Public Criminology in an Age of Austerity: Reflections from the Margins of Drug Policy Research

Andrew D. Hathaway

Abstract


On May 14th 2001 the author was invited to testify in Ottawa as an ‘expert witness’ by the Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs. Based on this experience, the present paper offers insight on the matter of presenting research with the aim of influencing drug policy discussions. The testimony was derived from statistics produced with standard survey items and measures for studying patterns and problems of cannabis use. Among other observations, the interpretation given was that, even at high use levels, marijuana users experience few symptoms of dependence or abuse. Excerpts from this testimony, and other work submitted, are cited in the 2002 report of the Committee. The potential impact of the testimony given is examined in this paper in relation to the other submissions which were based on qualitative research and one that was explicitly polemical in nature, or derived from ideological assertions by the author. The excerpts from these works that were eventually included in the final Senate report suggest that scientific arguments per se were not deemed more persuasive in this forum than the use of other kinds of rhetoric or evidence. These observations will be further situated in the context of scholarly discussion about the challenges and prospects of Public Criminology and the role of academics as “democratic underlabourers.”


Keywords


Public Criminology, Drug Policy Reform; austerity;

Full Text:

HTML PDF

References


Best, J. 1987. Rhetoric in claims-making: Constructing the missing children problem. Social Problems 34: 101–121.

Blumstein, A. 1993. Making rationality relevant. Criminology 31(1): 1-16.

Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. 1993. From ruling class to field of power. Theory, Culture & Society 10: 19-44.

Côté, J.E. and Allahar, A.L. 2011. Lowering Higher Education: The Rise of Corporate Universities and the Fall of Liberal Education. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

DeBeck, K., Wood, E., Montaner, J., and Kerr, T. 2007. Canada’s 2003 renewed drug strategy—An evidence-based review. HIV/AIDS Policy & Law Review 11(2–3): 4–12.

Erickson, P.G. 1998. Neglected and rejected: A case study of the impact of social research on Canadian drug policy. Canadian Journal of Sociology 23: 263-280.

Gouldner, A.W. 1968. The sociologist as partisan: Sociology and the welfare state. American Sociologist May: 103–116.

Gusfield, J.R. 1975. The (f)utility of knowledge?: The relation of social science to public policy toward drugs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 417, 1-15.

Gusfield, J.R. 1981. The Culture of Public Problems: Drinking-driving and the Symbolic

Order. University of Chicago Press.

Hathaway, A.D. 1997a. Marijuana and tolerance: Revisiting Becker’s sources of control. Deviant Behavior 18(2): 103-124.

Hathaway, A.D. 1997b. Marijuana and lifestyle: Exploring tolerable deviance. Deviant Behavior 18(3): 213-232.

Hathaway, A. D. 2001. Charter rights of Canadian drug users: A constitutional assessment of the Clay trial and ruling. Canadian Journal of Law and Society 16(1): 29-43.

Hathaway, A.D. 2003. Cannabis effects and dependency concerns in long-term frequent users: A missing piece of the public health puzzle. Addiction Research & Theory 11(6): 441-458.

Hathaway, A.D. and Erickson, P.G. 2003. Drug reform principles and policy debates: Harm reduction prospects for cannabis in Canada. Journal of Drug Issues 33(3): 467-496.

Hathaway, A.D. and Tousaw, K.I. 2008. Harm reduction headway and continuing resistance: Insights from safe injection in the city of Vancouver. International Journal of Drug Policy 19: 11-16.

Ibarra, P.R., & Kitsuse, J.I. 1993. Vernacular constituents of moral discourse: An interactionist proposal for the study of social problems. In G. Miller and J.A. Holstein, Eds. Constructionist Controversies: Issues in Social Problems Theory. N.J.: Aldine.

Latour, B. 2004. Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Loader, I. and Sparks, R. 2010. What is to be done with public criminology? Criminology & Public Policy 9(4): 771-781.

Locke, J. 1975. (1690). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Putnam, H. 1993. Objectivity and the science-ethics distinction. Pp. 143-157 in M.C. Nussbaum and A. Sen, Eds. The Quality of Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Reinarman, C. 2004. Public health and human rights: The virtues of ambiguity. International Journal of Drug Policy 15: 239–241.

Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs. 2002. Cannabis: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy. Ottawa: Available on the Parliamentary Internet: www.parl.gc.ca/illegal-drugs.asp.

Uggen, C. and Inderbitzen, M. 2010. Public criminologies. Criminology & Public Policy 9(4): 725-749.

Wacquant, L. 2011. From ‘public criminology’ to the reflexive sociology of criminological production and consumption. British Journal of Criminology 51: 438-48.

Winch, P. 2008. The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy. NY: Routledge.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Attribution to include the author or artist's name, date of first publication,
and the name of our journal: Radical Criminology.
ISSN 1929-7904
(Print) | ISSN 1929-7912 (Online)

SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave