IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/30926.html

Harm Reduction: When Does It Improve Health, and When Does it Backfire?

Author

Listed:
  • John Cawley
  • Davide Dragone

Abstract

Some harm reduction strategies encourage individuals to switch from a harmful addictive good to a less harmful addictive good; examples include e-cigarettes (substitutes for combustible cigarettes) and methadone and buprenorphine (substitutes for opioids). These have proven to be controversial. Advocates argue that people struggling with addiction benefit because they can switch to a less harmful substance, but opponents argue that this could encourage abstainers to begin using the harm-reduction method or even, eventually, the original addictive good. This paper builds on theories of addiction to model the introduction of a harm reduction method, and demonstrates the conditions under which each side is correct.

Suggested Citation

  • John Cawley & Davide Dragone, 2023. "Harm Reduction: When Does It Improve Health, and When Does it Backfire?," NBER Working Papers 30926, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:30926
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w30926.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Smart, Rosanna & Powell, David & Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo & Peet, Evan & Abouk, Rahi & Davis, Corey S., 2024. "Investigating the complexity of naloxone distribution: Which policies matter for pharmacies and potential recipients," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:30926. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.