Moral Entrepreneurship Revisited: Police Officers Monitoring Cannabis Retailers in Rotterdam, the Netherlands

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. ABSTRACTIn this paper on police officers who monitor coffee shops in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, I relate their work to Becker's moral entrepreneur (1963). Becker describes two categories of moral entrepreneurs: rule creators, such as the crusading reformer, and rule enforcers, for example the police. According to Becker, the rule enforcer is less naıve and more pragmatic than the rule creator. The main question of this paper is: in what respect can the work of the police officers be described as moral entrepreneurship? To answer this question I conducted in-depth interviews with six police officers on the meaning they attach to their duties of monitoring coffee shops. The research shows that police officers take a pragmatic approach, which also contains layers of morality that influence their rule enforcing. For instance, the way they define the character and intentions of the coffee shop managers is decisive in how they act towards them. Another difference is observed in relation to the two interests of the rule enforcer described by Becker. The police officers interviewed did not have to justify their existence and they did not have to gain respect by coercion. This is explained by (a) the routine character of the monitoring, which has created a predictable situation and a modus operandi known to all parties and (b) the criminalization of cannabis in recent years. The effect of this process is that the position of police officers in relation to cannabis sellers is not questioned.

Cannabis, Moral Entrepreneurship, and Stigma: Conflicting Narratives on the 26 May 2016 Toronto Police Raid on Cannabis Shops

“…In order to find an answer, we have to look at the social context within which the various moral entrepreneurs were working. For example, the factual neutral style of the state authorities that marked the press conference was related to the role of the "enforcer" and, as such, was less moralistic and more focused on getting things done (Becker 1963;Müller 2015). In addition, the fact that the situation comprised a public press conference at which cannabis activists were also present exerted an influence upon the primary speakers, that is, the The specific situation also played a crucial role in the case of Bill Blair, and we also need to look at the situation in which he acted to understand his stance.…”

“…The following two questions will guide this discussion: How did the two parties socially construct their pro-and anti-cannabis narratives, and in what way can we use the concept of moral entrepreneurship to describe, analyze, and explain the social construction of both narratives? In order to address these issues, I will, first, further develop the concept of moral entrepreneurship, which I utilized in a previous article that addressed police control of coffee shops in Rotterdam (Müller 2015). I will then explore the characteristics of moral entrepreneurship by relating it to studies concerning the social construction of moral narratives, such as moral panics and social problems.…”