We hope that this series of articles, essays, and monographs will be of interes and will contribute to thoughtful debate on drug policy. The views expressed in these documents do not necessarily reflect the opinions or positions of the . Executive Secretariat CICAD/OAS The new models are being implemented at a speed that far surpasses the slow progress of political and diplomatic reflection. As has been insinuated, the pressing need for change, in view of the shortcomings, flaws, and negative effects of current models, drives dynamism and urgent calls for a new chapter of debate, follow-up, monitoring, and evaluation. The idea is not just to launch yet another program, but rather to bring about a radical change in the control and oversight of psychoactive substances: as is oft-repeated, even to the point of excess, a paradigm shift. We began designing this report in January of 2017. From then until it was written in June of that same year, laws on the medical use of cannabis were passed in Argentina, Colombia, Mexico, and Puerto Rico, joining the ones already in force elsewhere. Naturally, some voices rightfully argue about the political and health-related suitability, legitimacy, legality, expediency, and effectiveness of these new models. Some spheres even emphatically reject the use of the expression “new models and/or approaches,” in an effort to, through rather magical thinking, pretend they do not exist. Another example of efforts to block dialogue is that despite the evidence available, it has been impossible to incorporate the terminology “harm reduction,” let alone the approach and practices entailed. The right to have one’s own point of view on the advisability, advantages, and disadvantages of these endeavors is just that: a right. But in multilateral forums and organizations, we do not always have the opportunity to calmly analyze, without ideological baggage, sterile fundamentalist views or dogmas, the pros and cons of these models.