Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T11:15:18.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bridging the gap between science and drug policy: From “what” and “how” to “whom” and “when”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2008

Robert J. MacCoun
Robert J. MacCoun
Affiliation:
Goldman School of Public Policy and Boalt School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-7320. maccoun@berkeley.eduhttp://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~maccoun/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For all its problems, the microeconomic “rational addiction” theory had the appeal of making clear predictions about the effects of various drug policies. The emerging picture of the “what” and “how” of addiction is far more complex. Addiction scientists might help bridge the science–policy gap by devoting more attention to the “whom” and “when” of addiction.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , August 2008 , pp. 454 - 455
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Auld, M. C. & Grootendorst, P. (2004) An empirical analysis of milk addiction. Journal of Health Economics 23:1117–33.Google Scholar
Becker, G. S., Murphy, K. M. & Grossman, M. (2004) The economic theory of illegal goods: The case of drugs. NBER Working Paper No. W10976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, W. K., DeGrandpre, R. J. & Higgins, S. T. (1995) The behavioral economics of concurrent drug reinforcers: A review and reanalysis of drug self-administration research. Psychopharmacology 118:250–59.Google Scholar
Gruber, J. & Koszegi, B. (2001) Is addiction “rational”? Theory and evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116:1261–1305.Google Scholar
Kleiman, M. A. R. (2001) Controlling drug use and crime with testing, sanctions, and treatment. In: Drug addiction and drug policy: The struggle to control dependence, ed. Heymann, P. B. & Brownsberger, William N.. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
MacCoun, R. J. (2003) Is the addiction concept useful for drug policy? In: Choice, behavioural economics and addiction, ed. Vuchinich, R. & Heather, N., pp. 383–408. Elsevier.Google Scholar
MacCoun, R. J. & Reuter, P. (2001) Drug war heresies: Learning from other vices, times, and places. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manski, C., Pepper, J. & Petrie, C., eds. (2001) Informing America's policy on illegal drugs: What we don't know keeps hurting us. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/books/0309072735/html/Google Scholar
O'Brien, C. P. & McLellan, A. T. (1996) Myths about the treatment of addiction. The Lancet 347:237–40.Google Scholar
Skog, O. J. & Melberg, H. O. (2006) Becker's rational addiction theory: An empirical test with price elasticities for distilled spirits in Denmark 1911–31. Addiction 101:1444–50.Google Scholar
Vuchinich, R. & Heather, N. (2003) Choice, behavioural economics and addiction. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar