INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT BY NDPA:
This paper was originally published in 2007/2008 in the Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice, which was established by Drug Free America Foundation (based in St Petersburg, Florida). Late in 2025, OVOM Sweden expressed interest in re-publishing this paper in their own website, and this prompted several associates of NDPA in other countries to express interest in re-visiting the paper – almost 20 entities have applied so far, and been sent ‘merged’ copies. (NDPA pointed out that because of the size of the paper – approaching 25,000 words – the original paper, as published, had been split into three parts and published in three consecutive volumes of the Journal. To facilitate study of the paper, NDPA undertook to merge the three parts back into one paper, as now presented in this current, merged re-publishing).
Some of the ‘encouragements’ while undertaking this sizeable task included the following:
- ‘Peter, thank you very much, we will find a good place for it’. Renee Besseling – OVOM – (NDL)
- ‘Peter, Excellent paper – I read it through and through’. John Coleman – President, DWI (USA)
- ‘Thanks – appreciate your always-fine work’. Shane Varcoe – Director, Dalgarno Institute (Au)
- ‘Great idea – Peter’s articles are a great contribution’. Gary Christian, tpg (Au)
- ‘This sounds like a great and much-needed initiative, Peter’. Jo Baxter, Exec Director, DFA (Au)
- ‘Wonderful. Thank you!’. Amy Ronshausen, Exec Director, DFAF, (USA)
- ‘Thank you very much!’. Beatriz Velasco Munoz Ledo (Mexico)
- ‘Thank you so much, Peter’. Stuart Reece (Au)
PREFACE
Introduction to this re-print – January 2026
This paper was written in the light of the author’s enormous respect for the many organisations he had collaborated with to that point in time – 2007 – (and with many of whom he continues to collaborate, at this present time in 2026). It also tries to charitably respect those who advocate a Harm Reduction oriented approach to drug strategy and policy (whilst not conclusively respecting their standpoint!). Courtesies aside, a more important point is that this paper dates from 2007, and a lot of water has flowed under the Harm Reduction and the Drug Policy bridges since then!
Whilst it is informative to re-visit this literature, and understand the provenance and the politics of Harm Reduction, it could be very useful if someone were to develop and report on what has passed between 2007 and 2026. (“But don’t look at me!” says Mr Stoker).
FOREWORD
Mr. Stoker is Director of the National Drug Prevention Alliance (NDPA), which he helped form. He has completed more than 40 years in this field and has helped three other charities to form, all running well. His first 7 years in the field were as a drugs/alcohol counsellor in a London drug agency; he also created and delivered a wide range of trainings and was a Government ‘Drug Education Advisor’ to some 100 primary and secondary schools. In 1987 he completed a one month study tour throughout America, under the auspices of the US State Department. He has delivered workshops at more than 10 PRIDE conferences, and in 2004 he received the PRIDE Youth Programs International Award for services to prevention. He has completed technology transfer trainings in Poland, Germany, Portugal and Bulgaria. In 2001 he was awarded a First Prize in the Stockholm Challenge contest for websites with a health promotion value. Mr. Stoker is often to be seen or heard on TV, radio or in national/regional newspapers and has authored many articles and papers. For 30 years prior to this career he worked as a Professional (Chartered) Civil Engineer, running projects which would have totalled approaching £10 Billion at present day values.
Peter Stoker |
 |
ABSTRACT
The history of ‘so–called Harm Reduction’ — starting with its conception in and dissemination from the Liverpool area of Britain in the 1980s — is described in comparison with American liberalisers’, ‘Responsible Use’ stratagem in the 1970s and with subsequent so–called Harm Reduction initiatives in the USA, Canada, Australia, Britain and mainland Europe. As the scope of a historical review of Harm Reduction — over several decades and across several countries — is necessarily large, this paper is presented in 3 parts. Part 1 examines the developments in the USA; whilst Part 2 looks at Britain, Canada, and Australia. Part 3 considers mainland Europe, and then goes on to explore reasons why the package called ‘Harm Reduction’ has fared better than ‘Responsible Use’ as well as some possible reasons why the present, Harm–Reduction–biased situation has come about. The text takes extracts from or synopses of papers presented by various writers on both sides of the argument. Reasons as to why the packaging of ‘Harm Reduction’ has fared better than ‘Responsible Use’ are explored as are some possible reasons why the present, Harm–Reduction–biased situation has come about. The paper concludes by suggesting possible ways forward for those advocating a prevention–focused approach –– learning from history.
To access the full document:
- Click on the ‘Source’ link below.
- An image of the front page of the full document will appear.
- Click on the image to open the full document.
