An analysis of scope, topics, methods and categories of drug policy research published in the International Journal of Drug Policy

Abstract

Introduction

While the field of ‘drug policy research’ feels intuitively knowable, there are few papers examining drug policy as a research object, and exploring the different methods and categories of drug policy research. This paper aimed to provide such an analysis.

Methods

The data source was research papers published in the International Journal of Drug Policy in 2023 and 2024 (N = 453) as this journal was most likely to surface drug policy research as well as reflect the multiple disciplines that engage in this field of practice. We applied an operational definition of ‘drug policy research’: research where the object of study was a policy, or a policy process. For those papers coded as ‘Yes’ to this definition, we coded the policy topic, drug class and methods used, in addition to the category of policy research.

Results

Of the 453 papers, 34.4 % (n = 156) were coded as drug policy research, the majority of which concerned criminalisation, decriminalisation and legalisation (23.7 %, n = 37), with the second largest topic area being harm reduction policies (20.5 %, n = 32), followed by drug treatment policies (16.7 %, n = 26) and restrictions on sales, advertising, and price (17.9 %, n = 28). All major drug classes were covered. Of the 156 studies 48.7 % (n = 76) employed quantitative methods and 42.3 % (n = 66) employed qualitative methods. We worked with five categories of drug policy research: evaluation (studying policy outcomes & effects, 36.5 %); implementation (studying policy implementation, 22.4 %); mapping (documenting policy positions, 16 %); policy-making (studying policy formation, 14.1 %); and finally policy design (studying policy mechanisms, 10.9 %). Notable gaps included prevention policy research, and studies of methamphetamine, psychedelics, and illicit cannabis policies, as well as quantitative methods for mapping studies and qualitative methods for outcome studies.

Discussion

The chosen operational definition forecloses and stabilises drug policy research as a particular field of practice, with associated topics and methods. It circumscribes it to around 34 % of publications in IJDP over 2023 and 2024. If another journal (or dataset of drug research) was chosen, it may be larger or smaller and with differing primary topics and methods as well as spread across categories of policy research. Perhaps more importantly however, we highlight that ‘drug policy research’ can be made otherwise – discussing three alternative conceptualisations: as research that aims to inform policy, as street-level implementation, or as policy ecology – each of which boundary ‘drug policy research’ differently.