Editors’ Introduction Global Trade in Alcohol and Drugs: Histories of Distribution and Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on the new interest in global history, drug and alcohol scholars have increasingly taken an international approach to their topics. The literature on the spread of alcohol and drugs around the world and on the development of international control regimes has grown rapidly.* To capitalize on this growing field, the 4th International Alcohol and Drug History Conference, held in August 2007 at the University of Guelph, cenetred on the theme of Global Approaches. The conference attracted participants from across the world, and paid particularly careful attention to the international trade in drugs and alcohol, the development of the international control regimes, and the impact of colonialism and neo-colonialism on the cultures of drug and alcohol use.This special issue of Contemporary Drug Problems focuses on global trade in alcohol and drugs, and attempts to suppress their use in different national contexts. Another set of articles from the conference is being published in Social History of Alcohol and Drugs. We are very grateful for generous support provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Associated Medical Services, the Alcohol and Drug History Society, the University of Guelph's College of Arts and History Department, and for the labor provided by the anonymous reviewers.Several of the articles focus on attempts by colonial authorities to regulate the sale and production of drugs. Ian Tyrrell examines American efforts to control alcohol and opium in the Philippines. Missionary and temperance groups lobbied hard to have the United States (US) adopt strict controls on opium. These controls provided the U.S. with the moral authority to pursue opium regulation internationally and to strengthen ties with China. By contrast, the lobbyists assumed a pragmatic position towards alcohol and were satisfied by the administration's efforts to control the number of drinking establishments through licensing. Simon Heap examines the difficulties that the British colonial government in Nigeria had in enforcing the ban on local homemade gin, or ogogoro. Import figures of sugar make it clear that illicit distilling was widely practiced despite British efforts to eradicate it. In a similar vein, Ashley Wright's article on colonial Burma demonstrates how British policies from 1826 to 1881 were rife with contradictions and inconsistencies. In pursuit of stable and profitable colonial rule, British opium legislation treated the ethnic groups in Burma differently from one another.Two articles examine interactions between the international drug trade and local communities. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.018 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".