The Romanian national focal point is a unit within the National Anti-Drug Agency under the remit of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The director of the Agency acts as the national coordinator on drugs in Romania. The director is responsible for coordinating the drafting of the national drugs strategy and related action plans and acts for their application. The director also has the responsibility of ensuring compliance with the international conventions and agreements to which Romania is party and proposes to the Government, through the Ministry of Internal Affairs, measures regarding the fulfilment of the obligations arising from these international documents.
E-mail addresses have been inserted in a way discouraging spam. Please replace [a] by @ before actually using any of the e-mail addresses.
Last updated: Wednesday, May 25, 2016
The fourth general population survey was conducted in Romania in November–December 2013 with a sample of 7 200 respondents aged 15–64 and using the standard methodology recommended by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). The previous studies took place in 2004, 2007, 2010. The 2004 survey revealed low lifetime prevalence rates for illicit drug use; however, subsequent studies indicated an increase in the lifetime use of all types of illicit drugs (including new psychoactive substances) from 1.7 % in 2007 to 8.4 % in 2013. The latest study confirms that cannabis continues to be most used drug in Romania. About 4.6 % of the adult population had used cannabis at least once in their lifetime, 2 % had used it in the past year and 1 % in the last 30 days. This was a substantial increase in the prevalence of cannabis use when compared to 2010 data (lifetime prevalence of 1.6 %, last year prevalence of 0.3 % and last month prevalence of 0.1 %). Males reported cannabis use more frequently than females. The prevalence of illicit drug use was higher in younger age groups. In 2013 the highest rate of recent and current prevalence was among 15- to 24-year-olds, at 3.4 % and 2.1 % respectively.
The 2010 and 2013 studies also examined use of new psychoactive substances (NPS), and both studies indicated that about 2 % of the Romanian adult population had experimented with them. However, there has been a reduction in recent use of these substances from 1.1 % to 0.3 % respectively, and none of the respondents indicated consumption of NPS in the last month. All other illicit substances were used less frequently by the general population. Thus the prevalence of lifetime use of ecstasy was 0.9 %, followed by cocaine at 0.8 % and amphetamines at 0.3 %.
National school surveys were conducted in Romania in 1999, 2003, 2007 and 2011 among a representative sample of students aged 15–16, as part of the European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD). Generally, the data showed that the prevalence of illicit drug use is low in Romania compared to other European Union (EU) Member States, but the trend seems to be increasing for most drugs. To date, these surveys have indicated that cannabis is the most prevalent drug among students and that lifetime prevalence increased from 1 % in 1999 to 7 % in 2011. Lifetime prevalence of inhalants was reported by 6 %, and cocaine and hallucinogens by 2 %. Last year prevalence of cannabis use was reported by 6 % and last month prevalence by 2 %.
Prevention activities in Romania are developed based on guiding principles outlined in the National Anti-Drug Strategy 2013–20 and the respective Action Plan for 2013–16, and coordinated by the National Anti-Drug Agency. The activities in this field are primarily implemented by the Ministry of Education and Scientific Research and a territorial network of 47 drug prevention, evaluation and counselling centres set up by the National Anti-Drug Agency, in cooperation with other governmental bodies. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are key partners in the implementation of projects at the local level.
Schools are the primary settings for universal prevention activities. Standard information programmes continue to play a significant part in drug-use prevention; however, personal skills development and peer-based training modalities are increasingly being incorporated within universal prevention activities. For example, the project Unplugged, focusing on the attitudes and skills of 12- to 14-year-old schoolchildren, was implemented in a district of Bucharest, and in 2012 it was scaled up to the national level. In addition, around 100 local school-based projects were implemented in Romania in 2014; some provided information and were designed to raise awareness about the consequences of drug use, while others promoted alternative leisure activities for pupils. Family prevention initiatives have been implemented mainly at the local level and aim to increase parents’ awareness of substance use risks and strengthen the protective role of the family; however, although the number of projects in this field shows a constant increase, participation in these activities remains low. Community-based prevention is mainly oriented towards information provision about licit and illicit drugs.
Selective prevention is mostly targeted at youngsters in recreational and festival settings, Roma groups, the prison population, former drug users, victims of family violence and young adults leaving care. Following a successful pilot of the EU-wide project FreD goes net, an early intervention project with young people who have come to the attention of police, work or school because of drug use, the initiative is now carried out nationwide in collaboration with local drug prevention, evaluation and counselling centres. Indicated prevention interventions remain isolated and rare. It should be noted that implementation of indicated prevention activities in 2011–14 was affected by a lack of financial and managerial resources at the national level.
In 2014 minimum standards for drug use prevention programmes, from an EU-funded project, were translated and it has been proposed that they will become a legally binding document in Romania. Romania is no longer participating in the second phase of the European Drug Prevention Quality Standards project.
Up to 2012 the EMCDDA defined problem drug use as injecting drug use or long duration/regular use of opiates, cocaine and/or amphetamines. However, in 2012 a new definition of ‘high-risk drug use’ was adopted. The new definition includes ‘problem drug use’, but is broader (mainly in its inclusion of the high-risk use of more substances). Details are available here.
Injecting drug use estimates based on the treatment multiplier method are available annually from 2008 for Bucharest only. It was estimated that in 2014 there were about 7 189 injecting drug users (95 % confidence interval (CI): 5 377–9 709), or 6.2 per 1 000 inhabitants aged 18–49 (95 % CI: 4.7–8.4). Based on data on injecting drug users from treatment, it is estimated that about 96.2 % of this group use heroin as a primary substance, while 2.3 % use new psychoactive substances (mainly synthetic cathinones). The lack of a nationwide estimate is explained by the lack of availability of suitable data sources, including the lack of availability of treatment outside the capital city.
In Romania, treatment is provided by the medical units within the Ministry of Health, integrated care services through the Drug Prevention, Evaluation and Counselling Centres within the National Anti-Drug Agency, and by treatment units in prisons and in specialised treatment centres. The treatment data reporting system in Romania is based on the treatment demand indicator (TDI) standard European protocol version 3.0, for which data have been collected since 2011. Individual data are collected by the treatment centres and reported to the national level; the process is regulated by law. Low-threshold agencies and general practitioners do not provide drug treatment in Romania.
In 2014 some 42 outpatient units, 23 inpatient units and 16 units in prisons provided data on treatment demand. A total of 2 622 clients entered treatment, of which 1 398 were new clients entering treatment for the first time. The majority of clients entered treatment through inpatient treatment centres.
In 2014 opioids were reported as the primary drug by 42 % of all treatment clients, followed by 37 % for cannabis and 13 % for other substances (mainly NPS). Among new treatment clients, 61 % reported cannabis as their main drug, followed by 28 % for other substances and 15 % for opioids (mainly heroin). In 2012 half of all (49 %) and new treatment clients (54 %) reported using other substance, mainly hypnotics and sedatives or NPS, as their main drug of use, while in 2013–14, following a change in legal provisions, the proportion of those who were admitted to treatment due to other substances decreased. In addition, an increase in the proportion of clients who entered treatment due to cannabis use in 2014 is attributed to initiation of the procedure which allows for treatment as an alternative to imprisonment for certain categories of offenders. Injection remains common among opioid users, thus in 2014 around 94 % of all and 85 % of new treatment clients whose primary substance was opioids reported that they currently injected it.
In 2014 the mean age of all clients entering treatment was 29, while new treatment clients were slightly younger with an average age of 26. With regard to gender distribution, among all clients entering treatment 83 % were male and 27 % were female. The proportion of females was slightly smaller among the new treatment clients, at 21 %.
Only a limited amount of data on the prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) is available at the national level. The available data from HIV notifications indicated an alarming increase in drug-related infectious diseases among people who inject drugs (PWID) between 2011 and 2013 (a total of 171 new HIV cases linked to injecting drug use were reported in Romania in 2011; 282 in 2012; 275 in 2013). However, in 2014 the number of new HIV notifications among PWID did not increase, as 154 new cases were reported. Nevertheless, this number is well above the average number of new HIV cases reported annually among PWID prior to 2011 (according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control). Data based on self-reported testing results among users seeking medical assistance also indicated an increasing trend from 2010 to 2013 (from around 4.2 % in 2010 to 49.2 % in 2013), but more recent data suggest some decrease in HIV prevalence rates among this group. In 2014 around 27.5 % of 229 drug treatment clients who inject drugs admitted being HIV positive.
Data from those who seek drug treatment indicated a constant upwards trend in HBV prevalence rates between 2009–13, mainly due to an increase in the prevalence among female drug users. Up to 2012 HBV prevalence constantly increased among those who have injected drugs for fewer than two years, but this trend seemed to come to an end in 2013.
With regard to HCV infection, the available data indicated an increasing trend in HCV prevalence from 63.9 % to 82.4 % among PWID admitted to treatment over the period 2008–12, with a peak in 2012. In 2013 the prevalence of HCV among this population reduced slightly to 74.2 %, while the highest rates are among those with an injecting drug history of five years and more. A possible reduction in HCV prevalence rates is also indicated by the 2012 study among a sample of PWID in Bucharest, where the reported HCV prevalence was at 79.3 %, which is lower than was reported in similar studies from 2007 and 2009.
The recent additional studies on the prevalence of blood-borne infections among PWID attending harm reduction services indicate more or less similar trends in HIV, HCV and HBV prevalence as those observed among drug treatment clients.
There has been a change in patterns of drug use and a new high-risk group of users has emerged in Romania in the last decade, which explains the recent changes in the prevalence of drug-related infections among PWID. Thus an emerging trend of using NPS has been registered, which has significantly altered the existing drug use models, with subsequent diffusion of phenomenon within entire PWID populations. In addition, sub-groups of young users engaging in high-risk drug use and sex workers, who have multiple risk factors are emerging groups. Moreover, the limited availability of adequate prevention measures has contributed to the trend, while intensified testing of PWID has led to higher detection rates in the most recent years.
Based on the rapid increase in HIV cases, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the EMCDDA carried out rapid risk assessments of the situation in the country in 2011 and 2013.
The data on drug-induced deaths in Romania was reported by the nationwide Special Mortality Register of the Forensic Medicine Network, which is comprised of 53 forensic medicine units nationwide. However, most data on drug-induced deaths originate from the National Legal Medicine Institute in Bucharest, and almost half of the network members do not report any drug-induced deaths, which indicates very significant partial coverage and subsequent underreporting and underestimation of the number of drug-induced deaths in the whole country. Apart from that, data extraction and reporting is in line with EMCDDA definitions and recommendations.
In 2014 there were 33 directly drug-induced deaths reported, indicating an increasing trend since 2011 (15 cases), and a return to the numbers reported in the period 2006–10. The sharp decline in the number of drug-induced deaths reported in 2011 was explained by an increase in the use of NPS and the replacement of heroin by these substances. With regard to distribution by gender and age in 2014, the majority of cases were male (25 case), and the mean age of victims was 30.1 years. All cases were toxicologically confirmed, and 25 were attributed to overdose by opioids. In the majority of these cases the presence of methadone was detected, which indicates an alarming increase since 2007. In addition, two or more psychoactive substances were present in the half of cases.
The drug-induced mortality rate among adults (aged 15–64) was reportedly 2.4 deaths per million in 2014, lower than the latest European average of 19.2 deaths per million, but this rate is an underestimate (see above).
Since 2005 the National Anti-Drug Agency (NAA) is responsible for the coordination of activities in the drugs field at both the national and local levels; however, the Ministry of Health (MoH) also plays a significant role in the provision of treatment through the network of national health programmes with therapeutic and social reintegration components.
Outpatient drug treatment is provided through a network of Drug Prevention, Evaluation and Counselling Centres of the NAA, Addiction Integrated Care Centres (private or NGO-based) and Mental Health Centres under the MoH. The inpatient treatment system network consists of detoxification units in the MoH hospitals and therapeutic communities run by the NGOs. Treatment provided by the Drug Prevention, Evaluation and Counselling Centres and the Mental Health Centres is funded from the public budget, and as such is free of charge for clients. Drug treatment is delivered in prisons in specialised prison treatment units, or by outside specialists.
The drug treatment system in Romania has three levels of assistance and care. The first level is the main access path to integrated care for drug users and provides treatment at primary medical assistance units and emergency rooms, together with general social services; it is delivered by public, private and non-governmental organisations. The second level is called the integrated care services. These are referral centres, operated exclusively by public treatment services, which provide psychiatric units for primary or specialised care, or for mental health treatment. The third level relates to highly specialised care, and consists of inpatient detoxification treatment and residential therapeutic communities. Aftercare services are poorly developed, with one day-care centre in the public network (near Bucharest) and several foundations and NGOs offering assistance in other Romanian cities.
Methadone maintenance treatment was introduced in 1998, and opioid substitution therapy (OST) with buprenorphine in 2007, and the combination buprenorphine/naloxone in 2008. The legal procedures for entering into OST were revised in 2005 in order to simplify access to treatment. Currently, the government provides OST in nine MoH hospitals and three Centres for Anti-Drug Prevention, Assessment and Counselling in Bucharest, as well as in prisons. In addition, three private providers and one NGO provide OST.
The coverage rate for OST is estimated to be low, with a total of approximately 1 200 clients benefiting from OST in 2014, of which 593 received methadone maintenance treatment.
Up to 2010 prevention activities targeting drug-related infectious diseases related to injecting were mainly financed under the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and were implemented by NGOs. In 2007 needle and syringe programmes funded by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) were also set up. However, the technical support programmes ended in 2010–11, and in order to address the potential ending of service provision the National Anti-Drug Agency took measures to provide clean needles and syringes through the National Programme of Medical, Psychological and Social Care of Drug Users 2009–12 (syringes were procured for supply in 2012 and 2013). In addition, a decision was taken on further project-based support to NGOs involved in harm reduction service provision. Resources from the structural funds were also allocated in 2011–12, to close the funding gap of the services. In addition, the General Council of Bucharest approved the financial support of harm reduction services. In 2012–13 these resources helped fund an NGO-led project providing harm reduction and reintegration programmes for people who inject drugs. Despite all these efforts, further sustainability and funding of harm reduction responses in Romania remains a challenge, although the Government made a commitment to step up and expand harm reduction responses in the new National Anti-Drug Strategy 2013–20 and its first Action Plan for 2013–16.
Needle and syringe programmes are implemented in Bucharest, which is considered to have the most serious problems related to injecting drug use, and also in two counties. However, the demand for such services outside the capital remains low. The 2013 HIV risk assessment confirmed an ongoing lack of prevention coverage in Romania. Two NGOs run outreach programmes for people who inject drugs, and provide needle and syringe exchange programmes in fixed locations (three units) and via street workers and a mobile team (53 outreach sites). Needle and syringe programmes are available in two prisons, although they are not used by the inmates. In 2014 NGOs distributed around two million syringes, sustaining same level of provision as in 2013, which represented nearly a doubling compared to the 2011–12 levels of provision. In addition to clean needles and syringes, the programmes also provide free voluntary counselling and testing, free hepatitis A virus and HBV vaccinations, support and information, risk reduction counselling, condoms and referrals to other services. Access to the treatment of drug-related infectious diseases is considered relatively easy in the case of HIV infection, but remains difficult for those with chronic HCV infection.
Due to its geographical location, Romania forms part of the Balkan route for heroin smuggling. The available data indicate that heroin originates in Afghanistan and is trafficked through Turkey and other Balkan countries into Romania towards central and western Europe. Cocaine is shipped from South America (Columbia, Bolivia and Venezuela) in larger quantities through the ports on the Black Sea, or by road and air from other EU Member States, and is mainly intended for markets outside the country. Cannabis comes mainly from Spain, Albania, Belgium, France and the Netherlands, and enters Romania from Hungary. The domestic production of cannabis has increased since 2010. In 2014 a total of 74 cannabis plantations were seized, which is more than reported in the previous years. While small-scale domestic cultivation of cannabis predominates, an industrial crop of cannabis was discovered in Romania in 2013, aiming to supply markets in Germany and the Czech Republic. Ecstasy and amphetamines originate in west European countries (Belgium and the Netherlands) and are trafficked to Romania or further to Turkey. In 2013 four illicit laboratories were seized in Romania, but none was discovered in 2014. NPS, originating in China, arrive in Romania usually via postal courier services.
Cannabis products remain the primary drugs seized in Romania. However, in 2013 and 2014 the quantities of cannabis products seized decreased when compared to previous years, except for cannabis plants, for which a significant increase in the number and quantities of seizures has been reported. In 2013 a total of 8 835 plants and 110 kg of green mass, and in 2014 a total of 422.164 kg of green mass were seized. With regard to stimulants, in 2014 the record amounts of ecstasy and amphetamines were seized. Thus, the seizures of ecstasy amounted to 317 966 (27 506 tablets in 2012), while a total amount of 3.802 kg of seized amphetamine was reported. The number of heroin seizures continued to decrease when compared to 2011–12, but remained far below the levels reported before 2010. Although in 2013 the amount of heroin seized increased almost threefold when compared to 2012 (45 kg in 2012; 111.6 kg in 2013), in 2014 only 25.787 kg was seized. A decline was also reported in the quantity of cocaine seized, from 161 kg in 2011 to 34 kg in 2014, while the number of seizures remains fairly constant over recent years.
In 2014 a total of 687 people were convicted by a court under the national drug legislation (913 in 2013; 1 096 in 2012; 853 in 2011), the majority (more than 97 %) due to drug trafficking charges.
Since 2004 penalties have been linked to the type of drug — ‘risk’ or ‘high risk’ — and there are new separate concepts of user and addict, according to diagnosis. The latest changes in the Criminal Code that entered into force on 1 February 2014 reduced several penalty ranges for supply offences.
Drug consumption per se is forbidden, but no punishment is specified. The court can impose a sentence of between three months and two years in prison or a fine in cases of possession for personal use of ‘risk’ drugs, or between six months and three years for ‘high-risk’ drugs. When a drug user is convicted of any of these offences, on imprisonment he or she can choose an integrated assistance programme instead; the consent of the drug user is a prerequisite for inclusion in such a programme. This has been enabled by, and clearly defined in, the new Criminal Code.
All actions related to the production and sale of ‘risk’ drugs are punishable by 2–7 years’ imprisonment, while for ‘high-risk’ drugs the range is 5–12 years. Import or export of ‘risk’ drugs is punishable by 3–10 years’ imprisonment, and in cases of ‘high-risk’ drugs the range is 7–15 years.
In the period 2009–10 some 44 NPS were placed under control in Romania. A number of other initiatives were undertaken in 2011–12 to increase the monitoring and control of NPS, enforcing various existing laws such as consumer safety laws, to counteract their trade and use. At the end of 2011 a new law counteracting the supply of any products with potentially psychoactive effects, regardless of their intended use, was adopted. It defines the characteristics as well as the procedure for how the supply of such products shall be authorised. Violations of the law are crimes punishable by prison sentences of six months to three years (less if the psychoactive effects were not actually known to the seller).
Romania’s National Anti-Drug Strategy 2013–20 was adopted by the Government on 9 October 2013. It was designed following consultations with stakeholders and takes into account the EU Drugs Strategy 2013–20. Reflecting a balanced approach, the National Anti-Drug Strategy is structured around the two pillars of drug demand reduction and drug supply reduction. It also contains three cross-cutting (or transversal) themes: (i) coordination; (ii) international cooperation; and (iii) research, evaluation and information. The National Strategy has five overarching objectives:
The National Strategy is being implemented through two Action Plans, addressing the periods 2013–16 and 2017–20. Evaluation and analysis form an important part of the National Strategy, and evaluation of both Action Plans and the overall strategy is planned.
Established in December 2002, the National Anti-Drug Agency (NAA) is a specialised legal entity under the coordination of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The NAA is tasked with the national coordination of Romania’s anti-drug strategy and the authorities involved in implementing it. Supply reduction issues are coordinated by the Directorate for Investigation of Organised Crime and Terrorism. In consultation with stakeholders, NGOs and the government, the NAA designed Romania’s National Anti-Drug Strategy 2013–20. The NAA is also responsible for international cooperation between Romanian institutions and foreign organisations working in the field. The Romanian Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction is also located within the NAA as one of its four units. The NAA is supported by a Scientific Committee.
The NAA has 47 Drug Prevention, Evaluation and Counselling Centres at the local level, six of which are in Bucharest.
In Romania, the financing of drug-related activities is decided annually by the entities in charge of their implementation. Estimates on labelled drug-related public expenditure (1) go back to 2004 but their completeness varies over time. Therefore, it is not possible to provide an estimate of Romanian drug-related public expenditure.
The budget of the National Anti-Drug Agency, i.e. of the agency that coordinates national drug policy, is the only budget item consistently reported over time. However, its share of the total drug-related expenditure is unknown. In the period 2009–12, on average the NAA’s budget represented about 0.003 % of gross domestic product. In 2013 Romania benefited from significant funding from European programmes and from foreign help; the funding was geared toward programmes such as OST, HIV and HCV screening for people from high-risk groups, and teams with dogs trained in drug trafficking detection.
The available information does not allow the total size and trends in drug-related public expenditure in Romania to be reported.
(1) Some of the funds allocated by governments for expenditure on tasks related to drugs are identified as such in the budget (‘labelled’). Often, however, the bulk of drug-related expenditure is not identified (‘unlabelled’) and must be estimated by modelling approaches. The total budget is the sum of labelled and unlabelled drug-related expenditure.
One of the objectives of the National Anti-Drug Strategy 2013–20 is ‘promoting scientific research as the fundamental basis in defining and developing response measures in the drug field’. The objective is implemented through actions foreseen in the Action Plan for 2013–16 to implement the related strategy by developing studies within different categories of population (general population surveys, ESPAD, young population, vulnerable groups) and also regional and local studies. These are mainly done on the basis of the methodologies developed by the National Anti-Drug Agency with the support of its Scientific Committee.
Drug-related research is mainly conducted by public bodies and NGOs, and findings are disseminated through websites and professional journals. Institutional bodies and NGOs may also benefit from external funds such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the Open Society Institute, the United Nations Children’s Fund and UNODC.
The National Anti-Drug Agency uses its website and reports, and national scientific journals, as the main dissemination channels for drug-related research findings. Recent drug-related studies have mainly focused on aspects related to the prevalence and the consequences of drug use (data collection for the ESPAD survey that took place in 2015) and research on vulnerable groups.
|Problem opioid use (rate/1 000)||:||:||0.2||10.7|
|All clients entering treatment (%)||2014||28.8%||4%||90%|
|New clients entering treatment (%)||2014||11.5%||2%||89%|
|Purity — heroin brown (%)||2014||1||22.2%||7%||52%|
|Price per gram — heroin brown (EUR)||2014||EUR 25||EUR 23||EUR 140|
|Prevalence of drug use — schools (%)||2011||4.0%||1%||5%|
|Prevalence of drug use — young adults (%)||2013||0.9%||0%||4%|
|Prevalence of drug use — all adults (%)||2013||0.5%||0%||2%|
|All clients entering treatment (%)||2014||16.9%||0%||38%|
|New clients entering treatment (%)||2014||16.6%||0%||40%|
|Price per gram (EUR)||2014||2||EUR 57.00 - EUR 49.54||EUR 47||EUR 107|
|Prevalence of drug use — schools (%)||2011||5.0%||1%||7%|
|Prevalence of drug use — young adults (%)||2013||0.5%||0%||3%|
|Prevalence of drug use — all adults (%)||2013||0.2%||0%||1%|
|All clients entering treatment (%)||2014||9.8%||0%||70%|
|New clients entering treatment (%)||2014||9.4%||0%||75%|
|Price per gram (EUR)||2014||2||EUR 9.50 - EUR 12.00||EUR 3||EUR 63|
|Prevalence of drug use — schools (%)||2011||4.0%||1%||4%|
|Prevalence of drug use — young adults (%)||2013||0.8%||0%||6%|
|Prevalence of drug use — all adults (%)||2013||0.3%||0%||2%|
|All clients entering treatment (%)||2014||0.6%||0%||2%|
|New clients entering treatment (%)||2014||0.9%||0%||2%|
|Purity (mg of MDMA base per unit)||2014||125 mg||27 mg||131 mg|
|Price per tablet (EUR)||2014||2||EUR 4.90 - EUR 5.81||EUR 4||EUR 16|
|Prevalence of drug use — schools (%)||2011||24.0%||5%||42%|
|Prevalence of drug use — young adults (%)||2013||10.1%||0%||24%|
|Prevalence of drug use — all adults (%)||2013||4.6%||0%||11%|
|All clients entering treatment (%)||2014||32.7%||3%||63%|
|New clients entering treatment (%)||2014||52.6%||7%||77%|
|Potency — herbal (%)||2014||13.0%||3%||15%|
|Potency — resin (%)||2014||19.2%||3%||29%|
|Price per gram — herbal (EUR)||2014||2||EUR 8.70 - EUR 9.68||EUR 3||EUR 23|
|Price per gram — resin (EUR)||2014||2||EUR 9.10 - EUR 9.61||EUR 3||EUR 22|
|Prevalence of problem drug use|
|Problem drug use (rate/1 000)||:||:||2.7||10.0|
|Injecting drug use (rate/1 000)||2014||3.5||0.2||9.2|
|Drug-related infectious diseases/deaths|
|HIV infections newly diagnosed (cases / million)||2014||1.0||0.0||50.9|
|HIV prevalence (%)||:||:||0%||31%|
|HCV prevalence (%)||:||:||15%||84%|
|Drug-related deaths (rate/million)||2014||9.0||2.4||113.2|
|Health and social responses|
|Syringes distributed||2014||926 391||382||7 199 660|
|Clients in substitution treatment||2014||17 026||178||161 388|
|All clients||2014||10 702||271||100 456|
|New clients||2014||3 773||28||35 007|
|All clients with known primary drug||2014||10 702||271||97 068|
|New clients with known primary drug||2014||3 773||28||34 088|
|Drug law offences|
|Number of reports of offences||2014||48 727||537||282 177|
|Offences for use/possession||2014||35 320||13||398 422|
b Break in time series.
p Eurostat provisional value.
: Not available.
1 Gross domestic product (GDP) is a measure of economic activity. It is defined as the value of all goods and services produced less the value of any goods or services used in their creation. The volume index of GDP per capita in Purchasing Power Standards (PPS) is expressed in relation to the European Union (EU-27) average set to equal 100. If the index of a country is higher than 100, this country's level of GDP per head is higher than the EU average and vice versa.
2 Expenditure on social protection contains: benefits, which consist of transfers in cash or in kind to households and individuals to relieve them of the burden of a defined set of risks or needs.
3 Unemployment rates represent unemployed persons as a percentage of the labour force. Unemployed persons comprise persons aged 15 to 74 who were: (a) without work during the reference week; (b) currently available for work; (c) actively seeking work.
4 Situation of penal institutions on 1 September, 2014.
5 Share of persons aged 0+ with an equivalent disposable income below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold, which is set at 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers).
|Year||EU (28 countries)||Source|
|Population||2014||19 947 311 e||506 944 075 bep||Eurostat|
|Population by age classes||15–24||2014||11.4 % e||11.3 % bep||Eurostat|
|25–49||36.8 % e||34.7 % bep|
|50–64||19.8 % e||19.9 % bep|
|GDP per capita in PPS (Purchasing Power Standards) 1||2014||55||100||Eurostat|
|Total expenditure on social protection (% of GDP) 2||2013||14.8 %||:||Eurostat|
|Unemployment rate 3||2015||6.8 %||9.4 %||Eurostat|
|Unemployment rate of population aged under 25 years||2015||21.7 %||20.3 %||Eurostat|
|Prison population rate (per 100 000 of national population) 4||2014||158.6||:||Council of Europe, SPACE I-2014.1|
|At risk of poverty rate 5||2014||25.4 %||17.2 %||SILC|
E-mail addresses have been inserted in a way discouraging spam. Please replace [a] by @ before actually using any of the e-mail addresses