CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This article has explored why Canada is finding it so difficult to implement a more balanced approach to the control of illicit drugs even though this has been its stated policy since the first National Drug Strategy in 1987. Six potential explanations for the observed enforcement bias were comparatively assessed: bureaucratic imperatives, political posturing, exportation of the US war on drugs, hidden agendas, distributive politics, and social judgments/social control. The table below provides a ranking of these explanations based on an integration of the data collected from Canadian drug policy experts, and an analysis of the historical and contemporary records:

The analysis in this article suggests that exportation of the US war on drugs and bureaucratic imperatives are the most important explanations for the continued emphasis on enforcement in Canadian drug control policy. Tough on crime political posturing, hidden agendas, and social judgments/social control weigh-in with somewhat less of an influence, and distributive politics is listed last as an unverified less significant influence. Most interestingly, it appears as though the top three explanations (exportation of the US war on drugs, bureaucratic imperatives, and tough on crime political posturing) are reinforced by several of the less influential explanations (hidden agendas, social control, and social judgments, respectively). These findings confirm the complexity of this issue, and may help explain why it has been so impervious to reform.