tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/drug-legalisation-2781/articlesDrug legalisation – The Conversation2022-06-13T07:59:37Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1842932022-06-13T07:59:37Z2022-06-13T07:59:37ZCannabis tourism: how a new travel trend is taking off<p>Legal cannabis consumption <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34364201/">rose</a> in the <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/353645/nearly-half-adults-tried-marijuana.aspx">US</a> and <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.601653/full">Europe</a> during the COVID pandemic, with some people turning to marijuana to help them <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33044893/">cope</a> with lockdowns and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/30/pandemic-marijuana-use-increase-covid">broken routines</a>. Meanwhile, fewer people today view the drug as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460321002768">harmful</a> compared to previous decades.</p>
<hr>
<iframe id="noa-web-audio-player" style="border: none" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=x84olp&id=https://theconversation.com/cannabis-tourism-how-a-new-travel-trend-is-taking-off-184293&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=D8352A&playColor=D8352A" width="100%" height="110px"></iframe>
<p><em>You can listen to more articles from The Conversation, narrated by Noa, <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/audio-narrated-99682">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>These factors may have contributed to a trend towards cannabis-related tourism, with destinations developing new holiday products to tempt customers, and rising travel bookings to destinations where cannabis is <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/11745398.2018.1435291">legal</a>. But there are risks for both destinations and tourists in embracing this trend.</p>
<p>Work by <a href="https://mmgy.myshopify.com/products/coming-soon-the-portrait-of-cannabis-tourism">MMGY Travel Intelligence</a> found <a href="https://www.travelagentcentral.com/your-business/stats-29-leisure-travelers-interested-cannabis-related-tourism">29% of leisure travellers</a> are interested in cannabis-related tourism. A study by the Dutch government revealed that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/11/foreigners-face-ban-from-amsterdams-cannabis-cafes">58%</a> of international tourists choose Amsterdam in order to consume drugs. And business in Dutch coffee shops has <a href="https://www.euronews.com/2021/12/13/dutch-cannabis-cafes-see-rise-in-business-during-covid-19-pandemic">increased</a> since the start of the pandemic. </p>
<p>Nine months after Illinois legalised recreational cannabis in January 2020, nearly <a href="https://Mjbizdaily.Com/Colorado-Summer-Cannabis-Sales-Thrive-Despite-Tourism-Slowdown/">30% of purchases</a> were by non-residents. Thailand has <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-61741422">just announced </a>it has legalised cannabis and is hoping this will boost tourism.</p>
<p>The tourism sector and <a href="https://www.nj.com/marijuana/2022/05/atlantic-city-gambles-on-nj-legal-weed-to-boost-tourism-and-draw-conventions.html">specific destinations</a> have reacted quickly to the demand for cannabis, hemp and CBD-related products by designing experiences that include those elements. They are also responding to the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ropr.12460">expected</a> economic potential related to increased <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3776095">hotel occupancy</a>, tax revenues, increased land values, business expansion, jobs and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ropr.12460">public health and safety benefits</a> that could be connected to cannabis sales.</p>
<p>Yet although tourism to other destinations with legalised cannabis is growing in <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/11745398.2018.1435291?journalCode=ranz20">popularity</a>, <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2022/05/29/cannabis-tourism-is-now-a-17-billion-industry-and-its-just-taking-off/">data</a> is only <a href="https://newheightscannabis.com/cannatourism-study/">beginning</a> to be collected. And so far no destination is ready to be labelled as the “<a href="https://twitter.com/cannabisretail/status/1410285794393214981">next Amsterdam</a>”.</p>
<h2>Big potential</h2>
<p>While cannabis-related travellers are believed to be <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2021/10/09/can-cannabis-tourism-help-revive-the-travel-industry/">high spending and well educated</a>, authorities <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/05/thailand-dreams-of-high-end-cannabis-tourism-after-marijuana-is-legalised">don’t want</a> to replicate the Dutch model, which led to massive concentration of cannabis coffee shops in Amsterdam and raised concerns over <a href="https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/amsterdam-mayor-to-move-ahead-with-tourist-cannabis-caffe-ban/">hard drug use and criminality</a>. </p>
<p>New business models are focusing on agri-tourism (meet-the-farmer sessions) and culinary tourism and events such as cannabis <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHTI-09-2020-0177/full/html">festivals</a>. Tourists can choose from <a href="https://emeraldfarmtours.com/">farm tours</a>, “<a href="https://www.budandbreakfast.com/">bud and breakfast</a>” hotels, <a href="https://www.canadahightours.com/toronto">city tours</a>, <a href="https://www.festicket.com/festivals/the-cannabis-world-cup-festival-amsterdam/">cannabis festivals</a>, <a href="https://www.visitoakland.com/things-to-do/cannabis-trail/">cannabis trails</a>, <a href="https://www.esquire.com/food-drink/restaurants/a26454549/weed-wine-food-pairings/">food, wine and marijuana pairings</a>, “ganja <a href="https://www.marijuasana.com/">yoga</a>”, and packages that combine <a href="https://www.hibnb.ca/">accommodation</a> and <a href="https://coloradocannabistours.com/denver-classes-attractions/">cannabis experiences</a>. </p>
<p>The potential for cannabis tourism is widespread around the world. More than 19 US states and <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2022/01/10/where-is-cannabis-legal-a-guide-to-all-50-states/">Washington DC</a> have now legalised recreational cannabis, along with <a href="https://ca.travelpulse.com/news/features/cannabis-tourism-climbing-to-new-heights.html">Canada</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/10/world/americas/mexico-cannabis-bill.html">Mexico</a>, <a href="https://qcostarica.com/uruguay-considers-allowing-tourists-to-buy-marijuana/">Uruguay</a> and <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article/27/4/taz098/5671717">others</a>. In Europe, Luxembourg allows the consumption of personally cultivated cannabis, while <a href="https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/04/20/switzerland-trials-legal-cannabis-sales-for-recreational-use">Switzerland</a> is trialling cannabis sales from pharmacies for recreational purposes. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2022/05/07/be-progressive-and-legalise-medical-marijuana-urges-ras-adiba">Malaysia</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/08/thailand-to-ease-cannabis-rules-but-smokers-warned-over-smell-nuisance">Thailand</a> have made initial steps towards legalising recreational use. <a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/03/03/costa-rica-medical-marijuana-legal">Costa Rica</a> and <a href="https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2022/06/349489/morocco-to-ensure-positive-impact-on-legal-cannabis-growers">Morocco</a> have also approved legalisation for medicinal purposes.</p>
<h2>Risks for tourists</h2>
<p>However, few countries have clarified the legality of cannabis use by tourists with legislation directed at recreational use by residents. This means tourists risk breaking the law <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/15/britons-who-legally-smoke-cannabis-in-the-us-risk-being-deported">unintentionally</a>, by interacting with <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/italian-court-reduces-sentences-us-tourists-over-policeman-murder-2022-03-17/">street dealers and police</a> as well as the health implications of consuming real and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-portugal-tourism-drugs/weeding-out-fakes-lisbon-tourism-at-threat-from-drug-dealers-idUSKBN2020DN">fake drugs</a>.</p>
<p>There is some evidence cannabis can <a href="https://www.apa.org/monitor/2018/12/marijuana">improve some mental health conditions and provide pain relief</a>. But tourists with pre-existing mental health disorders, for example, may risk their <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article/27/4/taz098/5671717">physical and psychological wellbeing</a>. Cannabis-related mental health events including <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article/doi/10.1093/jtm/taz098/5671717">depression</a> can also occur among those who have <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.640222/full">not been diagnosed</a> with mental health issues. </p>
<p>A patchwork of <a href="https://www.thelocal.es/20220429/whats-the-law-on-cannabis-in-spain/">complicated</a> <a href="https://www.leafly.com/news/lifestyle/countries-that-could-become-top-weed-tourism-destinations">laws and regulations</a> regarding recreational cannabis use by <a href="https://www.leafly.com/news/lifestyle/countries-that-could-become-top-weed-tourism-destinations">overseas tourists</a> means questions remain about the legality of consumption, the transport of cannabis vape pens overseas as well as issues of insurance cover and health care, during and after travel. </p>
<p>While Uruguay is planning to <a href="https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/travel-leisure/article/3148661/uruguay-considers-opening-legal-marijuana-market-tourists">allow</a> consumption by tourists, countries like Portugal, where cannabis has been decriminalised since 2001, still doesn’t allow them to buy it legally. In Spain, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/world/europe/marijuana-clubs-rise-out-of-decades-old-spanish-laws.html">cannabis clubs</a> allow visitors to donate to the club instead of purchasing a product. But <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00220426198527800">Spain</a> and other large markets <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2022-06-05-cashing-in-on-the-high-end-of-budding-cannabis-tourism/">like South Africa</a> are focused on <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JTF-10-2018-0064/full/html">domestic cannabis tourism</a> rather than international visitors. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/marijuana-4-essential-reads-on-the-uses-effects-and-potential-of-cannabis-181427">Marijuana: 4 essential reads on the uses, effects and potential of cannabis</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Few countries have carried out a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ropr.12460">cost-benefit analysis</a> around legal cannabis and tourism, or fully discussed issues of land and water use, police powers and benefits to local communities. While cannabis tourism can generate tourism and jobs, and reduce the power of organised crime, the goal of sustainable development is threatened by theft, racism, and a market stacked <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/15/business/cannabis-dispensaries-oakland.html">against</a> small local operators who often can not secure funding or insurance. There are also possible increases in pollution and public health and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ropr.12460">safety concerns</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/01/06/mexico-indigenous-cannabis-crops">Mexico</a> and <a href="https://mjbizdaily.com/british-columbia-launching-program-to-promote-indigenous-cannabis-products/">Canada</a> have promised funding for indigenously owned businesses to aid social and racial equality, while <a href="https://mjbizdaily.com/new-york-plans-200-million-fund-to-bolster-marijuana-social-equity-goals/">New York</a> plans to create a US$200 million (£162 million) public-private fund to support social equity goals. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212571X17303840">Resident support</a>, and <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cog/tri/2020/00000024/00000004/art00004">continual conversations</a> with communities on how to plan the sustainable development of cannabis tourism should be a vital part of development of the sector. </p>
<p>While it appears that the COVID pandemic helped <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2022/03/09/the-vice-age-how-sex-drugs-and-gambling-help-americans-cope-with-covid/?sh=1c9ec7093131">stimulate</a> and <a href="https://theharrispoll.com/briefs/how-covid-19-is-affecting-cannabis-usage/">legitimise</a> the use of marijuana, with dispensaries declared <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25741292.2020.1810397">an essential service</a> in parts of the US during the pandemic, tourism could expand and <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cog/tri/2021/00000025/00000004/art00006">normalise</a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8617584/#:">acceptance</a> of its use. </p>
<p>Perceived risks may fade and and tourist <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13032917.2019.1703771">guilt</a> may dissipate. Cannabis tourism is likely to become just another <a href="https://theconversation.com/tourism-is-the-missing-piece-of-canadas-cannabis-legalization-puzzle-177953">segment</a> of the holiday industry.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184293/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael O'Regan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Holiday destinations are creating cannabis-related events and activities to capture a new travel trend.Michael O'Regan, Senior Lecturer in International Tourism Management, Swansea UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1464592020-12-21T10:18:29Z2020-12-21T10:18:29ZCannabis: the problem with defining products around THC content<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373297/original/file-20201207-21-vpqk36.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/hAyInG_uDtE">Sam Doucette/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en">FAL</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Cannabis policy is undergoing a global revolution. Around the world, laws are changing. In the US, there are now <a href="https://www.esquire.com/lifestyle/a21719186/all-states-that-legalized-weed-in-us/">15 states</a> in which cannabis for adult-use purposes is legal, and nearly three dozen where it is legal for medical purposes. In 2018, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45806255">Canada</a> became the first G7 country to legalise cannabis for all purposes, following the first country to do so, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47785648">Uruguay</a>. More than <a href="https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/market-sectors/healthcare/marijuana-stocks/marijuana-legalization/">40 countries</a>, on every continent except Antartica, have implemented a legal framework for cannabis, primarily for medical purposes. </p>
<p>In the UK, consumption of cannabis – and cultivation, production and distribution that is unlicensed for non-medical or non-industrial purposes – is still illegal, subject to a warning or a fine of <a href="https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing">£90</a>. Penalties for possession and supply production range from five to 14 years in jail, unlimited fines or both.</p>
<p>But in November 2018, the UK government <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-announces-that-medicinal-cannabis-is-legal">legalised medical cannabis</a>, marking the opening of its legal, regulated market. This followed news that <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44519058">Billy Caldwell</a>, a young boy with severe epilepsy, was hospitalised after his cannabis medications were confiscated in June 2018. The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/19/home-secretary-sajid-javid-announces-review-into-medicinal-cannabis-use">process of reform</a> was expedited after the UK public called the morality of the government into question. </p>
<p>Despite legalisation, patient access <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/01/anger-at-nhs-failure-to-prescribe-cannabis-oil-medicines">remains restricted</a> – the few hundred people who have obtained medicines have primarily done so through private healthcare. In this context, the fact that the UK has historically been the world’s largest exporter of <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44197038">medical cannabis</a> is something of a surprise. This paradox cuts to the heart of many of the trends across the global cannabis market.</p>
<h2>The CBD market</h2>
<p>Although medical cannabis access is restricted, there is another popular, legal cannabis market where over-the-counter cannabis-based products are available. They are predominantly made up of a cannabinoid called cannabidol, commonly referred to as CBD, which as an isolated compound is legal in the UK. </p>
<p>One way CBD is defined is by its THC (delta 9 tetrahydrocannabinol) content. THC is one of the most <a href="https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.7326/0003-4819-126-10-199705150-00008?casa_token=3tl4rpbE4eEAAAAA%3AsFFDS1wnhLTc7tnDALsO_6UP1xCtjnBUJ4qPRtC-fGOVsZvppNvnUwU6PF_tea7vGw_NyRvhtweErg&">widely studied</a> and well-known cannabis compounds, a principle chemical in the plant that people associate with “getting high”. THC for non-medical purposes is illegal in the UK, and CBD products must contain less than 0.2% THC and less than <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2001/3998/contents/made">1mg of THC</a> per product: i.e. very, very small levels.</p>
<p>Consumers buy <a href="https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/cannabidiol-cbd-what-we-know-and-what-we-dont-2018082414476">CBD</a> for chronic pain, anxiety and inflammatory related issues, as well as sleep, metabolism, pleasure and mood. Name your need – from sex to sleep, relief to recovery, focus to fitness and skin health to gut health – there likely is a CBD product that claims to sort it. Currently, the UK CBD market value is around <a href="https://www.savills.co.uk/research_articles/229130/296363-0">£300 million</a>.</p>
<p>Research has found benefits of CBD use for a range of conditions, such as <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?author=GW%20Biosciences&publication_year=2018&title=Epidiolex">epilepsy</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6326553/">anxiety disorders</a>, and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6099309/">reducing tobacco use</a>. Acceptance is growing. Product choice is abundant, from cosmetic balms, gel capsules, liquid tinctures, food and beverages, trans-dermal patches, even toothpaste and mascara (the latter lacks evidence for use).</p>
<p>CBD products are marketed around the idea that they “can’t get you high”. This, after all, contributes to why they are on the accepted side of the law. And it’s true. You won’t experience a stereotypical high. But such jargon perpetuates the idea that “getting high” is shameful. To some patients, THC, or other psychotropic cannabinoids, are necessary compounds in their medicine. </p>
<p>Throughout <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/episode-12-women-in-cannabis-jessica-steinberg-from/id1454098889?i=1000438032634">my research</a> into the legal <a href="https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/people/jessica-steinberg">cannabis market</a>, I have observed how the commercialisation of the CBD market has created a misleading dichotomy of “bad” THC versus “good” CBD. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/16/style/self-care/cbd-oil-benefits.html">Media commentary</a> about CBD invariably discusses THC as a worse “option” – as if there were only two options. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Packet of CBD gummy bears." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/373295/original/file-20201207-23-10vvuxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘THC free’.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/q_vnJenyn9s">PharmaHemp/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en">FAL</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>THC vs. CBD</h2>
<p>Out of the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3736954/">400 plus</a> chemical compounds in the cannabis plant, CBD and THC are only the most well-known, and researched, cannabinoids. Both are psychoactive substances. But, THC is psychotropic, and CBD is <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1760722/">non-psychotropic</a>.</p>
<p>Psychoactive effects are a daily experience to most. No matter how you take your coffee, know that it includes a dose of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4462044/">psychoactivity</a>. Morning caffeine jitters and post “coffee highs” are such symptomatic effects. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3672386/">Chocolate</a> lovers will have also experienced <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575938/">psychoactive effects</a>, such as improved mood, stress reduction, and focus.</p>
<p>Psychotropic effects, by contrast, are what people stereotypically identify with the “high” of cannabis. There might be mood and mind-altering effects, which change behaviour, thoughts, perception and mental and motor activity. Many of the laws around cannabis, both in the UK and elsewhere, cling on to this distinction between psychoactive and psychotropic compounds as an easy way to distinguish between “benefical” and “harmful” substances.</p>
<p>But the synergy of THC and CBD, and other cannabinoids like THCV, CBN, CBG and delta-8 THC, are under <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3165946/">investigation by scientists</a> to explore how multiple compounds enhance the potential effect of the plant. This characterises a theory called “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006295218302387?casa_token=WdJShpffTrsAAAAA:zM38MPHQJYQ3oEqm__9OvSeyEajfIUdsq1MJCQMxlKirOuBtuvzaMRth01vOQl2ehBrtJgZ6Tg">the entourage effect</a>” that suggests that the synergy of various molecules found in cannabis, when combined, maximises potential efficacy of a whole plant compound, rather than isolated extracts. </p>
<p>This has been researched in the context of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7324885/">anxiety and mood disorders</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30152161/">migraines, pain and headaches</a>, <a href="https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2018/1691428/">cancer</a>, <a href="https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.00791.x">inflammation</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32149543/">Crohn’s disease</a>. Historically there have been restrictions to conduct cannabis research, so these studies provide a useful foundation for ongoing investigation.</p>
<p>Cannabis is a complex plant. Humans are complex, diverse beings. Cannabis legalisation in the UK – and many other countries – has aimed to simplify the plant, and its derived products, but the commercialisation of this has created two clumsy and unhelpful categories. Ultimately, this is detrimental to the longevity of patient access, scientific research and public knowledge about cannabis-based products and other plant medicines.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146459/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jessica Steinberg is the Founder and Managing Director of international cannabis consultancy, The Global C. She works primarily with the North American and European cannabis markets, including projects related to hemp and CBD, medical cannabis and adult-use cannabis. Her research is partly funded by various bodies at the University of Oxford, including her college, St. Hildas, and her department within the Faculty of Law. She was a John Blundell Scholar awarded by the Adam Smith Institute. </span></em></p>Out of the 400 plus chemical compounds in the cannabis plant, CBD and THC are only the most well-known, and researched, cannabinoids.Jessica Steinberg, DPhil Candidate in Socio-Legal Studies, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1347532020-03-26T13:59:19Z2020-03-26T13:59:19ZHow coronavirus is changing the market for illegal drugs<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323280/original/file-20200326-132995-tgg5v0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Reading between the lines. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.wallpaperflare.com/closeup-photography-of-rolled-banknote-with-cocaine-addiction-wallpaper-zecyl">Wallpaper flare</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The illicit drug market in the UK <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/868404/Review_of_Drugs_Evidence_Pack_-_FINAL_PUBLICATION_VERSION_1.pdf">turns over</a> more than £10 billion tax-free a year. Unlike the wider economy, we have limited intelligence about how it operates. But like the wider economy, it is certainly not immune to the disruption being caused by the COVID-19 virus. </p>
<p>As borders close, the supply and distribution of most drugs is being restricted – but <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/dygebq/drug-dealers-how-coronavirus-affecting-business">particularly</a> those that rely on ingredients <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/bvgazz/sinaloa-cartel-drug-traffickers-explain-why-coronavirus-is-bad-for-business">sourced</a> in China. We are already hearing reports of reductios in the supplies of “<a href="http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/synthetic-cannabinoids">Spice</a>”, for example, the synthetic cannabinoid which is often imported from that part of the world. There are also bound to be problems further down the distribution network. The edict to stay at home will be affecting the ability of city-based dealers to carry out “<a href="https://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/what-we-do/crime-threats/drug-trafficking/county-lines">county lines dealing</a>”, where they push their product into smaller towns and rural areas. </p>
<p>Previous heroin “droughts” in <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reducing-opioid-related-deaths-in-the-uk">the UK</a> and <a href="https://substanceabusepolicy.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1747-597X-1-11">Australia</a> have been accompanied by temporary falls in deaths, as people reduced their use or substituted with alternatives that were less lethal in an overdose. But more recently, we have seen significant increases in deaths from the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/misuse-of-fentanyl-and-fentanyl-analogues">synthetic opioid fentanyl</a> in North America, so we must be alert to the possibility that UK dealers and users will turn to this dangerous substance as heroin supplies dry up. As fentanyl is significantly stronger than heroin it is easier to store and move around due to the smaller quantity required.</p>
<p>Even where a user knows they have bought fentanyl rather than heroin, titrating a safe dose is challenging and this might only become apparent when it’s too late. The UK already has <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-drug-deaths-continue-to-rise-time-for-action-120449">the highest</a> rate of drug-related deaths in Europe, and the danger now is that the rate may climb even higher. </p>
<p>The government is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/government-response-to-coronavirus-led-by-science-grant-shapps">continually stressing</a> that it is led by research evidence in tackling the COVID-19 pandemic, but this doesn’t extend to acting on its advisers’ <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/699825/Letter_from_Victoria_Atkins_MP_to_OBJ.pdf">own recommendation</a> that it should set up drug consumption rooms to reduce the number of deaths from overdoses. It’s difficult to imagine a more important time to heed this advice. </p>
<h2>Another kind of panic buying</h2>
<p>Now that we are all self-isolating, a perfect set of ingredients come together: anxiety, boredom, escapism and loneliness. All of these are candidates for self-medicating with more drugs – as are the abrupt change of routine and being cooped up with family.</p>
<p>Just as we’ve seen <a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-why-people-are-panic-buying-loo-roll-and-how-to-stop-it-133115">people panic buying</a> toilet rolls and paracetamol, consumers of recreational drugs will, if they have the means, stockpile their drug of choice. More than 1.5 million people are <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/drug-misuse-findings-from-the-2018-to-2019-csew">regular users</a> of drugs in England and Wales alone, and the surge in demand has <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/dygebq/drug-dealers-how-coronavirus-affecting-business">already seen reports</a> of the price of drugs escalating.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1242796149603524610"}"></div></p>
<p>Stockpiling might lead people to take more drugs than usual. If they are dependent and subsequently can’t source the drug, they could suddenly end up with a withdrawal problem. This increases the risk that they will try a substitute drug, which again makes it more likely that they will come to harm since they may not be used to the drug or know what a safe dose should be. </p>
<p>The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction recently issued some <a href="http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/topic-overviews/covid-19-and-people-who-use-drugs">general advice</a> to users on reducing harm during the spread of coronavirus. This was welcome, but it didn’t say anything about the risks from drugs themselves at this time. </p>
<p>We are talking about a market without any quality control or regulation, in which consumers have no idea of the strength of their drug from dose to dose or which chemicals they are exposing themselves to. Mirroring the lack of testing for COVID-19, there’s no routine testing for drugs in the UK and many other countries – other than, say, at <a href="https://theconversation.com/festival-drug-checking-is-here-but-it-now-needs-to-be-expanded-across-the-country-63065">certain music festivals</a>.</p>
<h2>The growing threat</h2>
<p>Public Health England has asked frontline agencies to alert them to examples of drug substitution or contaminated product. Gathering this intelligence makes sense, but is of little benefit unless it is communicated directly to those at risk. This could be viewed by some as a government agency condoning drug use, so it is unlikely to do so directly.</p>
<p>There is already a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/drug-safety-update">similar process</a> for problems with prescribed drugs, as the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency alerts pharmacists, general practitioners and others involved in prescribing or dispensing these drugs to any hazards or emerging risks.</p>
<p>In the case of illegal drugs, the obvious network for feeding back equivalent information is the specialist drug treatment services. Unfortunately, that network <a href="https://transformdrugs.org/we-need-to-support-the-vulnerable-as-covid-19-spreads/">has shrunk</a> significantly over the last decade because the government has <a href="https://theconversation.com/drug-deaths-increase-as-fewer-people-access-treatment-84784">savagely cut</a> the treatment budget. Even then, this network doesn’t reach the majority of people with drug problems, as they are not in treatment. For obvious reasons, such people guard their identity. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323289/original/file-20200326-133001-szmzlb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Much obliged’.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/drug-trafficking-crime-addiction-sale-concept-519449383">Syda Productions</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The bottom line is that we need to be smarter and better informed about this large but hidden part of our economy. The pandemic is exposing how little we know, and our inability to protect the significant number of people involved in it. There are persuasive grounds to change our policy approach to drugs, including the potential to <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1477370819887514">reduce the harms done</a> by either no longer criminalising users or even <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-costs-and-benefits-of-a-licensed-taxed-and-regulated-cannabis-market/">legalising sales</a> and reaping the tax revenues. </p>
<p>“Doing what it takes to protect people” has to include everyone – not just those we morally approve of.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/134753/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alex Stevens is a member of the DrugScience committee, of the board of the International Society for the Study of Drug Policy, and of the Green Party</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ian Hamilton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Prices are surging amid shortages and panic-buying – and we could soon be facing a public health disaster. Ian Hamilton, Associate Professor, Addiction and Mental Health, University of YorkAlex Stevens, Professor in Criminal Justice and Faculty Director of Public Engagement, University of KentLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1300502020-01-27T18:57:11Z2020-01-27T18:57:11ZACT cannabis laws come into effect on Friday, but they may not be what you hoped for<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/311285/original/file-20200122-117943-14tijxd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">From January 31, ACT laws allow residents to cultivate and posses small quantities of cannabis.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/preparing-rolling-marijuana-cannabis-joint-drugs-790174744">guruXOX/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>New <a href="https://theconversation.com/home-grown-cannabis-to-be-legal-in-the-act-now-what-124268">cannabis cultivation and possession laws</a> come into effect in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) on Friday, January 31. But they’re not what most cannabis enthusiasts would be hoping for. </p>
<p>The ACT laws are a good first step, but they contradict federal laws that make cultivation and possession of cannabis a criminal offence. And it’s not clear whether these federal laws will continue to be enforced in the ACT.</p>
<p>The new laws also do little to regulate the supply of cannabis or its seeds. Instead, cannabis legislation and regulation should be approached in a similar way to alcohol and tobacco.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/most-australians-support-decriminalising-cannabis-but-our-laws-lag-behind-99285">Most Australians support decriminalising cannabis, but our laws lag behind</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What do the ACT laws allow?</h2>
<p>The new laws will allow territory residents aged 18 or older to grow cannabis plants at home. There will be a limit of two plants per person and four per household. And each person will be allowed to be in possession of no more than 50 grams of dried cannabis.</p>
<p>Cannabis plants can only be cultivated on private properties. And only by people who usually live there. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/home-grown-cannabis-to-be-legal-in-the-act-now-what-124268">Home grown cannabis to be legal in the ACT. Now what?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>These laws won’t impact criminal offences for the large-scale cultivation of cannabis, or the supply of cannabis or cannabis seeds.</p>
<p>The commercial sale of cannabis via retail outlets or coffee shops will also remain prohibited.</p>
<p>However, the laws prompt the obvious question: if people are growing cannabis plants, where are they getting the seeds? </p>
<p>Although a person would not be prosecuted for possession or cultivation of a cannabis plant under the new ACT laws, the person providing the seeds or plants would be committing <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/act/consol_act/cc200294/s619.html?context=1;query=cannabis;mask_path=au/legis/act/consol_act/cc200294">an offence</a>. </p>
<h2>What about the federal laws?</h2>
<p>Considerable uncertainty still exists over potential conflicts between these fresh ACT laws and federal laws that criminalise the possession of cannabis.</p>
<p>Under the federal <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00235">Criminal Code Act 1995</a>, it’s an offence to possess a controlled drug. This can carry a penalty of two years imprisonment. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=367&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/311286/original/file-20200122-117907-oqbiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It’s unclear whether people who grow and use cannabis are at risk.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/marijuana-grows-young-soil-seeds-medicines-1100081027">PRO Stock Professional/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Attorney-General Christian Porter MP has <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-20/ag-warns-act-residents-cannabis-possession-against-law/11620968">publicly stated</a> the federal offences will still have full effect in the ACT. As such, the Attorney-General’s office expects ACT police to enforce the federal criminal laws after January 31.</p>
<p>This will result in a bizarre situation where people growing plants at home in the ACT could be breaking federal laws despite being allowed to under local laws.</p>
<p>It’s hard to say how ACT Police will respond to people who use cannabis. The situation will require leadership within the ranks of law enforcement to decide the appropriate response.</p>
<h2>The evidence supports decriminalisation</h2>
<p>In most of Australia, the possession of cannabis is still a criminal offence. Given <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/ndshs-2016-detailed/data">34.8% of Australians</a> aged over 14 have smoked cannabis at least once, many Australians have broken the law.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-recreational-drug-policies-arent-working-so-what-are-the-options-for-reform-55493">economic costs to the justice system</a> involved in prosecuting cannabis offences are considerable, even when diversion schemes are in place. </p>
<p>Diversion schemes typically require people caught with small amounts of cannabis to attend education or drug counselling. These schemes appear <a href="https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi532">cost-effective</a> when compared to imprisonment. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-recreational-drug-policies-arent-working-so-what-are-the-options-for-reform-55493">Australia's recreational drug policies aren't working, so what are the options for reform?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Research suggests prosecuting people for possession of small quantities of cannabis might actually be <a href="https://espace.curtin.edu.au/bitstream/handle/20.500.11937/46365/18946_downloaded_stream_38.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y">more harmful than the drug itself</a>, leading to unemployment, relationships issues, and further problems with the law.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-war-on-drugs-has-failed-now-what-6222">Criminalisation</a> also creates a barrier to people seeking drug treatment and provides considerable profits for organised crime.</p>
<h2>A step in the right direction</h2>
<p>The ACT is leading Australia in progressive drug policy reform; the introduction of this law is another step in the right direction. </p>
<p>However, good laws should be unambiguous and clarify the inconsistencies with the federal law. They should also clarify the legal mechanisms for supply.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-approach-to-drug-reform-regulated-supply-of-cannabis-and-ecstasy-9502">A new approach to drug reform: regulated supply of cannabis and ecstasy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A variety of <a href="http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/topics/pods/legal-supply-of-cannabis">cannabis legalisation models</a> exist overseas, ranging from commercial retail sale and cultivation, to small scale sanctioned cannabis social clubs, which operate in some parts of Spain and the Netherlands. These clubs are not-for-profit collectives where cannabis can be grown and used. </p>
<p>Canada and many states in the US have adopted a commercial retail model, where people can buy cannabis at a local store, similar to alcohol or tobacco. Australia should follow these countries in regulating cannabis in a similar way to how we regulate alcohol and tobacco.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/130050/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The ACT legislation conflicts with federal laws, which still prohibit the possession of cannabis. It’s unclear how police will respond and whether users could still be charged.Stephen Bright, Senior Lecturer of Addiction, Edith Cowan UniversityJarryd Bartle, Sessional Lecturer, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1242682019-09-26T09:47:35Z2019-09-26T09:47:35ZHome grown cannabis to be legal in the ACT. Now what?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/294268/original/file-20190926-51438-173mape.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C17%2C3866%2C2550&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Two cannabis plants per person and four per household will be legal in the ACT from January 31.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/J5UEdHgixEE ">Esteban Lopez/Unsplash</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Australian Capital Territory took the next step towards regulation of the illicit drug market yesterday with <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-25/act-first-jurisdiction-to-legalise-personal-cannabis-use/11530104">new legislation</a> passing through parliament. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.legislation.act.gov.au/b/db_59295/">legislation</a>, which won’t come into effect until January 31, 2020, allows cultivation and possession of small amounts of cannabis for personal use for anyone over 18 years.</p>
<p>However, the sale or supply of cannabis is still a criminal offence.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/legal-highs-arguments-for-and-against-legalising-cannabis-in-australia-95069">Legal highs: arguments for and against legalising cannabis in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What happens now?</h2>
<p>The ACT has historically been one of the more liberal jurisdictions when it comes to cannabis.</p>
<p>The territory removed criminal penalties for possessing small quantities of cannabis in <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp0102/02RP06#legislative">1992</a> and broadened this in 2013. Currently, anyone found in possession of less than 50g of dried cannabis receives a “<a href="https://police.act.gov.au/safety-and-security/alcohol-and-drugs/drugs-and-law">simple cannabis offence notice</a>”, essentially a fine.</p>
<h2>What changes next year?</h2>
<p>The new legislation allows adults to grow cannabis plants at home, with limits of two plants per person and four per household, or to possess 50g of dried cannabis.</p>
<p>Cannabis plants can only be cultivated in parts of someone’s home not generally accessible by the public, and only by people who usually live there.</p>
<p>There is a 150g limit for fresh (or “wet”) cannabis to account for cannabis that has been harvested but not yet dried.</p>
<p>The law allows adults to possess cannabis within these limits without the need for a cannabis offence notice to be issued.</p>
<h2>What safeguards are in place?</h2>
<p>The legislation states cannabis must be kept securely when not in someone’s possession to restrict access by children and young people. Smoking cannabis near children is also an offence.</p>
<p>To protect the interests of children and young people, the simple cannabis offence notice still applies for people under 18. This puts it in line with the way possession of tobacco and alcohol by people under the age of 18 is dealt with.</p>
<p>There are still questions about how this law interacts with stricter Commonwealth laws governing banned drugs, with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/26/peter-dutton-cannabis-christian-porter-challenge-act-law-legalise-drugs">some MPs</a> warning about possible conflicts.</p>
<h2>How does this compare with similar regulation overseas?</h2>
<p>Cannabis <a href="https://adf.org.au/insights/cannabis-legalisation/">regulation</a> comes in many forms internationally. The most common model allows the legal sale or supply of cannabis to adults, with further allowances for home grown plants. </p>
<p>The ACT’s allowance of four plants per household is on par with what other jurisdictions allow internationally. However, the ACT’s allowable weight of possessed cannabis is on the lower scale.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/history-not-harm-dictates-why-some-drugs-are-legal-and-others-arent-110564">History, not harm, dictates why some drugs are legal and others aren't</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Some jurisdictions in Europe allow “<a href="https://transformdrugs.org/cannabis-social-clubs-in-spain-legalisation-without-commercialisation/">cannabis social clubs</a>”, which are a version of a “home grown” model. These are not-for-profit collectives where cannabis is grown and used. Cannabis is not sold. The clubs are only open to members, who own their own plants, and limits to the number of plants per person apply. </p>
<h2>What will the changes achieve?</h2>
<p>Removing offences associated with personal use of cannabis <a href="https://theconversation.com/decriminalisation-or-legalisation-injecting-evidence-in-the-drug-law-reform-debate-6321">reduces the burden on police and the criminal justice system</a>. It also removes the negative consequences associated with criminal convictions for drug use.</p>
<p>Most Australians support the <a href="https://theconversation.com/most-australians-support-decriminalising-cannabis-but-our-laws-lag-behind-99285">removal of criminal penalties</a> associated with cannabis use and possession, and a <a href="http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6026-how-australians-feel-about-marijuana-201501272145">sizeable proportion</a> support legislation.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/most-australians-support-decriminalising-cannabis-but-our-laws-lag-behind-99285">Most Australians support decriminalising cannabis, but our laws lag behind</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How will it affect people’s interactions with health services?</h2>
<p>Criminalisation of use and possession of drugs reinforces the stigmatisation of people who use them, a <a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ed7a/a83d5922415a60bbe1867f3310ace40fecd4.pdf">major barrier</a> to accessing health services. </p>
<p>The further we move away from the <a href="http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/brief-history-drug-war">war on drugs</a>, the more illicit drug use becomes a health and human rights issue, potentially reducing stigma.</p>
<p>This law is unlikely to have a big impact on the health system. Most people who use cannabis <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/ndshs-2016-detailed/contents/table-of-contents">do so irregularly</a> and acute harms (such as overdoses or severe reactions) are rare.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/men-and-women-use-cannabis-for-different-reasons-46745">Men and women use cannabis for different reasons</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Based on international evidence, full regulation <a href="https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/Ms%20Vivian%20Chiu%20-%20poster.pdf">does not result</a> in large increases in people using cannabis.</p>
<p>But, with reduced stigma, those who do may be more open to seeking help if their use starts to impact significantly on their day-to-day lives.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cannabis-and-psychosis-what-is-the-link-and-who-is-at-risk-95368">Cannabis and psychosis: what is the link and who is at risk?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Will it affect medical cannabis laws?</h2>
<p>Medical cannabis is treated under a completely <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/access-medicinal-cannabis-products-1">separate law</a>, in line with other pharmaceutical products. So, the change in recreational cannabis laws do not effect medical cannabis prescribing in the ACT.</p>
<p>However, it is possible that under the new laws people will self-medicate rather than go through medical channels. So they may not have the appropriate medical monitoring of their condition.</p>
<h2>Will other jurisdictions follow?</h2>
<p>Each state and territory determines its own drug laws. Currently there is <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-recreational-drug-policies-arent-working-so-what-are-the-options-for-reform-55493">significant variation</a> in both legal frameworks and implementation of laws in each jurisdiction. So, it is hard to tell whether other jurisdictions will follow. </p>
<p>Some <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/fiona-patten-moves-to-legalise-cannabis-predicts-revenue-of-205m-20181219-p50n4t.html">Victorian politicians</a> have been advocating for cannabis legalisation, but this may be some way off. Reason Party leader Fiona Patten has successfully campaigned for a <a href="https://joy.org.au/theinformer/2019/05/30/new-cannabis-parliamentary-inquiry-to-start/">parliamentary inquiry</a> into cannabis to investigate the matter further.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/124268/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Lee works as a paid consultant in the alcohol and other drug sector. She has previously been awarded grants by state and federal governments, NHMRC and other public funding bodies for alcohol and other drug research</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jarryd Bartle works as a drug policy consultant for various organisations, which may financially benefit from the legalisation of cannabis.</span></em></p>What will the new legislation mean for cannabis users in the ACT? And will other jurisdictions follow?Nicole Lee, Professor at the National Drug Research Institute, Curtin UniversityJarryd Bartle, Sessional Lecturer in Criminal Law, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1199142019-07-29T14:47:05Z2019-07-29T14:47:05ZEconomics of legalising cannabis – pricing and policing are crucial<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285872/original/file-20190726-43136-69mvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There's money to be made from legalising cannabis.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/two-hands-cannabis-money-concept-selling-1119576818?src=IcEq3a-Q5mVli8ktIMSDTw-1-1&studio=1">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Legalising cannabis can have major benefits for all citizens. If carried out correctly, everyone will benefit <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268118300386">from less crime</a> and stronger rule of law. Legalising the drug will especially help <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/cannabis-legalised-marijuana-protect-young-people-study-volteface-a8006221.html">protect young people</a> and may <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/cannabis-legalised-marijuana-protect-young-people-study-volteface-a8006221.html">even lower their consumption of the drug</a>. It is also a way of <a href="https://theconversation.com/analysis-reveals-economic-benefits-of-legalised-cannabis-20281">raising taxes for the state</a>, instead of fuelling criminal organisations, which currently control the illegal market.</p>
<p>These benefits are increasingly <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/the-cannabis-debate-63-per-cent-of-londoners-think-uk-should-follow-canada-and-make-cannabis-legal-a4179291.html">recognised by the public</a>. Crucial to seeing these benefits come about, is the way legalising cannabis is done and how the drug is priced once it is made legal. These are the findings from research I’ve <a href="https://cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=13814">carried out with colleagues in France</a>. There must be a combination of getting the price level right and cracking down on illegal activities to reach the right balance between reducing criminality and avoiding increases in cannabis consumption following legalisation.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/millions-use-cannabis-but-figures-for-how-many-become-dependent-arent-reliable-117283">Millions use cannabis, but figures for how many become dependent aren't reliable</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>To fight the black market, the price of legal cannabis has to be relatively low. For example, it could be set around or slightly below the current illegal price. This will attract current users of the drug away from their existing dealers.</p>
<p>But if nothing else is done, this will not be enough to eradicate the black market. Dealers will simply lower their prices to attract customers back. They are able to do this because there is currently a <a href="http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/56706/1/Ending_the%20_drug_wars.pdf">high markup in the illegal market</a>. </p>
<p>There is a large range of prices and cannabis products sold illegally but the average price of high-quality cannabis is roughly US$300 per ounce in London, according to the crowd-sourced website <a href="http://www.priceofweed.com/?mloc=1">priceofweed.com</a>. This is up to three times as high as production costs based on <a href="https://depts.washington.edu/esreview/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Archambault_McNeilly_Row_I-502_PublishOnline.pdf">evidence</a> from the <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/working_papers/WR764.html">US market</a>.</p>
<h2>Controlling consumption</h2>
<p>The increased competition that the legal market would bring would likely substantially increase consumption – not something most policy makers want. So as well as implementing a legal market, there needs to be a mix of policies to control consumption, including sanctions that are enforced against illegal activities. This would allow a government to price out dealers, while keeping the price of legal cannabis relatively high.</p>
<p>The reasoning is simple: if production or distribution costs of illegal cannabis increase, it is easier to drive criminals out of business by selling legal cannabis. <a href="https://cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=13814">My research shows</a> that the harsher the punishments you put in place against people selling cannabis illegally, the higher you can set the price of legal cannabis to price out dealers. We call this the “eviction price”.</p>
<p>Other instruments governments can use to increase the eviction price are to deter consumers from buying illegal cannabis through enforced sanctions or warning them against the dangers of using illegal cannabis compared to high-quality, safe products supplied on the legal market.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/285873/original/file-20190726-43145-nlp822.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A legal cannabis store in the US.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/anchorage-alaska-usa-july-24-2017-1082990222?src=92SrpxowSJ64dSjCJPReBA-1-50&studio=1">Linda Harms/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Viable alternatives</h2>
<p>It’s also important to introduce incentives for illegal cannabis producers and sellers to turn their activity toward the legal sector. So as well as investment in law enforcement to crack down on criminal activity, it’s important that former cannabis dealers are given viable job alternatives. Otherwise they may just switch to selling alternative illegal drugs or close substitutes. </p>
<p>Dealers often <a href="https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/understanding-drug-selling-local-communities">live in deprived neighbourhoods</a> and are trapped in vicious cycles of crime where low aspirations and job prospects push them into illegal businesses. Investment in these communities is therefore needed to support and train those that make a living from drug dealing.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/not-all-drug-dealers-are-the-same-its-time-to-ditch-outdated-stereotypes-93773">Not all drug dealers are the same – it's time to ditch outdated stereotypes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The money that will be generated by selling and taxing legal cannabis should be largely redistributed towards these kinds of initiatives. Plus, legalising cannabis may enable the police to reallocate their efforts towards other crimes, improving police effectiveness against class-A drugs and non-drug crimes. This was <a href="https://www.ucl.ac.uk/%7Euctpimr/research/depenalization.pdf">found in the London borough of Lambeth</a> after penalties were reduced in 2001 for those holding small amounts of cannabis.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933e">History also shows</a> that prohibition increases violent crimes. Famous gangsters such as Al Capone in Chicago in the 1920s profited from the imbalance between demand and supply of alcohol by establishing organised crime to supply and serve alcohol illegally in speakeasies. In illegal markets, violence is often seen as the only way to resolve conflicts and secure market power.</p>
<p>Our research was inspired by recent examples of cannabis legalisation in Canada and Uruguay. The stated objectives in both countries was to combat drug-related crime. It is too early to evaluate the overall effects of these policies but evidence from Canada suggests that illegal transactions linked to the black market <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3319762">shrunk as a result of legalisation</a>. And we also learnt from what did not work so well there: a shortage of legal supply helped the illegal market persist. So it’s important to avoid making the same mistakes and propose more effective policies to control the overall consumption of cannabis.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119914/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alice Mesnard does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>To fight the black market, the price of legal cannabis has to be relatively low. But if nothing else is done, the black market will persist.Alice Mesnard, Reader in Economics, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1105642019-01-30T19:11:33Z2019-01-30T19:11:33ZHistory, not harm, dictates why some drugs are legal and others aren’t<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256230/original/file-20190130-108364-1pdhyoo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">When considering harm to the user and to wider society, alcohol is much more of a problem than MDMA. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/DSB1MZWsGco">Krists Luhaers</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Drug-related offences take up <a href="https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/blog/decriminalisation-or-legalisation-injecting-evidence-drug-law-reform-debate">a lot of the resources</a> within Australia’s criminal justice system. In <a href="https://www.acic.gov.au/publications/intelligence-products/illicit-drug-data-report-0">2016–17</a> law enforcement made 113,533 illicit drug seizures and 154,650 drug-related arrests.</p>
<p>Harm-reduction advocates are calling for the <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/fiona-patten-moves-to-legalise-cannabis-predicts-revenue-of-205m-20181219-p50n4t.html">legalisation of some drugs</a>, and the removal of criminal penalties on others. And there’s public support for both.</p>
<p>But how did some drugs become illegal in the first place? And what drives our current drug laws?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/three-charts-on-who-uses-illicit-drugs-in-australia-110169">Three Charts on who uses illicit drugs in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Legal status isn’t based on risk or harm</h2>
<p>Most people assume drugs are illegal because they are dangerous. But the reasons aren’t related to their relative risk or harm. </p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)61462-6/fulltext">2010 study</a>, experts ranked 20 legal and illegal drugs on 16 measures of harm to the user and to wider society. This includes health damage, economic costs, and crime. </p>
<p>Overall, alcohol was the most harmful drug. MDMA (ecstasy), LSD and mushrooms were among the least harmful.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=815&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=815&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=815&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1024&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1024&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256543/original/file-20190131-112389-oja5sk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1024&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At various times around the world, <a href="https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/health/diet-nutrition/a30303/facts-about-coffee/">coffee</a> has been illegal and <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/drug-that-spans-the-ages-the-history-of-cocaine-6107930.html">cocaine</a> has been widely available.</p>
<p>Many drugs that currently carry criminal penalties began life as useful medicinal therapies, such as opiates, cocaine, MDMA, and amphetamines. They were often available over the counter at pharmacies or through licensed sellers.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256196/original/file-20190129-108338-rl1ec9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">These special tax stamps were issued by the IRS in the United States to sellers of various drugs including opium, cocaine and tobacco. To show that the appropriate tax had been paid, stamps were purchased and either affixed to the taxed goods or displayed in the taxed place of business.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>History of drug laws in Australia</h2>
<p>Australia, like the rest of the world, has had <a href="https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/resource/australian-illicit-drug-policy-timeline-1985-2015%20">a patchy approach</a> to criminalising substances, driven mostly by a desire to maintain international relations – particularly with the United States – rather than by concern for the public’s health or welfare.</p>
<p>Before federation in 1901, very few laws regulated the use of drugs in Australia. The first Australian drug laws in the early 20th century imposed restrictions on opium, primarily as a means to <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=yyjnqwvaC0wC&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false">discourage the entry</a> of Chinese people to Australia.</p>
<p>The temperance movement, mostly known today for the prohibition of alcohol in the 19th and early 20th centuries, played a key role in shaping global drug policy. Influenced by temperance activists, US President Theodore Roosevelt convened an international opium conference in 1909, which eventually resulted in the International Opium Convention. </p>
<p>Australia signed up in 1913, and by 1925 the convention had expanded to include the prohibition of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine, and cannabis.</p>
<p>These drugs were prohibited in Australia well before their use became widespread or problematic. It wasn’t until the 1960s that recreational drug use became a social concern. That’s when cannabis, heroin, and new psychedelic substances such as LSD became more commonly used for pleasure or in pursuit of spiritual enlightenment.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/weekly-dose-lsd-dangerous-mystical-or-therapeutic-64550">Weekly Dose: LSD – dangerous, mystical or therapeutic?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In 1961, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs updated all existing international conventions and moved toward a strictly prohibitionist approach to recreational drug use (except alcohol and tobacco).</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256253/original/file-20190130-108342-hmqjih.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">LSD only became a social concern in the 1960s.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/stamp-lsd-drug-on-tongue-pop-721659358?src=NYL8lFnMxSRN6n4K9cC51Q-1-3">Alexander_P/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One of the key contributing factors of drug consumption in Australia was the <a href="https://www.ukessays.com/essays/history/drug-use-in-the-american-army-in-the-vietnam-war-history-essay.php">Vietnam War</a>, during which soldiers provided viable markets for heroin, cannabis, and other illicit drugs.</p>
<p>By 1970 all Australian states had enacted laws that made drug supply a separate offence to drug use or possession, rather than merely a regulatory offence for misusing a medicine.</p>
<p>Drug use and related harms increased exponentially in Australia by the mid-1980s. The emergence of HIV/AIDS, as well as a dramatic increase in heroin-related deaths, led to calls for a more comprehensive approach to illicit drugs.</p>
<p>At that time, Australia led the world in a new way of thinking about drug policy. The National Drug Strategy came into effect in 1985, expanding from strict prohibition to explicitly include harm reduction, in addition to demand reduction (prevention and treatment) and supply reduction (customs and policing). In theory, that is. A <a href="https://theconversation.com/spending-down-on-harm-reduction-for-illicit-drugs-report-15346">recent study</a> found just 2% of drug funding goes to harm reduction, while 66% goes to law enforcement.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/spending-down-on-harm-reduction-for-illicit-drugs-report-15346">Spending down on harm reduction for illicit drugs: report </a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Cannabis possession and use is <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-recreational-drug-policies-arent-working-so-what-are-the-options-for-reform-55493">currently illegal</a> in Australia. </p>
<p>But starting around 30 years ago, several states and territories (South Australia, ACT and Northern Territory) removed the criminal penalties for personal use of cannabis. That means it’s illegal, but not a criminal offence. </p>
<p>In all other jurisdictions charges of possession can be subject to “diversion” by police or court, allowing offenders to avoid a criminal penalty.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256232/original/file-20190130-108342-rh3aaj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Some Australian states have removed the criminal penalties for possession of cannabis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/UoXLndT32Hg">Thought Catalog</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How are drugs currently classified as illegal?</h2>
<p>To be criminalised, a drug needs to be specifically scheduled under the relevant <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_for_the_Uniform_Scheduling_of_Medicines_and_Poisons#Schedule_8:_Controlled_drug">Poison Standards</a> as well as having separate criminal drug legislation.</p>
<p>Until recently, drugs needed to be specifically listed to be considered illegal, meaning legislation was constantly playing catch-up as new drugs were developed to circumvent the laws. Nearly 700 <a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/HealthyLiving/synthetic-drugs">new psychoactive substances</a> have been identified globally in the past decade. These synthetic drugs are designed to mimic the effects of common illicit drugs such as cannabis or cocaine.</p>
<p>Most Australian states and territories now ban the possession or sale any substance that has a “psychoactive effect” other than alcohol, tobacco and food. However, <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-predicted-banning-legal-highs-wouldnt-work-and-a-new-review-shows-its-as-bad-as-we-feared-104981">evidence from the United Kingdom</a> indicates such broad bans are unlikely to be effective.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-predicted-banning-legal-highs-wouldnt-work-and-a-new-review-shows-its-as-bad-as-we-feared-104981">We predicted banning legal highs wouldn't work – and a new review shows it's as bad as we feared</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Selective bans have resulted in some drugs that are relatively safe in their pure form becoming much more dangerous. Bans on MDMA, for example, have led to the manufacture of illegal preparations <a href="https://www.harmreductionaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Pill-Testing-Pilot-ACT-June-2018-Final-Report.pdf">with unknown potency and ingredients</a>. </p>
<p>Cannabis criminalisation has encouraged the production of more potent cannabis and, more recently, <a href="http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/reports/regulation-the-responsible-control-of-drugs/">synthetic cannabinoids</a>. </p>
<p>The effect has also been implicated in the rise of <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0955395917301548">fentanyl use in the United States</a> as authorities crack down on heroin and pharmaceutical opioids.</p>
<h2>Why regulate illicit drugs?</h2>
<p>The focus on reducing drug <em>use</em> doesn’t translate to reducing <em>harms</em>. In fact, harms continue to increase despite a <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/ndshs-2016-detailed/contents/table-of-contents">decrease</a> in alcohol and other drug use in Australia.</p>
<p>There is <a href="https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi486">no evidence</a> a prohibitionist approach to drug law has reduced the supply of illicit drugs. Instead, it has <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1468-0270.00275">increased organised crime</a> and acted as a <a href="http://www.australia21.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ASIllicitDrugsR1.pdf">barrier</a> for people seeking help.</p>
<p>Given the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-recreational-drug-policies-arent-working-so-what-are-the-options-for-reform-55493">failures of prohibition</a>, jurisdictions around the world are starting to <a href="https://theconversation.com/legal-highs-arguments-for-and-against-legalising-cannabis-in-australia-95069">look at the issue differently</a>. Several have brought cannabis under regulatory control, much like alcohol and tobacco, and others have removed criminal penalties associated with other drug use.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/256255/original/file-20190130-127151-1c8oq8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Canada recently legalised and started to regulate cannabis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/saint-john-new-brunswick-canada-october-1205513293?src=BgdD48ORnqBvSsIdDKxXNQ-1-3">Doug McLean/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most of the arguments to <a href="https://www.drugfree.org.au/index.php/8-general/140-drug-free-australia-s-arguments-against-drug-legalisation.html">maintain current prohibitionist drug laws</a> continue the moral objection to drug use that began in Australia with our early race-driven opium laws.</p>
<p>Since the beginning of recorded history, people have been taking mind-altering substances. Around 43% of Australians have <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-charts-on-who-uses-illicit-drugs-in-australia-110169">tried an illicit drug</a> at least once in their lifetime. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-recreational-drug-policies-arent-working-so-what-are-the-options-for-reform-55493">Australia's recreational drug policies aren't working, so what are the options for reform?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Whether you morally agree with drug use or not, the current drug laws are neither reducing harm nor stopping use. It’s time for a different approach.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/110564/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Lee works as a paid consultant in the alcohol and other drug sector. She has previously been awarded grants by state and federal governments, NHMRC and other public funding bodies for alcohol and other drug research.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jarryd Bartle works as a paid consultant in the alcohol and drug sector. He was also a candidate for Fiona Patten's Reason Party in the 2018 Victorian election.</span></em></p>Most people assume drugs are illegal because they are dangerous, but the reasons aren’t related to their relative risk or harm.Nicole Lee, Professor at the National Drug Research Institute, Curtin UniversityJarryd Bartle, Sessional Lecturer in Criminal Law, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/998322018-07-17T21:32:59Z2018-07-17T21:32:59ZThe trouble with edibles<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228119/original/file-20180717-44103-1wtiscj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">No one really knows for certain what the market potential is for cannabis, much less for edibles, but growth opportunities are palatable.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Oct. 17, smoking cannabis will become legal in Canada. As for cannabis edibles, they will take a bit longer: Cannabis-infused food products will be legal in a little less than a year’s time.</p>
<p>Once edibles are available, things will get complicated in Canada’s food industry. But with the right regulations, this is a profit opportunity that doesn’t come by every day.</p>
<p>Initially, Bill C-45 did not include edibles. That only happened last fall, when the parliamentary health committee decided that edibles would need to be included as well if the country was going to adopt a comprehensive approach to legalized cannabis. </p>
<p>According to a <a href="https://www.dal.ca/faculty/management/news-events/news/2017/09/26/dalhousie_releases_study_on_canadians__attitudes_towards_cannabis_infused_food.html">recently published survey from Dalhousie University</a>, 93 per cent of those favourable to the legalization of marijuana are also very likely to try at least one edible product. Recognizing this possibility, the parliamentary committee approved a neat little amendment and, voilà, edibles became part of the package.</p>
<p>The food industry is <a href="http://www.ufcw.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=31127:the-food-industry-and-canada-s-economy&catid=9752&Itemid=6&lang=en">a $200-billion sector</a>. It is a massive portion of our economy, split into multiple streams. Food retailing, food service, delivery, food trucks, institutional services, arenas, stadiums — there are channels of distribution everywhere, and food can get to wherever you are. </p>
<p>In less than a year, this will include cannabis — except that, unlike the smokeable version, edibles can be consumed by anyone without those around them knowing. It’s discreet, convenient — and potentially dangerous.</p>
<h2>Labelling required</h2>
<p>Health Canada was caught by surprise by the additional legalization of edibles, and is still trying to come up with an appropriate regulatory framework. Many questions linger about the distinct dangers that edibles pose, particularly for children. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/eating-weed-gummies-at-work-marijuana-rules-may-take-a-decade-to-sort-out-88208">Eating weed gummies at work? Marijuana rules may take a decade to sort out</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Food companies are notoriously paranoid about food-safety issues, because they are always just one recall, outbreak or tragic incident away from closing their doors. All it takes is one child eating a cannabis-infused product and the damage to that food company would be irreversible.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228118/original/file-20180717-44076-q9e6if.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Consumer sales of cannabis-infused food and drink are on the rise in California and Colorado.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s critical that a regulatory framework be put in place that would include proper labelling of edibles, complete with THC content and intoxicant warnings, to assure both the public and industry that edibles and humans can co-exist safely.</p>
<p>With adequate safety measures, edibles present a hugely profitable opportunity for the Canadian food industry. No one really knows for certain what the market potential is for cannabis, much less for edibles, but growth opportunities are palatable. </p>
<p>In California, for example, <a href="https://munchies.vice.com/en_us/article/3k55qj/californias-cannabis-edibles-just-got-surprisingly-boring">consumers purchased US$180-million worth of cannabis-infused food and drink last year</a>. This amounts to roughly 10 per cent of the state’s total cannabis sales. Sales are up 18 per cent since January of this year. In Colorado, where cannabis is also legal, sales of edibles <a href="https://business.financialpost.com/cannabis/we-made-some-terrible-mistakes-what-canada-can-learn-from-colorados-cannabis-legalization-experience">rose by about 60 per cent a year over the past two years</a>. </p>
<p>This kind of tremendous growth is what the food industry needs right now. The more consumers are exposed to cannabis, the more they will opt for the edible version. Quite simply, this is a potential phenomenon akin to what the industry saw with sales of gluten-free products.</p>
<h2>Industry shake up</h2>
<p>Edibles also stand to shake up current players in the food sector. For example, people may choose cannabis more often than a drink or two, and thus disrupt the alcohol industry. We could see some consumers substituting their usual wine, beer or spirits for a cannabis-infused spaghetti sauce, or possibly even cannabis oil. Or perhaps some will be opt for a pot muffin or brownie. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228116/original/file-20180717-44070-11m6mo8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Will cannabis pesto be on your grocer’s shelf soon?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In fact, many wine producers are concerned about what a mature cannabis market will look like. For Ontario, British Columbia and Nova Scotia — where the wine industry is flourishing — this could be a problem. </p>
<p>We are already seeing cannabis beer being launched in different places in the country. But it’s not just alcohol that is susceptible, as edibles can take many different forms: candies are the number one food product containing cannabis sold in the United States.</p>
<p>It will be interesting to see how branding strategies will align with cannabis, too. Some people will choose cannabis to get high, but not everyone. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/even-if-cannabis-is-legal-please-dont-toke-and-drive-97992">Even if cannabis is legal, please don't toke and drive</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Beyond the psychoactive effects of cannabis, there is also the possibility of pitching it as a superfood. The cannabis plant is full of nutritional value. It contains protein, carbohydrates, insoluble fibre, potassium, magnesium, sulfur, calcium, iron, zinc, vitamins E and C and many other elements considered beneficial for human health. </p>
<p>For food manufacturers looking for a new value-added feature, cannabis could potentially be the next omega-3 or probiotic.</p>
<h2>Uncertain stance</h2>
<p>The Dalhousie survey questioned businesses about their plans for cannabis edibles. Almost 20 per cent of the food processing companies surveyed are either in the edibles market already, or intend to enter the market within a year. </p>
<p>But, a whopping 50 per cent of food companies in Canada are uncertain about their position regarding cannabis. Respondents cited different reasons, such as concerns over employees being trained properly, or not knowing what products will eventually be allowed into the market. </p>
<p>Many companies are also worried about how cannabis can affect their brands or their supply chain strategy with other partners in the industry.</p>
<p>With legalization, the stigma linked to cannabis will eventually disappear, but it will take a while. The food industry is known to be extremely risk averse, and it won’t be any different toward cannabis. Until the industry knows the consumer is ready, cannabis edibles will stay on the sidelines — but hopefully not for too long.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99832/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sylvain Charlebois does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Cannabis-infused food products could shake up the food industry.Sylvain Charlebois, Professor in Food Distribution and Policy, Dalhousie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/814912017-07-27T14:40:35Z2017-07-27T14:40:35ZWhy the South African state needs to lose its fight against marijuana policy reform<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179611/original/file-20170725-28293-1defi3y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Thousands of South Africans are calling for the legalisation of marijuana. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Nic Bothma</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>South Africa is among many countries facing challenges to their drug control policies, particularly around marijuana, known locally as dagga. The <a href="http://www.sanctr.gov.za/YourRights/TheMedicinesControlCouncil/tabid/176/Default.aspx">Medicines Control Council</a> is developing <a href="http://www.mccza.com/documents/5933cac110.14_Media_Release_Cannabis_Nov16_v1.pdf">guidelines</a> for production for medicinal use and the country’s highest <a href="http://www.cda.gov.za/">drug policy guardian</a> has <a href="http://www.samj.org.za/index.php/samj/article/view/10863%3C/u">recommended</a> broader decriminalisation. </p>
<p>The key battle ground, however, is in the courts. </p>
<p>A new trial the state is likely to expend considerable energy trying to prove that marijuana use is seriously harmful. If this is indeed the substance of its argument, it should lose. The point isn’t whether marijuana causes harm, but whether criminal prohibition is the best way to address those harms.</p>
<p>South African Police Service statistics suggest that most anti-drug activity is against those in possession of small quantities. These are people who are unlikely to play any strategic role in drug supply, and whose deterrence or removal from the market has little prospect of having any impact overall.</p>
<h2>The legal wrangle to date</h2>
<p>The first recent knock to prohibition came in 2016 with a ruling by the Constitutional Court. The court <a href="http://www.saflii.org.za/za/cases/ZACC/2016/21.html">held</a> that the constitutional right to privacy was unjustly violated by parts of the country’s <a href="http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/a140_1992.pdf">drugs and drug trafficking act</a> that allowed a law enforcement officer to stop and search any person, property or vehicle on the grounds of “reasonable suspicion” of violation of the Act. The ruling <a href="http://www.groundup.org.za/article/when-can-police-search-your-home/">meant</a> that police would no longer be able to enter and search private properties without a warrant. </p>
<p>A bigger challenge came from the Western Cape High Court. This case was brought <em>inter alia</em> by <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/rastafarian-lawyer-in-the-dock-over-dagga-1315010">Gareth Prince</a>. Prince lost a <a href="http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2002/1.html">case</a> in the Constitutional Court in 2002 that sought exemption from the laws on the basis of his Rastafari religion. </p>
<p>Prince’s more recent case sought not just an exemption based on religious freedom, but to challenge marijuana prohibition overall on various grounds – including that it was based on an irrational distinction from alcohol. Ras Prince brought the case with Jeremy Acton, leader of the <a href="https://www.daggaparty.org.za/index-2.html">Dagga Party</a>.</p>
<p>Judge Dennis Davis, for a full bench, <a href="http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2017/30.html">found</a> that the criminalisation of marijuana within the home unjustifiably limited the right to privacy. He concluded that the state had failed to show that criminal prohibition was the least restrictive way to deal with the problems caused by marijuana. The order was suspended for 24 months to allow parliament to amend the relevant laws.</p>
<p>The state quickly indicated its intention to appeal and to continue enforcement without any change. But it seems that several people charged with marijuana crimes have received stays of prosecution pending the outcome of the legal process.</p>
<p>A separate case is about to kick off in Pretoria. Myrtle Clarke and Julian Stobbs, known as the <a href="http://citizen.co.za/news/1581689/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-dagga-couple/">“The Dagga Couple”</a>, have turned their arrest for possession into a decriminalisation crusade. Their team has raised funds for local and international <a href="https://fieldsofgreenforall.org.za/expert-witnesses/">expert witnesses</a> to help them make their <a href="https://www.fieldsofgreenforall.org.za/images/legal/DC_LEGAL_SUMMARY.pdf">argument</a> that the criminal prohibition of marijuana is irrational, wasteful, and unjustifiably infringes numerous constitutional rights. </p>
<p>This is the first time that the issues will have the chance to be properly aired in court. </p>
<p>It’s long overdue.</p>
<h2>Pattern of arrests</h2>
<p>According to the South African Police Service’s annual <a href="https://www.saps.gov.za/about/stratframework/annual_report/2015_2016/saps_annual_report_2015_2016.pdf">report</a>, there were 259,165 recorded counts of illegal drug possession or dealing in 2015/16. These charges resulted in 253,735 arrests, accounting for almost a sixth of all arrests. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179610/original/file-20170725-31338-1xvauvr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Rastafarian lights up during a march for the legalisation of marijuana in South Africa.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Nic Bothma</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most drug arrests are made through stop-and-search or roadblock operations. National figures aren’t available but those from two of the nine provinces suggest that a vanishingly small proportion of drug charges (2%-4%) are for dealing as opposed to possession of drugs. Very few drug arrests are made at ports of entry, through special operations, or through the Serious Organised Crime Investigation Units. </p>
<p>Between 65% and 70% of drug charges are for possession of marijuana. The presumption is that possession of over 115 grams (about 4 ounces) constitutes dealing. This means that every year police seek out and charge about one in every 300 people for possession of an amount of marijuana that weighs no more than an apple. </p>
<h2>Criminal prohibition</h2>
<p>It isn’t clear whether criminal prohibition is an effective way to dissuade or help drug users. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26515984">Evidence</a> from other countries suggests that, generally, the greater the perception of risk, the lower the prevalence of use. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179614/original/file-20170725-12396-1ibb8l8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the strength of this effect is <a href="http://cssdp.org/uploads/2016/09/State_of_the_Evidence_Cannabis_Use_and_Regulation_Sept_7.pdf">debatable</a> to say the least, and it remains far from clear whether a liberalisation in marijuana policy results in a significant increase in its use or in associated harms. The effects of the recent wave of marijuana policy changes in various US states, for example, are still being closely <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/10/13/heres-how-legal-pot-changed-colorado-and-washington/?utm_term=.a17c9d60429f">observed</a> and debated. </p>
<p>For people who have highly problematic drug use patterns, there is even <a href="http://beckleyfoundation.org/resource/briefing-paper-incarceration-of-drug-offenders-costs-and-impacts">less</a> consensus that the threat or reality of imprisonment is an appropriate or effective tool for either dissuading or helping them. Other approaches may well do significantly <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Caitlin_Hughes/publication/249284847_What_Can_We_Learn_From_The_Portuguese_Decriminalization_of_Illicit_Drugs/links/54d406e90cf24647580553bb.pdf">better</a>.</p>
<h2>Decriminalisation</h2>
<p>There are many <a href="http://decrim.idpc.net/">models</a> of decriminalisation. Policies that work in the Netherlands or Colorado might not work in a developing country like South Africa given differences in drug use, drug market and price structures, regulatory capacity and political climates.</p>
<p>The goal must be to find a broadly acceptable balance of a complex range of harms, benefits, and rights in the context of limited resources. </p>
<p>For example, South Africa needs to consider what impact decriminalisation would have on small-scale, informal farmers who <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0376835032000149252">depend</a> on the crop for their livelihood. Legalising marijuana could mean that they are forced out of the market by large agribusinesses, or falling prices. </p>
<p>On the other hand, prohibition arguably does more to harm the current producers and distributors than consumers. </p>
<p>The right balance won’t be found if marijuana is simply cast as a devastating alien threat to the nation’s children and communities. Instead it needs to be understood as a socially and economically ingrained pastime for which there is clearly considerable popular demand.</p>
<h2>Harm is not enough</h2>
<p>Justifying the criminal prohibition of marijuana is not a matter of proving that it causes harm. Evidence of major harm has not been enough to lead to the criminal prohibition of, for example, alcohol, nicotine, sugar, firearms and unprotected sex. </p>
<p>The case that needs to be made is whether criminal prohibition is effective, proportionate, and the minimally invasive way to address those harms. The state will struggle to prove this. An <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ann-fordham/drug-policy_b_9819900.html">increasing</a> number of countries have concluded that it is not.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/81491/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anine Kriegler receives funding from the National Research Foundation and the David and Elaine Potter Foundation. She contributed as amicus curiae to the Western Cape High Court case mentioned in the article.</span></em></p>If South Africa’s argument in court is that marijuana causes harm, it deserves to lose. The real question it should ask is whether criminal prohibition is the effective way forward.Anine Kriegler, Researcher and Doctoral Candidate in Criminology, University of Cape TownLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/778192017-05-24T15:44:27Z2017-05-24T15:44:27ZFact Check: do the police spend over a million hours a year fighting cannabis?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/170622/original/file-20170523-5749-1wxrhqa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Counting the cost.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>One million police hours fighting a cannabis market that is out of control. Time to regulate it. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Nick Clegg, former Liberal Democrat leader, commenting on <a href="https://twitter.com/nick_clegg/status/864084105897676800">Twitter</a> on May 15 on the party’s election pledge to legalise cannabis.</strong></p>
<p>According to the authoritative <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/drug-misuse-findings-from-the-2015-to-2016-csew">Crime Survey for England and Wales</a>, 6.5% of 16 to 59-year-olds use cannabis. But fewer people are using cannabis <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/drug-misuse-findings-from-the-2015-to-2016-csew">than in 1996</a>, when information first became available. </p>
<p>While much of the debate surrounding cannabis use has focused on the extent of potential harm to users, recently demands for a change in the law have focused on the benefit to the criminal justice system that legalisation might deliver. </p>
<p>The Liberal Democrats claim that a legal, regulated market for cannabis will save 1.04m police hours annually (just over half of this they calculate is spent on supply). Their calculations – which they shared with The Conversation – are based on <a href="https://data.gov.uk/dataset/criminal-justice-statistics/resource/1ded397e-aa3b-44c7-bc55-891c49019312">Ministry of Justice (MoJ) figures</a> of police caseloads for drug offences in 2015. They also use Treasury <a href="http://www.tdpf.org.uk/sites/default/files/Treasury-cannabis-regulation-CBA.pdf">estimates</a> of the number of hours police officers of different ranks (constable, sergeant or inspector) need to spend per case of cannabis possession or supply (updated from a thorough Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER) <a href="https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civil/Beckley_Foundation/Cannabis_Cost_Benefit_Analysis_Report_w_New_Foreword_110915.pdf.pdf">study</a>). The graph below shows the amount of time spent across officer ranks on each outcome for possession or supply of cannabis.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ERmpG/4/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="363"></iframe>
<p>Cannabis is a Class B drug in the UK, possession of which can lead to five years in prison and an unlimited fine or both. Supply and production <a href="https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing">can be punished</a> with up to 14 years in prison and an unlimited fine or both. In practice, and based on MoJ 2015 figures, three quarters of a total of 75,207 cases of cannabis possession are dealt with by warnings (51%, including khat), penalty notices (11%) or cautions (13%). By contrast, 81% of all Class B drug supply arrests end up in court. </p>
<p>Data on the amount of actual police time spent fighting cannabis supply, however, are fuzzy. Treasury estimates do not differentiate between the time spent by police on cautions and preparation for court. The MoJ police caseload figures (which list 12,040 cases in 2015) also refer to the supply of <em>all</em> Class B drugs, not just cannabis. Nevertheless, if supply cases are comparable to possession, cannabis should account for around 84% of Class B drugs supply – or a little over 10,000 cases.</p>
<p>The Liberal Democrats also propose that they “will make cannabis safer by limiting THC content” – the drug’s psychoactive element. The ISER and Treasury studies <a href="http://www.tdpf.org.uk/sites/default/files/Treasury-cannabis-regulation-CBA.pdf">suggest</a> the limit could be set at 10%, but after legalisation there would still be an illicit trade in cannabis over this limit and, as happens with cigarettes, for cannabis under this limit to still be sold on the black market. So the police will need to remain active to enforce the regulatory regime, as well as policing the supply and possession of higher potency cannabis, including skunk, which would remain illegal and according to the <a href="http://www.dldocs.stir.ac.uk">Home Office Cannabis Potency Study 2008</a> dominates the market. These factors would be expected to reduce the proposed savings on police time. </p>
<p>Because it is currently unknown how much time exactly the police spends fighting cannabis supply (rather than all Class B drugs) and because, even after cannabis legalisation, a large part of the illicit market for the drug is likely to remain, the Liberal Democrats’ alleged savings of just over half a million hours in relation to <em>supply</em> offences (precisely 553,840 hours, calculated as 12,040 caseloads multiplied by 46 hours) are overly ambitious. Indeed, reasonably expected savings from releasing police time from supply offences for cannabis under 10% THC content may be completely offset by the additional demands triggered by cannabis legalisation.</p>
<p>In the last ten years, 15% to 25% of the cannabis possession police caseloads ending in cautions and court preparations <a href="https://data.gov.uk/dataset/criminal-justice-statistics/resource/1ded397e-aa3b-44c7-bc55-891c49019312">refer</a> to under 18-year-olds.</p>
<p>As the Liberal Democrats would still need to police the use of cannabis by this age group, their calculations, based on all caseloads, are already overestimated by 50,414 hours, the time the police spent in 2015 dealing with under 18-year-olds. This is the sum of 21,310 hours for 2,130 cautions and 29,104 hours for 1,819 court preparations for non-adults. </p>
<p>Following legalisation of cannabis use for adults, however, the proportion of under-18s who are cannabis users may decrease. This expectation is in line with examples from the effect on under-18s of policy initiatives on <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03039.x/full">banning smoking</a> or <a href="http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.697684">alcohol consumption</a>. </p>
<p>Post legalisation, however, overall demand for cannabis is <a href="https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civil/Beckley_Foundation/Cannabis_Cost_Benefit_Analysis_Report_w_New_Foreword_110915.pdf.pdf">expected to rise</a> by between 9% and 24%. There is also evidence of a link between cannabis use and shop-thefts, other <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19485560903054762">acquisitive crimes</a> and <a href="http://www4.ntu.ac.uk/apps/news/187447-15/Revellers_face_brunt_of_violent_crime_study_suggests.aspx">violence</a>. Greater cannabis use will also <a href="https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civil/Beckley_Foundation/Cannabis_Cost_Benefit_Analysis_Report_w_New_Foreword_110915.pdf.pdf">likely increase</a> alcohol consumption and arguably alcohol–related offences. </p>
<p>There is <a href="http://www.tdpf.org.uk/sites/default/files/Treasury-cannabis-regulation-CBA.pdf">mixed evidence</a>, however, about the role of cannabis as a gateway drug for harder drugs but, if confirmed, cannabis legalisation may lead to a rise in still illegal harder drug use and associated offences. All these will pose additional demands on policing in indirect ways and further reduce savings on police time.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>The police spent nearly a million hours fighting cannabis in 2015, on the assumption that cannabis supply caseloads accounted for 84% of all Class B drug offences. A regulated and licensed cannabis market will definitely release police time with regards to enforcing possession of low potency cannabis. </p>
<p>But the overall 1.04m police hours the Liberal Democrats claim would be saved in police time by legalising cannabis is vastly overestimated because of the questionable estimates relating to supply offences. Discounting the 553,840 hours the police spent in 2015 enforcing the supply of Class B drugs offences – time which would still, at least in part, be required to regulate the sale of low potency cannabis and enforce the ban on the supply and possession of high potency versions of the drug – and the 50,414 hours spent policing cannabis possession among under-18s, which would also remain illegal, the hours potentially saved total under half a million. </p>
<p>There are, however, other potential positive policy outcomes from legalisation, such as a predicted fiscal benefit from tax revenue of between £541m and £768m – and overall savings to the health and criminal justice systems predicted at anywhere between £19m and £71.6m by the Treasury and ISER. The full extent of the reduction in police time arising from the legalisation of cannabis, however, is still very much open to conjecture.</p>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p><em>James Mehigan, lecturer in criminology, Open University</em></p>
<p>This is a logical and fair discussion of the available data on this topic. The point the Liberal Democrats are making, that in a legalised-cannabis- world police would have more time to deal with more serious offences, is a strong one. But quantifying exactly how much extra time they would have in such circumstances is fraught with difficulty. It is right to say that any form of legalisation will inevitably leave some cannabis criminalised and therefore subject to regulation by the police. This regulation will use up at least some of the freed hours. The Lib Dems have chosen a figure for freed hours at the high end of the scale and while the data doesn’t neatly allow us to be precise about the figures, the author’s calculation that it would be significantly lower is reasonable.</p>
<p>The question may be slightly bigger than just police hours, however. Possession of cannabis is a gateway offence that often introduces young people to the criminal justice system <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10610-012-9191-1">and its many deleterious effects</a>. Legalising it may alleviate pressure on other aspects of the criminal justice system (such as probation) and allow young people to more effectively enter the jobs market without the stigma of a criminal conviction. The economic impact of this cannot be measured in the abstract.</p>
<p><em>The Conversation is checking claims made by public figures and in the public domain. Statements are checked by an academic with expertise in the area. A second academic expert then reviews an anonymous copy of the article. Please get in touch if you spot a claim you would like us to check by emailing us at <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-factcheck@theconversation.com">uk-factcheck@theconversation.com</a>. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77819/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andromachi Tseloni has received research funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), the College of Policing, Higher Education Funding Council for England, and Home Office Police Knowledge Fund, and Drinkaware. She is a member of the Nottingham Crime and Drugs Partnership Board. This article does not represent the views of the research councils.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Mehigan is a member of the Policy Council at Liberty and the Police Action Lawyers Group'</span></em></p>The figures don’t really add up.Andromachi Tseloni, Professor of Quantitative Criminology, Nottingham Trent UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/736382017-03-01T23:52:58Z2017-03-01T23:52:58ZHow we could make cannabis safer for users<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/158718/original/image-20170228-29906-l2kmhb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Relaxing or risky?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/man-rolling-marijuana-joint-drugs-concept-582630481?src=SbzTtoukRVa3wIYfXf5p_A-1-1">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Most cannabis users find that the effects of occasional use of the drug are pleasurable, but some regular users experience harm. Daily cannabis use can lead to cannabis dependence, and heavy use, over months and years, can lead some users to experience memory impairment and psychotic symptoms – hearing and seeing things that are not there. </p>
<p>Even though problem users are a minority, the number of people who use cannabis means that this minority actually represents a significant number of people. In the UK, about <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376871610003753">one in 11 people</a> who try cannabis will develop a dependency. This equates to about 200,000 people. So if we could make cannabis safer, thousands of people would benefit.</p>
<h2>What makes cannabis risky?</h2>
<p>Unlike users in the US, those in Europe and the UK often <a href="http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/posters/2015/tobacco-in-cannabis-joints">smoke cannabis and tobacco joints</a>, so one of the risks, along with cannabis dependency, is that the user can also develop a tobacco addiction. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/m6df_F_ON6Q?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Despite the fact that the numbers who smoke cigarettes <a href="http://tlcr.amegroups.com/article/view/4894">has tumbled</a>, the use of tobacco with cannabis has persisted and users aren’t always aware of the <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376871608000483">risk of developing a tobacco habit</a>. This means that they might smoke more joints and confuse the symptoms of tobacco withdrawal with cannabis withdrawal.</p>
<p>Vaporisers allow the user to smoke cannabis without the use of tobacco, but while they are increasingly popular we <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460316303306">don’t have enough evidence to recommend this as a safer</a> alternative to the traditional joint. However, discouraging the combination of tobacco and cannabis in first-time users could improve their ability to have periodic breaks from drug use. </p>
<h2>Potency</h2>
<p>Daily or near daily use of cannabis is thought to be related to impaired thinking and reasoning (cognition). And heavy use over months and years can interfere with attending school, completing education and performing well at work. The active ingredient of cannabis, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), is the chemical responsible for the high experienced by users as well as many of the negative effects on the brain. However <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.13082/full">cannabidiol</a> (CBD), another constituent found in cannabis, appears to protect against the effects of THC on cognitive functioning and psychotic symptoms. </p>
<p>Cannabis strains with elevated THC levels have been developed to enhance the high and, unfortunately, this also increases the risk of adverse effects. According to some reports, while <a href="http://www.fsijournal.org/article/S0379-0738(17)30012-9/abstract">THC levels are increasing, concentrations of CBD are reducing</a> in hash (cannabis resin), which suggests that hash producers may now be competing with producers of skunk (high potency cannabis). </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=360&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/158400/original/image-20170225-22981-c4ib0u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">THC and CBD ratio.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ian Hamilton</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But as well as the risks of THC, users with a family history of psychotic disorders are at <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920996410000496">even greater risk</a>. And those who develop schizophrenia while continuing to use cannabis are more prone to relapse than those who did not use or <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215036615003636">who stopped using the drug</a>. </p>
<h2>Better measurement of cannabis use</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.libdems.org.uk/a_regulated_cannabis_market_for_the_uk">Cannabis can be regulated</a> in ways that reduce harm for users. One approach is to increase the tax on cannabis products with a higher THC content, making them more expensive. </p>
<p>A novel idea proposed by researchers from the Institute of Psychiatry and University College London is to <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(17)30075-5/fulltext">find a ratio of THC and CBD that minimises the adverse effects</a> of cannabis on health and brain functioning – this would probably involve increasing the levels of CBD. The rewarding effects or high would not appear to be compromised by doing so. Users who experienced adverse effects from high-potency cannabis could switch to products with higher levels of CBD. As higher concentrations of CBD appear to offer a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920996411002246">protective effect against psychosis</a>.</p>
<p>Legalisation of cannabis would allow researchers to assess the effects of using cannabis that varies in potency. Most of the epidemiological research on cannabis use was conducted in an era when lower-potency cannabis was probably used – and it was <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-cannabis-really-getting-stronger-62574">difficult for researchers to measure the THC and CBD</a> with any degree of accuracy. But this can only be achieved if the research community can agree on exactly how cannabis potency should be assessed and reported. </p>
<p>But while this is debated and more research is conducted, we must ensure that cannabis users are already aware of the risk of daily cannabis use. Awareness of both tobacco and cannabis dependency, as well as the risk of memory impairment and psychosis associated with high levels of THC may be the first steps in making cannabis use safer.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/73638/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ian Hamilton is affiliated with Alcohol Research UK.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wayne Hall receives funding from University of Queensland and has received funding from the World Heath Organisation for reviewing evidence on the adverse health effects of nonmedical cannabis use.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Monaghan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Smoking cannabis can cause addition, impaired memory and even psychosis.Ian Hamilton, Lecturer in Mental Health, University of YorkMark Monaghan, Lecturer in Crimimology and Social Policy, Loughborough UniversityWayne Hall, Professor and Director, Centre for Youth Substance Abuse Research, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/554932016-03-01T19:05:42Z2016-03-01T19:05:42ZAustralia’s recreational drug policies aren’t working, so what are the options for reform?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113308/original/image-20160301-4090-1110xx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Decriminalisation removes criminal penalties for drug use or possession.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-153850529/stock-photo-man-addicted-to-marijuana-or-cannabis-rolling-himself-a-joint-sitting-outdoors-in-the-shade-close.html?src=9eK7lHT6li5nSX1SfEgStQ-1-79">Viacheslav Nikolaenko/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Some of the greatest harms from using illicit drugs are because they are illegal. </p>
<p>Illegal drug production is unregulated and many drugs are manufactured in backyard labs. Users cannot be sure what’s in them or how potent they are, so the risk of adverse reactions, including overdose and death, is high. </p>
<p>A large proportion of the work of the <a href="http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi439.pdf">justice system</a> – police, courts and prisons – is occupied with drug-related offences. Many people have a criminal record for possessing drugs intended for personal use, which can affect their work prospects. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/r38.pdf">Drug busts</a> have little impact on the availability of drugs and, as we continue to see more harms including overdoses and deaths, it is clear we need a new approach to illicit drugs.</p>
<p>This week, a parliamentary drug summit, convened by the Australian Parliamentary Group on Drug Policy and Law Reform, is debating drug policy reform in Australia. This includes the options for reform: depenalisation, decriminalisation and legalisation. </p>
<h2>The options</h2>
<p>There are many different legal frameworks governing the use and supply of drugs:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><strong>Full prohibition</strong>: drug use, possession and supply are <a href="https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/find-legal-answers/criminal-offences">criminal offences</a> and result in a criminal record and sometimes prison sentence</p></li>
<li><p><strong>Depenalisation</strong>: drug use and possession are still criminal offences but with lighter penalties (referral for assessment, education and/or treatment); drug supply remains a criminal offence</p></li>
<li><p><strong>Decriminalisation</strong>: the removal of criminal penalties for drug use or possession. Illicit drugs remain illegal but criminal penalties are replaced with civil penalties (such as fines). People who use or possess drugs can still be charged, especially if they do not comply with paying the fine or attending the assessment. Drug supply remains a criminal offence</p></li>
<li><p><strong>Legalisation</strong>: use of a drug is legal as is drug supply.</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>What legal frameworks apply in Australia?</h2>
<p>In Australia, legislation is state-based. Different penalties apply to different drugs in different states.</p>
<p>South Australia, the ACT and Northern Territory have decriminalised cannabis by applying civil penalties, if a person meets certain eligibility criteria. All other states have no decriminalisation options for any illicit drugs.</p>
<p>All Australian states have depenalisation systems in place for cannabis, through diversion to education, assessment or treatment for those who meet eligibility criteria. Non-attendance at education, assessment or treatment can still lead to criminal charges. </p>
<p>All states, except NSW and Queensland, have depenalisation options for drugs other than cannabis.</p>
<h2>How does decriminalisation affect drug supply and use?</h2>
<p>Most research on decriminalisation is based on cannabis and has shown a number of consequences of decriminalisation.</p>
<p>One negative effect of decriminialisation is <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25959525">net-widening</a>: an increase in the number of people arrested or charged. The way decriminalisation is implemented can affect the extent of net-widening.</p>
<p>On the other hand, several studies <a href="http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/6/999.abstract">have shown</a> that decriminalisation does not increase drug use among existing or new users. It reduces demand on, and the cost of, the <a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/sen/committee/371/ille/presentation/single-e.htm">criminal justice system</a>. </p>
<p>Portugal <a href="http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/6/999.abstract">decriminalised the use and possession</a> of all illicit drugs in 2001. At the same time, it expanded investment in drug treatment, harm reduction and social reintegration. <a href="https://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DPA_Fact_Sheet_Portugal_Decriminalization_Feb2015.pdf">Impacts of this reform included</a> a reduced burden on the criminal justice system, reductions in problematic drug use, reductions in drug-related HIV and AIDS, reductions in drug-related deaths, and reduced social costs of responding to drugs.</p>
<h2>What about legalisation?</h2>
<p>There are few jurisdictions where drugs are legalised. Uruguay has recently legalised cannabis use and production, and is in the process of implementing that legislation.</p>
<p>Some states in the US have legalised possession and sale of small amounts of cannabis for personal use, including Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Alaska and Washington DC. So far, this move <a href="http://www.medicinalgenomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Assessing-the-pub-health-impacts-of-legalizing-recreational-cannabis-use-in-the-USA.pdf">does not seem to have led</a> to an increase in use of cannabis or an increase in harms in those states but further monitoring is needed.</p>
<p>Some of the arguments for legalisation are that it would reduce the black market and criminal networks associated with the drug trade, and shift responses and funding from police and the criminal justice system towards health and treatment programs. Taxes raised could be collected to benefit the community.</p>
<p>One of the arguments against legalisation is that it could result in a significant increase in drug use, based on the harms and costs associated with legal drugs, alcohol and tobacco.</p>
<h2>What does the Australian public think?</h2>
<p>There has been a clear shift towards viewing drug use as a health and human rights issue. Former Victorian police commissioner Ken Lay, head of the federal government’s Ice Taskforce, <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/ice-a-crisis-for-all-to-tackle-says-new-tsar-ken-lay/news-story/92fdf9dd9895dc8a011a6b1b32abcb70">has explained</a> that “you can’t arrest your way out of this problem”, while Mick Palmer, former AFP Commissioner, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/after-33-years-i-can-no-longer-ignore-the-evidence-on-drugs-20120606-1zwpr.html">notes</a> that “drug law enforcement has had little impact on the Australian drug market”. </p>
<p>Most Australians support some form of decriminalisation (caution, civil penalty or diversion) for all drugs. Only <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/ndshs/">5% of Australians support</a> a prison sentence for cannabis possession, with support for prison for ecstasy (14%), methamphetamine (21%) and heroin (24%) also relatively low.</p>
<p>One in four Australians (26%) <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/alcohol-and-other-drugs/ndshs/">believe that personal use</a> of cannabis should be legal and 69% support a change in legislation to allow the use of cannabis for medical purposes. Some 42% believe that a caution, warning or no action would be appropriate for possession of small amounts of cannabis. Between 5% and 7% of Australians support legalisation of other drugs.</p>
<p>It’s becoming increasing clear that the illegal status of drugs causes significant harms to users and the community. There is increasing recognition that a new approach is needed. </p>
<p>Decriminalisation of illegal drugs has the support of Australians and does not appear to increase use, but can substantially reduce harms. Further research in countries that have legalised some drugs is needed to identify any benefits and consequences.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/55493/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Lee works as a consultant to health services to support best practice implementation of methamphetamine and other drug treatment and is the President of the Australian Association for Cognitive and Behaviour Therapy. She has previously been awarded grants by the Australian Government for research into methamphetamine treatment options.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Professor Alison Ritter is an NHMRC Senior Research Fellow and Director of the Drug Policy Modelling Program, NDARC, UNSW. She has received research funding form the NHMRC, the ARC, philanthropic organisations and state and federal governments.</span></em></p>Some of the greatest harms from using illicit drugs are because they are illegal.Nicole Lee, Associate Professor at the National Drug Research Institute, Curtin UniversityAlison Ritter, Professor & Specialist in Drug Policy, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/426472015-06-02T15:00:27Z2015-06-02T15:00:27ZWhy the government is right to blanket ban new psychoactive substances<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83667/original/image-20150602-6990-hjdp3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">'Legal highs' to become defunct.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-161639954/stock-photo-drug-dealer-taking-money-for-heroine-and-ecstasy.html?src=TsONsjDlB3Y9RyiOM88R0A-1-1">Dealing by Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The proposals in the Queen’s Speech to introduce a general ban on “legal highs” has given all the usual suspects another opportunity to restate previously held positions. </p>
<p>Legalisers across the political spectrum, such as Release and the Adam Smith Institute, tell us that if only cannabis and ecstasy were legal there would be no market pressure to create drugs which mimic their effects in laboratories in China – and therefore legal highs would not exist. Meanwhile Julia Hartley Brewer <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11638124/Some-highs-are-more-legal-than-others.html">in The Daily Telegraph</a> tells us that “the ban on legal highs is a good thing and will undoubtedly save lives”.</p>
<h2>What the experts said</h2>
<p>The sober, evidenced, and persuasively argued <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368583/NPSexpertReviewPanelReport.pdf">report of the expert panel into New Psychoactive Substances (NPS)</a> – on which the proposed legislation is based – lacks both the certainty and rhetorical flourish of the commentators.</p>
<p>The expert panel began by contextualising the use of NPS. They acknowledged that measuring use precisely is impossible but all the evidence pointed to levels of use much lower than those implied by newspaper headlines: 1.3% of all adults; 1.9% of the 16-24 age group; 0.4% of schoolchildren – all small fractions of the use of more traditional drugs among the same groups. </p>
<p>Furthermore, the majority of NPS users are also users of illegal drugs (98% of those who had used mephedrone in the last year had also used another illicit drug) which suggests that the number of new users being introduced to the risks of drug use is negligible. All told the panel concluded that “NPS appear to be less used and associated with less harm than traditional illegal drugs.”</p>
<h2>Less harm not harmless</h2>
<p>Less harm however does not equate to harmless. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction in Lisbon <a href="http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/2015/new-psychoactive-substances">reported an unprecedented increase</a> in the number, type and availability of new psychoactive substances in Europe that “is also responsible for the
increase in serious harms reported to the EMCDDA in
recent years”. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=654&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=654&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83663/original/image-20150602-6960-1tt2l2l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=654&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Number of new psychoactive substances reported to the.
EU Early Warning System 2005-14.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/2015/new-psychoactive-substances">EMCDDA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In England there is evidence of an increase in mephedrone treatment need from 839 adults in 2010-11 to 1,630 in 2012-13, with a similar pattern for under 18s. Deaths associated with NPS have also been increasing, from 29 in 2011 to 52 in 2012 – still dwarfed by the 1,500 deaths associated with illicit drugs, but far too many to ignore and an alarming rate of increase.</p>
<p>The overall picture is of a small but growing problem with use concentrated among existing drug users. This can lead to the intensification of pre-existing problems such as <a href="http://www.beigeuk.com/2014/02/chem-sex-revealed-part-one/">unsafe sexual practices</a> between men who have sex with men, and dealing and bullying in custody, <a href="http://www.ppo.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/PPO-self-inflicted-deaths-publication-press-release.pdf">particularly among vulnerable young prisoners</a>. To these problems we need to add the continuing concern that the next wave of substances to arrive may have much greater potential for immediate and long-term harm. </p>
<h2>Other attempts at legislation</h2>
<p>Much of the media comment has focused on the shift in the legal basis for enforcement towards what the expert panel describe as a “precautionary principle” rather than responding to evidence of harm as the Misuse of Drugs Act (1971) does. </p>
<p>The panel recognised the significance of the shift but also painstakingly reviewed the attempts over the past few years to use existing legislation to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/may/01/chinese-labs-legal-highs-west-drugs">keep up with the labs in China</a> who could easily tweak the chemistry more quickly than the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), which makes recommendations to government on the control of dangerous or otherwise harmful drugs, could assess the harm for each slightly different formulation. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83658/original/image-20150602-6990-15aow0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Frog ‘e’: available at local head shops.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/666_is_money/5548568082/in/photolist-9siRYW-83p8yy-88dVNJ">Raquel Baranow</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There have been various attempts across the world to overcome this problem, including <a href="http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1918675,00.html">the outlawing of analogues</a> (substantially similar) in the US in 1986, which has proved cumbersome, expensive and not very effective, and the currently stalled attempts to introduce regulation <a href="http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/legal-highs-could-make-comeback-onto-nz-shelves-6230151">in New Zealand</a>. There have even been attempts by local authorities in the UK <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/action-against-head-shops">to use consumer protection legislation</a> to disrupt sales. Of all the models available, the expert NPS panel concluded in its report that the legislation introduced in Ireland in 2010 offered the most practical way forward. </p>
<p>In essence, under the new UK Psychoactive Substances Bill, any substance delivering a drug-type experience to the user will be illegal to manufacture or supply, but not to possess – unless it is already illegal, in which case it will remain subject to the Misuse of Drugs Act. Exemptions will be given by the Home Office to include foodstuffs and our current culturally sanctioned drugs, such as alcohol, tobacco and caffeine.</p>
<p>Some see this as the thin end of the wedge: the state taking to itself unprecedented powers to declare activities to be unlawful by default. The panel saw it as a proportionate pragmatic response to a market which seeks to profit from selling products which are inherently dangerous by sheltering behind the technical legal requirements to prove the harmfulness of each very slightly different variant.</p>
<p>There are no expectations that this approach will solve the problems with NPS overnight. While the panel believed that on balance it has the potential to reduce use and may save lives, critics have argued that it will have no effect at all, merely driving the domestic market into the hands of existing illegal drug dealers and leaving foreign-based websites to ship NPS into the UK at will. My own best guess is that it does have a reasonable chance of yielding some benefit.</p>
<h2>The exclusion of possession</h2>
<p>There are real advantages in driving activity underground. The panel identified 250 “head shops”, where legal highs are sold in high streets, and 120 UK-based online retailers. NPS are also increasingly being sold in petrol stations, newsagents, and market stalls. Closing down the visible points of sale will tend to deter novice users and, just as importantly, will prevent the normalisation of NPS use which the presence of open sales promotes.</p>
<p>The government deserves credit for following expert advice. Successive governments have ignored the advice of the ACMD over <a href="https://theconversation.com/david-nutt-i-was-sacked-i-was-angry-i-was-right-19848">a range of issues</a>. In this instance it has followed the advice of the panel in most key respects, setting a helpful precedent.</p>
<p>One of the key recommendations that has been accepted is that, although the offences related to NPS largely shadow those of the Misuse of Drugs Act, there will be no offence for recreational possession. This opens up opportunities to reflect again on the utility of the current offence of possession within the act itself – and, in particular, the vexed issue of imprisonment which looks to many observers, even those who do not favour legalisation, to be disproportionate. Presumably the <a href="https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/">Sentencing Council</a> will at some stage be asked to advise on the sentencing guidelines for the offences within the new act. Perhaps this will create an opportunity for them to give guidance to judges which will avoid too great a discrepancy in the response to those using very similar substances.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/42647/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Hayes is a former CEO of the National Treatment Agency. As such he was responsible to ministers and parliament for the funding and delivery of treatment for drug addiction in England between 2001-13. He currently chairs the Northern Inclusion Consortium, a collaboration between five third sector organisations providing integrated responses to social and economic exclusion</span></em></p>Successive governments haven’t always followed expert advice, but they have in the new bill to end ‘legal highs’.Paul Hayes, Hon. Professor Drug Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/261242014-05-01T13:45:14Z2014-05-01T13:45:14ZLegalising cannabis is more than just a yes or no decision<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/47427/original/scpp9nsh-1398870054.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A joint affair: legalising cannabis and doing it properly.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/prensa420/3083836418/sizes/l">Prensa420</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is one thing for a jurisdiction to decide that it no longer supports the prohibition of cannabis; it is another to figure out how to establish and regulate a legal cannabis market. Uruguay became the first nation to legalise the drug in 2013 but is still <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/24/uruguay-limit-licensed-marijuana-users-10g-a-week">working on the full set of rules</a> that will govern production, distribution, and use. Policymakers in Colorado and Washington State, which recently repealed cannabis prohibition, are also grappling with how to do this as other jurisdictions seriously discuss legalisation.</p>
<p>However, many of the details about how to regulate these newly legal markets – determining the number of growers, distributors, and retailers; licensing qualifications; product limitations; quality requirements; and marketing restrictions – are left to government agencies with little guidance on how to do it.</p>
<p>To inform these discussions we recently <a href="http://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP50487.html">published an article</a> which looked at the lessons from the alcohol and tobacco industry. Our goal was not to address whether cannabis legalisation is a good or bad idea but to help policymakers understand the decisions they face and experiences from the regulation of other substances. </p>
<p>The start of any truly honest discussion about how to regulate cannabis markets must start with clear objectives and goals. How these markets are opened can be as important as the decision to legalise cannabis. Knowing which lessons to take away from evidence on alcohol and tobacco regulation very much depends on what these objectives are. Objectives might focus on public health, public safety, personal liberty, restorative justice, maximising revenue, or some combination.</p>
<h2>Supporters and critics unite</h2>
<p>We can start with the premise that many reformers as well as those opposed to legalisation share a common set of public health objectives: to minimise access, availability and use by youths; drugged driving; cannabis dependence and addiction; consumption of products with unwanted contaminants and uncertain potency; and the use of cannabis at the same time as alcohol. The last of these is somewhat controversial, since concurrent use could also reduce alcohol consumption and some of the consequences <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629611001718">associated with heavy drinking</a>. But given the research that suggests that concurrent use <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02911.x/full">may also increase</a> traffic crashes and other health harms, it seems appropriate, at least initially, to seek to minimise using them together.</p>
<p>For jurisdictions focused on these five public health objectives there are many lessons to be learned from our experiences with regulating alcohol and tobacco. </p>
<p>There is a large amount of alcohol and tobacco literature demonstrating that consumption and its harms can be reduced by keeping prices artificially high, <a href="http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh342/236-245.htm">through taxation for example</a>. After legalisation, we would expect the cost of producing and distributing cannabis to drop as suppliers no longer have to be compensated for their risk and can take advantage of increasing returns to scale. One of the most effective tools for preventing a large drop in retail prices is to create a government-run monopoly. Where this is not possible, regulations can be imposed that create market inefficiencies, such as prohibiting outside production or large greenhouses. Similarly, licenses can be restricted to ensure limited competition with high fees. </p>
<p>Additional production or product requirements can inflate prices, and of course there is the option of excise taxes. Some of these options – such as requirements to product test and label cannabis products – would have additional benefits like protecting consumers from unwanted contaminants.</p>
<p>There also appear to be advantages, at least initially, to limiting the number and type of products that can be sold. Both the alcohol and tobacco industry have been innovative in developing new products that appeal to young users. Examples include candy and gum cigarettes, alcohol pops, and wine coolers. High potency cannabis products place users at greater risk of dependence, drugged driving, and other harms if used inappropriately. Restrictions on the type of products allowed could reduce the potential for new products that are particularly attractive to youth, for example cannabis-infused candies and vapouriser pens with flavoured hash oil.</p>
<p>We know from the alcohol and tobacco literature that partial bans on marketing are largely <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629600000540">ineffective at limiting use</a>, particularly <a href="http://www.jsad.com/jsad/article/Alcohol_Advertising_and_Youth/1475.html">youth use</a>. While difficult to establish in existing markets, it is conceivable that comprehensive bans on marketing may be possible as a first step away from prohibition.</p>
<p>Other lessons exist as well, such as restricting sales and banning public consumption to reduce youth exposure. It is important to keep in mind that any initial policy is likely to be just a first step; flexibility will need to be built in as knowledge is gained about the real (versus perceived) risks of these products and markets.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26124/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rosalie Pacula currently receives funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse and has done contract work in the past for the Office of National Drug Control Policy and European Commission . She is affiliated with the RAND Corporation and the National Bureau of Economic Research</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Beau Kilmer has recently worked on cannabis-related projects funded by the State of Washington, Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice, European Commission, and White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. He is a Senior Policy Researcher at the RAND Corporation.
</span></em></p>It is one thing for a jurisdiction to decide that it no longer supports the prohibition of cannabis; it is another to figure out how to establish and regulate a legal cannabis market. Uruguay became the…Rosalie Liccardo Pacula, Co-director, RAND Drug Policy Research Centre and Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate SchoolBeau Kilmer, Co-Director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Centre and Professor , Pardee RAND Graduate SchoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/256692014-04-23T04:37:04Z2014-04-23T04:37:04ZAssessing the costs and benefits of legalising cannabis<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/46882/original/xhvrvzg2-1398220207.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C67%2C1024%2C718&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">When government revenue is included, legalising appears to trump the status quo.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/hippie/2670770431">Philippa Willitts</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>About one-quarter of Australians <a href="http://www.dpmp.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/dpmp/resources/DPMP%20Bulletin%2021.pdf">support</a> the legalisation of cannabis. And advocates often point to the <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/10/news/marijuana-tax-revenue/">potential of raising tax revenue</a> from sales as part of their argument. But there has been limited analysis of the economic costs and benefits of legalisation – until now. </p>
<p>A study we <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0095569">published today</a> in the journal PLOS ONE compared the status quo with legalisation. We found that when using the standard cost-benefit framework which excludes government revenue, neither policy delivered substantially more economic benefits. </p>
<p>But when government revenue is included, legalising appears to trump the status quo. </p>
<h2>Two options</h2>
<p>The status quo in New South Wales is that juveniles found in possession of 15 grams or less of cannabis may receive a warning or a caution, and adults can receive up to two cautions. Those convicted for cultivation or for selling cannabis may get a fine or go to prison.</p>
<p>Our hypothetical legalisation policy, in contrast, was developed from a public health framework of regulation and harm minimisation. It incorporated some of the many lessons from tobacco and alcohol research including:</p>
<ul>
<li>limiting outlet density</li>
<li>no advertising</li>
<li>requiring plain paper packaging </li>
<li>requiring consumer licences</li>
<li>restricting sales to those aged 21 and over. </li>
</ul>
<p>Other elements of the hypothetical policy included:</p>
<ul>
<li>ongoing drug-driving testing</li>
<li>licensed commercial growers</li>
<li>a regulatory board to set prices</li>
<li>government as monopoly distributor and retailer. </li>
</ul>
<p>We chose a government monopoly as a way to limit lobbying and avoid claims of anti-competition from the industry, as has occurred with the tobacco industry.</p>
<h2>Costs and benefits</h2>
<p>A cost-benefit analysis such as the one we undertook provides an estimate in dollars of both the gains and losses to individuals and to the wider society for each policy. A policy is said to be socially desirable, and have a positive net social benefit, if the overall sum of the positive benefits outweighs the sum of the costs and harms. </p>
<p>Deciding whether something is a harm or a benefit is not necessarily straightforward. Some, such as the sense of well-being users gain from consuming cannabis, is a clear benefit to them. Obvious harms are the consequences of dependence, and the potential decrease in educational attainment in young persons who consume cannabis frequently. </p>
<p>However, less straightforward is stigma from a criminal record for possession or use of cannabis. Many see this as a harm whereas others see this as a benefit, and a way to deter cannabis use. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/46884/original/f3k2rf95-1398220466.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The net social benefit is the difference between the benefits and the costs.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/milkwhitegown/4420604477">Katherine Hitt</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The list of costs includes the financial burden of legalising marijuana on the criminal justice system (police, courts, corrections services) and the health-care system (from dependence, mental illnesses attributed to cannabis, and death from accidents). Added to this are regulatory costs, and consumer education and quit campaigns.</p>
<p>We attributed a 2007 Australian dollar value to all these costs, harms and benefits and then summed each policy option to obtain the net social benefit. </p>
<h2>The verdict</h2>
<p>The net social benefit (the difference between the benefits and the costs) was positive for both policies. </p>
<p>To illustrate the uncertainty around each of the estimates, we provided a mean figure and a 5-95% range. The mean net social benefit for the status quo was A$294.6 million (A$201.1 to A$392.7 million) and for the legalised–regulated model it was A$234.2 million (A$136.4 to A$331.1 million). </p>
<p>Both estimates fall within the same range. This indicates that both policies result in a similarly efficient use of resources. </p>
<p>But there’s a difference in who bears the costs and who benefits. For the status quo, for example, expenditures within the criminal justice system are higher, whereas in the legalised option the negative impact on educational attainment is greater. </p>
<p>Not included in the above results are potential revenues to government, as they are considered transfers and not normally included in a cost-benefit analysis. </p>
<p>When the revenues were added – after removing payments to growers and the costs of operating the cannabis shops – the net social benefit increased. In fact, it more than doubled to A$727.5 million, as did the level of uncertainty (it could be anywhere in the range of A$372.3 million to A$1,113.2 million). This suggests there may be gains for government coffers under legalisation. </p>
<p>But while the revenues are potentially large, so is the uncertainty around these numbers. <a href="http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP315.html">Other researchers have argued</a>, for instance, that the price of legalised cannabis would likely have to fall substantially to undermine the existing black market. This drop in price would likely lead to a negative impact on government revenues, may result in additional consumption and increased harms. </p>
<p>We may soon see data emerge on the harms, benefits and revenues from the introduction of legalised cannabis in the US state of Colorado. But it may be some time before true figures are known, especially given the <a href="http://www.cbs58.com/news/national-news/Pot-taxes-wont-be-as-high-as-hoped-255182061.html">recent revamping of budgetary expectations</a> in that state.</p>
<p>Given the uncertainty around the extent of the potential revenue gains and the similarity in net social benefits from both policy options, drivers for change are more likely to be political and based on public opinion, rather than economic arguments.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/25669/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marian Shanahan receives funding from the ARC and the NHMRC.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alison Ritter receives funding from the NHMRC as a Senior Research Fellow (APP1021988); the DPMP has been funded by the Colonial Foundation Trust and the ARC. </span></em></p>About one-quarter of Australians support the legalisation of cannabis. And advocates often point to the potential of raising tax revenue from sales as part of their argument. But there has been limited…Marian Shanahan, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Drug and Alcohol Research, UNSW SydneyAlison Ritter, Professor & Specialist in Drug Policy, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/208622013-12-04T06:31:20Z2013-12-04T06:31:20ZFree the weed, but growing an effective market would be tough<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/36822/original/ckzm2hcv-1386086966.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Perhaps the UK could buy a starter kit?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rose Robinson</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>We appear to be on the cusp of a major change in the laws surrounding the use and sale of cannabis. Several nations have now decriminalised usage, and the first steps toward full legalisation have taken place in Uruguay and some US states. </p>
<p>UK drugs minister Norman Baker has <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/26/drugs-minister-norman-baker-refuses-to-rule-out-legalisation-of-cannabis">refused to dismiss</a> the possibility of such a move here, prompting many to consider the prospect of a legal cannabis market and just how it would work. People are wondering if decriminalisation alone might be enough. If the market is left to its own devices, could it still deliver desired outcomes? One alternative might be to opt for full legalisation and state control, with cannabis taxed and licensed. </p>
<p>Of course, we now have real-world examples to compare. Uruguay is regarded as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-uruguays-legal-weed-means-for-the-war-on-drugs-16646">pioneer of cannabis legalisation</a> yet its policy for regulation is riddled with anomalies. Cultivation and sale remain illegal outside a set of strict exceptions. These caveats permit households to produce <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/04/uruguay-legalize-marijuana-george-soros">up to 480g</a> of cannabis per year and allow for the creation of “cannabis clubs” similar to those already in existence in Spain. </p>
<p>Considering that “seasoned” cannabis users will often use in excess of 30g per week this seems an excessively small allowance. Perhaps in light of this, the government grants licenses to produce commercial cannabis to a limited number of private companies. Even so, buyers are restricted to a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/22/uruguay-legal-cannabis-1-dollar-gram">limit of 40g per month</a>. All users are made to register on a database in order to deter cannabis tourism.</p>
<p>The picture in the US is even more complex. Despite federal law prohibiting the use and sale of cannabis, several states have opted to deviate from statute and allow usage, again, with various caveats. California, for example, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/us/few-problems-with-cannabis-for-california.html?_r=0">permits the use</a> of cannabis for medicinal purposes (a system widely abused) while also reducing penalties for possession to misdemeanour status. Washington state and Colorado have opted to legalise and license cannabis cultivation and supply while others such as Vermont have decriminalised possession of less than one ounce (28 grams).</p>
<h2>Homegrown problems</h2>
<p>These weed markets are still mostly in their infancy (at least in their legalised forms) and it may still be too early to judge them a success or failure. But here in the UK, suggestions of what a post-prohibition cannabis market might look like have already run into a variety of problems.</p>
<p>Take the guide <a href="http://www.tdpf.org.uk/resources/publications/after-war-drugs-blueprint-regulation">produced by the drug charity Transform</a>, for instance. It is probably the best available but many of its proposals, particularly those relating to regulation of home production, are still unworkable. CLEAR, a political party that campaigns for reforms to cannabis laws, runs into similar problems in <a href="http://www.clear-uk.org/tax-regulate/">their own proposal</a> with calls for limits on the number of plants or lighting wattages that would be impossible to enforce.</p>
<p>CLEAR also proposes a ban on the sale of home-produced cannabis, thus allowing commercial growers to dominate the market. Suggesting, <a href="http://www.tdpf.org.uk/resources/publications/how-regulate-cannabis-practical-guide">as Transform does</a>, that domestic growing for personal use is unlikely to have significant impact is optimistic in the extreme. The size and scale of the already existing home grow sector would say otherwise, not to mention the existing criminal organisations who are not simply going to walk away from the market.</p>
<p>The idea that cannabis control policy could mirror that of alcohol and tobacco is also misguided. Any attempt to regulate cannabis must recognise the nature of the drug itself; high quality weed can be easily and regularly grown at home. The same cannot be said for either alcohol or tobacco, which means any regulation would require a new approach, particularly in respect of taxation.</p>
<h2>Taxing questions</h2>
<p>The problem of how, and what, to tax clearly demonstrates the complexities of any potential move toward legalisation. It’s all very well saying there are “<a href="https://theconversation.com/analysis-reveals-economic-benefits-of-legalised-cannabis-20281">economic benefits</a>” to regulating cannabis, but figuring out an effective tax system that delivers both revenue and consumer value would be much harder.</p>
<p>One suggestion is for <a href="http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/TaxUKCan.pdf">dual tax bands</a>. Strong “skunk” cannabis and high-quality resin would attract higher revenues than lower grade product. This would not only favour the large-scale commercial grower, (who could afford to pay for batch strength testing) over the smaller cultivators but, <a href="http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/TaxUKCan.pdf">proponents argue</a>, would also “discourage the use of more potent strains”. But this fails to realise that the major appeal of “skunk” cannabis lies in its potency, and any attempts at limiting this serve only to force users to continue to grow their own. </p>
<p>Duty based on number of plants should be ruled out due to significant differences in yields per type of plant and growing method used; it would be like taxing beer and champagne at the same rate as they both come in bottles. A more practical suggestion is for a levy of one pound per gram, regardless of the type of weed. This alone would raise <a href="http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/TaxUKCan.pdf">almost a billion pounds per year</a> in duty. </p>
<p>Unless there is a massive reversal of public and political will, it seems cannabis will be either legalised or decriminalised in the near future. But despite the best efforts of those favouring reform to draft a workable proposal of post-prohibition cannabis markets, it’s clear that there are still issues to be resolved. </p>
<p>Perhaps the answer will come from the experiences of nations that have taken the plunge first. Certainly, those of us who are thinking beyond legalisation to a functioning weed market are keeping a keen eye on Uruguay, California and elsewhere. If those places fail to provide any concrete lessons, then the UK looks set for a period of trial and error.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/20862/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Craig Ancrum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We appear to be on the cusp of a major change in the laws surrounding the use and sale of cannabis. Several nations have now decriminalised usage, and the first steps toward full legalisation have taken…Craig Ancrum, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, Teesside UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/202812013-11-14T06:13:17Z2013-11-14T06:13:17ZAnalysis reveals economic benefits of legalised cannabis<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35185/original/7vdq4ycy-1384365146.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Have you paid tax on that?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">prensa420</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is easy to despair of the low quality of public debate on drugs policy in the UK. Some of the loudest voices reflect fixed views and make opportunistic use of any fragment of evidence that happens to support them. The very act of contemplating certain policy options can attract vehement criticism and –- consequently, perhaps –- some policy-makers who, before entering government, had open minds on options for drugs policy, cling firmly to the prohibitionist line when in power. </p>
<p>Few participants in the public debate on drugs policy are prepared to consider the full range of issues involved in policy choice, or acknowledge the large uncertainties that exist in the research evidence. The debate is often conducted in emotive terms, using vague conceptions of “tough” and “liberal” policy, sometimes making large deductive leaps that have little backing in logic.</p>
<p>Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in Britain (the research reported here all relates to England and Wales rather than Great Britain or the UK). Although its use has been in slow decline for over a decade, <a href="https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/d/153">survey evidence</a> still suggests that there may be as many as 3.4m users (down from 5.5m in 2006), more than all other illegal drugs combined. </p>
<p>UK policy is prohibitionist: the users and suppliers of cannabis are threatened with maximum sentences of five and 14 years imprisonment respectively. We currently imprison more than 2,000 people a year for cannabis offences, despite the lack of any clear empirical evidence of an effect of enforcement activity on cannabis use.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=246&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=246&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=246&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35182/original/4hfhjps3-1384363031.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=309&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trends in custodial sentences for cannabis offences and cannabis use.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This prohibitionist policy is dictated by international treaty provisions and aspirations which found expression in a remarkably implausible UN slogan: “a drug-free world – we can do it!”</p>
<h2>Would regulation work?</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/d/153">recent report</a> co-authored with Mark Bryan and Emilia Del Bono considers one radical policy option –- a system of licensed, regulated and taxed cannabis supply. </p>
<p>We identify no fewer than 17 possible consequences that need to be evaluated before arriving at an informed and balanced view on the case for this reform. They include: savings in various policing and criminal justice costs; changes in cannabis-related crime, accidents, dependency, mental and physical illness, productivity, and the scarring effects of a criminal record. </p>
<p>Cost-benefit analysis can be used to put all projected consequences of reform –- both monetary and non-monetary -– on a common cash-equivalent basis. This gives us a coherent overall view of the arguments and some idea of which particular consequences might be crucial in tilting things one way or the other. </p>
<p>We evaluate only the effect of the reform on the social costs imposed by cannabis users on the rest of society and we are able to make estimates of the net social effects of reform for 13 of the 17 items on our list of possible consequences.</p>
<p>There are large uncertainties in evaluating the costs and benefits of reform. The first is what a legalised market would look like. The US model of legalisation leads to a large numbers of suppliers and different products that is hard to regulate. Other models, like the extreme case of a <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-uruguays-legal-weed-means-for-the-war-on-drugs-16646">government monopoly proposed for Uruguay</a>, entail fewer, larger licensed suppliers operating under tight product controls. </p>
<p>The possibility of product regulation is one of the strongest arguments for legalisation. The primary psychoactive component of cannabis is D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which has been linked to impaired brain function and psychotic symptoms, but research suggests that another component, cannabidiol (CBD) has a protective anti-psychotic effect. In the last decade or so, there has been a worrying rise in the market share of high-THC, low-CBD forms of cannabis (usually known as “skunk”), and this worrying trend has proved impossible to control under prohibitionist policy.</p>
<p>A second major source of uncertainty is the nature of demand. It has not proved possible to arrive at a clear understanding of the reasons for the slow decline in cannabis use or the shift towards higher-potency product. There is also no research consensus on price effects, especially the cross-effects of variation in cannabis prices on the demand for alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. </p>
<p>A third difficulty is in identifying the true causal relationship between cannabis use and eventual long-term harms. </p>
<h2>So what’s the cost (or benefit)?</h2>
<p>Given these uncertainties, we considered three possible outcomes based on differing levels of cannabis demand after legalisation. A “low response”, where cannabis use barely increases; a “high response” scenario, where usage increases a great deal; and a “mid response”. </p>
<p>We assume a significant degree of product regulation, with government setting excise taxes at a rate comparable with those used in the alcohol and tobacco markets. We also assume a residual illegal supply with a market share rather larger than the share of illegal supply in the tobacco market at present. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35183/original/327bwrwz-1384364642.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Projected net social benefit of reform under three demand response scenarios.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The striking feature of these estimates is how small the projected costs and benefits are. This is partly because we are only considering costs and benefits to non-users. The anticipated costs to cannabis users themselves (health risks, for instance) are necessarily outweighed by the anticipated enjoyment of consumption.</p>
<p>But it is also partly because the plausible scale of cost savings (reduced enforcement costs) and cost increases (medical care, crime victimisation) to society appear to be inherently modest. There is no compelling evidence for a huge impact –- either good or bad –- on the rest of society from the changes in cannabis use likely to be produced by legalisation.</p>
<p>A possible exception to this is cannabis-related crime. Although we find very little evidence that cannabis use causes any crime at all, the large size of the market means that costs could be high under the most pessimistic “high response” scenario. But the large projected net increase in cannabis-related crime in that case (almost £600m) is highly uncertain, with a margin of error of plus or minus £800m.</p>
<p>By far the largest projected impact relates to the government budget. Under this reform, government gains additional tax revenue from licensed supply and makes net savings on policing and criminal justice costs. Since taxes represent transfers within society rather than gains to society, the improvement in the government’s budgetary position is not a strong argument for reform in principle, but it might be an attractive feature of reform to governments in practice.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/35184/original/4pvctycw-1384364727.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Projected gains to the government budget.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is nothing in these findings that should frighten any government –- there is no “killer fact” that makes legalisation unthinkable. While there is a significant possibility of net social harm if the demand response to policy change turned out to be extremely high, close monitoring of prevalence would allow the policy to be evaluated in practice and reversed if necessary.</p>
<p><em>A version of this article first appeared at <a href="http://societycentral.ac.uk/2013/11/01/the-costs-and-benefits-of-a-licensed-taxed-and-regulated-cannabis-market/">Society Central</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/20281/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Pudney does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It is easy to despair of the low quality of public debate on drugs policy in the UK. Some of the loudest voices reflect fixed views and make opportunistic use of any fragment of evidence that happens to…Stephen Pudney, Professor of Economics, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/63212012-04-12T01:11:07Z2012-04-12T01:11:07ZDecriminalisation or legalisation: injecting evidence in the drug law reform debate<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/9502/original/6qhk2zfk-1334191342.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">One argument for legalisation is it will move the problem away from police and the criminal justice system, where it currently dominates resources.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Simon Mossman</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>We should all be concerned about our laws on illegal drugs because they affect all of us – people who use drugs; who have family members using drugs; health professionals seeing people for drug-related problems; ambulance and police officers in the front line of drug harms; and all of us who pay high insurance premiums because drug-related crime is extensive.</p>
<p>Drug-related offences also take up the lion’s share of the work of police, courts and prisons. But what can we do? Some people feel that we should legalise drugs – treat them like alcohol and tobacco, as regulated products. And legalisation doesn’t necessarily need to apply for every illegal drug.</p>
<h2>Why legalise?</h2>
<p>One of the arguments for legalisation is that it would eliminate (or at least significantly reduce) the illegal black market and criminal networks associated with the drug trade. Other arguments include moving the problem away from police and the criminal justice system and concentrating responses within health. </p>
<p>Governments could accrue taxation revenue from illegal drugs as they currently do from gambling, alcohol and tobacco. A regulated government monopoly could secure direct income; our <a href="http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/MicroEco/downloads/SHANAHANCannabis%20CBA%20Melbourne%20Nov%20vers%20Sunday.pdf">research suggests</a> this may be as high as $600 million a year for a regulated cannabis market in New South Wales.</p>
<p>The strongest argument against legalisation is that it would result in significant increases in drug use. We know that currently legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco, are widely consumed and associated with an extensive economic burden to society – including hospital admissions, alcoholism treatment programs and public nuisance. So why create an environment where this may also come to pass for currently illegal drugs? </p>
<p>The moral argument against legalisation suggests the use of illegal drugs is amoral, anti-social and otherwise not acceptable in today’s society. The concern is that legalisation would “send the wrong message”.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, there’s no direct research evidence on legalisation because no country has legalised drugs yet. But suppositions can be made about the extent of cost-savings to society. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9501/original/jd7s859d-1334190735.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The moral argument against legalisation is that it would send the wrong message.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">acidpix/Flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Indeed, some of our <a href="http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/MicroEco/downloads/SHANAHANCannabis%20CBA%20Melbourne%20Nov%20vers%20Sunday.pdf">research</a> on a regulated legal cannabis market suggests that there may not be the significant savings under a legalisation regime that <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/04/heroin_and_cocaine_cost_britai.html">some commentators</a> have argued. But these are hypothetical exercises. </p>
<h2>Decriminalisation</h2>
<p>An alternative to legalisation is decriminalisation. Experts don’t agree on the terminology and there’s much confusion. But, in essence, decriminalisation refers to a reduction of legal penalties. This can be done either by changing them to civil penalties, such as fines, or by diverting drug use offenders away from a criminal conviction and into education or treatment options (also known as “diversion”). </p>
<p>Decriminalisation largely applies to drug use and possession offences, not to the sale or supply of drugs. Arguments in favour of decriminalisation include its focus on drug users rather than drug suppliers. The idea is to provide users with a more humane and sensible response to their drug use. </p>
<p>Decriminalisation has the potential to reduce the burden on police and the criminal justice system. It also removes the negative consequences (including stigma) associated with criminal convictions for drug use. </p>
<p>One argument against decriminalisation is that it doesn’t address the black market and criminal networks of drug selling. There are also concerns that it may lead to increased drug use but this assumes that current criminal penalties operate as a deterrent for some people. </p>
<p>The moral arguments noted above also apply to decriminalisation – lesser penalties may suggest that society approves of drug use. </p>
<p>Many countries, including Australia, have decriminalised cannabis use: measures include providing diversion programs (all Australian states and territories), and moving from criminal penalties to civil penalties (such as fines in South Australia, Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory).</p>
<p>Our team’s research on <a href="http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/6/999.full">Portugal</a> suggests that drug use rates don’t rise under decriminalisation, and there are measurable savings to the criminal justice system.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/9500/original/v8rf8fg5-1334190304.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The moral argument against decriminalisation is that it suggests society approves of drug use.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">floresyplantas.net/Flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In Australia also, there hasn’t been a rise in cannabis use rates despite states and territories introducing civil penalties for users. And research on diverting drug use offenders away from a criminal conviction and into treatment has shown that these individuals are just as likely to succeed in treatment as those who attend voluntarily.</p>
<p>At the same time, research has also noted a negative side effect to the way in which decriminalisation currently operates in Australia – “net widening” - whereby more people are swept up into the criminal justice system than would have occurred otherwise under full prohibition because discretion by police is less likely and/or they do not fulfil their obligations.</p>
<p>Despite the largely supportive evidence base, politicians appear reluctant to proceed along the decriminalisation path. Some commentators have speculated that this is because of public opinion – decriminalisation is regarded as an <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/pm-rejects-call-for-decriminalisation-20120403-1wav8.html">unpopular policy choice</a>. </p>
<p>But public opinion is largely in support of decriminalisation, where it concerns cannabis (though not decriminalisation for other illegal drugs). In the <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=32212254712">last national survey</a>, more than 80% of Australians supported decriminalisation options for cannabis. The other reason for equivocal policy support, I believe, is a lack of clarity about the issues. </p>
<p>There’s poor understanding about the different models of decriminalisation and some basic confusion exists. Many people equate decriminalisation with legalisation, but as detailed above, they are very different in policy, intent and action. </p>
<p>Decriminalisation is also sometimes incorrectly confused with harm reduction services, such as injecting centres or prescribed heroin programs. </p>
<p>The Australia21 Report released last week to stimulate informed public debate is an important step foward. In order for the debate to progress, we need clarity of terms, and dispassionate presentation of what evidence we have. Every policy has both risks and benefits and we need to talk about these. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/6321/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alison Ritter receives funding from the NHMRC, the ARC and The Colonial Foundation Trust.
She was a participant in the Australia 21 Roundtable held in January, 2012.</span></em></p>We should all be concerned about our laws on illegal drugs because they affect all of us – people who use drugs; who have family members using drugs; health professionals seeing people for drug-related…Alison Ritter, Professor & Specialist in Drug Policy, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.