Critically explaining British policy responses to novel psychoactive substances using the policy constellations framework

Abstract

Background: A growing number of researchers are trying to provide explanations for continuity and change in drug policy in different contexts. Such research predominantly falls in the pluralist realm of public policy where various actors compete to have their policy proposals accepted. Method: Using a critical framework called Policy Constellations (PC), developed by Stevens and Zampini, this paper attempts to explain reactions of the British Government to Novel Psychoactive Substances (NPS) between 2008–2016. Qualitative data comes from in-depth interviews with stakeholders (N = 15), including NGO workers, a former Home Secretary, drugs ministers, governmental advisors, a former senior police officer, former Deputy Drug Coordinator, and a former Advisory Council for the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) member. Results: Two ‘constellations’ competed in British NPS policy setting. The PC framework illustrates power imbalances between these competing stakeholders. Abstinence orientated actors (the conservative constellation) enjoyed strategic advantages and media power which allowed them to create a favourable policy setting. These advantages were not enjoyed by the liberal constellation who struggled to access the policy setting and influence policy developments. Conclusion: The prohibitive nature of the policy used to counter NPS can be explained with the domination of actors whose values align with the conservative constellation.