Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/34409
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Drug Consumption Rooms and Public Health Policy: Perspectives of Scottish Strategic Decision-Makers
Author(s): Nicholls, James
Livingston, Wulf
Perkins, Andy
Cairns, Beth
Foster, Rebecca
Trayner, Kirsten M A
Sumnall, Harry R
Price, Tracey
Cairney, Paul
Dumbrell, Josh
Parkes, Tessa
Keywords: drug consumption rooms
safer injecting facilities
overdose prevention centres
drugs
policy
harm reduction
interventions
harm reduction
problem drug use
public health
Scotland
Issue Date: Jun-2022
Date Deposited: 10-Jun-2022
Citation: Nicholls J, Livingston W, Perkins A, Cairns B, Foster R, Trayner KMA, Sumnall HR, Price T, Cairney P, Dumbrell J & Parkes T (2022) Drug Consumption Rooms and Public Health Policy: Perspectives of Scottish Strategic Decision-Makers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (11), Art. No.: 6575. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116575
Abstract: 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.
DOI Link: 10.3390/ijerph19116575
Rights: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Licence URL(s): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ijerph-19-06575-v2.pdfFulltext - Published Version358.65 kBAdobe PDFView/Open



This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.