“在目前的框架内,我们没有任何答案”:爱尔兰大麻政策变化的紧张局势

IF 0.9 Q3 Psychology
Chris Ó Rálaigh, S. Morton
{"title":"“在目前的框架内,我们没有任何答案”:爱尔兰大麻政策变化的紧张局势","authors":"Chris Ó Rálaigh, S. Morton","doi":"10.1108/dat-10-2020-0064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nInternational policy approaches to cannabis production and use are changing rapidly, and within the Irish context, alternatives to prohibition are being considered. This study aims to explore policymaker’s attitudes towards the decriminalisation and legal regulation of cannabis for recreational use in the midst of an unfolding policy process, examining the degree which a “policy window” might be open for the implementation of cannabis policy change.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nSemi-structured interviews were held with eight key informants within the policy field in Dublin, Ireland. Kingdon’s (2014) Multiple Streams framework was used to consider whether the problems, policy and political streams were aligning to support progressive policy change.\n\n\nFindings\nIrish policymakers indicated broad support for the decriminalisation of cannabis. The legal regulation of cannabis received more qualified support. Existing policy was heavily criticised with criminalisation identified as a clear failure. Of particular interest was the willingness of policymakers to offer opinions which contrasted with the policy positions of their organisations. While a policy window did open – and close – subsequent governmental commitments to examine the issue of drugs policy in a more deliberative process in the near future highlight the incremental nature of policy change.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study provides unique insight into the opinions of policymakers in the midst of a prolonged period of policy evolution. A latent aspiration for historical policy change was situated within the realpolitik of more traditional approaches to policy development, demonstrating that the alignment of Kingdon’s (2014) problem, policy and political streams are essential for change in cannabis policy.\n","PeriodicalId":44780,"journal":{"name":"Drugs and Alcohol Today","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“We don’t have any answers within the current framework”: tensions within cannabis policy change in Ireland\",\"authors\":\"Chris Ó Rálaigh, S. Morton\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/dat-10-2020-0064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nInternational policy approaches to cannabis production and use are changing rapidly, and within the Irish context, alternatives to prohibition are being considered. This study aims to explore policymaker’s attitudes towards the decriminalisation and legal regulation of cannabis for recreational use in the midst of an unfolding policy process, examining the degree which a “policy window” might be open for the implementation of cannabis policy change.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nSemi-structured interviews were held with eight key informants within the policy field in Dublin, Ireland. Kingdon’s (2014) Multiple Streams framework was used to consider whether the problems, policy and political streams were aligning to support progressive policy change.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nIrish policymakers indicated broad support for the decriminalisation of cannabis. The legal regulation of cannabis received more qualified support. Existing policy was heavily criticised with criminalisation identified as a clear failure. Of particular interest was the willingness of policymakers to offer opinions which contrasted with the policy positions of their organisations. While a policy window did open – and close – subsequent governmental commitments to examine the issue of drugs policy in a more deliberative process in the near future highlight the incremental nature of policy change.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis study provides unique insight into the opinions of policymakers in the midst of a prolonged period of policy evolution. A latent aspiration for historical policy change was situated within the realpolitik of more traditional approaches to policy development, demonstrating that the alignment of Kingdon’s (2014) problem, policy and political streams are essential for change in cannabis policy.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44780,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drugs and Alcohol Today\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drugs and Alcohol Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/dat-10-2020-0064\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs and Alcohol Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/dat-10-2020-0064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:关于大麻生产和使用的国际政策方针正在迅速变化,在爱尔兰范围内,正在考虑禁止的替代办法。本研究旨在探讨政策制定者在政策发展过程中对娱乐用大麻的非刑事化和法律监管的态度,研究实施大麻政策变化的“政策窗口”可能打开的程度。设计/方法/方法在爱尔兰都柏林与政策领域的8位关键线人进行了半结构化访谈。Kingdon(2014)的多重流框架被用来考虑问题、政策和政治流是否一致,以支持渐进式政策变化。爱尔兰政策制定者表示对大麻合法化的广泛支持。对大麻的法律管制得到了更充分的支持。现有的政策受到了严厉的批评,刑事定罪被认为是明显的失败。特别令人感兴趣的是,政策制定者是否愿意提供与其组织的政策立场形成对比的意见。虽然政策窗口确实打开了- -也关闭了- -随后政府承诺在不久的将来以更慎重的方式审查毒品政策问题,这突出了政策变化的渐进式性质。原创性/价值本研究对长期政策演变过程中决策者的观点提供了独特的见解。历史政策变化的潜在愿望位于更传统的政策制定方法的现实政治中,这表明Kingdon(2014)问题,政策和政治流的对齐对于大麻政策的变化至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“We don’t have any answers within the current framework”: tensions within cannabis policy change in Ireland
Purpose International policy approaches to cannabis production and use are changing rapidly, and within the Irish context, alternatives to prohibition are being considered. This study aims to explore policymaker’s attitudes towards the decriminalisation and legal regulation of cannabis for recreational use in the midst of an unfolding policy process, examining the degree which a “policy window” might be open for the implementation of cannabis policy change. Design/methodology/approach Semi-structured interviews were held with eight key informants within the policy field in Dublin, Ireland. Kingdon’s (2014) Multiple Streams framework was used to consider whether the problems, policy and political streams were aligning to support progressive policy change. Findings Irish policymakers indicated broad support for the decriminalisation of cannabis. The legal regulation of cannabis received more qualified support. Existing policy was heavily criticised with criminalisation identified as a clear failure. Of particular interest was the willingness of policymakers to offer opinions which contrasted with the policy positions of their organisations. While a policy window did open – and close – subsequent governmental commitments to examine the issue of drugs policy in a more deliberative process in the near future highlight the incremental nature of policy change. Originality/value This study provides unique insight into the opinions of policymakers in the midst of a prolonged period of policy evolution. A latent aspiration for historical policy change was situated within the realpolitik of more traditional approaches to policy development, demonstrating that the alignment of Kingdon’s (2014) problem, policy and political streams are essential for change in cannabis policy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Drugs and Alcohol Today
Drugs and Alcohol Today SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信