Abstract
Background: New Zealand's (NZ) drug policy has largely retained a criminal justice focus for over 50 years, despite multiple reviews recommending legislative overhaul, and public support for a health-based approach. Deliberative democracy, including mechanisms such as citizens assemblies, have been identified as a potential mechanism to overcome some of the inertia within drug policy. This project aimed to 1) engage with a group of citizens to try to develop a group consensus on how best to respond to drugs in NZ, and 2) explore how community members' diverse views were affected by deliberation, and their experiences of a deliberative workshop process.
Methods: Seven deliberative workshops were held with a group of ten retirees living in Christchurch NZ. Participants were asked to engage in group discussions that may (or may not) lead to a group consensus. Workshops included discussions with expert guest speakers, reading and discussion of journal articles and reports. The final session was a debrief, the purpose of which was to understand what influenced participants' views, and the experience of the deliberative workshop process.
Results: The group produced a consensus statement and set of recommendations for politicians and policymakers, which emphasised a health-based approach to drugs. The value of dialogue, mutual learning, and deliberation to achieve change arose from analysis of the debrief.
Conclusions: This study highlights the potential value of deliberative democracy and demonstrates that a group of 'lay' citizens can reach nuanced, thoughtful, and practical solutions for drug policy.