Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Illegal Drugs, Drug Trafficking and Violence in Latin America pp 99–111Cite as

Legalize, Regulate, or Prohibit? Public Policy Dilemmas

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 806 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines the different policy options to address the drug problem. I discuss the merit and pitfall of three different polices. The first is legalization, which sometimes takes the form of a broad decriminalization of the different phases. The second is regulation that refers to legal measures aimed at monitoring and controlling the circulation of illegal drugs without actually legalizing (i.e., maintaining prohibition). Finally, prohibition means making drugs illegal, directing law enforcement resources toward eliminating the market for drugs, and sanctioning different actors involved in the business. I analyzed the implications of each policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    One clarification is necessary on the use of the term “decriminalization.” Usually, criminalization is used when drug possession is treated as a crime, while decriminalization entails no sanctions for users. In many countries, decriminalization means that even though the crime exists, the person who commits said crime will not be punished. The reason for keeping it a crime is that if use were completely legalized, the entire chain would have to be legalized.

  2. 2.

    Sweden has a wide range of prevention and treatment programs available, though it imposes severe punishments for anyone involved in the drug market (users included). Since the 1970s, sentences for drug-related crimes have grown progressively more severe. See the summary at http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/pdf/report_drugspolicy.pdf pp. 10–12.

  3. 3.

    The case of Washington DC is particularly complex because the US Congress has jurisdiction in budget affairs and is entirely opposed to legalization.

  4. 4.

    See Nicholas Kristoff article at the New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/opinion/sunday/portugal-drug-decriminalization.html.

  5. 5.

    The recent opioid epidemic in the United States is unrelated to a drop in prices in the 1990s. As mentioned earlier, this epidemic is tied to the painkiller crisis over the past decade.

References

  • Allen L, Trace M, Klein A (2011) Decriminalization of drugs in Portugal: a current review. The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme Drugscope, Briefing paper vol 6

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale and associates (2009) “The Continued Standstill in Reducing Illicit Drug Use,” Policy Brief at www.carnevaleassociates.com/publications.html.

  • Caulkins J, Reuter P (2013) New visions for National Security at Issues in Science and Technology. http://issues.org/23-1/caulkins/

  • Caulkins J, Reuter P, Iguchi M, Chiesa J (2005) How goes the “war on drugs”?: an assessment of U.S. drug problems and policy. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez Lemus M, Stanton K, Walsh J (2005) Colombia: a vicious circle of drugs and war. In: Youngers C, Rosin E (eds) Drugs and democracy in Latin America: the impact of U.S. policy. Lynne Rienner, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuter P, Trautmann F (2009) A report on global illicit markets 1997–2008. European Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Rojas I (2005) Peru: drug control policy, human rights and democracy. In: Youngers C, Rosin E (eds) Drugs and democracy in Latin America: the impact of U.S. policy. Lynne Rienner, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Rydell P, Everingham S (1994) Controlling cocaine: supply versus demand programs. Rand Corporation Monographs. En http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR331.html

  • Tokatlian J (2010) La guerra antidrogas y el Comando Sur: Una combinación delicada. Foreign Affairs en Español 10:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Youngers C (2005) The collateral damage of the U.S. war on drugs; collusions and recommendations. In: Youngers C, Rosin E (eds) Drugs and democracy in Latin America: the impact of U.S. policy. Lynne Rienner, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Latin American Studies on Insecurity & Violence, National University of Tres de Febrero, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Marcelo Bergman

Authors
  1. Marcelo Bergman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bergman, M. (2018). Legalize, Regulate, or Prohibit? Public Policy Dilemmas. In: Illegal Drugs, Drug Trafficking and Violence in Latin America. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73153-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73153-7_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73152-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73153-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation