Content uploaded by Manja Abraham
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Manja Abraham on May 13, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
PLACES OF DRUG PURCHASE IN THE NETHERLANDS
Presentation held at the 10th Annual Conference on Drug Use and Drug
Policy, Vienna, September, 1999.
© 1999 Manja D. Abraham. All rights reserved.
URL of this document: http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/abraham.places.pdf
PLACES OF DRUG PURCHASE
IN THE NETHERLANDS
Manja D. ABRAHAM
Abstract: This paper focuses on the place of purchase of drugs in the Netherlands. The reason to focus on this topic is that one of the
aims of Dutch policy is to separate the cannabis market from that of most other drugs. Dutch narcotics legislation distinguishes ‘drugs
with acceptable risks’ and ‘drugs with unacceptable risks’ (see Leuw 1994, Cohen 1994, de Kort 1995). Drugs with acceptable risk
include cannabis and mushrooms. Drugs with unacceptable risk include heroin, cocaine, LSD and ecstasy. The question addressed here
is whether or not the system of tolerated distribution of cannabis type drugs and mushrooms via the so called coffee shop and smart shop
supports this separation or not. We will show that distinction between distribution of cannabis type drugs and ‘drugs with unacceptable
risks’ is indeed partly valid. Evidence for this conclusion is found in the results of a large national drug use survey.
In 1997, approximately 22,000 respondents throughout the Netherlands were asked about their lifestyles and use of licit and illicit
drugs. Additionally, they were questioned on the place of purchase of their consumed drugs. The data collected indicate that relatives
and friends are either the most important or the second most important source for obtaining drugs. The paper concludes that the market
of acceptable and unacceptable risk drugs is separated. This means that few drugs other than cannabis are purchased in coffee shops.
However, locations of unregulated cannabis distribution exist beside a regulated market. We have well-founded reasons to believe that
most cannabis is distributed by coffee shops, and thus regulated. We do not know what happens in the unregulated parts of the cannabis
market place.
1. Introduction
One of the foundations of Dutch drug policy is the toler-
ance of cannabis and mushroom sale in coffee shops and
smart-shops. The official reason for this is to prevent the
‘acceptable risk’ drug user getting involved with the ‘unac-
ceptable risk’ drug user. This is in short the distinction be-
tween the distribution of acceptable and unacceptable risk
drugs.
In this article we will first elaborate on the Dutch policy
that allows cannabis distribution (via the well known ‘cof-
fee shops’) to go unprosecuted; then we will present a few
data on drug use prevalence in the Netherlands, followed
by answers to such questions as: ‘where do people buy their
drugs’ (more specifically their cannabis), and ‘is cannabis
the only substance sold in coffee shops’?
This paper is largely based on the results of the most
recent national survey of licit and illicit drug use Licit and
illicit drug use in the Netherlands, 1997 (Abraham et al.,
1999).
2. The Policy
The Dutch harm reduction policy postulates a distinction
between drugs with acceptable and unacceptable health risks.
This policy is laid down in the so-called ‘Opium Act’. The
Opium Act of 1976 regulates the status of a large number
of substances. The law has a dual listing of substances it
declares as ‘illicit’ for use, production or distribution. Sched-
ule I contains all the substance drugs with ‘unacceptable
risks’ (including hash oil). Schedule II was created for can-
nabis products such as hashish and marijuana. Both cat-
egories are illicit, but priority for criminal investigation and
prosecution is given to the first. Maximum penalties for
trafficking drugs with ‘unacceptable risks’ were raised in
1976, and penalties for possession of cannabis for personal
use in amounts up to 30 grams were lowered, with posses-
sion constituting a misdemeanour (Korf, 1995). In October
1996 this amount was revised to 5 grams for personal use,
and 500 grams for coffee shop owners. At the same time,
magic mushrooms were added to Schedule II. (Public Pros-
ecution Service, regarding guidelines for criminal offences
against the Opium Act1).
Hashish and marihuana (cannabis) are drugs with ac-
ceptable risks and their sale is tolerated in coffee shops.
Conditions are laid down by the government as well as by
local policy-makers. Coffee shop owners can possess up to
500 grams. If they have more in stock or if they do not obey
other regulations, the local police may intervene, depend-
ing on the nuisance caused and the local policy. The gov-
ernment has drawn up directives, which coffee shops have
to follow in order to be tolerated. These rules are the Ahoj-
g directives. They stand for: No advertising (A); No sale of
hard drugs (although ‘hard drugs’ is not an official term, it
is mentioned in the directives, referring to Schedule I drugs)
(H); No nuisance (O); No sale of drugs to youths under 18
years of age and no admission of youths to coffee shops (J);
No sale of large quantities (max 5 grams per transaction)
(G). Within these directives, local policy-makers may add
regulations, for example, to prohibit the presence of coffee
2
MANJA D. ABRAHAM
Drug
The Netherlands,
nation-wide
Cannabis 15.6%
Cocaine 2.1%
Ecstasy 1.9%
Mushrooms 1.6%
Last year prevalence
Cannabis 4.5%
Cocaine 0.6%
Ecstasy 0.3%
Mushrooms 0.6%
Cannabis 33.1%
Cocaine 22.7%
Ecstasy 25.4%
Mushrooms 4.7%
Total sample 21,959
Table 1. Drug use in the Netherlands, population age 12 and
older, 1997 (weighted percentages)
Lifetime prevalence
Experienced use (more than 25 times per rep.lifetime use)
shops within a given radius of primary schools. The local
policy (also) determines how actively any possible coffee
shop nuisance is dealt with. As well, municipalities have
the right not to tolerate any cannabis distribution taking
place within their jurisdiction. Although this right is rarely
used, it is sometimes implemented in municipalities where
the Christian Democrats or other Christian political parties
are dominant.
The position of mushrooms in the Dutch opium law is
ambiguous but in practice we have a similar situation as
with cannabis type drugs. At the moment (1999) the mush-
room itself is legal but the active substances psylocybin and
psilocin are registered as illicit drugs (Adelaars, 1997).
Mushrooms are sold in special shops called smart-shops, in
a way very similar to the sale of cannabis products in so
called coffee shops.
3. Dutch Survey on Licit and Illicit Drugs
Dutch legislation prohibits the sale of Schedule I drugs in
coffee shops. We now come to the core point of this paper.
We want to test the effect of this policy on the basis of re-
ports of all last-year drug users in our survey. Hence, to
what extent is the policy of ‘market separation’ successful?
Is all cannabis bought in coffee shops? What other drugs
can be bought in coffee shops? Where do people buy their
drugs if not in coffee shops?
This article is based on the results of the survey on licit
and illicit drugs in the Netherlands. This survey provides
prevalence estimates of both licit and illicit drug use, and is
based on a nationally representative sample of the regis-
tered (registered by municipalities, in the register of popu-
lation) population aged 12 and over. The registered popu-
lation is nearly the entire Dutch population. A total of 21,959
respondents participated in this survey. Respondents were
questioned in a computer-assisted personal interview
(CAPI). The survey was designed with the co-operation of
Statistics Netherlands (CBS), and funded by the Ministry
of Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS).
The questionnaire asked about the use of various licit
and illicit drugs (including tobacco, alcohol, sedatives,
hypnotics, cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, amphetamines, hal-
lucinogens, mushrooms, opiates, inhalants and perfor-
mance-enhancing substances), as well as respondent back-
ground and lifestyle characteristics. It included questions
about the place of purchase of drugs. All who reported use
of ‘a drug’ within the last year were asked per reported
drug:
“Where did you get the ‘name of the drug’ that you
used?”. The following answers could be given (more than
one answer was possible):
a) Relatives, friends, acquaintance
b) Coffee shop
c) Café/pub
d) Other place of entertainment
e) On the street from a stranger
f) Community centre, youth club, association
g) Home dealer
h) Delivery service2
i) Smart-shop
4. Prevalence of Drug Use
The figures presented in Table 1 give an idea of the preva-
lence of cannabis use in the Netherlands. To put these fig-
ures into perspective, figures for cocaine, ecstasy and mush-
rooms are also shown. Full information can be found in
Abraham et al., 1999. The first part of Table 1 gives preva-
lence rates of lifetime drug use. Of the total population aged
12 years and older, 15.6% used cannabis; 2.1% used co-
caine, 1.9% ecstasy and 1.6% magic mushrooms. Interna-
tional drug use prevalence data indicate that the lifetime
cannabis use rate in the Netherlands (15.6%) is lower than
that found in, for example, Denmark (31.3%), the U.K.
(22.0%) and the U.S. (32.9%), and approximately equal to
West Germany (13.9%) and France (16.0%). Unfortunately
these figures are not totally comparable, but they give a
reasonable impression (see: European Monitoring Centre
for Drugs and Drug Addiction 1998, Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration 1997).
The second part of the table shows prevalence rates of
last-year drug use. Cannabis was used in the year prior to
the interview by 4.5% of the population. Cocaine was tried
at least once last year by 0.6% of the population, ecstasy by
0.3% and magic mushrooms by 0.6%.
The third section of figures shows the experienced use
rates – the proportion of lifetime users who had used a given
drug at least 25 times. Experienced user rates give some
3
PLACES OF DRUG PURCHASE IN THE NETHERLANDS
indication of experience level. Of the persons who have
ever taken cannabis,. 33.1% have done so more than 25
times in their life. For cocaine and ecstasy the figures are
22.7% and 25.4% respectively. The experienced mushroom
use rate is much lower; only 4.7% of the lifetime users have
consumed mushrooms 25 times or more.
5. Place of Purchase of Cannabis, Cocaine, Ecstasy,
and Mushrooms
We will now turn to the question as to where people buy
illicit drugs. We asked all last-year users of all illicit drugs
where they ‘most often’ purchased the substance. Findings
are reported in Table 2, for two age groups. In one section,
we show the data for the group of respondents in the 12-17
age group. This group is not allowed to purchase in coffee
shops. Also the smart-shops usually do not admit clients
under 18 years old. In the other part, we show data for last-
year drug users aged over 18.
With regard to the core question ‘is the market separa-
tion successful?’ we will answer in the affirmative if we 1)
find that only cannabis can be bought in coffee shops, and
2) that all cannabis is indeed purchased within the regu-
lated coffee shop system.
What drugs can be bought in coffee shops?
For last-year drug users aged 12 to 17, we see that coffee
shops are not the only place of purchase for cannabis. How-
ever, of the total of 223 reported purchases in coffee shops,
211 concerned the sale of cannabis. For other drugs the
coffee shop plays a negligible role.
For last-year drug users over 18, we see that coffee shops
are the most important place to buy cannabis, but again,
not the only one. From the total of 722 reported purchases
in coffee shops, 699 concerned the sale of cannabis. Other
drugs are purchased there only rarely (the other drugs most
often mentioned are mushrooms, which also can be bought
in special shops: smart-shops –10 purchases out of 23 non-
cannabis purchases). It seems that the coffee shop offers no
or few possibilities for purchasing drugs other than can-
nabis. Few Schedule I drugs are bought in coffee shops (23
purchases out of 722). This is in concurrence with the in-
tended separation of the markets.
Is all cannabis bought in coffee shops?
Among last-year cannabis users aged 12 to 17, we see that
relatives and friends are the most important source of can-
nabis (45.8% of the 524 cannabis sources). Coffee shops
are the second most important place to buy cannabis
(40.3%). The youth club, delivery service, café or pub, other
places of entertainment, street dealers and home dealers
play a very limited role.
For last-year cannabis users aged 18 and over, coffee
shops are the most important place to obtain cannabis. How-
ever, of the 1468 answers, not even half (47.6%) reported
purchase in coffee shops. Relatives and friends are the sec-
ond most important sources of cannabis (38.8%). The home
dealer is, again of small importance for the purchase of
cannabis. Other places of entertainment (clubs, disco-
theques, etc.) play a small role as regards the purchase of
Use
last
year
n% n% n% n% n% n% n% n
Aged 12 to 17
Cannabis 240 45.8 211 40.3 14 2.7 12 2.3 39 7.4 8 1.5 524 100 405
Cocaine 17- 0- 2- 2- 4- 0-2510023
Amphetamines 22 - 0 - 6 - 2 - 6 - 0 - 36 100 36
Ecstasy 26- 1- 6- 3- 4- 0-4010039
Hallucinogens 9 - 3 - 1 - 3 - 2 - 8 - 26 100 24
Mushrooms 18 23.4 8 10.4 3 3.9 6 7.8 4 5.2 38 49.4 77 100 73
Cannabis 570 38.8 699 47.6 59 4.0 55 3.7 73 5.0 12 0.8 1468 100 1237
Cocaine 116 55.2 4 1.9 29 13.8 10 4.8 51 24.3 0 0.0 210 100 193
Amphetamines 59 66.3 2 2.2 4 4.5 8 9.0 15 16.9 1 1.1 89 100 93
Ecstasy 159 64.1 4 1.6 37 14.9 8 3.2 33 13.3 7 2.8 248 100 232
Hallucinogens 28 30.4 3 3.3 7 7.6 9 9.8 3 3.3 42 45.7 92 100 95
Mushrooms 49 27.1 10 5.5 11 6.1 9 5.0 3 1.7 99 54.7 181 100 160
- Not enough cases (answers) to provide accurate estimates.
* Bar, cafe, pub, community centre, youth club, association, other places of entertainment.
** More than one answer was possible.
Table 2. Place of purchase of last year users, by age 12 to 17, and 18 and older, 1997, The Netherlands.
Aged 18 and older
Relatives,
friends Coffeeshops Cafe, pub*
Stranger or
other
Homedealer,
delivery Smartshop
Total
answers**
4
MANJA D. ABRAHAM
cannabis. The tolerated existence of shops for cannabis cre-
ates an official retail possibility, but apparently this does
not eliminate the importance of non-official circles for these
drugs.
6. For Whom is the Coffee Shop Most Important?
Table 3 takes a closer look at the last-year cannabis user.
The place of purchase of cannabis is reported for two kinds
of respondents: non-experienced users (who have used can-
nabis less than 25 times in their life) and experienced users
(who have used cannabis 25 times or more in their life).
For both groups, the two main sources of cannabis are rela-
tives and friends, and coffee shops. Nevertheless, the data
show a disparity between these groups, regarding their ‘num-
ber one’ source. For the inexperienced user, relatives and
friends are the main source (59.7% of their cannabis is pur-
chased from relatives and friends, 31.9% from coffee shops).
However, the place of purchase for the experienced user is
primarily the coffee shop (54.0% from coffee shops, 32.2%
from relatives and friends). It is interesting that experienced
cannabis users buy mainly in coffee shops. This very prob-
ably means that the greater part of cannabis distribution is
via coffee shops and not via unregulated channels.
7. Conclusion
This paper gives an overview of the situation regarding the
separation of ‘acceptable and unacceptable risk’ drug mar-
kets in the Netherlands. We focused on cannabis. The fol-
lowing topics have been discussed: the Dutch drug law and
its coffee shop policy, the prevalence of use of various illicit
drugs, and the place of purchase of these drugs.
We tested the effect of the coffee shop policy on the ba-
sis of self-reporting by respondents in our national drug
use survey. According to our data, the aim of the policy has
partially been achieved. For a total of 945 persons, drug
transaction took place in coffee shops. Of these transac-
tions, cannabis was sold in 910 cases and only in 11 cases
were ‘unacceptable risk’ drugs sold in coffee shops. This
means that few drugs other than cannabis are purchased in
coffee shops. However, unregulated cannabis distribution
locations exist beside a regulated market. As shown, a total
of 1992 places were named where persons bought cannabis.
Only 945 purchases took place in coffee shops.
Notes
1 See for more information in Dutch Richtlijnen voor het
opsporings- en strafvorderingsbeleid inzake strafbare feiten
van de Opiumwet, <http:// www.openbaarministerie.nl/
beleidsregels/docs/11.htm>.
2 The term ‘delivery service’ requires some clarification. A
dealer runs the delivery service. In general these are not
coffeeshop owners. Dealers advertise their phone numbers in
local newspapers. Like you can order a pizza by phone, some-
one will come to your house (or another agreed place). He
will sell you the cannabis. When the dealer is not registered
as a coffeeshop owner, he is officially breaking the law if he
possesses more than 5 grams of cannabis. The use of mobile
phones and the quickly changing telephone numbers make it
difficult to locate the delivery services and to undertake ac-
tion (Bieleman 1999).
References
Abraham, M.D., P.D.A. Cohen, R.J. van Til, & M.A.L. de Winter
(1999), Licit and illicit drug use in the Netherlands.
Amsterdam: CEDRO/Mets.
Adelaars A. (1997), Alles over paddo’s. Amsterdam: Prometheus.
Bieleman B. & J. Snippe (1999), Gedogen gewogen, evaluation
of the Amsterdam coffeeshop policy. Stichting Intraval,
Groningen: De Bie.
Cohen, P.D.A. (1994), The case of the two Dutch drug policy
commissions. An exercise in harm reduction 1968-1976. Pa-
per presented at the 5th International Conference on the Re-
duction of Drug related Harm, 7-11 March 1994, Addiction
Research Foundation, Toronto. Amsterdam: CEDRO.
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (1998),
Annual report on the state of the drugs problem in the Euro-
pean Union. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of
the European communities.
Korf, D.J. (1995), Dutch treat. Formal control and illicit drug
use in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.
Kort, M. de (1995), Tussen patiënt en delinquent. Geschiedenis
van het Nederlandse drugsbeleid. Hilversum: Verloren.
Leuw, E. (1994), Initial construction and development of the offi-
Use
last
year
Cannabis n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n
Non experienced 389 59.7 208 31.9 17 12.6 15 2.3 15 2.3 8 1.2 652 100 631
Experienced*** 407 32.2 683 54.0 44 3.5 50 4.0 80 6.3 0 0.0 1264 100 988
Total 1619
* Bar, cafe, pub, community centre, youth club, association, other places of entertainment.
** More than one answer was possible.
*** Used more than 25 times in a lifetime.
Table 3. Place of purchase of last year cannabis users, 1997, The Netherlands.
Relatives,
friends Coffeeshops Cafe, pub*
Stranger or
other
Homedealer,
delivery Smartshop
Total
answers**
5
PLACES OF DRUG PURCHASE IN THE NETHERLANDS
cial Dutch drug policy. In: Leuw, E., & I. Haen Marshall (Eds)
(1994), Between Prohibition and Legalization. The Dutch Ex-
periment in Drug Policy. Amsterdam: Kugler Publications.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(1997), National Household Survey On drug abuse: Popula-
tion Estimates 1997. Department of Health and Human Ser-
vices. Rockville: DHHS Publication.