Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 19, 2024 Fri
Time: 7:37 pm
Time: 7:37 pm
Results for cannabis
32 results foundAuthor: Room, Robin Title: Cannabis Policy: Moving Beyond Stalemate Summary: This paper considers the findings of the Beckley Foundation's Global Cannabis Commission Report (Room et al, 2008). An overview of the scientific literature on cannabis, detailing its potential harms and those caused by its prohibition. It moves on to consider the various strategies that different jurisdictions have adopted to deal with cannabis use, before moving beyond the Conventions, arguing that countries should have more autonomy to develop policy best suited to their individual circumstances. Details: London: The Beckley Foundation, 2008, 242p. Source: Internet Source Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117828 Keywords: CannabisDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. National Drug Intelligence Center Title: Marijuana and Methamphetamine Trafficking on Federal Lands Threat Assessment Summary: Drug trafficking organizations, criminal groups, and independent traffickers frequently produce and transport illicit drugs, particularly marijuana and methamphetamine, in or through federal lands. The largest seizures of cannabis from federal lands have been in California and Kentucky, where the primary producers are Mexican drug trafficking organizations and Caucasian independent dealers, respectively. Mexican drug trafficking organizations and criminal groups smuggle marijuana across the Southwest Border through federal lands; Canada-based criminal groups, outlaw motorcycle gangs, and independent dealers smuggle marijuana through federal lands along the Northern Border. Details: Johnstown, PA: National Drug Intelligence Center, 2005. 14p. Source: Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116184 Keywords: CannabisDrug TraffickingMarijuanaMethamphetamineOrganized CrimeSmuggling (Drugs) |
Author: Wood, Evan Title: Tools for Debate: US Federal Government Data on Cannabis Prohibition Summary: Several initiatives in the state of California, including Bill 2254 and the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis proposition, have fuelled the international discussion about the known impacts of cannabis prohibition and the potential impacts of a regulated (i.e., legal) market. Surprisingly, to date, an impact assessment of cannabis prohibition based on data derived through US federal government surveillance systems has been largely absent from this debate. Drawing upon cannabis surveillance systems funded by the US government, this report summarizes information about the impacts of US cannabis prohibition on cannabis seizures and arrests. The report also tests the assumption that increased funding for the enforcement of cannabis prohibition and subsequent increased seizures and arrests reduce cannabis-related harms, by evaluating US federally funded surveillance systems examining cannabis potency, price, availability and rates of use. Details: Vancouver, Canada: International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, 2010. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 29, 2010 at: http://www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-2.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-2.pdf Shelf Number: 120117 Keywords: CannabisDrug ControlDrug PolicyDrug ProhibitionMarijuana |
Author: Bretteville-Jensen, Anne Line Title: Decriminalization and Initiation into Cannabis Use Summary: The central question faced by policy makers contemplating decriminalization of cannabis is whether such a move will lead to an increase in use, and if so, by whom and by how much. We address this question by investigating the impact of decriminalization on the decision to start using cannabis. Our analysis is based on individual level information from a general population in Australia. Australia provides an interesting case study for examining this issue because it has decriminalized the use of cannabis in half of its states and territories. In modeling cannabis uptake, we use a discrete-time hazard model and account for unobserved dierences between states that decriminalize and those that do not. We find that decriminalizing cannabis shifts the age distribution of uptake towards younger age groups while leaving the proportion of those who will start using cannabis unchanged. This suggests that decriminalization effects when individuals start using cannabis, rather than whether or not they start. Details: Melbourne: University of Melbourne, Department of Economics, 2011. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper Series; Research Paper Number 1130: Accessed April 30, 2012 at: http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/MicroEco/downloads/decriminalization%20and%20initiation%20into%20cannabis%20use.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/MicroEco/downloads/decriminalization%20and%20initiation%20into%20cannabis%20use.pdf Shelf Number: 125101 Keywords: CannabisDrug AbuseDrug Policy (Australia)Marijuana Decriminalization |
Author: Jiggens, John Lawrence Title: Marijuana Australiana : Cannabis Use, Popular Culture and the Americanisation of Drugs Policy in Australia, 1938-1988 Summary: The word 'marijuana' was introduced to Australia by the US Bureau of Narcotics via the Diggers newspaper, Smith's Weekly, in 1938. Marijuana was said to be 'a new drug that maddens victims' and it was sensationally described as an 'evil sex drug'. The resulting tabloid furore saw the plant cannabis sativa banned in Australia, even though cannabis had been a well-known and widely used drug in Australia for many decades. In 1964, a massive infestation of wild cannabis was found growing along a stretch of the Hunter River between Singleton and Maitland in New South Wales. The explosion in Australian marijuana use began there. It was fuelled after 1967 by US soldiers on rest and recreation leave from Vietnam. It was the Baby-Boomer young who were turning on. Pot smoking was overwhelmingly associated with the generation born in the decade after the Second World War. As the conflict over the Vietnam War raged in Australia, it provoked intense generational conflict between the Baby-Boomers and older generations. Just as in the US, pot was adopted by Australian Baby-Boomers as their symbol; and, as in the US, the attack on pot users served as code for an attack on the young, the Left, and the alternative. In 1976, the 'War on Drugs' began in earnest in Australia with paramilitary attacks on the hippie colonies at Cedar Bay in Queensland and Tuntable Falls in New South Wales. It was a time of increasing US style prohibition characterised by 'tough-on-drugs' right-wing rhetoric, police crackdowns, numerous murders, and a marijuana drought followed quickly by a heroin plague; in short by a massive worsening of 'the drug problem'. During this decade, organised crime moved into the pot scene and the price of pot skyrocketed, reaching $450 an ounce in 1988. Thanks to the Americanisation of drugs policy, the black market made 'a killing'. In Marijuana Australiana I argue that the 'War on Drugs' developed -- not for health reasons -- but for reasons of social control; as a domestic counter-revolution against the Whitlamite, Baby-Boomer generation by older Nixonite Drug War warriors like Queensland Premier, Bjelke-Petersen. It was a misuse of drugs policy which greatly worsened drug problems, bringing with it American-style organised crime. As the subtitle suggests, Marijuana Australiana relies significantly on 'alternative' sources, and I trawl the waters of popular culture, looking for songs, posters, comics and underground magazines to produce an 'underground' history of cannabis in Australia. This 'pop' approach is balanced with a hard-edged, quantitative analysis of the size of the marijuana market, the movement of price, and the seizure figures in the section called 'History By Numbers'. As Alfred McCoy notes, we need to understand drugs as commodities. It is only through a detailed understanding of the drug trade that the deeper secrets of this underground world can be revealed. In this section, I present an economic history of the cannabis market and formulate three laws of the market. Details: Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, Centre for Social Change Research, 2004. 294p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed April 30, 2012 at: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/15949/ Year: 2004 Country: Australia URL: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/15949/ Shelf Number: 125108 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug ControlDrug PolicyDrug ProhibitionMarijuana (Australia)Organized Crime |
Author: Alonso, Martin Barriuso Title: Cannabis Social Clubs in Spain: A Normalizing Alternative Underway Summary: Cannabis social clubs (CSC) are noncommercial organisations of users who get together to cultivate and distribute enough cannabis to meet their personal needs without having to turn to the black market. They are based on the fact that the consumption of illegal drugs has never been considered a crime under Spanish legislation. Taking advantage of this grey area, private clubs that produce cannabis for non-profit distribution solely to a closed group of adult members have existed for years. Since their appearance in 2002, CSCs have enabled several thousand people to stop financing the black market and to know the quality and origin of what they are consuming, whilst creating jobs and tax revenue. All of this has happened without having to withdraw from existing UN drug treaties. This article outlines the nature and functioning of these clubs. It also proposes a better route for legalisation of drugs: rejecting the creation of an open trade system, similar to that of alcohol or tobacco and opting instead for a consumer-focused, non-profit model that avoids many of the risks inherent in a market dominated by the pursuit of economic profit. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 9: Accessed May 2, 2012 at: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr9.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Spain URL: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr9.pdf Shelf Number: 125118 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalilzationDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: Williams, Jenny Title: Why Do Some People Want to Legalize Cannabis Use? Summary: Preferences and attitudes to illicit drug policy held by individuals are likely to be an important influence in the development of illicit drug policy. Among the key factors impacting on an individual's preferences over substance use policy are their beliefs about the costs and benefits of drug use, their own drug use history, and the extent of drug use amongst their peers. We use data from the Australian National Drug Strategy's Household Surveys to study these preferences. We find that current use and past use of cannabis are major determinants of being in favor of legalization. These results control for reverse causality from favorable attitudes to use. We also find that cannabis users are more in favor of legalization the longer they have used cannabis and, among past users, the more recent their own drug using experience. This may reflect that experience with cannabis provides information about the costs and benefits of using this substance. Finally, we uncover some evidence that peers' use of cannabis impacts on preferences towards legalization. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 16795: Accessed May 2, 2012 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16795 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16795 Shelf Number: 125121 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug Policy (U.S.)Marijuana |
Author: Maftei, Loredana Title: Illegal Drug Markets in Europe: The Negative Consequences of Globalization Summary: Globalizing processes have profoundly shaped the European drugs situation. The illegal drug markets have reached to evolve and to transform all the advantages of this phenomenon, in their favor. Based on globalization aspects, the paper purpose is to present the main characteristics of illicit drugs market within European countries, from the last years. Furthermore the article is focused on the analysis of theoretical and empirical drugs literature, especially on the current reports and studies of EMCDDA and UNODC, which indicated certain drug sectors. Due to its richness, position and high demand of illegal drugs, Europe is viewed by criminal organizations as a transit area for heroin, cocaine, cannabis and synthetic drugs, and a big customer which continued to sustain this profitable enterprise, over the last decades. Regarding the drug problem, the governance needs to be reframed and to take account of economical, social and moral character. The simple connection of illegal drug markets with globalization, gives the originality note of the paper, which leads to some important new insights for future research and policy. Details: Romania: Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iași,, 2012. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 19, 2012 at: http://www.cse.uaic.ro/WorkingPapers/articles/CESWP2012_IV2_MAF.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Europe URL: http://www.cse.uaic.ro/WorkingPapers/articles/CESWP2012_IV2_MAF.pdf Shelf Number: 125685 Keywords: CannabisCocaineDrug MarketsDrug TraffickingHeroinIllegal Drugs (Europe) |
Author: McSweeney, Tim Title: Young People, Cannabis Use and Anti-Social Behaviour Summary: This report by the Institute for Criminal Policy Research, King’s College London, presents findings of a study on young people, cannabis use and anti-social behaviour. To date few research studies have focused on the question of whether young people’s cannabis use has any influence on the incidence or frequency of any anti-social behaviour or criminal activity they may engage in. This research intended to yield a more nuanced understanding of young people’s cannabis use and any associations this use may have with anti-social behaviour. The study found that: · Most of the sixty-one young people questioned acknowledged the potential for harm posed by cannabis, but felt capable of making rational and informed decisions about its use. · Most young people, and around half of the eighty community respondents, knew that cannabis had been reclassified from a Class B to a Class C drug. Two in three professionals opposed the decision to reclassify. · Most of the nineteen professionals interviewed felt that young people smoking cannabis in public caused problems for local residents. However, less than half of young people saw this as anti-social, and two-thirds of residents said they were unaffected by this behaviour. · Almost all young people believed that their age group was routinely accused of acting in an anti-social way, even when they had not been. · Young people believed ASB could be reduced if there were more opportunities and facilities for them. Respondents to the community survey also thought under-investment in local facilities had exacerbated the area’s problems. · Young people wanted a clearer definition of what constituted ASB and better advertising and education about cannabis use. Some professionals supported this, and favoured an integrated approach to tackling deprivation, education, training and employment, and sexual health as well as drugs and ASB. · Opinion amongst residents was divided on whether there is a link between young people’s cannabis use and ASB. Less than half of the professionals thought that cannabis use predisposed young people to anti-social behaviour. · Many community respondents believed that the burden of tackling young people’s cannabis use and ASB should not rest with any single agency. Professionals supported a multi-agency approach to tackling ASB but questioned local agencies’ ability to do this. Details: London: The Institute for Criminal Policy Research, King’s College London, 2007. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 1, 2012 at: http://www.icpr.org.uk/media/5590/young%20people%20cannabis%20use%20and%20ASB.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.icpr.org.uk/media/5590/young%20people%20cannabis%20use%20and%20ASB.pdf Shelf Number: 126229 Keywords: Antisocial BehaviorAt-risk YouthCannabisDrug Abuse and Crime (U.K.)Juvenile OffendersMarijuana |
Author: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs Title: Cannabis Production and Markets in Europe Summary: This study brings together available evidence to provide a comprehensive analysis of cannabis production and markets across the EU. It combines information from EMCDDA routine reporting — data on patterns of prevalence and use, seizures, police reports, drug-law offences, cannabis potency and retail market prices — with literature on cannabis markets to create an in-depth analysis of the issue in a European context. The analysis presented in this volume covers, as far as possible, the 30 countries that participate in the EMCDDA’s reporting system. That is the 27 EU Member States, Croatia, Turkey and Norway. The information reviewed is based on a number of sources and methodologies. We list below the main sources and data used as a basis for the analysis, and more detailed methodological notes are provided throughout the text. Some of the data used in this report are derived from the EMCDDA’s routine monitoring, based on its Reitox network of national focal points. Data on prevalence and patterns of drug use, drug seizures, police reports of drug law offences, cannabis potency and retail prices are part of the quantitative data sets submitted by reporting countries on an annual basis. Quantitative data are routinely analysed and made available in the online Statistical bulletin (EMCDDA, 2011b), but more in-depth analyses were carried out for this publication. In addition, the EMCDDA’s routine monitoring includes a national narrative report providing an overview of the drug phenomenon and, among other issues, information on drug supply and drug trafficking, drug laws and sentencing practices. Legal texts held in the European Legal Database on Drugs (ELDD) and an ad hoc consultation of the legal correspondents network that informs the database were also used as sources of information for this report. In addition, two independent studies were carried out to obtain more detailed data and other information on specific aspects of cannabis production and markets in Europe. The issue of market shares of different cannabis products was a focus of both of these exercises. First, the national focal points, within the context of a Selected issue data collection exercise (Reitox national focal points, 2009), provided an overview of cannabis production (brief history, plantations seized, ‘grow shops’), distribution of cannabis at national level (structure and actors, wholesale prices, retail outlets, transaction sizes) and cannabis supply reduction responses (law enforcement activities, cannabis seizures, cannabis offences). These national contributions result from an analysis of different sources, including quantitative data, targeted studies, research, expert opinions and information from operational actors such as law enforcement. Second, the EMCDDA commissioned a study (Costes et al., 2009) to provide an overview of cannabis production methods (covering topics such as materials and costs) and typologies of growers, and of cannabis flows and trafficking routes to and within Europe. The authors carried out a survey based on key informants drawn from across Europe as part of this exercise. This report is also informed by an extensive review of the literature, which took in both scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals and the ‘grey literature’ 16 (including reports from international organisations). For a number of the issues addressed in this report, the literature served as the only information source or as a complement. Analysis of the literature proved to be key in areas where standardised data collections are relatively rare, in particular on the botany of cannabis and on the production of cannabis both outside and within Europe. Chapter 1 reviews the origins of cannabis and its diffusion. Consideration is given to the morphology and anatomy of this interesting plant — which can be characterised by its extreme natural variation. This is accompanied by an analysis of production issues, including cultivation and processing for consumption. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the source countries for the cannabis imported into Europe. It includes a critical review of the considerable, and arguably insurmountable, challenges associated with estimating global cannabis production. The chapter focuses mainly on cannabis production in, and exportation to Europe from, the five regions and countries (the ‘big five’) most often mentioned as a source: North Africa (Morocco), south-west Asia (Afghanistan), the Balkans (Albania), the Middle East (Lebanon) and sub-Saharan Africa (South Africa). Chapter 3 is dedicated to cannabis production in Europe. Starting with the historical context, including the substitution of imported resin by domestically produced herb in some countries, it then reviews available evidence of the extent and type of cannabis cultivation across Europe. A typology of cannabis growers and their motivations is discussed. Distribution, either social or commercial, is addressed, and an analysis of issues related to transactions and prices is presented. Cannabinoid contents, and in particular tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), are addressed in Chapter 4, as are issues affecting the sampling and quantitative analysis of THC in cannabis products. This is followed by a review of the data available on cannabis potency in Europe. Chapter 5 focuses on cannabis consumption. Starting with an overview of the situation and trends in cannabis use in Europe, it then reviews the results of the few studies that have estimated the size of the market for cannabis in Europe. It ends with an analysis of the market shares at consumer level of cannabis herb and cannabis resin across Europe. Differences in the legislations controlling cannabis cultivation and supply in Europe are discussed in Chapter 6, which also provides an analysis of data on cannabis offences reported by law enforcement, and of cannabis seizures across Europe. The chapter ends with a brief overview of the strategies and tactics employed by law enforcement in their fight against cannabis cultivation and cannabis trafficking in Europe. Details: Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2012. 274p. Source: Internet Resource: EMCDDA Insights Series No 12; Accessed November 9, 2012 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/insights/cannabis-market Year: 2012 Country: Europe URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/insights/cannabis-market Shelf Number: 126911 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Markets (Europe)Drug OffendersDrug SmugglingMarijuana |
Author: Bryan, Mark Title: Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards a Cost-Benefit Analysis Summary: We agree with David Cameron's observation on drugs policy that "it would be very disturbing if some radical options were not at least looked at". Among the radical options that are often proposed is the creation of a system of licensed cannabis supply subject to taxation and regulation of supply and demand sides of the market. In this study, we consider a hypothetical reform of this kind and identify a long list of possible sources of net social cost and benefit that could result. We attempt to quantify them, using the concept of net external benefit as an evaluation criterion. Net external benefit is the total value in cash-equivalent terms of the costs and benefits that cannabis use imposes on society outside the user him/herself, and it therefore excludes the potential net benefits ('enjoyment') accruing to cannabis users in a reformed market. Our evaluation is consequently conservative in that it contains an inherent bias in favour of the prohibitionist status quo. In our view, it is impossible with available UK evidence to produce a credible estimate of net consumption benefits. Despite the bias this entails, it gives a far more reliable picture of the policy question than the many widely-cited estimates of the "social cost of drug use", which include internal costs (potential harms to drug users) but ignore completely the internal benefits which are the reason that recreational drugs are used in the first place. The estimates underpinning our evaluation should not be seen as predictions of what would happen if such a policy were to be introduced in some future period, since they relate to the market situation as it existed in England and Wales in 2009/10, and they abstract from any transitional adjustments (and any accompanying transitional cost). We have not attempted to extend the evaluation to cover Scotland or Northern Ireland, since most of the data resources available to us cover England and Wales only. In constructing the estimates, we consider a wide range of evidence and the difficulties involved in drawing conclusions from that evidence. We provide simple, largely subjective, quantitative indications of the degree of uncertainty involved in our estimates, some of which should be regarded as illustrative calculations rather than formal estimates. Our aim is not to produce a definitive cost-benefit analysis of a licensed and regulated cannabis market - which we believe to be impossible in the present state of knowledge - but to set out clearly the range of considerations that need to be considered in forming a view about this policy, and to indicate which aspects of the evaluation are likely to be critical to the outcome of a full cost-benefit analysis. Details: London: The Beckley Foundation; Colchester, UK; Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, 2013. 156p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2013 at: http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/BF-CANNABIS-CBA-REPORT.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/BF-CANNABIS-CBA-REPORT.pdf Shelf Number: 129956 Keywords: CannabisCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug MarketsDrug Policy (U.K.)Marijuana |
Author: Bewley-Taylor, Dave Title: The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options for Reform Summary: The cannabis plant has been used for spiritual, medicinal and recreational purposes since the early days of civilization. In this report the Transnational Institute and the Global Drug Policy Observatory describe in detail the history of international control and how cannabis was included in the current UN drug control system. Cannabis was condemned by the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as a psychoactive drug with "particularly dangerous properties" and hardly any therapeutic value. Ever since, an increasing number of countries have shown discomfort with the treaty regime's strictures through soft defections, stretching its legal flexibility to sometimes questionable limits. Today's political reality of regulated cannabis markets in Uruguay, Washington and Colorado operating at odds with the UN conventions puts the discussion about options for reform of the global drug control regime on the table. Now that the cracks in the Vienna consensus have reached the point of treaty breach, this discussion is no longer a reformist fantasy. Easy options, however, do not exist; they all entail procedural complications and political obstacles. A coordinated initiative by a group of like-minded countries agreeing to assess possible routes and deciding on a road map for the future seems the most likely scenario for moving forward. There are good reasons to question the treaty-imposed prohibition model for cannabis control. Not only is the original inclusion of cannabis within the current framework the result of dubious procedures, but the understanding of the drug itself, the dynamics of illicit markets, and the unintended consequences of repressive drug control strategies has increased enormously. The prohibitive model has failed to have any sustained impact in reducing the market, while imposing heavy burdens upon criminal justice systems; producing profoundly negative social and public health impacts; and creating criminal markets supporting organised crime, violence and corruption. After long accommodating various forms of deviance from its prohibitive ethos, like turning a blind eye to illicit cannabis markets, decriminalisation of possession for personal use, coffeeshops, cannabis social clubs and generous medical marijuana schemes, the regime has now reached a moment of truth. The current policy trend towards legal regulation of the cannabis market as a more promising model for protecting people's health and safety has changed the drug policy landscape and the terms of the debate. The question facing the international community today is no longer whether or not there is a need to reassess and modernize the UN drug control system, but rather when and how to do it. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute; Swansea, UK: Research Institute for Arts and Humanities, Swansea University, 2014. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 13, 2014 at: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_web.pdf Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_web.pdf Shelf Number: 131900 Keywords: CannabisDecriminalizationDrug ControlDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug ProhibitionMarijuana |
Author: Crick, Emily Title: Selling cannabis regulation: Learning From Ballot Initiatives in the United States in 2012 Summary: Key Points - In November 2012, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon voted on ballot initiatives to establish legally regulated markets for the production, sale, use and taxation of cannabis.1 Washington and Colorado's measures won by wide margins, while Oregon's lost soundly. - A majority of voters view cannabis in a negative light, but also feel that prohibition for non-medical and non-scientific purposes is not working. As a result, they are more likely to support well-crafted reform policies that include strong regulations and direct tax revenue to worthy causes such as public health and education. - Ballot measures are not the ideal method for passing complicated pieces of legislation, but sometimes they are necessary for controversial issues. Other states often follow in their footsteps, including via the legislature. - The successful campaigns in Washington and Colorado relied on poll-driven messaging, were well organised, and had significant financing. The Oregon campaign lacked these elements. - The Washington and Colorado campaigns targeted key demographic groups, particularly 30-50 year old women, who were likely to be initially supportive of reform but then switch their allegiance to the 'no' vote. - Two key messages in Washington and Colorado were that legalisation, taxation and regulation will (i) free up scarce law enforcement resources to focus on more serious crimes and (ii) will create new tax revenue for worthy causes. - National attitudes on legalising cannabis are changing, with more and more people supporting reform. Details: Swansea, UK: Swansea University, Global Drug Policy Observatory, 2014. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief 6: Accessed February 12, 2015 at: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/Selling%20Cannabis%20Regulation.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/Selling%20Cannabis%20Regulation.pdf Shelf Number: 134610 Keywords: CannabisDecriminalizationDrug Policy (U.S.)Marijuana |
Author: Blickman, Tom Title: Cannabis policy reform in Europe: Bottom up rather than top down Summary: With the regulation of recreational cannabis markets in Uruguay and the US states of Colorado and Washington in 2013, and - in November 2014 - the approval of cannabis regulation ballots in the states of Oregon and Alaska, a breakthrough in conventional cannabis policy is emerging. The current policy trend towards legal regulation of the cannabis market is increasingly seen as a more promising model for protecting people's health and safety and has changed the drug policy landscape and the terms of the debate. The prohibitive model has failed to show any sustained impact in reducing the market, while imposing heavy burdens upon criminal justice systems; producing profoundly negative social and public health impacts; and creating criminal markets supporting organised crime, violence and corruption. While in the Americas cannabis policy reform is taking off, Europe seems to be lagging behind. That is to say, in European nations at the level of national governments - where denial of the changing policy landscape and inertia to act upon calls for change reigns. At the local level, however, disenchantment with the current cannabis regime gives rise to new ideas. In several countries in Eu rope, local and regional authorities are looking at regulation, either pressured by grassroots movements - in particular the Cannabis Social Clubs (CSCs) - or due to the involvement of criminal groups and public disorder. This briefing will give an overview of recent developments in Europe. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2014. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies No. 28: Accessed March 11, 2015 at: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/dlr28.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Europe URL: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/dlr28.pdf Shelf Number: 134889 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug Policy (Europe)Drug ReformMarijuanaOrganized Crime |
Author: International Centre for Science in Drug Policy Title: State of Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation Summary: Science in Drug Policy (ICSDP) has sought to ensure that policy responses to the many problems posed by illicit drugs are informed by the best available scientific evidence. State of the Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation is the ICSDP's contribution to the growing global conversation on cannabis. This report should be read in tandem with Using Evidence to Talk About Cannabis, a complementary guide to having evidence-based discussions on cannabis use and regulation. The regulation of recreational cannabis markets has become an increasingly important policy issue in a number of jurisdictions. Colorado and Washington State made headlines in 2012 when they became the first jurisdictions in the world to legalize and regulate the adult use and sale of cannabis for non-medical purposes. In 2013, Uruguay became the first country to legalize and regulate recreational cannabis markets. Momentum towards regulation continued in the United States in 2014 with successful ballot initiatives in Alaska, Oregon, and the District of Columbia. Globally, the issue of cannabis regulation is front and center in a growing number of jurisdictions, including Canada, Jamaica, Italy, Spain, several Latin American countries, and a number of additional U.S. states, including California, set to vote on legalization initiatives in 2016. Unsurprisingly, given the robust global conversation around the regulation of recreational cannabis markets, claims about the impacts of cannabis use and regulation are increasingly part of the public discourse. Unfortunately, though, these claims are often unsupported by the available scientific evidence. Another reoccurring problem in the public discourse is the selective inclusion of research studies based on their support for a predetermined narrative. The intentional exclusion of studies with contradictory findings does not allow for an objective review and analysis of all the evidence. This "cherry picking" of the evidence is a routine practice that distorts public understanding. By outlining the current state of all the scientific evidence on common cannabis claims, State of the Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation strives to ensure that evidence, rather than rhetoric, plays a central role in policymaking around this important issue. The harms of misrepresenting the scientific evidence on cannabis should not be overlooked. Given that policy decisions are influenced by public opinion and media reports, public discourse needs to be well informed. By addressing knowledge gaps with scientific findings, the ICSDP hopes to dispel myths about cannabis use and regulation, and ensure that the scientific evidence on these topics is accurately represented. Only then can evidence- based policy decisions be made. Readers of this report will notice three repeating themes emerge through the discussion of the scientific evidence on common cannabis claims. First, many of the claims confuse correlation and causation. Although scientific evidence may find associations between two events, this does not indicate that one necessarily caused the other. Put simply, correlation does not equal causation. This is a commonly made mistake when interpreting scientific evidence in all fields, and is unsurprisingly a recurring source of confusion in the discourse on cannabis use and regulation. Second, for several of these claims, the inability to control for a range of variables ("confounders") means that in many cases, we cannot conclude that a particular outcome was caused by cannabis use or regulation. Unless scientists can remove all other possible explanations, the evidence cannot conclusively say that one specific explanation is true. Third, many of the claims cannot be made conclusively as there is insufficient evidence to support them. Findings from a single study or a small sample cannot be generalized to entire populations. This is especially pronounced for claims related to cannabis regulation, as not enough time has passed since the regulation of recreational cannabis in Colorado, Washington State, and Uruguay to examine many of the impacts of these policy changes. These three common pitfalls are important to take into account when reading media reports and advocacy materials that suggest scientists have conclusively made some finding related to cannabis use or regulation. In many cases, due to the reasons outlined above, this will actually result in a misrepresentation of the scientific evidence. State of the Evidence: Cannabis Use and Regulation is comprised of two sections: Common Claims on Cannabis Use and Common Claims on Cannabis Regulation. Common Claims on Cannabis Use presents evidence on frequently heard claims about cannabis use, including claims on the addictive potential of cannabis, cannabis as a "gateway" drug, the potency of cannabis, and the impact of cannabis use on the lungs, heart, and brain (in terms of IQ, cognitive functioning, and risk of schizophrenia). Common Claims on Cannabis Regulation presents evidence on frequently heard claims about the impacts of cannabis regulation, including the impact of regulation on cannabis availability, impaired driving, the use of cannabis, drug crime, drug tourism, and "Big Marijuana." For each claim, the relevant available scientific evidence is presented and the strength of the scientific evidence in support of the claim is determined. Readers will notice that none of the claims are strongly supported by the scientific evidence, reinforcing the significant misrepresentation of evidence on cannabis use and regulation. Details: Toronto, ON: The Centre, 2015. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 28, 2015 at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64663568/library/State_of_the_Evidence_Cannabis_Use_and_Regulation-international-centre-for-science-in-drug-policy.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64663568/library/State_of_the_Evidence_Cannabis_Use_and_Regulation-international-centre-for-science-in-drug-policy.pdf Shelf Number: 136611 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Lenton, Simon Title: The social supply of cannabis among young people in Australia Summary: Cannabis is the most prolifically used illicit drug in Australia, however, there is a gap in our understanding concerning the social interactions and friendships formed around its supply and use. The authors recruited cannabis users aged between 18 and 30 years throughout Australia, to explore the impact of supply routes on young users and their perceived notions of drug dealing in order to provide valuable insight into the influence that reciprocal relationships have on young peoples access to cannabis. Findings reveal that the supply of cannabis revolves around pre-existing connections and relationships formed through associates known to be able to readily source cannabis. It was found that motivations for proffering cannabis in a shared environment were related more to developing social capital than to generating financial gain. Given this, often those involved in supply do not perceive that they are breaking the law or that they are 'dealers'. This social supply market appears to be built on trust and social interactions and, as such, presents several challenges to law enforcement. It is suggested that there would be benefit in providing targeted education campaigns to combat social supply dealing among young adults. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, December 2015. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 503: Accessed March 2, 2016 at: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi503.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi503.pdf Shelf Number: 138010 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug DealingDrug MarketsIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse Title: Cannabis Regulation: Lessons Learned in Colorado and Washington State Summary: In November 2012, Colorado and Washington state became the first two US states to legalize the personal possession and retail sale of cannabis. The two states developed regulatory frameworks with many common features (e.g., minimum purchase age of 21, ban on public use), and some key differences. For example, Washington bans personal production, while Colorado permits up to five plants per household. The two states began with different contexts: Colorado had a well-established, regulated medical distribution system to build on, and Washington had no existing regulated supply. Retail sales began on January 1, 2014, in Colorado and on July 8, 2014, in Washington. To learn from evidence and experience about the legalization of cannabis for non-therapeutic use and its health, social, economic and public safety impacts, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (CCSA) led delegations to Colorado (February 2015) and Washington state (August 2015). The delegations consisted of partners from public health, treatment and enforcement sectors. The goal was to inform the ongoing dialogue about policy options for the regulation of cannabis in Canada and internationally by observing the effects of the various models and approaches in the two states. The aim was not to take a position on the question of legalization, but to collect the best available information to support evidence-informed policy advice. To this end, the delegation met with stakeholders from a range of perspectives, including public health, regulation, government, enforcement, prevention and the cannabis industry. The overarching lesson that emerged during discussions with stakeholders was that any jurisdiction considering policy change should identify a clear purpose to drive the overall approach. In other words, begin by defining the problem to be solved and the goals to be achieved. Colorado and Washington had to develop a comprehensive regulatory framework taking a substance from criminal prohibition to retail sales. Any new regulatory system for cannabis needs to address considerations across health, public health, enforcement, criminal justice, social and economic sectors. It must account for the administration, monitoring and enforcement of all processes, including production, processing, sales, advertising and taxation. The framework also has to coordinate federal, state, district and municipal orders of government, and their respective roles in such areas as enforcement, taxation and health care. The CCSA delegation learned the following key lessons about developing a regulatory framework from stakeholders: - Reconcile medical and retail markets to promote consistency in such areas as purchase quantities and administration, and to reduce the scope of the grey market, which is the market for products produced or distributed in ways that are unauthorized or unregulated, but not strictly illegal; - Be prepared to respond to the unexpected, such as the overconsumption of edibles in Colorado and an unmanageable volume of licensing applications within a limited time frame in Washington state; - Control product formats and concentrations to ensure there are no unanticipated consequences from unregulated formats and concentrations; - Prevent commercialization through taxation, rigorous state regulation and monitoring, and controls on advertising and promotion; and - Prevent use by youth by controlling access and investing in effective health promotion, prevention, awareness and education for both youth and parents. The need to invest in effective implementation was a common message of stakeholders in both Colorado and Washington. They highlighted the value of allocating a portion of funds generated through retail sales to education, prevention, treatment and research. They also emphasized the need to ensure proactive investment to build capacity before the new regulations are implemented and retail sales begin. These investments fall into several common themes: - Take the time required to develop an effective framework for implementation and to prepare for a successful launch; (Colorado stakeholders recommended taking longer than the one-year period provided in that state. There is also a need to give retailers time to develop capacity to meet consumer demand. Washington stakeholders encountered price escalation as retailers struggled to obtain or produce product within two months of receiving licenses.) - Develop the capacity to administer the regulatory framework, recognizing that a significant investment in staff and administration is required to process licenses, conductcomprehensive inspections and address violations; - Provide strong central leadership and promote collaboration to bring diverse partners to the table from the beginning and to promote open, consistent communication and collaborative problem-solving; - Invest proactively in a public health approach that builds capacity in prevention, education and treatment before implementation to minimize negative health and social impacts associated with cannabis use; - Develop a clear, comprehensive communication strategy to convey details of the regulations prior to implementation, so that the public and other stakeholders understand what is permitted, as well as the risks and harms associated with use, so that individuals can make informed choices; - Ensure consistent enforcement of regulations by investing in training and tools for those responsible for enforcement, particularly to prevent and address impaired driving and diversion to youth, and to control the black market; - Invest in research to establish the evidence base underlying the regulations, and to address gaps in knowledge, such as new and emerging trends and patterns of use; and - Conduct rigorous, ongoing data collection, including gathering baseline data, to monitor the impact of the regulatory framework and inform gradual change to best meet policy objectives and reduce negative impacts. In summary, the consistent message CCSA heard was that any jurisdiction considering regulatory changes to cannabis policy should take the time to set up the infrastructure and allocate the resources needed to get it right, assess impacts along the way and make incremental changes, as needed. Details: Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2016 at: http://www.ccsa.ca/Resource%20Library/CCSA-Cannabis-Regulation-Lessons-Learned-Report-2015-en.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://www.ccsa.ca/Resource%20Library/CCSA-Cannabis-Regulation-Lessons-Learned-Report-2015-en.pdf Shelf Number: 138920 Keywords: CannabisDrug PolicyDrug UseMarijuanaMarijuana Legalization |
Author: Garat, Guillermo Title: Paraguay: The cannabis breadbasket of the Southern Cone: A focus on the largest cannabis producer in South America Summary: Key Points - Paraguay is the principal producer of cannabis in South America. Despite its importance as a supplier of cannabis in South America, there has been a surprising absence of serious studies of its impact on its own society, and on the play of offer and demand in neighbouring countries. - After 40 years of an intense "war on drugs", there are now eight departments involved in the business, with spiralling homicide rates, an absence of state policy intervention, drug traffickers infiltrated into local political structures, and millions of dollars which are shared out by terrorist organizations, a new chain of services connected to the illicit trade, and - to a much lesser extent - small farmers suffocated by repeated crises. - Contradictions in productive structures, the lack of agrarian policies, poverty and the absence of perspectives for the rural population led to a gradual, and progressively more blatant, adoption of cannabis cultivation by young. Over time, growing cannabis became one of the few viable economic prospects for large sectors of the population. - Intermediaries who manage contacts with the buyers on the border with Brazil, employ young people to grow, protect, harvest, dry, press, package and even transport the cannabis - not just within Paraguay, but even into nearby countries, using the limited means at their disposal, such as their shoulders, bicycles and motorbikes. - The use of cannabis is looked down on by the general population, particularly in rural areas, and even in the communities where it is grown, it is commonly referred to as the "demon weed" (hierba maldita). Lifetime use of cannabis in Paraguay is the second lowest in all Latin America, only 0.4% admitting to having tried it. - Some politicians, government officials, civil society organisations and farmers' organisations see the benefit of the regulation of the cannabis market in Paraguay, but the debate is still incipient. Details: Bonn, Germany: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2016. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Briefing, no. 46: Accessed November 2, 2016 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/drug_policy_briefing_46.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Paraguay URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/drug_policy_briefing_46.pdf Shelf Number: 145004 Keywords: CannabisDrug MarketsDrug PolicyDrug TraffickingIllicit TradeMarijuanaWar on Drugs |
Author: Ramsey, Geoff Title: Getting Regulation Right: Assessing Uruguay's Historic Cannabis Initiative Summary: After close to three years, the final element of Uruguay's historic cannabis law is set to be implemented in early 2017, when commercial sales are expected to begin. While advancements have been slow and deliberate, Uruguay is not alone in taking such a cautious approach. The U.S. state of Maryland, for instance, approved a medical cannabis program in 2013, but a series of careful adjustments has also postponed sales until 2017. Now that the commercial sales element of the law is about be phased in, the government of President Tabaré Vázquez is facing a key moment of opportunity. With the basic structures created by the law soon to be up and running, the government should ensure a robust system of monitoring and evaluation is also in place, to assess whether the cannabis law is in fact achieving its goals, identify problems that may arise, and indicate where and how the new regime may need to be revised. This report, "Getting Regulation Right: Assessing Uruguay’s Historic Cannabis Initiative," lays out the progress that Uruguayan authorities have made in rolling out the law to date. It also examines current monitoring and evaluation efforts underway, as well as opportunities for Uruguay to respond to potential obstacles thus far. Uruguay's government makes no pretense that its law should be a model for others. But Uruguay's leaders also know that, as the first nation to legalize and regulate every level of the cannabis market, their new system will be coming under close scrutiny, at home and abroad. As citizens and leaders elsewhere ponder whether and how to legalize and regulate cannabis in their own countries, the lessons to be learned in Uruguay can help inform cannabis policy well beyond the country's own borders. Details: Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America, 2016. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 20, 2016 at: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Getting-Regulation-Right-WOLA-Uruguay.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Uruguay URL: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Getting-Regulation-Right-WOLA-Uruguay.pdf Shelf Number: 147301 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana Legalization |
Author: Canada. Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Title: A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada Summary: On June 30, 2016, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, and the Minister of Health announced the creation of a nine-member Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“the Task Force”). Our mandate was to consult and provide advice on the design of a new legislative and regulatory framework for legal access to cannabis, consistent with the Government’s commitment to “legalize, regulate, and restrict access.” To fulfill our mandate, we engaged with provincial, territorial and municipal governments, experts, patients, advocates, Indigenous governments and representative organizations, employers and industry. We heard from many other Canadians as well, including many young people, who participated in an online public consultation that generated nearly 30,000 submissions from individuals and organizations. The Task Force looked internationally (e.g., Colorado, Washington State, Uruguay) to learn from jurisdictions that have legalized cannabis for non-medical purposes, and we drew lessons from the way governments in Canada have regulated tobacco and alcohol, and cannabis for medical purposes. A Discussion Paper prepared by the Government, entitled “Toward the Legalization, Regulation and Restriction of Access to Marijuana,” informed the Task Force’s work and helped to focus the input of many of the people from whom we heard. The Discussion Paper identified nine public policy objectives. Chief among these are keeping cannabis out of the hands of children and youth and keeping profits out of the hands of organized crime. The Task Force set out guiding principles as the foundation of our advice to Ministers: protection of public health and safety, compassion, fairness, collaboration, a commitment to evidenceinformed policy and flexibility. In considering the experience of other jurisdictions and the views of experts, stakeholders and the public, we sought to strike a balance between implementing appropriate restrictions, in order to minimize the harms associated with cannabis use, and providing adult access to a regulated supply of cannabis while reducing the scope and scale of the illicit market and its social harms. Our recommendations reflect a public health approach to reduce harm and promote health. We also took a precautionary approach to minimize unintended consequences, given that the relevant evidence is often incomplete or inconclusive. Minimizing Harms of Use In taking a public health approach to the regulation of cannabis, the Task Force proposes measures that will maintain and improve the health of Canadians by minimizing the harms associated with cannabis use. This approach considers the risks associated with cannabis use, including the risks of developmental harms to youth; the risks associated with patterns of consumption, including frequent use and co-use of cannabis with alcohol and tobacco; the risks to vulnerable populations; and the risks related to interactions with the illicit market. In addition to considering scientific evidence and input from stakeholders, the Task Force examined how other jurisdictions have attempted to minimize harms of use. We examined a range of protective measures, including a minimum age of use, promotion and advertising restrictions, and packaging and labelling requirements for cannabis products. In order to minimize harms, the Task Force recommends that the federal government: f Set a national minimum age of purchase of 18, acknowledging the right of provinces and territories to harmonize it with their minimum age of purchase of alcohol f Apply comprehensive restrictions to the advertising and promotion of cannabis and related merchandise by any means, including sponsorship, endorsements and branding, similar to the restrictions on promotion of tobacco products f Allow limited promotion in areas accessible by adults, similar to those restrictions under the Tobacco Act f Require plain packaging for cannabis products that allows the following information on packages: company name, strain name, price, amounts of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) and warnings and other labelling requirements f Impose strict sanctions on false or misleading promotion as well as promotion that encourages excessive consumption, where promotion is allowed f Require that any therapeutic claims made in advertising conform to applicable legislation f Resource and enable the detection and enforcement of advertising and marketing violations, including via traditional and social media f Prohibit any product deemed to be “appealing to children,” including products that resemble or mimic familiar food items, are packaged to look like candy, or packaged in bright colours or with cartoon characters or other pictures or images that would appeal to children f Require opaque, re-sealable packaging that is childproof or child-resistant to limit children’s access to any cannabis product f Additionally, for edibles: Z Implement packaging with standardized, single servings, with a universal THC symbol Z Set a maximum amount of THC per serving and per product f Prohibit mixed products, for example cannabis-infused alcoholic beverages or cannabis products with tobacco, nicotine or caffeine f Require appropriate labelling on cannabis products, including: Z Text warning labels (e.g., “KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN”) Z Levels of THC and CBD Z For edibles, labelling requirements that apply to food and beverage products f Create a flexible legislative framework that could adapt to new evidence on specific product types, on the use of additives or sweeteners, or on specifying limits of THC or other components f Provide regulatory oversight for cannabis concentrates to minimize the risks associated with illicit production f Develop strategies to encourage consumption of less potent cannabis, including a price and tax scheme based on potency to discourage purchase of high-potency products f Require all cannabis products to include labels identifying levels of THC and CBD f Enable a flexible legislative framework that could adapt to new evidence to set rules for limits on THC or other components f Develop and implement factual public education strategies to inform Canadians as to risks of problematic use and lower-risk use guidance f Conduct the necessary economic analysis to establish an approach to tax and price that balances health protection with the goal of reducing the illicit market f Work with provincial and territorial governments to determine a tax regime that includes equitable distribution of revenues f Create a flexible system that can adapt tax and price approaches to changes within the marketplace f Commit to using revenue from cannabis as a source of funding for administration, education, research and enforcement f Design a tax scheme based on THC potency to discourage purchase of high-potency products f Implement as soon as possible an evidenceinformed public education campaign, targeted at the general population but with an emphasis on youth, parents and vulnerable populations f Co-ordinate messaging with provincial and territorial partners f Adapt educational messages as evidence and understanding of health risks evolve, working with provincial and territorial partners f Facilitate and monitor ongoing research on cannabis and impairment, considering implications for occupational health and safety policies f Work with existing federal, provincial and territorial bodies to better understand potential occupational health and safety issues related to cannabis impairment f Work with provinces, territories, employers and labour representatives to facilitate the development of workplace impairment policies The Task Force further recommends that: f In the period leading up to legalization, and thereafter on an ongoing basis, governments invest effort and resources in developing, implementing and evaluating broad, holistic prevention strategies to address the underlying risk factors and determinants of problematic cannabis use, such as mental illness and social marginalization f Governments commit to using revenue from cannabis regulation as a source of funding for prevention, education and treatment Details: Ottawa: Health Canada, 2016. 112p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 23, 2016 at: http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/task-force-marijuana-groupe-etude/framework-cadre/alt/framework-cadre-eng.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/task-force-marijuana-groupe-etude/framework-cadre/alt/framework-cadre-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 147805 Keywords: CannabisCannabis LegalizationDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: McCulloch, Lizzie Title: Black Sheep: An Investigation into Existing Support for Problematic Cannabis Use Summary: Black Sheep reveals that a legal regulated market would better support people experiencing problematic cannabis use as the sector is lacking a clear, effective strategy for linking people into support and guidance. With the current illegal and unregulated market reducing the visibility of cannabis users, practitioners have reported that "we're just fumbling around in the dark trying to find them". Among people showing signs of cannabis dependence, only 14.6% have ever received treatment, help or support specifically because of their drug use, and 5.5% had received this in the past six months. Details: London: Volteface, 2016. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2017 at: http://volteface.me/app/uploads/2017/02/BlackSheeporiginal.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://volteface.me/app/uploads/2017/02/BlackSheeporiginal.pdf Shelf Number: 145130 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AdditionDrug DecriminalizationMarijuana |
Author: Corda, Alejandro Title: Cannabis in Latin America and the Caribbean: From punishment to regulation Summary: Cannabis (or marihuana) is one of the most widely consumed psychoactive substances in the world. According to the United Nations World Drug Report, 183 million people, or 3.8% of the world's population, used cannabis in 2014. Its cultivation was also reported by 129 countries. Cannabis is subject to the United Nations System for International Control of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (hereafter "drugs") and is the most widely consumed of all the drugs. According to that control system, cannabis is among the substances with the strictest legal status; they are the most prohibited, supposedly because of the harm they cause and their lack of medical usefulness. Nevertheless, its medicinal, spiritual and social use has been recorded in different places and times in human history, without serious associated consequences. Its prohibition began in the early 20th century, even though there were - and are - no records of overdose deaths, and public health risks are relatively low, even compared to other psychoactive substances with less strict legal status, such as alcohol and tobacco. Unlike other substances subject to control, which are produced in only certain regions of the world, cannabis is cultivated, produced and consumed worldwide. Some countries, however, have historically been regional producers or have a longer history or closer ties with the plant. On the American continent, this is true of Mexico in North America, Jamaica in the Caribbean, and Paraguay and Colombia in South America. Proposals for regulation of the cannabis market have been on the table for a number of years. The movement of users and growers has placed the issue on the social, political and media agenda, and there have been some reforms. One example is Uruguay, where the decision was made to regulate the market for cannabis for any kind of use. In other countries, however, reforms have been limited to regulating systems of access to cannabis for medicinal or therapeutic use. Although the international drug control system considers the possibility of "medical and scientific" use of cannabis, prejudices about the substance have hampered the development of regulations and acceptance by Western medicine. In fact, many "reforms" related to medicinal cannabis required only modification of low-level regulations. This means that a proposal being presented as novel is actually something that should always have existed. Key points The prohibitionist approach imposed on cannabis by the international drug control system still persists in nearly all of the Latin American and Caribbean countries examined. In almost all of them, possession falls under criminal law. Some countries' legislation establishes thresholds below which cannabis possession should not be considered a crime. Only in Uruguay does the law include regulation of the entire chain. Although cannabis organizations and other groups have managed to place the issue on the agenda, in most countries reforms are still pending or have been inadequate. The inclusion of relatives and users of cannabis for medicinal and therapeutic purposes has helped give impetus to the movement and to raise awareness among both political stakeholders and the public. Many of the reforms under way do not recognize the need to regulate the recreational and cultural use of cannabis and run the risk of perpetuating the current consequences, with the persistent impact on health, security, institutionality and human rights that the prohibition of cannabis and the lack of state regulation allow and encourage. The countries of Latin America and the Caribbean should prepare for future reform scenarios, instead of considering temporary measures that will perpetuate the same harmful consequences. Limiting reform solely to medicinal cannabis is only a partial, inadequate and temporary solution. If change is truly sought, it is necessary to move toward models of state regulation of cannabis for all purposes. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug policy Briefing no. 48: Accessed April 6, 2017 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_48_eng_web_def.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Latin America URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_48_eng_web_def.pdf Shelf Number: 144729 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and Addiction Drug Offenders Drug Policy Drug ProhibitionDrug Reform Marijuana |
Author: Blickman, Tom Title: Morocco and Cannabis: Reduction, containment or acceptance Summary: This policy briefing discusses whether or not the aim of reducing cannabis cultivation is realistic or beneficial for Morocco, what it would actually mean for the major production area the Rif - one of the poorest, most densely populated and environmentally fragile regions in the country - and what that could imply for meaningful sustainable development. The briefing will give some historical background, discuss developments in the cannabis market, and highlight environmental and social consequences as well as the recent debate about regulation in Morocco and about European policies. KEY POINTS - Morocco continues to be the world's largest producer of cannabis resin (hashish). Over the past 50 years, the Moroccan cannabis growers shown a remarkable resilience to government attempts to eradicate or reduce cannabis cultivation as well as a noteworthy ability to adapt to changing international market conditions. - Since Morocco's independence the government has practiced a policy of containment regarding cannabis cultivation, allowing no new areas but tacitly allowing those already in production to be maintained. - The rapid increase in illicit cannabis cultivation in the Rif during the last decades, as well as poor soil conservation practices, have taken a heavy toll on the Rif's already threatened forests and fragile ecosystems. - The unregulated cannabis market in Morocco has negative social consequences. Some 48,000 growers have arrest warrants hanging over their heads, which is a source of corruption and repression. An amnesty and decriminalization could be effective measures to diminish negative social consequences and open the debate about regulation. - Cannabis farmers in Morocco should have access to emerging legally regulated cannabis markets that are gaining ground worldwide. The challenge is to find a sustainable development model that includes cannabis cultivation in Morocco, instead of excluding cannabis and ignoring the realities of more than 50 years of failed attempts to eradicate the only viable economic option in the region. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2017. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Briefing, no. 49: Accessed April 6, 2017 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_49_eng_web.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Morocco URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_49_eng_web.pdf Shelf Number: 144730 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and Addiction Drug MarketsDrug Offenders Drug Policy Drug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Putri, Dania Title: Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies Summary: Key Points - Traditional use of cannabis in Indonesia has mainly been found in the northern part of Sumatra, particularly in the Aceh region. Restrictions in production, use and distribution of cannabis were initiated by the Dutch colonial government in the 1920s following international actions on cannabis control. - Cannabis is the most widely used illicit substance in Indonesia, with approximately two million users in 2014. Under the current narcotics law cannabis is included in the mostrestrictive Schedule I list, along with substances such as heroin, and crystal meth or shabu. Penalties for cannabis-related offences are comparable to shabu- or heroin-related offences, in spite of the common perception that cannabis is less harmful. - The ambiguous nature of the narcotics law often triggers the victimisation of cannabis users who are either falsely accused as dealers, or have limited or no access to legal support during legal proceedings. Entrapment and extortion by law enforcement and security officers are widespread. - Government attempts to alleviate prison overcrowding by sending users to rehabilitation centres have triggered many criticisms, mainly due to their problematic methods (such as forced urine tests and breaches of patient confidentiality) and the questionable effectiveness of mandatory rehabilitation programmes, especially as the majority of cannabis users do not develop problematic use. - Decriminalizing use, possession for personal use and small-scale cannabis cultivation for personal use may help resolve various issues ranging from prison overcrowding to extortion of users by law enforcement officers, and may also free up human and financial resources to tackle problematic use. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2016. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Policy Briefing no. 44: Accessed April 12, 2017 at: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_44_13012016_map_web.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Indonesia URL: https://www.tni.org/files/publication-downloads/dpb_44_13012016_map_web.pdf Shelf Number: 144819 Keywords: CannabisDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug OffendersDrug PolicyIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Monaghan, Geoffrey Title: Practical implications of policing alternatives to arrest and prosecution for minor cannabis offences Summary: The purpose of this report is not to present a comparative study of legal rules and policies pertaining to cannabis in these or other countries, but to examine an issue largely neglected in the academic literature and by those advocating drug policy reform: namely the practical implications of policing and enforcing these developments. The report provides an overview of some of the many difficulties that may - and do - confront police services when tasked to implement such measures (including the exercise of discretion) through examination of the rules and experiences of four jurisdictions, namely, Australia, England and Wales, Portugal and Switzerland. Along with some examples from the USA, specific aspects of each case study are scrutinised with the intention of highlighting points likely to be of interest to policy makers and practitioners alike. Details: London: International Drug Policy Consortium, 2013. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Modernising drug law enforcement - Report 4: Accessed May 19, 2017 at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/566349360/library/MDLE-report-4_Practical-implications-of-policing-alternatives-to-arrest.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/566349360/library/MDLE-report-4_Practical-implications-of-policing-alternatives-to-arrest.pdf Shelf Number: 131376 Keywords: CannabisDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Hughes, Brendan Title: Cannabis Legislation in Europe: An Overview Summary: Cannabis is the drug most often mentioned in reports of drug law offences in Europe. In 2014, the drug accounted for 57% of an overall estimate of 1.6 million offences (EMCDDA, 2016). Cannabis is also Europe's most commonly used illicit drug. It is estimated that at least one in every eight young adults (aged 15-34 years) used cannabis in the last year across the European Union. At the national level, these rates range from less than 1% to over 20% of young adults. The most recent data suggest that 1% of the adult population (aged 15-64 years) of the European Union and Norway, or about 3 million individuals, are smoking cannabis on a daily or near- daily basis. The trends in use also vary between countries. In surveys since around 2005, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom have shown decreasing or stable trends in reported use, while upward trends can be observed in Bulgaria, France and three of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland and Sweden). A renewed debate about the laws prohibiting or permitting cannabis use and supply around the world has been fuelled by the legalisation of supply and use of cannabis for 'recreational' purposes in some US states and Uruguay since 2012. Proposals to legalise the drug have raised concerns they may lead to increases in cannabis use and related harms, and questions about the ways in which cannabis for non-medical purposes could be regulated to mitigate these concerns. In the European Union, a system of unlimited distribution has evolved in the Netherlands since the 1970s, and this has seen further developments in the last few years. The advantages and disadvantages of these regulated systems are being closely observed. The model of 'cannabis social clubs' has been increasingly mentioned in drug policy debates. Its advocates argue that the decision to not prosecute individuals for cannabis use in some countries can also be applied to registered groups of individuals, in order to permit a closed system of cannabis production and distribution. At present, the model is rejected by national authorities in Europe. Throughout Europe there is media and public discourse on the issue of changing cannabis laws. However, national administrations are concerned about the public health impact of cannabis use and generally oppose the decriminalisation or legalisation of cannabis for recreational use. Nonetheless, cannabis laws and the medical and scientific research that informs policy-making can be regarded as entering a period of change, the direction of which is still unclear. It is with this background in mind that the EMCDDA has decided to produce this report. Incorporating and building on earlier EMCDDA work (see Resources, page 30), the present study outlines the legislation relating to cannabis around the European Union (with a focus on 'recreational' use, rather than production and use for medical or industrial purposes). Written for a broad audience, the report aims to give brief answers to some of the more frequently asked questions raised in the discussions about cannabis legislation. These have been grouped into four parts: 1. What is cannabis and what are countries' obligations to control it? 2. What do the laws and associated guidelines say? 3. What happens to cannabis offenders in practice? 4. Where is cannabis legislation going? Details: Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 25, 2017 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/4135/TD0217210ENN.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/4135/TD0217210ENN.pdf Shelf Number: 145791 Keywords: CannabisDrug LegalizationDrug PolicyIllicit DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Mawani, Fatima Title: Measuring Illicit Cannabis Seizures in Canada: Methods, Practices and Recommendations Summary: The measurement of illicit cannabis seizures in Canada was not previously studied in detail. Measuring seizures is important because the data can be analyzed to develop an understanding of many areas of cannabis regulation and enforcement - from trends in criminal methods or enforcement efficiency, to the size and value of illicit markets. This report examines the current methods of measuring the metric of cannabis seizures in Canada, with particular attention paid to the way seizure information is recorded by law enforcement officials. A discussion of potential improvements to the way Canada currently measures the metric of cannabis seizures is presented, including a critical review of which analyses could be undertaken if improvements to seizure reporting were introduced. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2017. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: RESEARCH REPORT: 2017-R002: Accessed September 7, 2017 at: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2017-r002/2017-r002-en.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2017-r002/2017-r002-en.pdf Shelf Number: 147141 Keywords: CannabisDrug EnforcementIllegal DrugsIllicit marketsMarijuana |
Author: Jelsma, Martin Title: Balancing Treaty Stability and Change: Inter se modification of the UN drug control conventions to facilitate cannabis regulation Summary: Key Points - Legal tensions are growing within the international drug control regime as increasing numbers of member states or jurisdictions therein move towards or seriously consider legal regulation of the cannabis market for non-medical purposes, a policy choice not permitted under the existing UN legal framework. - Reaching a new global consensus to revise or amend the UN drug control conventions to accommodate cannabis regulation, or that of other psychoactive plants and substances currently scheduled in these treaties, does not appear to be a viable political option in the foreseeable future. - The application of dubious or 'untidy' legal arguments to accommodate regulated cannabis markets does little for the integrity of the regime, undermines respect for international law more broadly and is not sustainable. - Appealing to human rights obligations can provide powerful arguments to question full compliance with certain drug control treaty provisions, but does not in itself resolve the arguable conflict between different treaty obligations. - States may wish to adopt a stance of respectful temporary non-compliance as they pursue legally valid and appropriate options for the re-alignment of international obligations with domestic policy. - The nature of the international drug control regime's internal mechanisms does much to limit avenues for modernisation and forces states to consider extraordinary measures, such as the rightful choice made by Bolivia in relation to coca to withdraw and re-adhere with a new reservation. - Amongst reform options not requiring consensus, inter se modification appears to be the most 'elegant' approach and one that provides a useful safety valve for collective action to adjust a treaty regime arguably frozen in time. - Inter se modification would require the like-minded agreement to include a clear commitment to the original treaty aim to promote the health and welfare of humankind and to the original treaty obligations vis-a-vis countries not party to the agreement. - A legally-grounded and coordinated collective response has many clear benefits compared to a chaotic scenario of a growing number of different unilateral reservations and questionable re-interpretations. - Among other things, inter se modification would provide opportunities to experiment and learn from different models of regulation as well as open the possibility of international trade enabling small cannabis farmers in traditional Southern producing countries to supply the emerging regulated licit spaces in the global market. - Inter se modification would facilitate the development of what, within an international policy environment characterized by faux consensus, is increasingly necessary: a 'multi-speed drug control system' operating within the boundaries of international law, rather than one that strains against them. Details: Swansea, UK: Global Drug Policy Observatory, Swansea University, 2018. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Report 7: Accessed April 5, 2018 at: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Stability-Change-Inter-Se-Modification_GDPO-TNI-WOLA_March-2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: International URL: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Stability-Change-Inter-Se-Modification_GDPO-TNI-WOLA_March-2018.pdf Shelf Number: 149703 Keywords: CannabisDrug ControlDrug MarketsDrug PolicyIllegal DrugsMarijuana |
Author: Pulido Moreno, Rodrigo Title: Cannabis in Uruguay. A case study of the regulated cannabis market in Uruguay Summary: This study deals with the impact of the legislative bill that enabled the creation of a regulated cannabis market in Uruguay as a means to combat organized crime in the country. This study will also explore the hypothesis that this legislative bill changed the legal character of criminality as well as reformulating narcotic issues from being a criminal issue into a public health issue. Analyzing the very specific case of Uruguay's current narcotic policies becomes a means to explore the ideas that constitute Law Nr 19.172 "Marijuana and its derivatives" which might be indicative of the attitudes in society regarding criminality. This ties into the new iteration of the dichotomy between law and democracy as a result of this legislative reform in Uruguay and the possible new role of legal theory in a democratic country which is discussed in this article. Details: Stockholm: Department of Romance Studies and Classics Institute of Latin American Studies, University of Stockholm, 2017. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed April 17, 2018 at: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1069404/FULLTEXT01.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Uruguay URL: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1069404/FULLTEXT01.pdf Shelf Number: 149841 Keywords: CannabisDrug EnforcementDrug MarketsDrug PolicyMarijuana |
Author: Sexton, B.F. Title: The influence of cannabis and alcohol on driving Summary: The most recent of TRL's major studies investigating the incidence of alcohol and drugs in road accident fatalities has shown a large increase in the incidence of drugs present in fatal casualties (drivers, riders, passengers and pedestrians). Among all road users illicit drugs were present in 18% of fatalities. These figures represent a sixfold increase in the detected incidence of illicit drugs present in fatalities since the previous, similar, study 12 years earlier. In the most recent research cannabis constituted around two thirds of the illegal drugs found in fatalities. In the study of fatalities referred to above, 24% of the drivers who had consumed cannabis were also over the drink/drive limit, and a further 16% had consumed some alcohol but were below the legal limit. Anecdotal evidence suggests that regular cannabis users often consume alcohol during a cannabis-smoking session. The amount of alcohol they consume is usually below the legal limit, and hence they may believe that their driving is unaffected by the alcohol. It is therefore important to establish the degree of impairment caused by such a dose of alcohol in combination with a typical cannabis dose. In 1999, the (now) DfT (Department for Transport), commissioned a review of the latest evidence of the impairment effects of cannabis. The report of that review provided an overview of the effects of cannabis on driving and accident risk and identified areas where current knowledge was deemed to be insufficient to guide road safety policy. This raised important questions, which have now been addressed by a research project carried out by TRL for Road Safety Division, DfT, to investigate the degree to which cannabis impairs psychomotor and cognitive skills relevant to the driving task. The first phase (reported previously) of this first UK study had the following objectives: To provide reliable data, under laboratory conditions, on the impairing effects of cannabis on driving. To determine the duration and extent of any impairment under different degrees of intoxication (using different levels of cannabis). To provide an overview of attitudes and habits of cannabis users in relation to driving and explore factors which may influence the decision to drive under its influence. The objectives were addressed using male drivers who were experienced cannabis users. These subjects carried out a variety of laboratory-based tasks and drove in the TRL simulator under four cannabis conditions: placebo; low ∆9 -THC (the main active cannabinoid of tetrahydrocannabinol); high ∆9 -THC; and cannabis resin The second phase, reported here, considers the influence of alcohol in combination with cannabis. This research has two objectives: To provide reliable data, under laboratory conditions, on the impairing effects of the combination of moderate doses of cannabis and alcohol on driving; To investigate whether police surgeons can readily distinguish between unimpaired individuals and those impaired by alcohol, cannabis and by a combination of the two. Details: London: Transport Research London, 2002. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: TRL543: Accessed September 17, 2018 at: https://trl.co.uk/sites/default/files/TRL543.pdf Year: 2002 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://trl.co.uk/sites/default/files/TRL543.pdf Shelf Number: 151560 Keywords: Alcohol-Impaired Driving CannabisDriving Under the Influence Drugged Driving Drunk Driving Marijuana |
Author: Mungroo, Pat Title: Cannabis Regulation: The World is moving forward, what is stopping us? Summary: The conference was perfectly timed to coincide with a transformation in the international outlook for cannabis. For some 50 years the question has been, will it ever be possible for people to buy relatively safe cannabis from a legal outlet. Today the question is quite different. Now everyone is asking which of the models of cannabis regulation will be the most safe and effective. So far we have at least five options. Cannabis regulation in Washington, Colorado, Uruguay, the Netherlands and Spain all differ one from the other. There are of course other questions too. Will the Federal Authorities take a different view of cannabis regulation once President Obama leaves the White House? It seems likely that so many States will have introduced regulation by 2016 that it will be difficult to put the gene back in the bottle. Or will the federal banking laws continue to undermine the cannabis industry and ultimately kill it? In the UK politicians have been persuaded by psychiatrists that cannabis causes psychosis and memory loss and controls should therefore not be relaxed. Professor Curran's work and contribution to the conference is of great importance. Professor Curran used scientific methods to show that the balance between THC and CBD in cannabis is important in determining the level of risk of the drug. Regulation, which could control the potency of legally available cannabis, would thus create a much safer world for our young people. Professor Curran's work is supported by Dr. Robin Murray who also emphasised the key importance of the THC strength of cannabis in determining the risk of psychosis. Melissa Bone's contribution on medical consumption of cannabis, particularly for the treatment of cancer, underlines the need to re-schedule cannabis to support research into its medicinal uses. John Churchill is right to emphasise the need to create a fire wall between cannabis use and drug dealers; at the same time separating the hard and soft drugs markets. The arguments of Peter Reynolds and Peter Moyes also deserve to be taken seriously. What we need is public education about the facts presented in this helpful report, to replace the myths which have dominated public thinking for so long. Details: Cambridge: Qualitative Cannabis Research Forum, 2014. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Conference Report: Accessed October 11, 2018 at: https://www.academia.edu/9535332/Cannabis_Regulation_The_World_Is_Moving_Forward_What_Is_Stopping_Us Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.academia.edu/9535332/Cannabis_Regulation_The_World_Is_Moving_Forward_What_Is_Stopping_Us Shelf Number: 151474 Keywords: CannabisDrug PolicyDrug ReformMarijuana |
Author: Rosen, Alana E. Title: High Time for Criminal Justice Reform: Marijuana Expungement Statutes in States with Legalized or Decriminalized Marijuana Laws Summary: As states continue to legalize or decriminalize recreational marijuana, there is a chasm within our society. One segment of the population can use, possess, transport, and cultivate marijuana without fear of prosecution. Another segment of the population suffers from the collateral consequences of previous marijuana-related offenses. This Article argues that any state that enacts marijuana legalization or decriminalization statutes should automatically include an expungement provision that clears the criminal record of individuals who engaged in activities now deemed lawful under the new legalization and decriminalization laws. This Article proposes model language for an expungement statute that serves as a guide for legislators, judges, and attorneys. The proposed expungement statute will help individuals obtain access to opportunities and benefits now denied them because of their marijuana-related criminal records including employment, professional licenses, financial aid, public housing, travel abroad, firearms' purchases, the right to vote, and jury service. Changes to the law will also benefit communities that have been disproportionately targeted by the War on Drugs and marijuana prohibition. Details: Lubbock, Texas: Texas Tech University School of Law, 2019. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 8, 2019 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3327533 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3327533 Shelf Number: 156259 Keywords: CannabisCriminal RecordDecriminalizationExpungementLegalizationMarijuanaWeed |