Aim: Minimum Pricing for Alcohol (MPA) was enacted in Wales on March 2nd 2020. During the legislative process (i.e. consultation and parliamentary discussion), concern was expressed about the possibility of some drinkers switching to using other substances in response to any rise in the cost of alcohol. This paper reports on findings from a study which explored these pre-implementation concerns and how the policy was shaped. Method: The research involved surveys (n=193) and interviews (n=87) with drinkers (predominantly harmful or treatment seeking) and providers of services. Survey responses were detailed, thus when combined with the interviews, provided a wealth of qualitative data, which are drawn upon in this paper. Results: The findings highlight an expectation that most drinkers would respond to the new policy with adaptations of their coping mechanisms to maintain alcohol use at pre-legislative levels. This was either by switching alcohol products and adjusting their lifestyle to maintain an affordable drinking habit or developing new behaviours to manage additional costs. A small group of those with previous experience of drug use were identified as likely to switch from using alcohol to some other substances. Conclusions: Prior to the legislation being implemented awareness of the detail of the policy was found to be low, and the perceptions of increased potential harm for certain groups, including switching, were linked to concern about a lack of treatment capacity.
There is widespread support for the introduction of Drug Consumption Rooms (DCRs)in Scotland as part of a policy response to record levels of drug-related harm. However, existing legal barriers are made more complex by the division of relevant powers between the UK and Scottish Governments. This paper reports on a national, qualitative study of key decision-makers in both local and national roles across Scotland. It explores views on the political barriers and enablers to the adoption of Drug Consumption Rooms and the potential role of these facilities in the wider treatment system. It also considers approaches to evidence, especially the types of evidence that are considered valuable in supporting decision-making in this area. The study found that Scottish decision-makers are strongly supportive of DCR adoption; however, they remain unclear as to the legal and political mechanisms that would make this possible. They view DCRs as part of a complex treatment and support system rather than a uniquely transformative intervention. They see the case for introduction as sufficient, on the basis of need and available evidence, thus adopting a pragmatic and iterative approach to evidence, in contrast to an appeal to traditional evidence hierarchies more commonly adopted by the UK Government.
This paper is a reflective piece, it adopts a mixture of applied practice and theory considerations. These conceptualisations capture what are still relatively early understandings and uses of such methodologies, acquired across several decades of research and service provision experiences. The paper is structured around some of the sequences of the research process and as such provides a broad framework for such approaches. Findings: PAR and PAI approaches utilise several key theoretical considerations. There are many critical issues associated with adopting these approaches, including those of ethics, funding, involvement, language, resources and support. Three key principle reasons (moral, political and research based), help explain why we should see more adoption of such approaches in substance use related research. Research limitations/implications: This paper represents author views which are by their nature very subjective. Practical implications: Implementation of the key considerations highlighted within this paper can lead to an active adoption of PAR and PAI methodologies within alcohol and drug research. Increasing the use of such methodologies will allow commissioners, researchers and service providers to develop a more nuanced understanding of the experiences of and responses to alcohol and drug use. Originality/value: This paper captures critical conversations at a time of increased calls for service user involvement across all aspects of alcohol and other drug provision, including evaluation and research.
Background People who use drugs in Scotland are currently experiencing disproportionately high rates of drug-related deaths. Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) are harm reduction services that offer a safe, hygienic environment where pre-obtained drugs can be consumed under supervision. The aim of this research was to explore family member perspectives on DCR implementation in Scotland in order to inform national policy. Methods Scotland-based family members of people who were currently or formerly using drugs were invited to take part in semi-structured interviews to share views on DCRs. An inclusive approach to ‘family’ was taken, and family members were recruited via local and national networks. A convenience sample of 13 family members were recruited and interviews conducted, audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically using the Structured Framework Technique. Results Family members demonstrated varying levels of understanding regarding the existence, role, and function of DCRs. While some expressed concern that DCRs would not prevent continued drug use, all participants were in favour of DCR implementation due to a belief that DCRs could reduce harm, including saving lives, and facilitate future recovery from drug use. Participants highlighted challenges faced by people who use drugs in accessing treatment/services that could meet their needs. They identified that accessible and welcoming DCRs led by trusting and non-judgemental staff could help to meet unmet needs, including signposting to other services. Family members viewed DCRs as safe environments and highlighted how the existence of DCRs could reduce the constant worry that they had of risk of harm to their loved ones. Finally, family members emphasised the challenge of stigma associated with drug use. They believed that introduction of DCRs would help to reduce stigma and provide a signal that people who use drugs deserve safety and care. Conclusions Reporting the experience and views of family members makes a novel and valuable contribution to ongoing public debates surrounding DCRs. Their views can be used to inform the implementation of DCRs in Scotland but also relate well to the development of wider responses to drug-related harm and reduction of stigma experienced by people who use drugs in Scotland and beyond.
Contribution Analysis (CA) is being increasingly favoured as a policy evaluation tool. This includes application to evaluate alcohol and drug policies. This paper reflects on one such example and begins by providing a brief overview of Contribution Analysis as an evaluative research method. It then describes the way in which Contribution Analysis was applied to evaluate alcohol and drug policy in Wales, one of the constituent countries of the United Kingdom. The paper reports on two issues. Firstly, how the theory of Contribution Analysis was translated into practice. Secondly, the key learning points for us as evaluators that arose out of the utilisation of this method. The article highlights that our use of CA enabled a rich exploration of programmes within their contextual setting, and had a range of limitations and considerable challenges associated with identifying and explaining causalities. Within these methodological discussions we also illustrate how the policy was more successfully in elements closer to its nomenclature framing; i.e. harm reduction, than it was to other incorporated aims. The analysis presented in this paper will be useful across a range of jurisdictions where the need to evaluate drug and alcohol policy and practice initiatives may arise.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.