Netherlands Compared With The US

"Results—Laws regarding alcohol and cannabis were found to be strictest in the United States, somewhat less strict in Canada, and least strict in the Netherlands. On most measures of drinking, rates were lower in the United States than in Canada or the Netherlands. With United States as the referent, relative risks (RR) for monthly drinking were 1.30 (1.11–1.53) for Canadian boys and 1.55 (1.31–1.83) for girls, and 2.0 (1.73–2.31) for Dutch boys and 1.92 (1.62–2.27) for Dutch girls. Drunkenness was also higher among Canadian boys and girls and Dutch boys. However, rates of cannabis use did not differ between the countries, except that Dutch girls were less likely to use cannabis in the past year (RR= .67; 0.46–0.96)."

"The HBSC survey results indicated that drinking prevalence and drunkenness were lower on all measures among both boys and girls in the United States compared with boys and girls in Canada and boys in the Netherlands, but there was no difference in drunkenness or age of first drunkenness between American and Dutch girls. The prevalence reported by youth in the United States, with monthly use of 34.0% for males and 29.3% for females, is consistent with other reports (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006; Johnston et al., 2007), and significantly lower than the prevalence reported by Canadian youth of about 45% for both boys and girls and Dutch youth of 67.9% for boys and 56.2% of girls. Of course, 10th grade Dutch students are close in age to the legal drinking age of 16 in the Netherlands. Also, despite higher drinking prevalence, Dutch girls were less likely to report having been drunk by age 14 suggesting that adolescent drinking and drunkenness do not correspond in all population groups. Overall, these cross-national differences in drinking prevalence are somewhat consistent with the hypothesis that higher legal age, more difficult access, and greater penalties for use may have discouraged adolescent drinking in the United States."

Percentage of People In the Netherlands Aged 18 and Over In The General Population Reporting Last-Month Use Of:

• Marijuana: 4.6%
• Cocaine: 0.7%
• Opiates: "Hardly any"
• Ecstasy: 1.1%
• Amphetamine: 0.5%
• GHB: 0.2%
• Sedatives and Tranquilizers: 6.5%

Percentage of People In the Netherlands Aged 18 and Over In The General Population Reporting Last-Year Use Of:

• Marijuana: 7.5%
• Cocaine: 1.6%
• Opiates: "Hardly any"
• Ecstasy: 2.8%
• Amphetamine: 1.1%
• GHB: 0.4%
• Sedatives and Tranquilizers: 10.2%

Table: Drug Use and Crime Indicators, Comparison Between The US and The Netherlands

"The Netherlands is a significant transit country for illicit drugs, especially cocaine from South America entering through the Port of Rotterdam and destined for European markets. Customs officials announced in January that authorities confiscated 38 tons of cocaine in the Port of Rotterdam in 2019, an increase of 50 percent from 2018. Officials announced in July that authorities intercepted twice as much cocaine in the ports of Rotterdam and Vlissingen in the first half of 2020 as in the same period in 2019.  The Netherlands is one of the largest sources of synthetic drugs for international markets and has identified an increase in the number of methamphetamine laboratories where Mexican nationals were accomplices. A typical methamphetamine lab seizure in 2018 yielded 22 kilograms (kg), but in 2019, the average seizure was over 400 kg.  
 
"The Dutch Opium Act prohibits the possession, commercial distribution, production, import, and export of all illicit drugs.  The act distinguishes between “hard” drugs (e.g., heroin, cocaine), and 'soft' drugs (cannabis products).  Sales of less than five grams of cannabis products are 'tolerated' (i.e., illegal but not prosecuted) in regulated establishments called 'coffee shops.'

"Drug traffickers increasingly use legitimate postage companies to distribute narcotics to global customers. Authorities report that dealers send over 100,000 packages containing cocaine, ecstasy, or methamphetamines to foreign countries each year."

"In 2018, approximately 1.02 million Dutch people aged 18 and older had used cannabis in the past year (7.5% of this age group). Last-year use is highest among people aged between 18-19 and 20-24, (21.4% and 23.7%). The figure for last-month use among people aged 18 and older is 4.6%. More than a third (35.0%) of the last-month users smoked dope (almost) every day.

"The percentages of people who had ever smoked dope (23.7%) and those who smoked dope (almost) every day (1.6%) were higher in 2018 than in previous years (21.1% and 1.2% in 2015), but it is still too early to speak of a trend.

"The percentage of last-year cannabis users among 15-64-year-olds in the Netherlands was, at 9.6%, higher than the European average (7.4%).

"Of cannabis users aged 18 and older, 83.5% used cannabis recreationally, 5.8% used cannabis only for medical reasons, and 10.7% used cannabis both as a medicine and recreationally. Of those who (also) used cannabis as a medicine, 90.6% did so without a doctor's prescription.

"Among secondary school pupils between 12 and 16 years old, there was a fall in last-year use between 2003 and 2015 (from 13.1% to 8.2%), but last-year use remained at the same level in 2017 (7.9%)."

"Twenty years ago the Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport (VWS) founded the Drugs Information and Monitoring System (DIMS). The DIMS explores the chemical content of drugs, the health risks, and monitors trends. The drugs are collected by means of those users who bring their drugs for control to an organisation affiliated with the DIMS. These organisations have weekly office hours. This method of collecting drugs brings along the possibility to exchange information between the personnel at the testing facilities and the users. The user is informed about the composition of the delivered drugs and is warned about the risks. The data that are collected this way are used for education, prevention, and drug policy. Next to this, the data are used to inform the network of organisations participating in the DIMS.
"Acute health risks for users can occur, for example in case extra harmful substances are detected in the drugs. In case of such acute health risks, the DIMS will start a national or a regional warning campaign, a Red Alert. In 2011, the DIMS warned two times at a national level. The first national warning targeted the risks of using ecstasy pills contaminated with PMMA [Para-Methoxymethamphetamine], and the second national warning targeted pills with a high dose of MDMA. During the first six months of 2012, about 4,000 people visited the consulting hours of the DIMS-facilities, about 160 people every week. In total 4,421 samples were delivered, about 176 samples weekly (DIMS 2012) (see also § 10.3).
"At the request of the present Cabinet, the DIMS has increased its tasks with regard to the "Reporting Desk New Drugs" (Meldpunt Nieuwe Drugs, MND). The MND monitors the new psychoactive drugs which appear frequently on the market, like mephedrone, 4-MEC, or MDPV. These new drugs raise questions about who are the users and about the (health) risks. At a special website (www.meldpuntnd.nl/) the users can report new drugs anonymously and eventually can describe their experiences with these drugs."

"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. Schedule I contains all the substance drugs with ‘unacceptable risks’ (including hash oil). Schedule II was created for cannabis products such as hashish and marijuana. Both categories 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 possession 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 Prosecution Service, regarding guidelines for criminal offences against the Opium Act¹).

"Hashish and marihuana (cannabis) are drugs with acceptable 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, depending on the nuisance caused and the local policy. The government has drawn up directives, which coffee shops have to follow in order to be tolerated. These rules are the Ahojg 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)."

"In the city of Venlo (province of Limburg), on the Dutch-German border, the Hektor Project to combat drug-related crime and nuisance at the local level, started in 2001 and was extended several times, first by a combined contribution of the central and municipal government, but since 2010 Hektor is only financed by the local government. Its purpose was to diminish public nuisance mostly caused by German drug tourists. The project operated on three levels. One level aimed at diminishing public nuisance by tracking down and closing non-tolerated points of sale (administrative enforcement) and step up action against drug-related crime. The second level had to do with the redevelopment of parts of the city centre to make it more attractive to new investment. The third level of the project concentrated on redefining the local coffee shop policy. In 2007 three illegal drug trade venues were closed. The experienced drug related nuisance diminished significantly in the centre of the town since two coffee shops were relocated in 2005. Because the illegal drug trade shifted to other parts of the town, it was decided in 2007 to extend the Hektor-approach to all parts of the town of Venlo. The municipal authorities, the police, the Public Prosecution Service and the Tax and Customs are cooperating to tackle illegal drug trade and public nuisance caused by drug tourists. According to the third evaluation of the Hektor project, which was carried out before the introduction of new Dutch coffee shop policy, it is possible to diminish illegal street trade and drug related public nuisance in a Dutch border town by the approach chosen in Hektor (Snippe 2012).
"Another project to combat drug related nuisance, which started as a pilot project but was continued since 2003, is the Courage Project of the municipalities of Roosendaal and Bergen op Zoom near the border with Belgium in the province of North Brabant. One of the results of this project was that the mayors of both municipalities decided in September 2009 to close down the four tolerated coffee shops. However, the Courage Project was continued among others with a monitor called the Drugsscan, in order to follow the developments. Since the closure of the coffee shops 95 per cent of the drug tourists disappeared from the street scene. The Courage Team shifted the emphasis from drug related public nuisance to investigating drug related criminality. In 2011 narcotics for the amount of 7 million euro were confiscated and dispossessions for the amount of 600,000 euro were collected (Courage 2012; www.courage.nu)."

"There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976 policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to close down coffee shops and more aggressively enforce the regulations."