From Alternative Development to Development-Oriented Drug Policies
From Alternative Development to Development-Oriented Drug Policies
复制标题
从替代发展到以发展为导向的毒品政策
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Sarah David
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Daniel Brombacher;Sarah David
本政策评论旨在从从业者的角度追溯替代发展概念的演变-以及近几十年来全球药物管制制度的变化。自1970年代以来，减少毒品供应主要集中在执法和作物替代方案上。一些国家政府在吸取了负面经验之后，侧重于考虑到毒品作物种植区的社会经济和政治条件的以发展为主导的办法。1988年的联合国药物管制公约（《禁止非法贩运麻醉药品和精神药物公约》）首次提到了反倾销的概念，1998年的《政治宣言》为反倾销演变为传统药物供应管制制度中的“第三支柱”创造了必要的回旋余地。另一个政治里程碑是2016年联合国大会关于世界毒品问题的特别会议（UNGASS）的成果文件，因为它是第一个专门针对以发展为导向的药物管制的一整章。近年来-考虑到反倾销以前的特殊地位-越来越多的国家宣布它们要么在国内实施反倾销措施，要么在国外支持这些措施。反倾销干预措施的明显增加可能是由于政府越来越多地参与，但也可能是由于反倾销越来越受欢迎，对现有措施进行了重新命名。然而，在政治势头增强的情况下，供资情况相当糟糕。2013年的最新数字表明，反倾销仅占全球官方发展援助的0.1%。虽然最近资金似乎略有增加，但作者认为，到目前为止，资金的真实的激增还看不到。
This policy comment aims to trace the evolution of the concept of alternative development (AD)—alongside changes in the global drug control regime during recent decades—from a practitioner’s point of view. Since the 1970s, drug supply reduction was primarily concentrated on law enforcement and crop substitution programmes. Following negative experiences, some governments focused on development-led approaches that consider the socio-economic and political conditions of drug crop cultivating areas. Both the 1988 United Nations drug control convention (Convention Against the Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances), the first to mention the concept of AD, and the 1998 Political Declaration created the latitude necessary for AD to evolve into a ‘third pillar’ within the traditional drug supply control system. Another political milestone was the Outcome Document of the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on the World Drug Problem (UNGASS), as it was the first to dedicate an entire chapter solely to development-oriented drug control. In recent years—unexpectedly given the niche that AD had formerly been—a growing number of countries have declared that they either implement domestic AD measures or support them abroad. The observable increase in AD interventions may be due to a growing engagement of governments, but could also be explained by a rebranding of existing measures, given the increased popularity of AD. The funding situation in light of this enhanced political momentum is, however, rather poor. Latest figures, from 2013, show that AD only accounts for 0.1 per cent of global official development assistance. Though there seems to have been a slight increase in funding recently, the authors argue that a real surge in funding is so far not in sight.