Managing Coexistence: Resident Experiences of the Open Drug Scene and Drug Consumption Rooms in Inner Vesterbro, Copenhagen

Abstract

The inner-city area of Inner Vesterbro in Copenhagen, Denmark, houses the largest open drug scene in Scandinavia. Since the 1980s, the area has been a gathering point for people who use, buy, and sell drugs. During the last two decades, urban redevelopments have resulted in marked demographic changes amid concerns about processes of gentrification. The drug scene, however, remains, and the last 7 years have seen the implementation of a new police strategy of “nonenforcement” of minor drug possession offences alongside the opening of two drug consumption rooms (DCRs) in the area. This article presents findings from a study of resident attitudes toward local DCRs and daily experiences of the open drug scene. Specifically, we draw on material generated via an online questionnaire distributed among residents in the area ( N = 566) and qualitative interviewing of 33 residents. The article also proposes a change in perspective toward drug scene encounters, one that is not hinged exclusively on a narrow understanding of nuisances understood as negative affective states. This new approach is employed in an analysis of resident experiences of drug scene encounters. The analysis shows that rather than experiencing drug users and the drug scene exclusively as a nuisance or threat to community order, most residents are supportive of DCRs and generally accept the presence of a drug scene in the area. The article concludes with a brief discussion of results and their relation to current debates on urban coexistence, progressive harm reduction initiatives, and public space management.

Biopower, Disciplinary Power and Surveillance: An Ethnographic Analysis of the Lived Experience of People Who Use Drugs in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside

“…Here, drug possession is de facto decriminalized and instead of apprehending people who use drugs, police operate with the direct mandate to support them. Practically this means police patrol solely on foot, look to build rapport with the community and actively engage in reducing drug-related harms as opposed to directly reducing the amounts of drugs being consumed (Bancroft & Houbourg, 2020; Kammersgaard, 2019). As will be discussed below, although the Vancouver Police Department’s methods of policing the DTES in some ways echo this form of policing (less arrests for drug possession), their lack of rapport within the community remains highly problematic when analyzed through the lens of harm reduction.…”

Narrative Politics in Policy Discourse: The Debate Over Safe Injection Sites in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

“…The notion that a SIS will eradicate a public nuisance—defined as the nuisance caused by streets littered with drug paraphernalia, publicly visible drug overdoses, crime surrounding open air drug markets, and the actions of people who are on drugs—dominates the debate in the establishment stage (Zajdow, 2006). Public nuisance is often a key concern of local actors in SIS debates (Bancroft & Houborg, 2020; Kolla et al, 2017). During such debates, framing and storytelling strategies are influenced by unique jurisdictional concerns and contexts (Fitzgerald, 2013; Williams, 2016), and the stringency of regulations for program participants often depends on beliefs about the importance of protecting the health of people who use drugs (Zajdow, 2006); thus, context and perceptions of people who use drugs are central components of narrative analyses of SISs.…”

Drug dealing and drug use prevention – a qualitative interview study of authorities’ perspectives on two open drug scenes in Stockholm

“…Over the years, European cities have switched back and forth between enforcement and harm reduction measures (e.g., Oslo) [ 10 ], have moved to a more harm-reduction-oriented approach (e.g., Copenhagen) [ 9 ], or have used a combination of both approaches (e.g., Zurich) [ 11 ]. In contrast to strategies aiming to promote the coexistence of people who use drugs and the rest of society [ 11 , 12 ], the counteracting strategies assessed in the current study aim to prevent, thereby reduce, and in the long run, abolish, open drug scenes. This can be seen as a natural choice based on the Swedish penal law on narcotics [ 13 ], under which drug dealing and the use of illicit drugs are criminalized.…”

“…In fact, due to the complexity of the problem, a combination of prevention, enforcement, harm reduction, and treatment measures implemented via structured cooperation among different stakeholders has been identified as the most effective approach, the case of Zurich being one example [ 8 , 11 , 21 ]. Some researchers have even suggested coexistence between people who use drugs and the rest of society as a plausible strategy [ 11 , 12 ], if accepted by the public [ 12 ]. Again, the Swedish strategy to combat illicit drugs focuses to a large extent on the protection of young or marginalized people, which may lead to other priorities than those made in countries with coexisting approaches [ 22 ].…”