The core of this emerging international perspective is a comprehensive analysis published in the esteemed journal Science, which argues for the removal of coca leaves from Schedule I of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Schedule I positions coca alongside the most strictly regulated narcotics, placing severe restrictions on its cultivation, use, and trade. The reinforcement of this categorization has impeded not only traditional practices but also critical scientific inquiry into the leaf’s potential medicinal and nutritional properties. Lead researcher Dawson M. White from Harvard University emphasizes the necessity of distinguishing coca from cocaine to foster policies that are evidence-based and culturally just.

This imperative comes at a critical juncture as the World Health Organization (WHO) undertakes a formal review of the coca plant’s global drug status. WHO’s Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD) is scheduled to convene in Geneva in October 2025, a meeting anticipated to produce recommendations to the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs. Crucially, an extensive WHO expert report expresses consensus on the negligible health risks posed by traditional coca use, while concurrently highlighting the societal and economic detriments resulting from prohibitionist policies. This positions the upcoming review as a potentially transformative moment in international drug policy.

The stark contrast between the coca leaf and purified cocaine lies not only in their pharmacological profiles but also in their sociocultural contexts. Cocaine is a potent stimulant with high potential for addiction and significant health risks, attributable to its chemical isolation and concentrated dosage. In contrast, the coca leaf contains a complex matrix of bioactive alkaloids that produce mild stimulant effects when traditionally consumed, typically by chewing or brewing into teas. Indigenous communities, who have cultivated coca for over 8,000 years, have developed sophisticated knowledge systems enabling the sustainable use of the plant within ceremonial, medicinal, and nutritional frameworks. This intrinsic relationship challenges the reductionist approach of lumping coca and cocaine into a single legal category.

Anthropological insights further underscore the necessity of incorporating Indigenous perspectives into policy reform. Groups such as the Indigenous Medicine Conservation Fund advocate for recognition of the leaf’s role in maintaining social and territorial balance, emphasizing that current prohibitionist measures are not only scientifically flawed but also perpetuate colonial biases. Collective statements from traditional producers and Indigenous representatives, including petitions from Bolivia and Colombia, call on global health authorities to acknowledge the multifaceted value of coca and to disentangle its reputation from that of its illicit derivatives.

In addition to cultural and biological considerations, there are robust public health arguments for revising coca’s status. The WHO’s Critical Review Report on Coca Leaf (2025) affirms that customary consumption does not engender significant public health concerns, distinguishing it markedly from substances with high abuse liability. Moreover, the criminalization of coca exacerbates socioeconomic vulnerabilities in rural Andean populations, where the plant constitutes a cornerstone of subsistence and local economies. De-scheduling the leaf would pave the way for regulatory frameworks that protect public health while honoring cultural traditions.

Pathways to medical research are also notably hindered under the current legislative regime. Scientific exploration into the coca leaf’s diverse bioactive compounds remains underdeveloped, restricted by legal constraints and stigmatization. Removing coca from international control lists could unlock a wealth of pharmacological discoveries, revealing novel therapeutic applications that align with the bioethical principle of benefit-sharing with Indigenous knowledge holders. This transformation promises multidimensional advancements, bridging traditional wisdom with innovative science.

Economic ramifications of reclassification are profound. De-scheduling could foster sustainable development initiatives across coca-growing regions by legitimizing cultivation and processing practices aligned with environmental stewardship and community well-being. Such policies would buttress rural economies, diminish illicit market dynamics, and contribute to equitable globalization narratives that respect Indigenous sovereignty and cultural heritage.

This scientific and policy discourse, catalyzed by gatherings such as the “Wisdom of the Leaf” summit in Urubamba, Peru, embodies a collaborative effort among researchers, Indigenous leaders, and policymakers. The summit highlighted the convergence of traditional ecological knowledge and modern scientific methodologies, offering a holistic framework for understanding coca beyond reductive legal labels. A short documentary produced in conjunction with this initiative has helped amplify this agenda on a global scale, garnering broader public attention to the nuances of coca use.

The pressing call to de-schedule coca reflects an urgent need to rectify a decades-long misclassification embedded within international narcotics legislation—a misstep that perpetuates cultural erasure, impedes research, and inflicts harm on communities with historical ties to the plant. By realigning policy with scientific evidence and Indigenous realities, the international community can advance a more equitable drug governance paradigm that supports both human rights and public health.

In conclusion, the movement to reconsider the legal framework surrounding the coca leaf represents a seminal moment in drug policy reform. It exemplifies how interdisciplinary evidence—from pharmacology to anthropology—can inform nuanced regulatory decisions that reconcile scientific rigor with cultural respect. The upcoming WHO deliberations are poised to set a precedent, potentially inaugurating a new era where coca is understood and managed not as a dangerous narcotic but as a sacred, medicinal, and economically valuable botanical resource deserving of protection and reverence.

Subject of Research: Scientific and policy distinctions between coca leaf and cocaine, implications for drug control reform.

Article Title: Scientific Distinctions between Coca and Cocaine Support Policy Reform

News Publication Date: 15-Oct-2025

Web References:

• WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence Meeting: https://www.who.int/news-room/events/detail/2025/10/20/default-calendar/forty-eighth-expert-committee-on-drug-dependence
• Pronunciamiento by coca communities: https://zenodo.org/records/17281859
• Short film from Wisdom of the Leaf summit: https://youtu.be/dJCF8TjTVRY?si=ZiId0PXyo-U2p0Oy

References:
Dawson M. White et al., “Scientific Distinctions between Coca and Cocaine Support Policy Reform,” Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.aeb2948, 2025.

Image Credits: Caroline Conzelman

Keywords: Health and medicine

The coca leaf, cultivated and used for millennia by Indigenous peoples across South America, particularly in Andean and Amazonian regions, deserves recognition as fundamentally different from cocaine. Unlike cocaine, which has a documented history of addiction and severe health complications, the coca leaf functions as a mild stimulant with minimal addictive potential when used traditionally. The leaves have been integral to cultural, medicinal, and social practices deeply embedded in Indigenous worldviews, offering nutritional benefits, and aiding in altitude sickness and fatigue, without the deleterious effects characteristic of cocaine use.

International law, however, currently places the entire coca genus under Schedule I of the 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. This classification groups the coca leaf alongside substances like heroin and cocaine, drugs universally acknowledged for their high abuse potential and severe health risks. The consequence has been a sweeping criminalization of the coca leaf, ignoring its distinct pharmacological profile and cultural context. More than 11 million Indigenous and mestizo people have seen their traditional ways of life stigmatized and criminalized, undermining their sovereignty and access to ancestral knowledge.

The legal framework has also acted as a substantial barrier to scientific inquiry. Researchers have found themselves restricted in their ability to study the coca leaf’s complex alkaloid profile and its interactions within biological systems. Unlike isolated cocaine, the leaf contains a mixture of alkaloids that appear to modify the effects of cocaine alkaloid when consumed in its natural form. Studies reveal that these alkaloids, when combined, may contribute to the leaf’s relatively benign stimulant effects without the high addiction liability. This biochemical complexity challenges the simplistic classification that lumps the coca leaf with more dangerous substances.

Furthermore, recent advancements in ethnobotany and pharmacology have deepened the understanding of the coca leaf’s role within Indigenous cultures. The leaf is more than a drug; it is a sacred plant enmeshed in spiritual traditions and customary laws governing its use and stewardship. By disregarding this cultural significance, international drug policy has not only marginalized Indigenous knowledge systems but has perpetuated injustices rooted in colonial legacies. The authors emphasize that any regulatory or policy responses must be informed by this rich socio-cultural context to avoid replicating historical harms.

White and colleagues argue that the forthcoming recommendation from the ECDD represents a crucial juncture for policy reform. A scientific reassessment could lead to the descheduling of the coca leaf, thereby rectifying a decades-long mistake that conflated coca with cocaine. This reform would not only facilitate evidence-based regulation but would also revive scientific research opportunities to explore the plant’s pharmacological properties more fully. Such a change could inspire a shift toward policies that reconcile public health goals with respect for Indigenous rights and environmental sustainability.

The distinction between coca and cocaine underscores a broader challenge in drug policy: the difficulty of balancing public health concerns, scientific realities, and cultural rights. By failing to differentiate between a plant and its refined derivative, policies have often been counterproductive, undermining local economies and obstructing pathways to sustainable development in regions where the coca leaf is traditionally cultivated. Reconsidering this policy framework demands a multidisciplinary approach that integrates toxicological data, ethnographic insights, and human rights principles.

Importantly, the descheduling of coca would not imply a deregulation that allows unregulated markets but would instead unlock the possibility of nuanced regulatory frameworks that account for traditional use and modern scientific evidence. This could include legal protections for Indigenous communities, controlled cultivation, and monitoring systems that deter illicit processing while supporting legitimate economic activities. Such frameworks could provide models for rethinking drug policies globally, especially for other substances similarly misunderstood or unjustly criminalized.

The paper also highlights how the criminalization of coca leaf has had unintended consequences, including the fueling of illicit drug markets and violence, as marginalized cultivators are pushed into clandestine economies. By removing the coca leaf from Schedule I, governments and international bodies can reduce these pressures and redirect efforts toward harm reduction, public education, and sustainable agriculture practices. This shift could stabilize communities and contribute to drug control policies that are more humane and effective.

Scientific distinctions extend beyond pharmacology to include sociopolitical dynamics, where the conflation of coca and cocaine has often been wielded as a tool of social control. The perpetuation of stigmatizing narratives has facilitated aggressive eradication campaigns, which have decimated local ecosystems and productivity, disrupting cultural lifeways and economic security. The authors call for a decolonizing approach to drug policy, one that centers Indigenous voices and integrates traditional knowledge systems alongside scientific methodologies.

In conclusion, the distinction between coca and cocaine is not merely semantic but foundational to crafting equitable and scientifically grounded drug policies. The work of White and colleagues signifies a pivotal moment in international drug governance, opening pathways to reforms that honor both evidence and tradition. The ECDD’s impending decision could pave the way for a paradigm shift, one that disentangles cultural practices from the criminal justice apparatus and fosters policies that promote human rights, scientific progress, and sustainable development.

Such a shift challenges entrenched legal frameworks and global political will but represents a movement toward justice and rational drug policy. As global conversations around drug reform continue to escalate, the reassessment of the coca leaf by the WHO’s ECDD stands as a beacon for policies that reflect complexity, respect, and reason. This historic opportunity may ultimately redefine the global drug landscape, facilitating more effective, compassionate, and informed governance of psychoactive substances.

Subject of Research: The scientific, cultural, and legal distinctions between the coca leaf and cocaine, and their implications for international drug policy reform.

Article Title: Scientific distinctions between coca and cocaine support policy reform

News Publication Date: 16-Oct-2025

Web References: 10.1126/science.aeb2948

Keywords: Coca leaf, cocaine, drug policy reform, Indigenous rights, pharmacology, WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence, cultural heritage, international law, 1961 UN Single Convention, descheduling, ethnobotany, addiction, public health