Whose safety comes first? Comparing responses to open drug scenes in Oslo and Helsinki

Visible and persistent: Oslo’s long-term struggle

In Oslo, open drug scenes have been part of the urban landscape for decades, despite repeated efforts by authorities to disperse them. Areas such as Storgata, Brugata, Urtegata and Grønlandsleiret remain active, and Oslo is among the European cities with the largest open drug scenes in the city centre.

As police presence has intensified, the scenes have spread to new areas, including near residential zones and schools. This has sparked concerns about youth exposure, often based more on assumptions than documented evidence. Oslo’s response includes harm reduction measures such as drug consumption rooms (in operation since 2005) and proposals for designated public spaces where people can gather without fear of being driven away.

Driven by shifting drug markets with unstable availability of heroin and the international cocaine boom, crack cocaine has recently become a flashpoint in Oslo’s open drug scenes, contributing to more street-level disturbances and growing tension. The visibility of these issues makes them difficult for residents and policymakers to ignore. Yet, responses often rely on more surveillance and security measures, which can lead to harmful consequences: people are pushed out of sight, but without a pathway to support, they end up in even more precarious or unsafe conditions.

Helsinki: emerging open drug scenes and growing concern

In Helsinki, drug use has become increasingly visible in public spaces, leading to disturbances and weakening sense of safety among residents. Open drug scenes have emerged around areas such as Kurvi, Itäkeskus and Kontula, as well as other major public transport hubs and locations near low-threshold services. The rise in alpha-PVP use – a synthetic stimulant – has escalated concerns. Its unpredictable effects, including episodes of aggressive behavior, have made the public perceive these spaces as less safe, fueling public debate about how the city should respond.

As in Oslo, open drug scenes in Helsinki have begun to disperse into surrounding areas, especially after the so-called Piritori area (also known as “Speed square”) was calmed through renovation and investment. Residents in Kurvi have called for more police presence, not just for surveillance, but for genuine engagement and collaboration.

While Oslo has operated a drug consumption room since 2005, Helsinki has only recently proposed establishing one, supported by a citizens’ initiative. The proposal was ultimately rejected due to current legislative barriers. Well-designed facilities, however, have the potential to reduce public nuisance and enhance residents’ sense of safety.

From control to support and care

In many cities, including Oslo and Helsinki, residents often express a desire for increased police presence when drug use and related disturbances are visible. While policing might help for a while, it is not a sufficient solution. Police resources are limited, and when officers arrive, the open drug scenes often disperse temporarily, only to return once the taillights of the police car disappear around the corner.

Addressing these challenges requires a broader strategy, including well-resourced low-threshold services, harm reduction initiatives, outreach social work, and collaboration among neighborhoods, business owners, police, and professionals from health care and social services. All these efforts must happen simultaneously, for the initiative to be effective.

Beyond police patrols, there should be more help and low-threshold services for people with drug-related challenges. These services should be available not only during office hours, but also in the evenings and on weekends, as current opening hours often fail to meet actual needs. Services are also overly concentrated in just a few locations; support services and housing units should be more evenly distributed across the city, while still ensuring they remain easy to reach. Additionally, outreach work is needed on trains, metros and stations, where drug-related challenges often emerge.

Police play a crucial role in maintaining public safety and responding to disturbances related to visible drug use. However, when enforcement efforts focus on displacing people who use drugs from specific areas, it is essential that officers can refer them to safe, accessible places where support is available. Without such options, the problem is simply relocated, not resolved.

This is where outreach work becomes a vital partner. Teams of professionals and peer experts can bridge the gap between enforcement and care, ensuring that interventions are not just about control, but form a part of a broader, humane and coordinated response.

Building trust through open dialogue

When new substance use services are planned, early and honest engagement with community members is essential. Open forums should allow concerns to be heard and differing perspectives genuinely considered.

Criticism of these services should not be dismissed with labels like “nimby,” nor should people who use drugs be stereotyped as “criminals.” Nimby is an acronym for “Not in my backyard,” a term describing residents who oppose for example new services such as drug treatment facilities in their local area, often due to concerns about public disturbances or safety. Instead, the planning process should aim to build mutual understanding, and trust. A safe and inclusive city is one where coexistence between people who use drugs, and the wider community is not just tolerated but actively supported.

There are no simple or quick solutions. Sustainable responses also require listening to the perspectives of people who use drugs. Open dialogue between authorities, local actors, and residents, including those with lived experience, is essential for promoting safety in these areas.

Language and attitudes matter

The language we use, and how the media talks about people who use drugs matters. Labelling them as victims, patients or criminals, ignores their rights and humanity, making it harder to build trust. People who use drugs are not a homogenous group; they come from different backgrounds and have different needs and goals. To create services that truly help, it is essential to understand and respect this diversity.

Safe supply and mental health support

In addition to social and health support, there is a pressing need to invest in mental health care and to implement programs for safe supply. Strengthening mental health services is crucial, as substance use, and mental health are deeply interconnected. Safe supply refers to the legal and regulated provision of drugs that are otherwise only available through illicit markets, aiming to reduce overdose risks and reliance on illegal toxic street drugs. Implementing safe supply can strengthen the effectiveness of supportive intervention.

In Oslo, the five-year pilot project “Heroinassistert Behandling i Oslo” (HABiO) offers medically supervised heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) for individuals with severe opioid dependency. The program aims to help patients return home safely from the clinic rather than back to the street to obtain drugs through crime. Preliminary findings suggest that HAT improves both physical and mental health and reduces criminal activity among participants – though the program remains too strict and too narrow in scope.

Towards a safer city together

Safety in urban spaces should not be the sole responsibility of police or service providers. It must be a shared effort that includes residents, local businesses, municipal authorities, and crucially, people who use drugs themselves. Yet their voices are largely absent from public debate, with decisions made about them rather than with them. This exclusion weakens the legitimacy and effectiveness of policies meant to support them.

Building trust requires dialogue, inclusion, and mutual respect. Trust-building initiatives such as peer support programs, neighborhood mediation, and community policing can foster a sense of collective responsibility. A safer city is not one where people are pushed out of sight, but one where coexistence is actively supported through shared solutions.

The article is written by

Inari Viskari, Senior planning officer, Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare THL

and

Arild Knutsen, Leader of The Association for Humane Drug Policy, Norway