Examining the construction and representation of drugs as a policy problem in Australia's national drug strategy documents 1985-2010

Background
National drug policies are often regarded as inconsequential, rhetorical documents, however this belies the subtlety with which such documents generate discourse and produce (and re-produce) policy issues over time. Critically analysing the ways in which policy language constructs and represents policy problems is important as these discursive constructions have implications for how we are invoked to think about (and justify) possible policy responses.
Methods
Taking the case of Australia's National Drug Strategies, this paper used an approach informed by critical discourse analysis theory and aspects of Bacchi's (2009) ‘What's the Problem Represented to be’ framework to critically explore how drug policy problems are constructed and represented through the language of drug policy documents over time.
Results
Our analysis demonstrated shifts in the ways that drugs have been ‘problematised’ in Australia's National Drug Strategies. Central to these evolving constructions was the increasing reliance on evidence as a way of ‘knowing the problem’. Furthermore, by analysing the stated aims of the policies, this case demonstrates how constructing drug problems in terms of ‘drug-related harms’ or alternately ‘drug use’ can affect what is perceived to be an appropriate set of policy responses. The gradual shift to constructing drug use as the policy problem altered the concept of harm minimisation and influenced the development of the concepts of demand- and harm-reduction over time.
Conclusions
These findings have implications for how we understand policy development, and challenge us to critically consider how the construction and representation of drug problems serve to justify what are perceived to be acceptable responses to policy problems. These constructions are produced subtly, and become embedded slowly over decades of policy development. National drug policies should not merely be taken at face value; appreciation of the construction and representation of drug problems, and of how these ‘problematisations’ are produced, is essential.