title: Analysing pseudoephedrine/methamphetamine policy options in Australia using multi-criteria decision modelling.
abstract: In this paper we capture and synthesize the unique knowledge of experts so that choices regarding policy measures to address methamphetamine consumption and dependency in Australia can be strengthened. We examine perceptions of the: (1) influence of underlying factors that impact on the methamphetamine problem; (2) importance of various models of intervention that have the potential to affect the success of policies; and (3) efficacy of alternative pseudoephedrine policy options.
  
  
  
  We adopt a multi-criteria decision model to unpack factors that affect decisions made by experts and examine potential variations on weight/preference among groups. Seventy experts from five groups (i.e. academia (18.6%), government and policy (27.1%), health (18.6%), pharmaceutical (17.1%) and police (18.6%)) in Australia participated in the survey.
  
  
  
  Social characteristics are considered the most important underlying factor, prevention the most effective strategy and Project STOP the most preferred policy option with respect to reducing methamphetamine consumption and dependency in Australia. One-way repeated ANOVAs indicate a statistically significant difference with regards to the influence of underlying factors (F(2.3, 144.5)=11.256, p<.001), effectiveness of interventions (F(2.4, 153.1)=28.738, p<.001) and policy options (F(2.8, 175.5)=70.854, p<.001).
  
  
  
  A majority of respondents believed that genetic, biological, emotional, cognitive and social factors are the most influential explanatory variables in terms of methamphetamine consumption and dependency. Most experts support the use of preventative mechanisms to inhibit drug initiation and delayed drug uptake. Compared to other policies, Project STOP (which aims to disrupt the initial diversion of pseudoephedrine) appears to be a more preferable preventative mechanism to control the production and subsequent sale and use of methamphetamine. This regulatory civil law lever engages third parties in controlling drug-related crime. The literature supports third-party partnerships as it engages experts who have knowledge and expertise with respect to prevention and harm minimization.
authors.affiliation: ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods, The Australian National University, Canberra, A.C.T. 2601, Australia. Electronic address: matthew.manning@anu.edu.au.
authors.forename: Matthew
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Manning
authors.affiliation: ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods, The Australian National University, Canberra, A.C.T. 2601, Australia.
authors.forename: Gabriel T W
authors.initials: GT
authors.lastname: Wong
authors.affiliation: Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, Mt Gravatt Campus, Brisbane, Queensland 4122 Australia.
authors.forename: Janet
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Ransley
authors.affiliation: Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane, Queensland 4111, Australia.
authors.forename: Christine
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Smith
mesh_terms: D019969:Amphetamine-Related Disorders / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D001315:Australia / Q000453:epidemiology; D003415:Crime / Q000517:prevention & control; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D040261:Harm Reduction; D006291:Health Policy; D006801:Humans; D008694:Methamphetamine / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000737:chemistry; D010465:Perception; D011050:Policy Making; D054199:Pseudoephedrine / Q000737:chemistry / Q000600:supply & distribution*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
chemical_list: D008694:Methamphetamine; D054199:Pseudoephedrine
keywords: Drug policy; Drug prevention; Harm-minimization; Methamphetamine; Multi-criteria decision analysis; Policing strategies