This systematic review of 15 qualitative studies explores recovery capital among migrants and ethnic minorities (MEM). The results of the framework analysis indicate that addressing barriers to recovery and (often minority-related) root causes of problem substance use is vital to recovery among MEM, as well as building recovery capital on personal, social and community level. The review unpacks the importance of "cultural" and "spiritual" elements of recovery capital both inside and outside treatment, the interconnectedness of the different dimensions of recovery capital, as well as their intertwinement with root causes of substance use and barriers to recovery. The results point out the importance of offering culturally and trauma-sensitive relational support and building recovery capital through recovery-oriented systems of care. Moreover, this study highlights the need for further research concerning recovery in MEM populations.

In this paper, we elaborate on the premises of studying problem substance use and treatment disparities among migrants and ethnic minorities. Due to the growing medicalisation of research on problem substance use and disparities in this group, policy makers, health researchers and practitioners often feel compelled to rely on epidemiological studies when grounding and understanding the link between ethnicity, problem substance use and treatment disparities. We argue that the bulk of epidemiological research suffers from crucial methodological and conceptual flaws that necessitate a reconsideration of their usefulness in policy and treatment practice. First, epidemiological research is based on static concepts of ethnicity and race as primordial analytical categories. Second, and as a consequence of the first argument, such research rarely distinguishes sufficiently between ethnic and non-ethnic determinants and mechanisms influencing problem substance use and treatment disparities. And third, these studies often depart from methodological individualism and subordinate contextual and structural determinants and mechanisms. This paper aims to re-evaluate (the factors and mechanisms mediating) the relationship between ethnicity, the nature of problem substance use, and treatment disparities, and to overcome some of the gaps in existing research methods mentioned above. More specifically, this implies (1) a critical revision of the ethnicity concept in epidemiology, (2) the inclusion of non-ethnic determinants and mechanisms by means of applying intersectional analysis and ethnic boundary making perspectives, (3) the broadening of methodological individualism in order to include all levels (from micro to macro) and loci (individual, community, society) of research in holistic research designs. Such “doubled research” allows researchers to analyse and have an impact on treatment disparities among migrants and ethnic minorities.

Environmental drug prevention interventions are gaining momentum alongside and in concert with 'classical' prevention practices such as school, family and community interventions. The Icelandic Prevention Model (IPM) is particularly gaining attention because of its innovative environmental approach and because of its supposed impact on lowering (the onset of) substance use among youth during the past two decades in Iceland. Although this model is rooted in well accepted prevention principles and has been prominent in public discussions and the media across the world, much remains unknown about the active ingredients, the core elements and their contribution to lowering (the onset of) substance use among youth. In this discussion paper we highlight the model's strengths (bottom-up approach, local assessment and dissemination, multi-component, targeting risk and protective factors, supervised leisure activities, curfew hours) and raise some critical concerns (transferability, external and internal validity) that should be considered and dealt with before implementing, adapting and evaluating the model in other contexts.

Possessing a strong ethnic identity and ethnic network are described in some epidemiological literature as moderating factors in the relation between perceived discrimination and varying types of substance use in people with a migration background (PMB). The purpose of this paper is to qualitatively explore problem use, discrimination, ethnic identity and social networks in a small purposive sample of users with a Turkish and Eastern European migration background in Ghent, Belgium. The authors present data retrieved within the framework of a qualitative community-based participatory research study that primarily aims to understand the nature of substance use in PMB. In the secondary analysis, the authors focus on a sub-study examining substance use by people with a Turkish (n=55) and Eastern European (n=62) migration background and explore how individuals perceive discrimination, ethnic identity and (ethnic) social networks in 117 qualitative interviews. Almost all the respondents in this study reported perceived (inter-)ethnic discrimination. The authors establish that problem users in this study have a complex but albeit weak sense of ethnic identity nor do they have a strong ethnic network. This, in combination with perceived discrimination, is a risk factor for continued problem substance use and may hamper recovery related to problem use. This article intends to lay the groundwork for future research that should focus more on longitudinally studying the intertwined relation between problem use, discrimination, ethnic identity and especially social instead of solely ethnic networks, their complex nature as well as their relation to recovery processes among persons with a migration background.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion are key concepts in European ethical research standards, especially in qualitative migration and refugee studies (QMRS). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA, 2012, 2023) provides a framework for the European research community that is grounded in the principles of doing no harm, reliability, honesty, respect, and accountability. The 2023 revision of this Code also emphasizes the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion. However, these principles are not yet adequately integrated and operationalized in European universities’ ethics standards. Moreover, ethical guidelines often fail to prioritize reciprocal benefit, as suggested in migration scholarship. This article aims to address these gaps by presenting experience-based strategies that meet research needs, and, importantly, research population needs, on the premise that reciprocity is the basis of equity. Between March and November 2023, the Centre for the Social Study of Migration and Refugees (CESSMIR) at Ghent University organized five structured workshops to explore ethics in QMRS. Researchers focused on identifying inspiring practices that are relevant to both the “do no harm” and “reciprocal benefit” principles across all stages of research: design, recruitment, data collection, analysis, and dissemination. The inspiring practices that were identified include: reflecting on researcher positionality (invisibility, reasonable availability, advocacy), non-intrusive recruitment, iterative informed consent, ethnographic observation as a falsifying method, checking construct validity and data collection site considerations, linguistic reflexivity, analyzing interaction, back-translation and dissemination in collaboration with and adapted to the concerned communities, and, finally, co-creation throughout all research phases. This article proposes the use of its “Guiding questions for equity and reciprocal benefit in qualitative migration and refugee studies (QMRS Guide 1.0)” to support ethical reflection throughout the research process from an ethics-by-design perspective. It advances the discussion on the incorporation of diversity, equity, and inclusion into university ethics codes, linking migration governance, research, and knowledge politics.