Working in a relational way is everything: Perceptions of power and value in a drug policy-making network

Abstract Background The development of drug policies has been a major focus for policy-makers across North America in light of the ongoing public health emergency caused by the overdose crisis. In this context, the current study examined stakeholders’ experiences and perceptions of power and value in a drug policy-making process in a North American city using qualitative, questionnaire, and social network data. Methods We interviewed 18 people who participated in the development of a drug policy proposal between October 2021 and March 2022. They represented different groups and organizations, including government ( n = 3), people who use drugs-led advocacy organizations ( n = 5), other drug policy advocacy organizations ( n = 5), research ( n = 3) and police ( n = 2). Most of them identified as men ( n = 8) and white ( n = 16), and their ages ranged between 30 and 80 years old (median = 50). Social network analysis questionnaires and semi-structured qualitative interviews were administered via Zoom. Social network data were analysed using igraph in R, and qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis. The analyses explored perceptions of value and power within a drug policy-making network. Results The policy-making network showed that connections could be found across participants from different groups, with government officials being the most central. Qualitative data showed that inclusion in the network and centrality did not necessarily translate into feeling powerful or valued. Many participants were dissatisfied with the process despite having structurally advantageous positions or self-reporting moderately high quantitative value scores. Participants who viewed themselves as more valued acknowledged many process shortcomings, but they also saw it as more balanced or fair than those who felt undervalued. Conclusions While participation can make stakeholders and communities feel valued and empowered, our findings highlight that inclusion, position and diversity of connections in a drug policy-making network do not, in and of itself, guarantee these outcomes. Instead, policy-makers must provide transparent terms of reference guidelines and include highly skilled facilitators in policy discussions. This is particularly important in policy processes that involve historical power imbalances in the context of a pressing public health emergency.