Er cannabisbrug et socialt problem? : Et komparativt studie af problemdefinitioner og problemforståelser af cannabisbrug i Amsterdam og København

Sammanfattning: The objective of this comparative study has been to investigate how and if cannabis use constitutes a social problem in Amsterdam and Copenhagen. The purpose was to gain an understanding of how different political, institutional and legal environments might affect the understanding of cannabis use and the constitution of social problems. The empirical material consists of 21 interviews with cannabis addiction therapists, local government politicians and researchers. The study is formed on the basis of a qualitative, social constructionist approach, employing problem definition theory and argumentation strategies as a tool for analysis. The main questions addressed were: what characterizes the political problem definition of cannabis use in Amsterdam and Copenhagen; what characterizes the understanding of cannabis use amongst the therapists in the two cities and do the national problem definition, its development and scientific research affect the therapist’s understandings. The main findings of the study were that while Amsterdam still operate with the approach presented in the 1970s in which cannabis is seen as a softdrug that generates acceptable risks, Copenhagen has changed their approach during the last decade and has tightened the regulations and now represents a ‘zero tolerance’ strategy. The understanding of cannabis use among the therapists was highly influenced by the national problem definition. Where the therapists in Amsterdam had a focus on the majority of the population’s unproblematic use, the therapists in Copenhagen had a focus on the ethical and moral side of cannabis legislation, emphasizing the signal value of a ban. Due to a sharp distinction of individual and societal problems, cannabis did not constitute a social problem in Amsterdam. In Copenhagen, cannabis use was seen as a social problem, with references to homogeneity and societal costs. Thereby our study suggests that social work is more affected by surrounding contexts, than it is by rigorous professional knowledge.