Month: June 2022

Last week, I opened a discussion on harm reduction policies for drug users. Despite their effectiveness at reducing incidents of disease and death, many harm reduction programs, such as needle exchanges or safe supply to users, remain controversial and underutilized.

Although supporters of harm reduction often portray opponents as lacking in empathy or critical thinking, values analysis exposes a far more complicated moral environment. Opponents of harm reduction often view drugs as inherently dirty and corrupting, so any effort by the government to facilitate drug use would seem morally wrong, even if such efforts would ultimately save lives. As well, drug decriminalization could be viewed as a surrender, with the government basically admitting to its own impotence in battling drug use. But if drugs are inherently bad, then this approach could be viewed as a dereliction of duty.

In recent years, drug policies have begun to shift dramatically in many countries. After decades of viewing drug users as criminals, governments have started to implement more measures focused on harm reduction. In selecting these policies, governments accept that drugs are never going to be eliminated, so it is best to give up the quixotic fight and make drug use as safe as possible.

Approaches to harm reduction are varied. Minor steps include the creation of needle exchanges, sites where drug users can receive sterilized equipment, and Good Samaritan Laws, legislation that protects individuals present at the scene of an overdose from arrest or prosecution. Perhaps the most widely discussed and studied approach to harm reduction is the creation of safe consumption sites, where users can take drugs in a supervised environment without fear of legal prosecution. Canada has long been a leader in this space. Insite, North America’s first legal supervised consumption site, opened in 2003 in Vancouver, and there are currently 37 similar facilities across the country.

The main goal of Values Added is to demonstrate that all policy analysts should consider values in their work, regardless of subject matter. The public’s view of government policies, whether related to controversial topics or not, is going to be coloured by their moral compasses. Policies deemed righteous can expect to receive significant public backing, while those viewed as immoral will lack popular support. This dynamic can make or break a policy; the implementation of unpopular policies is likely to be resisted and the public will vote for parties who pledge to change the government’s direction. Without moral support for their chosen solutions, governments struggle to solve pressing issues.

With this in mind, values analysis is best viewed as a general tool that should be applied to a range of different issues. To demonstrate, I have developed a list of policy problems with important moral considerations. This will serve as a table of contents for past Values Added articles and a roadmap for future subjects of exploration. I hope all readers will find something relevant to their work in this list.

Agriculture

Agricultural Price Support Programs and Subsidies: In many countries, agricultural producers receive various subsidies, special programs, and other hand-outs, which can raise food prices (like under the supply management system) or taxes (with direct subsidies to agricultural producers). These financial supports are sometimes provided for political and pragmatic reasons, but they are also driven by our moral intuitions. Farmers are often portrayed as sympathetic figures who deserve support when times are tough. Perhaps more importantly, farmers can be viewed as keepers of a traditional way of life that is intertwined with national identity. As a consequence, altering support programs for farmers is usually morally fraught.