market policies
The evolution of sustainability models, from descriptive, to strategic, to the three pillars framework for applied solutions
Cross-pillar politics
Three pillars of sustainability
Expertise, Truth, and Urban Policy Mobilities
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |