Ecological Modeling of US Drug Regulatory Frameworks and Their Impacts on Social Welfare Topics

Background/Purpose:  The author developed and examined ecological models for four primary regulatory frameworks in order to describe the functional potential of US illegal drug policies. Each framework (Prohibition, Decriminalization, Legalization, and Federalization) was reviewed in the context of its ability to produce positive outcomes that reflected the core social work values of equity and social justice.   

Methods:  Ecological modeling was used to describe the impacts of each regulatory framework’s operationalized strategy on social welfare-related outcomes within the three primary areas of concentration for current U.S. drug policies: drug use, the drug supply, and the drug market.  The models illustrate each framework’s methodological limitations, define their potential for affecting change in each area of concentration, and demonstrate each framework’s capacity to produce positive outcomes consistent with social welfare values.  A diagram formulated on principles of operative synergism was also constructed to specify the differences in:  Framework initiatives, intended outcomes individual methodological objectives, philosophical principles, strategic foci and operational procedures, and evaluation methods.

Results:  The ecological models demonstrate the significant differences in the operational capability of each framework to address various harms caused by drug use, the drug market, and the drug supply.  The prohibition framework was shown to be the most rigid and limited of the four frameworks in terms of its functional ability to reduce substance use or produce positive social welfare-related outcomes.  Decriminalization exhibited the potential to directly impact social welfare issues related to drug use, but was unable to address similar issues related to the drug market or drug supply.  Legalization demonstrated an ability to address social welfare topics in all three policy-targeted areas, but raised significant ethical concerns regarding its exposure of the illegal drug economy to a free market system.  The Federalization approach showed the greatest capacity for addressing both social welfare topics and reducing the effects of drug use, the drug market, and drug supply.  Of the four frameworks, only the Federalization Model allowed for the incorporation of operational objectives from all four frameworks and exhibited the potential to decrease substance use while still implementing a public health-oriented approach.   

Implications:  The implications of this research suggest that drug policy stakeholders need to begin incorporating ecological principles and an operative synergism perspective into their analyses of drug-related, social welfare outcomes.  The ability of these theoretical approaches to clearly define the capabilities and limitations of each framework, to accurately demonstrate the full scope of effects related to drug use, the drug market, and the drug supply, and to display the full range of outcomes that result from the implementation of individual regulatory strategies, allows them to provide a much more accurate portrayal of the complete impact of illegal drugs than other analytical methods.  Understanding these processes is critical to crafting future legislation that is efficient, effective, and employs the core principles of the social work discipline.