Drug policy and rationality: An exploration of the research–policy interface in Ireland

References

• Berridge V, Thom B. Research and policy: What determines the relationship. Policy Studies 1996; 17: 23–34
   Google Scholar
• Building on Experience – National Drugs Strategy 2001–2008 (2001). Dublin: Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• Butler S. Drug problems and drug policies in Ireland: A quarter of a century reviewed. Administration 1991; 39: 210–235
   Google Scholar
• Butler, S. (1999). A tale of two sectors: A critical analysis of the proposal to establish drug courts in the Republic of Ireland. Conference paper presented at the 10th annual ESSD conference on drug use and drug policy in Europe ‘Illicit drugs: Patterns of use – pattern of response’, Vienna, Austria.
   Google Scholar
• Butler S. Alcohol, drugs and health promotion in modern Ireland. Institute of Public Administration, Dublin 2002a
   Google Scholar
• Butler S. The making of the methadone protocol: The Irish system. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 2002b; 9: 311–323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler S, Mayock P. An Irish solution to an Irish problem: Harm reduction and ambiguity in the drug policy of the Republic of Ireland. The International Journal of Drug Policy 2005; 16: 415–422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi BCK, Pang T, Lin V, Puska P, Sherman G, Goddard M, Clottey C. Evidence based public health policy and practice: Can scientists and policy makers work together?. Journal of Epidemiology Community Health 2005; 59: 632–637
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courts Service News (2006). Drug courts praised as expansion announced, Vol. 8, An tSeirbhis chúirteanna Courts Service.
   Google Scholar
• Dail Debates (2007, April 24). Written answers. Retrieved from http://www.debates.oireachtas.ie/Xml/29/DAL20070424A.PDF.
   Google Scholar
• Duke K. Evidence-based policy making?: The interplay between research and the development of prison drugs policy. Criminology and Criminal Justice 2001; 1: 277–300
   Google Scholar
• Duke K. Getting beyond the ‘official line’: Reflections on dilemmas of access, knowledge and power in researching policy networks. Journal of Social Policy 2002; 31: 39–59
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer C. ‘Doing good with a vengeance’: A critical assessment of the practices, effects and implications of drug treatment courts in North America. Criminal Justice 2003; 3: 227–248
   Google Scholar
• Gomez LE. Misconceiving mothers: Legislators, prosecutors, and the politics of prenatal drug exposure. Temple University Press, Philadelphia 1997
   Google Scholar
• Gusfield J. Constructing the ownership of social problems: Fun and profit in the welfare system. Social Problems 1989; 36: 431–441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall W. The contribution of research to Australian policy responses to heroin dependence 1990–2001: A personal response. Addiction 2004; 99: 560–569
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill M. The policy process in the modern state. Prentice Hall, Harvester Wheatshelf 1997
   Google Scholar
• Irish Examiner (2009, September 18). http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfaukfkfsnsn/rss2/
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins P. “The Ice Age”: The social construction of a drug panic. Justice Quarterly 1994; 11: 7–31
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom CE. The science of “muddling through”. Public Administration Review 1959; 19: 79–88
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn L. Public management: Old and new. Routledge, London 2006
   Google Scholar
• Merchants Quay Ireland. Submission to the review of the National Drug Strategy. Merchants Quay Ireland, Dublin 2008
   Google Scholar
• Morgan M. Drug use prevention: An overview of the research. Stationary Office, Dublin 2001
   Google Scholar
• National Advisory Committee on Drugs. Use of Buprenorphine as an intervention in the treatment of opiate dependence syndrome. Stationery Office, Dublin 2002
   Google Scholar
• National Centre for Pharmoeconomics (2007). Economic evaluation of Suboxone for the management of opiate addiction prepared for the expert group on a regulatory framework for Suboxone and Buprenorphine.
   Google Scholar
• National Drug Strategy (Interim) 2009–2016 (2009). Dublin: Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• Nolan JL. Reinventing justice: The American drug court movement. Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford 2001
   Google Scholar
• O'Donnell, R., & Damian, T. (2006). Social partnership and the policy process. In S. Healy, B. Reynolds, & M. Collins (Eds.), Social policy in Ireland: Principles, practice and problems, (2nd ed, pp. 109–132). Dublin: The Liffey Press.
   Google Scholar
• Secker A. The policy-research interface: An insiders view. Addiction 1993; 88(Suppl.)115S–120S
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sixsmith J, MacGabainn S. A process evaluation of the national awareness campaign 2003–2005. Stationery Office, Dublin 2007
   Google Scholar
• Stevens A. Survival of the ideas that fit: An evolutionary analogy for the use of evidence in policy. Social Policy and Society 2007; 6(1)25–35
   Google Scholar
• Verster A, Bunning E. Buprenorphine critical questions answered. Euro-Methwork, Amsterdam 2005
   Google Scholar