Australia has become the first country to recognise psychedelics as medicines, after the Therapeutic Goods Administration took researchers by surprise and approved the psychedelic substances in magic mushrooms and MDMA for use by people with certain mental health conditions.

MDMA and psilocybin, the active ingredient in magic mushrooms, will be considered schedule 8 drugs - meaning they’re approved for controlled use when prescribed by a psychiatrist - from July this year after the TGA acknowledged there were few other options for patients with specific treatment-resistant mental illnesses.

The changes will allow MDMA to be used to treat post-traumatic stress disorder, and psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression. They will still be considered prohibited substances - or schedule 9 drugs - for all other usages.

Australia becomes first country to recognise psychedelics as medicines

We spoke to Anne-Marie Cockburn just days after the anniversary of the death of her daughter Martha from an ecstasy overdose. She is one of the founders of Anyone’s Child, an organisation of people who have lost a family member and demand a change in drug policies.

In the early hours of July 20, 2013, Anne-Marie Cockburn received an unexpected call that would change the course of her life. Her fifteen-year-old daughter Martha was critically ill in hospital after taking MDMA. She died shortly after. Thus begins the journey of this mother from Oxford who, unafraid of making the political class uncomfortable, has become a tireless activist for drug policy reform in the United Kingdom, so that there are no more stories like Martha’s.

After the death of her daughter, Anne-Marie began writing 5,742 Days (the number of days Martha lived), a book that chronicles the first months of mourning in real time and that warms your heart on every page. She is co-author of What Martha Did Next (‘What Martha Did Next’, 2015) and one of the founders of Anyone’s Child, an organisation of people who have lost a family member and demand a change in drug policies. She speaks passionately and nostalgically about her involvement with The Forgiveness Project, a restorative justice program in which she visited prisons and shared her story with inmates.

UK: Martha's shoes: Anne-Marie's journey, a mother who lost her daughter to an ecstasy overdose

8th December, 13.30 to 15.30 CET at the Vienna International Centre and online

Interpretation in French, Russian and Spanish will be available

The UNODC Synthetic Drug Strategy 2021-2025 was formally launched in November 2021, centered around four “spheres of action” (multilateralism and international cooperation, early warning on emerging synthetic drug threats, science-informed health responses, and counter-narcotic interventions).

To enhance and sustain meaningful civil society engagement in the context of the UNODC Synthetic Drug Strategy, UNODC together with The Alliance and the Vienna NGO Committee (VNGOC) are organizing an initial 

consultation with relevant civil society stakeholders on 8th December 2022

, in the margins of the reconvened meeting of the 65th CND. The meeting will serve as an initial “kick-off” to develop substantiative civil society expert groups that can play a consultative role in the implementation, adaptation and evaluation of the Synthetic Drug Strategy.

The consultation will be held in a hybrid format (online and in person) on

 8th December, 1.30PM (CET) to 3.30PM (CET). Civil society representatives interested in contributing are invited to participate.


Interpretation in FR, RU and ES will be provided.

Interested civil society representatives are invited to 

Note: Kindly note that no funding will be provided for travel costs. Interested participants wishing to attend in-person are expected to cover all associated costs.

Engaging with the UNODC Synthetic Drug Strategy - Civil society consultation

Pill testing services could potentially be used to reduce drug-related harm. This study aims to identify patterns of ecstasy use among live music event attendees; explore the opinions and potential usage of illicit pill testing programs and examine factors associated with the likelihood of still taking a pill containing a potential harmful substance.

A cross-sectional survey was completed by 760 people attending a major Australian live music event in 2017.

The most commonly used drug in the last 12 months was ecstasy (73.9%). About 5% of people who use drugs had sought medical attention due to consumption of ecstasy. People who use drugs agreed “a lot” that pill testing should be provided for free at live music events (82.2%) and that it should be combined with harm reduction advice (62.9%). Additionally, 32% of all participants agreed ‘a lot’ that they would be more likely to take illicit drugs at a music festival if pill-testing services were present. However, if people perceived that a harmful substance was detected in their drugs after using a pill testing service, 52.3% of people who have used illicit drugs reported that they would ‘not at all’ be likely to still consume the drug. They also reported that they would still take a pill if testing demonstrated the presence of unintended MDMA-type substances (70.3%), amphetamines (31.2%) or ketamine (27.8%). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that only increased frequency of ecstasy use was significantly associated with taking a pill despite pill testing services detecting a harmful substance. Gender, age, alcohol and previously seeking ecstasy-related medical attention were not associated in the multivariate analyses.

A high proportion of live music attendees consume alcohol and ecstasy. Both people who have and who have not used illicit drugs support the implementation of pill testing services. People reported they would change their consumption patterns according to the results given by pill testing services. The findings may be used to stimulate public debate, and assist drug and alcohol policy makers in the implementation of harm minimisation strategies such as combining pill testing services with harm reduction advice.

Patterns of ecstasy use amongst live music event attendees and their opinions on pill testing: a cross sectional study

Every weekend people of all ages flock to the venues of the north’s vibrant and varied dance music scene, raving together in huge warehouse-style venues or small specialist nights in spaces commandeered or custom built for clubbers. Their focus is the mutual appreciation of music and the joy of movement to “a series of wholly repetitive beats”. When these venues close at around 4am or later, the party continues, with hundreds, maybe thousands of after-parties taking place. Since its emergence in the late 1980s, the UK’s dance music scene has grown into a multi-billion-pound global industry, bringing jobs and cultural kudos to our cities and towns.

What many know but rarely discuss is that this partying is fuelled by the class A drug MDMA, commonly known as ecstasy or simply MD, consumed in the form of pills, powders and crystal. When we do get to hear about this drug, it is mostly as the result of the loss of a young person’s life. MDMA-related deaths have risen over the last seven years, reaching an all-time high of 92 deaths in 2018-19 across England and Wales alone. Calls on the government to regulate the MDMA market, rather than leave it in the hands of organised criminal gangs and small-time social dealers, have long been ignored. We are also facing a new set of problems with the emergence of online drug markets.

MDMA in its pure form is relatively safe, having been administered in successful clinical trials as a therapeutic drug to help people with all manner of health conditions, from PTSD to alcohol addiction. Yet successive governments have actively blocked science-based policy change about MDMA for therapeutic use, preventing much-needed clinical research via the prohibitive costs and bureaucracy required to run clinical trials with Schedule 1 substances such as MDMA.

At the same time, government have spent decades undermining harm reduction efforts for recreational users – such as free drinking water and on-site drug checking – for the sake of appearing tough on drugs. As Professor David Nutt, esteemed neuro-psychopharmacologist and former chair of the government’s own Advisory Council for the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) testifies, when faced with the ACMD’s recommendation to downgrade MDMA to a class B drug in the late 2000s to reflect its lesser harms, the then Home Secretary Jaqui Smith shouted down the phone and promptly sacked him.

Why don’t we just… regulate MDMA?

When you're stuck at the bottom of the world, you take what you can get. For Claire*, that's cocaine and ketamine, occasionally MDMA. Or at least that's what she hopes she's getting. She knows she's not, not all the time. There's a difference from bag to bag, dealer to dealer, "especially with things like 'cocaine', which is probably just methamphetamine and washing powder". Since returning from Berlin, where quality drugs were cheap and plentiful, the 34-year-old Aucklander doesn't take drugs as often; they're "s…" here. But that doesn't stop a lot of Kiwis. It's that "she'll be right" attitude, Claire says.

It's a mentality Wendy Allison knows too well. The director of drug testing service KnowYourStuffNZ, her last five summers have been spent on the festival circuit, picking out pesticides and bath salts before they slip past the lips and nostrils of unsuspecting festival-goers. Last year they tested 805 samples across 13 events – more than double the previous year.

She's seen some worrying things: cathinones, or bath salts, are the big one. If someone thinks they've got MDMA and they haven't, bath salts are the likely imposter – and while some of the effects are similar, users may also experience anxiety attacks, heart arrhythmia and fits. Overdosing is more likely because people don't get the high they're expecting, so they go back for more. Deaths overseas and hospitalisations in New Zealand have cathinones to blame.

Super-strength MDMA is another concern. Four years ago, the pills started showing up in Europe and the UK, linked to hospitalisations and deaths; two summers later they were here. Allison is expecting to see more of the pills this season, with some containing up to four times the average dose of MDMA.

But it's the Kiwi attitude to drugs that worries her most. Drugs in New Zealand have historically been of low and fluctuating quality. Without any way of finding out what's in them, Kiwis have been "trained to take things without knowing what they are", she said. "There's a resigned attitude that in order to have a good time, you've got to go through this risk of having a not-so-good time – and as long as you don't die, that's fine."

But give people information and they will use it: 87 per cent of clients surveyed by KnowYourStuff last summer said their behaviour had changed as a result of using the service. Sixty-two per cent of people whose drugs weren't what they thought said they wouldn't take them.

KnowYourStuff does more than test people's drugs and send them on their way. For starters, they don't give any substances back after testing; they are destroyed in the process. The first thing they tell people is that taking any drugs is risky. The next is what the specific risks are, and what users can do to reduce them, discussing dosages, symptoms, what could go wrong, what not to mix.

Testing one person's drugs might prevent one death, but changing how people approach drug use will have the biggest effect on harm, Allison said. The shift from "she'll be right" is starting, with people more aware of risks and less willing to accept dodgy drugs as normal.

It's not just that there's no legal imperative to offer harm reduction facilities for drug users – it's difficult, bordering on illegal. Section 12 of the Misuse of Drugs Act makes it a crime to knowingly permit a venue to be used for drug use, which means festival testing operates in a legal grey area.

No-one has been charged for having it on-site, but the threat looms large. It's hard to get past councils, insurers, police and stakeholders, even when the promoters themselves are keen. And they are: they don't want a death on their hands.

Mitch Lowe has had some success getting drug-testing across the line, but only at smaller events such as Raglan and Timaru Soundsplash. At the major festivals he puts on – Bay Dreams, One Love – it's been a "flat no". He can't see the sense in that - the more people, the greater the risk, the more potential there is for reducing harm.

"It's frustrating to have something that's right there, that has evidence that shows it's something that reduces risk, and for us to not be able to put that into effect," Simon Wallace says. He's one of the people behind Friendly Potential, an Auckland club night that has spawned two festivals. Organisers weren't dealing with situations where people might take drugs, he said – they did.

With the number of people taking drugs on the rise, we're starting to see some movement on festival testing. Earlier this month, the Government announced a $59,000 study that will take place this summer, looking at the effectiveness of drug testing as a harm reduction tool.

A Victoria University of Wellington criminology team will be going to events, conducting interviews and sifting through data provided by KnowYourStuff. The evidence they come back with will be used to shape any potential next steps by the Government.

At the moment, National opposes drug testing. NZ First only recently came around to it after a heated debate from its youth wing at its annual conference. Allison hopes the evidence to come out of this summer will be enough to secure a law change. But right now they're going headfirst into festival season with Section 12 as it is, and that worries her.

"If we are unable to attend a particular event because of the Government's lack of action on this and somebody dies at that event, I will be blaming the Government for that," she said.

Sometimes it takes a tragedy to prompt action, Green MP Chlöe Swarbrick said, pointing to the pastoral care laws passed in the wake of the death of University of Canterbury student Mason Pendrous, who lay dead in his room for weeks. She has been leading the charge for drug law reform, and said she welcomed this summer's research project as a way of strengthening the case for legal drug checking.

When politicians consider whether to change the law, Allison said they would be dealing with one fundamental question: "Should we or should we not try to save the lives of people who have broken the law?"

"For us the bad thing is that they die – not that they take drugs."

Pingers, parties and politics: How festival drug testers are trying to save lives

The first market size estimates for cannabis, cocaine, MDMA, amphetamines and heroin were published in the EMCDDA‐Europol 2016 European Drug Markets Report, covering 2013. The challenges in obtaining such estimates were recognised at that time, though the need to assist policymakers in prioritising interventions by providing information on the scale, relative importance and changes in the markets for different drugs outweighed these concerns. The project was seen as a process, where the estimates would be improved in subsequent rounds by addressing data issues and developing the methodology. Since 2016 additional and different data sources have become available and where appropriate the methodology has been changed, though the basic underlying method remains as it was.

Developments for the estimates published in this report include:

data on the amounts of drugs used by various types of user have been extended and updated, using information from the European Web Survey on Drugs (EWSD);

routinely monitored data from the Member States have been updated, improving estimates of the number of users and drug prices. For example, 24 of the EU countries have reported a more recent general population survey than that available when the initial estimates were made;

crack use by high‐risk opioid users has been included in the cocaine market size estimates;

data on patterns of use for cannabis herb and resin, separately obtained from the EWSD, have been used to estimate the contribution of these different forms of cannabis to the overall cannabis market. In the previous estimates, numbers of seizures were used in the absence of suitable information about use of these products.

The hidden nature of the topic, the limitations inherent in some of the available data and the need for simplifying assumptions contribute to uncertainty around the estimates. Alternative methods of estimation were considered and are mentioned in the report, though each has its own data issues and weaknesses. The demand‐side approach remains the favoured method, though it is recognised that the estimates are the outcome of the approach adopted, and alternative approaches will generate different values.

Some key principles underpinning the approach taken are:

wherever possible, the data used came from routine data collections held by the EMCDDA to facilitate the planned process of improving and updating over time;

European estimates were obtained by summing individual country estimates;

where imputation of missing data was necessary, as far as possible, this was based on other related data;

every effort has been made to note all imputations and assumptions made within the estimation process, so that the limitations are clear.

As with the initial estimates, the 2017 figures are likely to underestimate the market; given the available data from which they were constructed, and despite their substantial size, these estimates should be considered as minimum values. Country estimates have not been produced, given issues of comparability in the data, the focus remaining on obtaining EU estimates of the quantity and value of the market for cannabis, cocaine, MDMA, amphetamines and opioids. A consequence of this process is that the 2013 and 2017 estimates are not directly comparable and should not be interpreted as a trend.

Estimating the size of the main illicit retail drug markets in Europe: An update

The much-awaited NSW coroner’s report into music festival deaths was released today.

In the report, Deputy State Coroner Harriet Grahame recommends pill testing, a ban on sniffer dogs and a reduction in the number of strip searches, among other measures to prevent deaths.

These evidence-based strategies for harm reduction are to be applauded. But it remains to be seen if the NSW government will change its stance on drug use and harm reduction to implement the coroner’s recommendations.

The inquest examined the deaths of six young people who died during or just after attending music festivals in NSW between December 2017 and January 2019.

All died as a result of taking MDMA or ecstasy. Five of the six also had other drugs in their system.

It can be hard for the community to grapple with some of the underlying issues when drug use is illegal and drug users are stigmatised. It is difficult to properly explain the potential risks to young people if our only permissible message is “just say no”. While we continue to hide the true extent of drug use, it remains inherently more dangerous.

However, Grahame noted the NSW government had already put in place, since these deaths, a range of measures including more formalised emergency medical responses at festivals and clinical guidelines on how to manage drug incidents before the person reaches hospital.

She also noted festival organisers had implemented strategies that improved safety since these deaths.

When the NSW coroner looked at how to cut drug deaths at music festivals, the evidence won. But what happens next?

MDMA is well established as a popular psychoactive substance across much of the Western world. Hundreds of thousands of people break the law to access its effects, which include increased energy, euphoria, and enhanced sociability. The categorisation of MDMA as a Class A drug in the UK and Schedule I drug internationally – categories reserved for drugs deemed to pose the highest risk to individuals and society – has never meaningfully disrupted its supply, nor its widespread use. MDMA is cheaper and purer than ever before and is available at the click of a mouse via darknet drug markets.

For several years, MDMA-related adverse events and fatalities have been increasing in the UK, with some claiming that taking MDMA today is the riskiest it has ever been. Responses are polarised between those who assert that the risks of MDMA use necessitate mitigation through prohibition and increased law enforcement, and those who perceive prohibition to be exacerbating these risks by exposing users to an unregulated market of pills and powder of unknown strength and quality. Whichever view you take, current policy is not meeting its goal of reducing harms, and greater control of MDMA production, distribution, purchase, and consumption is needed in order to prevent MDMA-related emergencies.

This report examines the acute, sub-acute, and chronic harms related to MDMA use in detail. We examine the production, distribution, purchase, and consumption of the drug; related risks and harms; and the impact prohibition has on these, as well as the potential impact of alternative policies. Crucially, our evidence shows that most harms associated with MDMA use arise from its unregulated status as an illegal drug, and that any risks inherent to MDMA could be more effectively mitigated within a legally regulated market.

Under prohibition, people purchase MDMA pills, crystal, and powder from an illegal market, with little certainty as to what these contain. Given that illegal drugs are not subject to strict production standards, consumers are exposed to the risks of poisoning or accidental overdose as a result of contamination, adulteration, and unknown strength and purity. Naïve commentators demonise the drug and simply urge young people to ‘just say no’, whilst failing to account for those who say ‘yes’. In the meantime, preventable deaths continue to occur, and otherwise law-abiding people are punished for non-violent offences such as the possession or social supply of MDMA. Governments and the mainstream media persist in perpetuating the myth that the War on Drugs is winnable if it were fought harder, and those calling for drug policy reform – as we do here – are framed as ‘radicals’ who have little or no regard for the health and wellbeing of citizens.

This characterisation could not be further from the truth. Those calling for careful reform to existing drug policy include the parents of young people whose lives have been lost or ruined by harms related to the prohibition of MDMA. We incorporate their voices in this report alongside those of academics and former police officers, highlighting the ‘broad church’ of those dedicated to fighting for reform. This includes scientists undertaking ground-breaking research into the therapeutic potential of MDMA, who work within a regulatory regime that makes such research exorbitantly expensive and time-consuming, because of the Schedule 1 status that MDMA holds in the UK.

As we enter the fourth decade of MDMA’s widespread use, new thinking is needed on how to better control production and distribution, and on how to reduce the risks associated with its consumption. There is growing evidence to support reorienting drug policy away from an ideologically driven criminal justice-led model to one rooted in pragmatic health and harm reduction principles. This is reflected in the widespread reform of cannabis laws occurring in numerous jurisdictions around the world, and the growth of treatment programmes for heroin users which include prescription heroin and supervised injecting rooms. These hard-fought policy changes acknowledge the failure of prohibition to meet its goals and produce a ‘drug-free world’. They are built on a robust and ever-growing evidence base which demonstrates how permitting or prescribing the use of legally regulated drugs improves health and safety outcomes for people who use drugs and their communities at a reduced cost to the state, whilst also providing wider employment and economic opportunities. This logic can be extended to the use of MDMA and other currently prohibited psychoactive substances.

follows this pragmatic path and pursues policy aims which many of us share, such as improvements in public health promotion, targeted harm reduction, evidence-informed policy and practice, human rights, social justice, participatory democracy, and effective governmental expenditure. For the first time, we outline detailed recommendations for drug policy reform to better control the production, distribution, purchase, and consumption of MDMA products. Reform and the reduction in MDMA-related harms this will bring cannot happen overnight. The changes we outline here, which culminate in a strictly regulated legal market for MDMA, are to be phased in gradually and closely evaluated through independent policy research to ensure health and social outcomes are properly documented, with findings folded back into the ongoing reform process.

The report is available on the Beckley Foundation's website.

Roadmaps to regulation: MDMA

Since the beginning of the HIV epidemic, the focus on HIV prevention, treatment and care among people who use drugs has concentrated on the needs of people who inject drugs, and mainly on those who inject opioids. However, data show that there are HIV-related risks associated with the use of non-injecting stimulant drugs, as well as with the unsafe injection of such drugs, including cocaine, amphetamine-type stimulants (excluding MDMA), and stimulant new psychoactive substances. Use of stimulant drugs has also been associated with higher risk of HIV transmission through unsafe sexual behaviours in certain subsets of key populations.

To achieve SDG target 3.3 and the UNAIDS Fast-Track strategy for ending AIDS by 2030, it is crucial to address the needs of people who use stimulant drugs who are at risk of HIV, with specific attention to the intersections among key populations. Ending the AIDS epidemic is only achievable if we ensure that the right people access the right services, delivered in the right place at the right time, leaving no one behind.

The purpose of this publication is to provide guidance on implementing HIV, hepatitis C (HCV) and hepatitis B (HBV) programmes for people who use stimulant drugs and who are at risk of contracting these viruses. It aims to:

Increase awareness of the needs and issues faced by the affected groups, including the intersectionality among different key populations

Provide implementation guidance to help establish and expand access to core HIV and hepatitis prevention, treatment, care and support services

It is a global document that should be adapted according to the specific context, including the type of stimulant drug used (cocaine, ATS or NPS) and the key populations involved, which vary considerably according to regions.

The present guide proposes a package of core interventions adapted from existing international guidance:

WHO, UNODC, UNAIDS technical guide for countries to set targets for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment and care for injecting drug users

WHO Consolidated guidelines on HIV prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care for key populations – 2016 update

Implementing comprehensive HIV and HCV programmes with people who inject drugs: practical guidance for collaborative interventions (the “IDUIT”)

It also incorporates guidance from the implementation tools for other key populations:

Implementing comprehensive HIV/STI programmes with sex workers: practical approaches from collaborative interventions (the “SWIT”)

Implementing comprehensive HIV and STI programmes with men who have sex with men: practical guidance for collaborative interventions (the “MSMIT”)

Implementing comprehensive HIV and STI programmes with transgender people: practical guidance for collaborative interventions (the “TRANSIT”)

However, none of these guidance documents and tools addresses the specific needs of people who use stimulant drugs and are at risk for HIV and hepatitis B and C – hence the need for this publication.

HIV prevention, treatment, care and support for people who use stimulant drugs

By Liz McCulloch & Scarlett Furlong / Volteface

In this report, Volteface aims to bridge the gap in understanding of how social media is being used as a marketplace for illicit drugs and the impact this is having on young people – social media’s primary user group.

This report examines how prevalent this phenomenon is, which platforms are most likely to host this activity, what drugs are being advertised, how the platforms are being used, and what impact this is having on young people’s wellbeing, as well as the challenges facing social media regulators and law enforcement.

This research used a mixed methodology of both qualitative and quantitative research. To ascertain the prevalence of this phenomenon, Volteface commissioned Survation in January 2019 to conduct a nationally representative poll of 2,006 16-to-24 year olds.

An unrepresentative ethnographic trawl was conducted on Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat – the platforms on which the poll suggested that drug distribution activity is most prevalent. This involved setting up accounts that observed and recorded evidence of drugs being advertised and sold through these platforms. The researchers did not communicate with any social media users during the trawl and all published screenshots have been anonymised.

Volteface also invited relevant stakeholders to take part in interviews, an online survey and focus groups to evaluate the impact of drug selling and buying through social media platforms. A total of 24 interviews were conducted, five online survey responses were received and 30 young people aged 13 to 17 participated in four focus groups.

One in four young people (24%) reported that they see illicit drugs advertised for sale on social media – a significant figure considering how recent a phenomenon this is.

Of those who reported seeing illicit drugs advertised for sale on social media:

56% saw drugs being advertised on Snapchat, 55% on Instagram and 47% on Facebook.

63% saw cannabis being advertised – making it the most commonly seen drug advertised for sale.

Cocaine was the second drug most commonly seen advertised (26%), followed by MDMA/Ecstasy (24%), Xanax (20%), Nitrous Oxide (17%) and Codeine/Lean (16%).

72% said that they see illegal drugs advertised for sale on social media sites or apps once a month or more.

36% were not concerned by seeing drugs advertised for sale on social media. Worryingly, this percentage increased the younger the respondent. 33% aged 18+ were not concerned, but this jumped to 48% for under-18s.

The data indicated that there is an association between frequency of social media use and the likelihood of seeing drugs advertised for sale. The baseline of seeing drugs advertised for sale on social media is 24%. This increases to 29% of respondents who use social media every hour, compared to 14% of respondents who use social media once a day.

Social media is providing drug dealers with easy-to-use and familiar platforms that they can utilise to find and build trust with customers, advertise their business, and disguise their activities. Concerningly, Volteface’s research has shown that dealers have been quick to take up this opportunity, with one in four young people now seeing drugs advertised for sale on social media.

The emergence of drug markets on social media is not simply a transfer of harmful activity from the offline world onto the online world. It is a new problem which presents new threats. Regulators and enforcers will not be able to tackle this new, illicit online drug market and minimise the harms associated with it unless innovative approaches are put in place.

DM for Details: Selling drugs in the age of social media

By Helena Valente, Daniel Martins, Helena Carvalho, Cristiana Vale Pires, Maria Carmo Carvalho, Maria Pinto & Monica J. Barratt.

Drug checking services are being implemented in recreational settings across the world, however these projects are frequently accused of a lack of evidence concerning their impact on people who use drugs. This paper describes the implementation of a drug checking service at the Boom Festival 2016 and explores the impact of this service on its users’ behavioural intentions.

Click here to read the full article (restricted access)