no conflict of interest regarding my presentation October 24th Evaluation of drug laws and policies by means of indicators and data regarding minor subjects, PDUs…... Carla Rossi, Centro Studi Statistici e Sociali, Ce3S http://www.ce3s.eu/, info.ce3s@gmail.com No conflict of interest regarding my presentation

Drug Policy evaluation ‘Evaluation is essential for effective policymaking, helping ensure that policies and programmes have the desired effect, provide value for money and do not have negative unintended consequences’ (http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/topic- overviews/policy-evaluation_en)

Quantitative evaluation The goals of drug law and policy interventions are summarized as demand reduction and supply reduction. The impact and the consequences can be measured by several, calculated or estimated, indicators, obtained on the basis of administrative and of survey dates sets. The consequences that have been studied are summarized in consumer health indicators, consumer crime indicators and drug market size and consequences. Country comparisons are important. Even a single country (Italy) data sets are of high interest, since three different laws, more or less repressive, have been subsequently in force in a quite short period (11 years).

Available data sets Information on specific sub-populations is particularly rich and can be exploited to analyse special aspects, but also to derive more general considerations: students (ESPAD survey); problem drug users (PDUs): data from the health and social assistance services; reported dealers (police, trials and other repression bodies data sets); minor subjects involved in drug using and dealing (many sources data sets).

A very bad unscientific drug law in Italy At the beginning of 2006, the so-called Fini- Giovanardi law was approved, even more harmful than the former one, already prohibitionist (Jervolino- Vassalli of 1990, D.P.R. 309/90). The latter is again in force after the Constitutional Court's February 12, 2014 ruling, which "eliminated" the 2006 law. Fini-Giovanardi law, absolutely lacking in scientific bases, has produced very seriously measurable damages that prohibitionist politicians do not know or do not evaluate in their gravity, as they publicly demonstrate (http://2017.festivaleconomia.eu/- /cannabis-proibire-legalizzare-o-liberalizzare- ).

Fini-Giovanardi Law (2006:) harmful consequences for drug consumers The 2006 drug law (Fini-Giovanardi) was more restrictive, particularly with regard to cannabis. The consequences, both criminal and administrative, for sellers and consumers of cannabis were equalized to those of other illegal substances (heroin, cocaine ...). Same penalties for the sale of all substances without distinction. Consumers could no longer avoid the administrative sanction (suspension of driving license, passport withdrawal, ...) even accepting therapeutic intervention to limit the use of the substance (secondary prevention), as was possible with the DPR 309/90.

Therapeutic programs and administrative sanctions for reported drug users

Poly-drug dealing and (consequently) poly-drug using From the official data on the seizures of DCSA (Central Direction of Anti-Drug Services) it appears that immediately after the entry into force of Fini- Giovanardi, the poly-dealing increased. As a consequence, poly-drug use increased soon and is recently quite high in Italy. Further information comes from surveys: Poly-drug using (ESPAD 2011); Poly-drug dealing (EU survey 2013);

Poly-drug dealing (EU survey 2013) Trautman F, Kilmer B, Turnbull P. Eds. Further insights into aspects of the illicit EU drugs market. European Commission, 2013.

Country Median Mean   Albania 0.12 0.46 Italy 0.27 0.44 Bosnia and Herzegovina (Federation) 0.19 Cyprus 0.07 0.34 Montenegro 0.05 0.3 Liechtenstein 0.04 Iceland 0.26 Malta 0.24 Ireland France 0.08 United Kingdom 0.23 Netherlands Bulgaria 0.21 Belgium (Flanders) Slovenia 0.2 Russian Federation Hungary Serbia 0.03 Germany Portugal 0.18 Croatia Slovak Republic 0.17 Poland Latvia Greece Denmark Czech Republic Sweden 0.16 Norway Ukraine 0.15 Kosovo Bosnia and Herzegovina (Republic of Srpska) 0.02 Finland 0.14 Romania 0.13 Lithuania Moldova Estonia Faroe Islands Global mean  0.04 0.21  Normalized poly-drug use score (PDS) ordered with respect to the value of the mean (ESPAD 2011, 38 countries).

Italian administrative data sets show… The proportion of minor drug consumers reported is increasing; the proportion of assisted PDUs (15-19 years old and 20-29 years old) are increasing; the proportion of hospitalizations of minors due to drug use is increasing; the proportion of minors involved in criminal actions connected to drug using and dealing is increasing.

Percentage of minors among subjects reported for drug use and ratio of minors reported to 10,000 minor residents Increase Percentage: + 56% Ratio: +27%

Age distribution of PDUs in therapy services (%) Class <19 increase:+1050% Class 20-29 increase:+23.54% Age 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 <15 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.01 15-19 0.17 0.52 1.36 2.49 2.52 <19 0.22 0.54 1.38 2.53 20-24 3.61 4.95 5.44 5.98 6.12 25-29 9.05 9.54 9.5 9.87 9.52 30-34 12.93 12.99 12.82 12.9 12.52 35-39 15.87 15.62 15.61 15.46 14.98 >39 58.31 56.35 55.25 53.27 54.32

Hospitalizations due to drug use and indicators of minors Year Minor residents (14-17) Hospitalized <15 Hospitalized 15-17 Minors hospitalized Total hospitalized Ratio1 (1000)=Minors hospitalized/1000 Hospitalized Ratio2 (100000)=Minors hospitalized/100000 residents 2006 2303574 101 268 369 18867 19.6 16.0 2007 2313057 106 258 364 19405 18.8 15.7 2008 2313230 98 366 18849 19.4 15.8 2009 2294561 105 218 323 16999 19.0 14.1 2010 2272967 80 232 312 17075 18.3 13.7 2011 2246865 89 233 322 16665 19.3 14.3 2012 2226869 110 241 351 16483 21.3 2013 2233475 109 320 429 16553 25.9 19.2 2014 2278587 132 376 508 17393 29.2 22.3 2015 2293778 383 493 17835 27.6 21.5

Hospitalization of minors due to drug use (indicators)

Age distributions of minor PDUs who were hospitalized in 2010 and 2015 due to specific illegal substance use

Crime indicator 1: percentage of minors among subjects reported for drug dealing in 100 police operations

Crime indicator 2: Proportion of minors defendants

Conclusions Several conclusions can be obtained, in particular regarding Italy. The main ones: with respect to demand reduction: the overall inefficacy of prevention interventions; with respect to supply reduction: the inefficacy of law enforcement interventions; increasing minors subjects involved in using and dealing; upturn of heroin use in recent years…..

Many further data sets and indicators are available I can provide further data and indicators: drug market dimension, arrested dealers, inefficacy of law enforcement …. Unfortunately I can’t show them here…..there is no time, ….but they can be requested. Thank you very much