We need research centers in our field

Funding for alcohol and drug research centres and research groups varies significantly across different regions of the world, influenced by governmental policies, public health priorities and available resources. There are specialized centers for this research, often connected to treatment and/or solutions to community problems.

Through its Alcohol Research Centers Program, the US-based National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) gives long-term economic support to conduct interdisciplinary research on alcohol use disorder and related issues. Typically, the program supports centres for 5 years of interdisciplinary research (NIAAA, 2024). In Canada, both the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and provincial health agencies provide funding for alcohol and drug research (e.g., CIHR, 2024). In Australia, research centres and groups receive funding from national health agencies such as the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC, 2024). The South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) conducts research on substance use, including alcohol and drug dependence, with a unit dedicated to prevention and treatment strategies (SAMRC, 2024). In all parts of the world, various non-profit organizations have also started support research initiatives, particularly those aimed at public education and prevention.

In the context of Nordic research infrastructure, the research centers and groups look different in different countries, but the welfare states have been interested in maintaining them for monitoring developments and seeking to understand trends. These centers may be situated at universities, such as the Center for Social Science Research on Alcohol and Drugs (SoRAD) at Stockholm University (Storbjörk et al., 2020) and the Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research (CRF) at Aarhus University. In Finland and Norway, similar centers have been incorporated as research groups into public health institutes, whereas, in Iceland, research is dispersed across various environments. Additionally, all Nordic countries have both sector and university-based research associated with different institutes and practice-related organizations.

In the beginning of this autumn, we were reached by the news that a larger downsizing project by the Danish government threatens the existence of the Danish Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research at Aarhus University (CRF). Researchers and academics from the Nordic countries were not late to respond and sent a letter to minister Sophie Hæstorp Andersen at the Department for Social Affairs and Housing.

The 53 signatories expressed concern, emphasizing the CRF's significant role in Nordic research collaboration. The letter highlighted the importance of CRF's work in addressing substance use and its related challenges, which contribute to public health issues and social problems in Nordic societies. The signatories also expressed concern over the loss of CRF leading to a diminished ability to efficiently monitor substance use and hinder the development of evidence-based social policies, ultimately impacting both Nordic and international research communities.

At the time when this journal issue goes into press, we still do not know if and how much the CRF will suffer, but we keep our fingers crossed for our Danish colleagues and hope they can continue with their great contributions to the field of social science alcohol and drug research.

In this issue

Lauren Alex O’Hagan (2024) examines the Instagram marketing strategies of a prominent nicotine pouch brand in the UK. The research revealed that the posts frequently mislead consumers, downplay the risks associated with nicotine, and present nicotine pouches as fashionable lifestyle items instead of smoking alternatives. Marte Reikvam Devold and colleagues (2024) have investigated gambling within the indigenous Sámi culture by examining the perspectives, beliefs and attitudes towards gambling among the Sámi and those residing in predominantly Sámi regions who are familiar with the culture. The purpose of the study by Adriana Lavinia Bulumac (2024) was to identify and clarify the differences between highly affiliated and low/non-affiliated participants in Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings. The findings indicated that, while common themes exist among both groups, addiction specialists should focus more on organizational commitment, spirituality, well-being and addiction-related concepts because these influence successful AA affiliation and reflect on recovery outcomes. In a longitudinal study, Kerstin Geißelsöder and colleagues (2024) are investigating the differences between incarcerated individuals receiving opioid substitution treatment (OST) and those not receiving OST, focusing on addiction-related outcomes during incarceration and post-release.