The European Commission welcomes today's political agreement between the European Parliament and the Council on a stronger mandate which establishes a new EU Drugs Agency. The new Agency builds on the achievements of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.

Illicit drugs pose a complex security and health problem that affect millions of people in the EU and globally. The 

 estimates that over 83 million adults in the EU (i.e. 29% of the adult population) have used illicit drugs at least once during their lives. In 2020, an estimated 5 800 overdose deaths in the EU involved illicit drugs, most of which due to combinations of illicit opioids, other illicit drugs, medicines and alcohol (a practice also known as poly-drug toxicity). At the same time, there is still a high availability of substances, in particular cocaine, as well as an increasing number of different substances, often of high potency or purity. These developments call for effective action at EU level.

With this enhanced mandate, the EU Drugs Agency will play a new role, including:

 in case particularly dangerous substances become available on the market;

 on illicit drugs that negatively impact public health, safety and security;

 the simultaneous consumption of different drugs

Set-up a network of forensic and toxicological laboratories,

 bringing together national laboratories, to enhance information exchange on new developments and support training of forensic drug experts;

Develop and promote evidence-based interventions, best practice and awareness raising activities and assistance

 with reinforced cooperation with key partners, such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the International Narcotics Control Board, as well as also with regional, national, and other agencies and bodies in drug producer and transit countries;

Enhanced network of national contact points

, in charge of providing the agency with the relevant data.

The Regulation must now be formally adopted by the European Parliament and the Council.

EU Drugs Agency: European Commission welcomes political agreement on new fully-fledged Agency

Civil society organisations sent an open letter to the EU Commission to criticise the new call for drug policy grant proposals that almost only focuses on law enforcement and excludes harm reduction.

Since the Drug Unit of the EU Commission was relocated to the Internal Security Department, civil society has been concerned about the continuous shifting of its approach towards a more repressive, law-and-order direction from a balanced, integrated model of drug policies.

The new call for proposals launched by the Commission is another step in this direction. Unlike the previous EC JUST drug policy grant calls, this funding mechanism almost only focuses on supply reduction. From its four objectives, three focuses on improving supply reduction, it has only one objective on drug prevention – while harm reduction is completely missing.

Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network (C-EHRN), an umbrella of European harm reduction organisations (Rights Reporter Foundation, the organisation operating this website, is a Steering Committee member) sent an open letter to Ilva Johanson, Commissioner of Home Affairs, and Fiona Sipala, the head of the Drug Unit of the EC, to address this issue.

“We write to you on behalf of Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network (CEHRN), representing 158 civil society organisations (CSO) working in the area of harm reduction drug policy in Europe. C-EHRN is part of Foundation De Regenboog Groep and, as such, is also represented in the EU Civil Society Forum on Drugs.

Together with the undersigned networks, we would like to express our concern and disappointment with the current call of the Internal Security Grant concerning better law enforcement in the area of illicit drug trafficking. We believe this call does not reflect the principles of an evidence-based, integrated, balanced and multidisciplinary approach to the drugs phenomenon and is not in line with the Drug Strategy of the European Union. The call has a narrow focus on law enforcement interventions, with no objectives to improve complex public health and social services, including harm reduction.

For several years, the members and organisations we work with have benefited from the EC JUST Drug Policy grants launched by the European Commission. These grants demonstrated the balanced, evidence-based and multidisciplinary approach to drug policies in accordance with the core principles of the European Union. They provided an excellent opportunity for civil society organisations working in the field of drugs to cooperate internationally and exchange knowledge and good practices.
When the Drugs Unit was moved from the Justice Department to the Internal Security Department, civil society organisations were promised that this would not affect the balanced and multidisciplinary approach to drug policies of the EU Commission.
However, the apparent shift towards law enforcement and crime prevention proves different – with social and public health aspects slipping off the agenda.

The Internal Security call lays only limited emphasis on drug demand reduction and none at all on harm reduction. At the same time, no other EU Programme took over this responsibility, leaving drug demand and harm reduction behind, without any opportunity for EU funding and support.

This is an extremely concerning development. EU funding has become increasingly important in recent years because of the emerging funding crisis for harm reduction, especially in the Eastern part of the European Union. Since the 2008 economic crisis, funding for harm reduction has constantly been declining in most Member States.

Several essential services operated by CSOs have been closed down or curtailed due to budget cuts and the retreat of international donors.

On top of the funding crisis, CSOs experience a shrinking space for civil society in several Member States, where governments are increasingly hostile to those organisations that receive international funding or work with marginalised groups of society. With decreasing national and local funds, direct funding from the European Commission was often the only funding opportunity to improve advocacy and innovation in the harm reduction field for many organisations. This opportunity is now lost.

DG Home is the department within the EC responsible for developing and implementing a balanced, integrated and evidence-based EU Drug Policy. Such a balanced approach requires that funding mechanisms are available for all drug policy areas and not only for law enforcement and crime prevention programmes.

We, therefore, call upon the European Commission and DG Home to reinstall the funding mechanism for drug demand and harm reduction to ensure a balanced and evidence-based drug policy also in the future.

We look forward to your response and hope for your continued support for civil society in the area of drug policy and harm reduction.”

Drug Policy Network South East Europe [DPNSEE]

EU HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis and Tuberculosis Civil Society Forum

Eurasian Harm Reduction Association [EHRA]

European Network of People Who Use Drugs [EuroNPUD]

Federation des Acteurs en Education en Promotion de la Sante de Guyane [AGRRR] International Drug Policy Consortium [IDPC]

International Network of People Who Use Drugs [INPUD]

Youth Organizations for Drug Actions [YODA]

Civil society demands balanced EU funding for drug policies

In March 2022, the Italian government made 

 the two principal ingredients of the Amazonian brew ayahuasca, Schedule I controlled substances. In addition, components of these plants (harmine and harmaline from 

) are now controlled as well. Schedule I is a category created by the International Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971 that includes components declared to have “no medical or scientific use” and pose a “high risk for public health"

This decision came after five police interventions were registered by the Department for Anti-Drug Policies (an agency instated to oversee drug-related policies by the Council of Ministers) between December 2019 and November 2021. Pavia’s Poison Control Centre had also reported two cases of intoxication related to the intake of harmine in 2011 and 2018. In the recent decree, the Italian Ministry also cites that ayahuasca has been illegal in France since 2005, in addition to non-specified arguments derived from scientific literature. Some drug policy reform groups have asked the Ministry to share bibliographic references for the evidence used in the decision.

This motion put forth by Health Minister Roberto Speranza was not anticipated, particularly since in 2009 the Cassation Court had ruled that ayahuasca was not illegal. The reason given for the policy change was that ayahuasca (as well as three of its components) presents “risks to public health.” Speranza made this decision in an effort to abide by “international obligations,” which was the same rationale that was used to block Italy’s cannabis referendum.

Italy's recent decision to schedule ayahuasca

This survey is a part of a larger research project by the Civil Society Forum on Drugs aiming to assess the state of implementation of the EU Action Plan on Drugs 2017-2020 in the EU Member States and beyond. It is addressed to civil society organisations working in the field of drug policy.
The Civil Society Forum on Drugs (CSFD) is an expert group of the European Commission. Its members are selected by the Commission for a three-year mandate based on their competencies, knowledge, and expertise. One of its thematic working groups is concerned with the EU drug strategies and action plans.
Following the survey conducted at the beginning of the Action Plan 2017-2020 implementation (report can be accessed here), the CSFD continues the monitoring of accessibility and quality of key demand reduction and harm reduction measures. This survey aims to collect the data allowing for the evaluation of the current situation and identify the potential changes taking place during the last three years. Its results, complemented with other elements of this research project, will be published on the CSFD website.
Please, fill in the questionnaire providing answers according to your best expert knowledge. If you have any questions, please contact Iga Jeziorska, the Chair of the Working Group on the EU Action Plan, at:iga.kender-jeziorska@euro-yoda.org Thank you for your contribution!

Survey: Civil society perspectives on the implementation of the EU Action Plan on Drugs

The strategy aims to ensure a high level of health promotion, social stability and security and contribute to awareness raising. On the basis of this strategy, the Council will prepare an action plan which will set out concrete measures to achieve these priorities.

With this strategy, the EU and its member states reaffirm their commitment to an approach which is based on evidence, comprehensive and balanced between demand and supply reduction of drugs, with the preservation of human rights at its core. At the same time, this strategy uses the lessons learned from the COVID-19 crisis in the drugs area and takes a future-oriented approach, promoting research, innovation and foresight to respond more effectively to increasing challenges and to anticipate them.

 drug supply reduction/enhanced security

 the strategy targets all aspects of the illicit drug market, and includes the prevention of, dissuasion from and disruption of drug related crime, in particular organised crime, through judicial and law enforcement cooperation, intelligence, interdiction, confiscation of criminal assets, investigations and border management. This priority area has been further enhanced as compared to the 2013-2020 strategy, to respond to the challenging developments in European drug markets. These are characterised by a high availability of various types of drugs, ever larger seizures, increasing use of violence and huge profits, as well as the use of social media platforms, apps and the internet and darknet for illicit drug trafficking. Such features have not faded during the COVID-19 crisis, to the contrary.

 policy area consists of a range of mutual reinforcing measures including prevention, early detection and intervention, counselling, treatment, rehabilitation, social reintegration and recovery. Such action needs to be appropriate to the local social context and the needs of the target population, be informed by scientific evidence and be safe and effective. It needs to be developed through the close collaboration of a number of health and social support services. The COVID-19 crisis has further revealed the need to ensure continuity of these actions.

A new, dedicated chapter has been added on 

. This section includes measures and policies to prevent or reduce the possible health and social risks and harm for users, for society and in prison settings. It covers aspects such as reducing the prevalence and incidence of drug-related infectious diseases, preventing overdoses and drug-related deaths and providing alternatives to coercive sanctions.

The strategy also identifies three cross-cutting themes in support of the policy areas:

: enhancing the role of the EU as a global broker for a people-centred and human rights-oriented drug policy through cooperation with third countries, regions and international organisations, while strengthening the commitment to development-orientated drug policies and alternative development measures.

: providing the EU and member states with the necessary comprehensive research and foresight capacities to address drug challenges in a more agile and proactive manner, increasing preparedness to respond to future challenges.

coordination, governance and implementation

: ensuring optimal implementation of the strategy, including via the key action of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) and of Europol, involving civil society and providing adequate resources at EU and national level to achieve this.

European Union Drugs Strategy 2021-2025

About 20 minutes into a US House of Representatives hearing on the findings of the Western Hemisphere Drug Policy Commission—a body created under Obama and tasked with re-evaluating drug policy in the Americas—its chair made a statement that, heard on its own, could have sparked hope in the hearts of harm reductionists frustrated with the country’s violent global war on people who use or sell drugs.

“The US government needs better metrics and stronger evaluations of what does and doesn’t work,” said Dr. Shannon O’Neil, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and the Commission’s chair. “Counting how many police officers have received training or how many hectares of coca have been eradicated doesn’t necessarily tell us whether we are reducing the harm of illegal drugs for Americans.”

Anyone familiar with the vast scientific literature on effective techniques for reducing the harms associated with criminalized drug use might think O’Neil was on the verge of calling for measuring drug policy in terms of access to naloxone, syringes, gold-standard addiction medications like buprenorphine, and even, simply, quality housing.

But not so. Instead, in a report this month providing drug policy recommendations for the incoming Biden-Harris administration, O’Neill and the Commission set forth a vision for an optimized global drug war that integrates “public health policies” into a more efficient assault on people involved in Latin American drug economies.

A “humane” global drug war is possible, house commission tells Biden

According to reports in 2018 from African Union Member States, the consumption and trafficking of controlled substances have escalated in all five (5) AU Regions. Growing use of cocaine, tramadol, amphetamine type stimulants (ATS), new psychoactive substances (NPS) have been stated. Heroin consumption and injection is rising in Eastern and Southern Africa resulting (in the absence of the necessary health services) in high transmission rates of HIV and hepatitis among people who inject drugs, particularly women and young people.

Large shipments of heroin are transhipped on the high seas of Eastern Africa, and that of cocaine off-shore in the Atlantic Ocean, while on-shore shipments are made through harbours and airports across the continent. Women, especially those from lowincome backgrounds, continue to be vulnerable to recruitment as drug couriers. In West, East and Southern Africa trafficking of and/or diversion from licit batches of precursor chemicals for illicit use, especially ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, occurs frequently. This takes place in areas where ATS drugs are manufactured in clandestine laboratories on a large scale, resulting in online sales of these and other drugs, including NPS.

The African Union has since 1996 adopted Action Plans to address drug control and associated crime prevention on the continent, resulting in the establishment of institutional mechanisms in Member States, Regional Economic Communities and at the AU Commission to coordinate balanced and integrated responses to the mentioned drug control challenges.

The responses encapsulated in the AU Plan of Action on Drug Control and Crime Prevention (2019-2023) (AUPA) mirrors that of the African Common Position for the 2016 UNGASS General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on the World Drug Problem, as well as the seven (7) chapters of Operational Recommendations of the UNGASS Outcome Document. In addition, the AUPA contains two additional pillars with objectives and activities to address crime prevention, and coordination of the implementation of the AUPA at national, regional and continental levels, respectively.

The overall objective of the AUPA (2019-2023) is to improve the health, security and socio-economic well-being of the people of Africa by addressing drug trafficking and problematic drug use in all its forms and manifestations and preventing the onset of drug use.

Objectives and outputs/activities under the nine (9) chapters or pillars address the following:

Measures to tackle drug demand reduction and health issues associated with drug use, focusing on prevention and treatment of drug use with provisions for training of workers and professionals in these fields, parental skills training, life skills training for children and young people, reducing harm associated with drug use and implementing alternatives to punishment for drug use.

Availability and access to controlled substances for medical and scientific purposes while preventing their diversion, with emphasis on erasing barriers that suppress accessibility to medicines, including for the relief of pain and suffering, as well as reducing non-medical use of medicines and availability of counterfeit medicines

Measures to address drug supply reduction along with countering enablers of drug trafficking: firearms, corruption and money laundering which addresses illicit trafficking in drugs, drug law enforcement and intelligence sharing and ratification of AU instruments on combating corruption, money laundering, terrorism and trafficking in small arms.

Measures to address crime prevention and criminal justice reform, with emphasis on international cooperation on combating transnational organized crime, fighting emerging organized crime such as cybercrime, rise in gangs, extortion, violence and criminal governance. It involves continuous assessment of fragility and vulnerability, and analysis of risk, pressures and stress factors in societies.

Criminal justice reform, particularly addressing prison decongestion and noncustodial sentencing, is of critical importance to prevent reoffending, among others.

Cross cutting issues on drugs and human rights pertaining to all vulnerable groups, especially youth, women, children and communities, and this pillar provides for policy makers and law enforcement authorities to be oriented on human rights to health and safety as it relates to the field of drugs, emphasizing respect for and dignity of those in treatment, as well as protective and risk factors for vulnerable girls, women, children and youths. In this regard, national epidemiological surveillance on drug use, production and trafficking, research and data collection and national drug control coordination mechanisms are critical.

Evolving reality: trends and circumstances, emerging and persistent challenges and threats mainly focusses on countering the availability and use of NPS and ATS, sales of these drugs through the internet, and the importance of interregional forensic drug testing cooperation.

Alternative development and alternative means of livelihood, also targeting grower communities in the agricultural sector with a specific focus on Technical, Vocational Education and Training (TVET) for youth and women employment, including economic and social infrastructure development.

International and regional cooperation based on the principle of common and shared responsibility which makes provision for engagement with international partners for technical and financial support, for participation in regional, continental and international fora and for fast-tracking of extradition and mutual legal assistance arrangements.

Continental, regional and national management, oversight, reporting, monitoring and evaluation of the AU Plan of Action on Drug Control and Crime Prevention (2019-2023) entails actions by the African Union Commission to account to the AU Policy Organs on the implementation and impact of the AUPA (2019-2023).

African Union Plan of Action on Drug Control and Crime Prevention (2019-2023)

On the path toward building up its internal security, on 24 July 2020, the European Commission adopted a new EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025 (and the Annex) as part of the Security Union Strategy. The new EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025 sets out the political framework and priorities for action in the next five years.

The objective is to protect citizens through better coordinated actions to address the security and health implications of drug trafficking and drug use. It reinforces the evidence-based, integrated and balanced approach to demand and supply reduction of drugs, through a comprehensive, multidisciplinary lens.

The current drugs situation in the EU requires comprehensive security and health responses covering the scientific, environmental, socio-political, technological and international dimensions of the issue.

The EU Agenda on Drugs outlines 8 strategic priorities which are divided under

Enhanced security (focused on all aspects of illicit trafficking of drugs).

Increased prevention (of the adverse effects of drugs including link to violence).

Addressing drug related harms (through access to treatment, risk and harm reduction, and a balanced approach to the issue of drugs in prisons).

It is accompanied by an Action Plan covering concrete operational steps and activities.

EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025

The new Security Union strategy would “fight” against drugs together with child abuse and arms trafficking. This is a bad approach.

The European Commission has published its new EU drug strategy (now called the Drugs Agenda), which is part of a wider Security Union strategy entitled “Delivering on a Security Union: initiatives to fight child sexual abuse, drugs and illegal firearms.” While I celebrated the previous Action Plan as the most progressive ever, I think this document has come as a disappointment for civil society organisations that have been advocating for a sensible, balanced approach in drug policies.

Here are 4 reasons why (this article is not a comprehensive review and it does not reflect the official position of the Civil Society Forum on Drugs or other organisations but only my personal views).

The European Union should not fight drugs but reduce harms

The 63rd session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND or Commission) took place in Vienna between 4 and 6 March 2020. Incredible as it now seems, held during the early phases of the current global health pandemic, only the precautionary absence of a few full delegations and warnings regarding healthcare counter measures made it feel any different from previous ‘normal’ sessions. Indeed, since this year’s meeting followed on from the Commission’s 2019 Ministerial Segment and multilateral agreement on the associated Ministerial Declaration expectations were relatively low. Indicative of this was the tabling of only five resolutions, around half the number seen in previous years. Nonetheless, as has been increasingly the case the twin issues of complexity and tension were identifiable throughout the week. Put simply, with intricacy, fluidity and dynamism continuing to characterize illicit drug markets has come growing variations in national policy approaches designed to deal with them and attendant inter-state and state-UN system tensions at the international level.

Implicit and explicit manifestations of this reality were evident from the opening session. For example, the CND Chair, Ambassador Mansoor Ahmed Khan, spoke of the ‘need to understand each other’s perspective’. While the new UNODC Executive Director, Ms. Ghada Fathi Waly, deliberately highlighted the mythical ‘Vienna spirit of consensus’; something she evidently found ‘quite inspiring’ upon arrival in the Austrian capital. Yet, amidst some welcome areas of agreement, including notably access to controlled substances for medical use, the revised Annual Report Questionnaire and – at a rhetorical level at least – support for the Sustainable Development Goals, increasing divergence was impossible to hide. Within the General Debate some countries still chose to deploy the language of a ‘drug free world’ while others were more pragmatic in their support for drug policies genuinely underpinned by a human rights and public health-based approach. Indeed, while not unique to Vienna, interpretative variation around the concept of human rights remains.

This could be seen both within the Plenary and the Committee of the Whole (CoW), where resolutions are negotiated, in relation to differing views on the Chief Executive Board’s 2018 UN System Common Position on Drug Policy and the work of the associated UN System Coordination Task Team. While not alone, the Russian Federation was arguably most vocal and active in opposing supportive references to this new initiative to improve system-wide coherence, including in relation to cooperation with human rights bodies and better data collection and analysis. And maintaining its role as the most vociferous supporter of the shape of the extant control system, the Russian Federation was also especially active in challenging the recommendations of the WHO’s Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD) regarding cannabis classification; an issue that played out at various points across the session and due to the hard fought second postponement of a vote by Commission members has taken on the mantle of an almost ‘too hot to handle’ issue. Although largely overshadowed by the debates around the ECDD’s recommendations, tensions around legally regulated markets for non-medical adult use also remained, with the INCB legitimately flagging it up as an ongoing issue of concern. This is particularly so considering declared and potential legislative shifts in Luxembourg and New Zealand respectively.

With engagement spanning a range of issue areas, civil society was once again highly visible and active at this year’s CND. As members of country delegations as well as NGO delegations in their own right, representatives were involved in the organisation of side events, often in collaboration with member states and UN agencies, and delivered several statements within the plenary. Beyond this, the now formalized ‘informal dialogues’ with UN bodies continued. Although she was unfortunately unable to attend due to illness, these included Executive summary 2 The 2020 CND Report of Proceedings dialogues with the UNODC Executive Director, the INCB President – and for the first time – representatives of the WHO.

While any assessment of the outcomes of the 63rd session must now be re-framed within the context of COVID-19, it is fair to conclude that, with the inescapable sands of divergence within its gears, the CND’s consensus driven machinery continues to grind away, but in an increasingly laboured and shuddering fashion. It is true that this year, as at recent sessions, the system has been able to tolerate divergence in high-level views on the quest for a ‘drug free world’ versus a preference for harm reduction and market management approaches, and even to a certain extent endure diverging views on some aspects of human rights. But, as events in March revealed, increasing endeavour is now required to keep the wheels turning as intended.

The 2019 Commission on Narcotic Drugs and its Ministerial Segment: Report of Proceedings

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2018 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2017 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2016 Commission on Narcotic Drugs and its special segment on preparations for the UNGASS on the world drug problem

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2015 Commission on Narcotic Drugs and its special segment on preparations for the UNGASS on the world drug problem

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2014 Commission on Narcotic Drugs and its High Level Segment

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2013 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2012 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2011 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2010 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2009 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2008 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2007 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2006 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2005 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

The 2020 Commission on Narcotic Drugs - Report of Proceedings

The UK government has announced a summit focused on reducing the impact of problem drug use that will bring together a variety of experts from across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The announcement was made by Minister for Crime, Policing and the Fire Service Kit Malthouse at a meeting of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee on the 23rd of October.

The summit will be held in Glasgow, and the intention is for it to take place before Christmas. It will provide an update on Dame Carol Black’s review of drugs, which is due to report later this year.

The meeting will also provide an opportunity to discuss the issues of drug use across the UK, share best practice on common goals and identify areas for closer collaboration.

Speaking after the committee meeting, the minister said:

“The number of drug deaths across the UK is extremely concerning, particularly the figures for Scotland. We should continue to work closely at all levels and across the nations of the UK to tackle the issue of drug misuse.

Drug summit in Glasgow announced by UK government

By the Cooperation Programme between Latin America, the Caribbean and the European Union on Drug Policies (COPOLAD)

The production, distribution and consumption of drugs have a significant impact on the health, social development, economy, security and governance of societies and citizens throughout the world. The challenges posed by this phenomenon can only be addressed through effective and collaborative international efforts to counteract the numerous problems related to drugs. These problems have an adverse impact on the daily lives of citizens and the societies in which they are present, especially with regard to the most vulnerable social groups.

The Cooperation Programme between Latin America, the Caribbean and the European Union on Drugs Policies is a bi-regional cooperation programme aimed at supporting the implementation of effective pubic policies to reduce the risks associated with drug use and supply within the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). To achieve this objective, COPOLAD shares and fully advocates the European Union's position of supporting public policies on drugs based on a global and balanced approach linked to human development objectives such as full respect for human rights, including gender sensitivity and women's empowerment, a public health-oriented approach, good governance and the rule of law.

Demand reduction