Search

In October 2018, Canada legalized recreational cannabis. Key goals of legalization included reducing access by minors and eliminating the illicit market. Now, three years into the legal regime, important public policy questions are beginning to emerge. With police being tasked to enforce the Cannabis Act and associated provincial/territorial legislation, there is a critical need to understand their experiences, including the successes they have had, challenges they have experienced, and issues that remain unresolved. This paper begins to address these issues by presenting results from a qualitative study involving law enforcement personnel who, through their primary roles and responsibilities, have been actively involved in overseeing cannabis enforcement (in supervisory roles) since legalization in October 2018. Three key findings emerged from the analyses, and all were tied to the overarching perception that the illicit cannabis market has persisted since legalization: 1) there is a small but significant pattern of abuse of the medical system of production and distribution, specifically tied to designated grower provisions; 2) there are many challenges associated with halting online sales of illicit cannabis; and 3) the issue of unregulated sales of cannabis from Indigenous reserves remains a "hot button" political issue, in need of resolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cannabis liberalization is a fascinating case study in moral-legal re-negotiation. From broad international examples of decriminalization to specific local legalization models, numerous criminological questions are emerging. This paper describes three significant challenges for cannabis liberalization. These include persistent inequalities associated with policing cannabis, the invisibility of coercive care and control within diversion, and the hazards associated with illusory policy reform. We present Cannabis Criminology as a multidisciplinary effort to understand the prohibition, decriminalization, legalization, and nascent regulation of cannabis in ways that acknowledge but transcend law-based paradigms. Consistent with criminology's multiple and sometimes contradictory dimensions, we outline five thematic areas that can inform the study of cannabis. These include law, society, and social control, police and policing cannabis, race, ethnicity and intrusion, the economics of cannabis use, and cannabis and criminal behavior. Finally, we conclude that privileging the views of people who use cannabis can provoke more inclusive, participatory, and otherwise imaginative efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cannabis 'formula stories' are disproportionately conceptualized from the gaze of a few mostly high-income Anglo-American nations that not only shape their own narratives and policies of cannabis but are also influential abroad. Lack of research in other mostly non-English-speaking countries has translated into a gap in knowledge about what cannabis formula stories are adopted, and how stigma is conceptualized by cannabis users. Using semi-structured interviews with cannabis users, this paper gives the first insight into how cannabis stigma is constructed in the post-Soviet European Riga, Latvia. Analysis corroborates previous findings of the delegitimization strategies that cannabis users adopt to resist stigma. However, people who stigmatize cannabis use are constructed as Soviet-born and agency-stripped Homo Sovieticus, who perceives all cannabis users as physically discriminable 'potheads.' To avoid sanctions, cannabis users, as members of the generation that does possess agency, avoid appearing as potheads. Thus, the knowledge and considered evasion of symbols that adhere to societal discriminatory ideas about 'pothead' cannabis users represent users' 'secret knowledge' and their functional relationship with a cannabis-disdaining society. The study demonstrates how exaggerated stories shift user attention away from reflections about consumption patterns and toward a concern for the critical capacity of exaggerated cannabis story disseminators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: The liberalization of cannabis policies has the potential to affect the use of other substances and the harms from using them, particularly alcohol. Although a previous review of this literature found conflicting results regarding the relationship between cannabis policy and alcohol-related outcomes, cannabis policies have continued to evolve rapidly in the years since that review. SEARCH METHODS: The authors conducted a narrative review of studies published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, that assessed the effects of cannabis policies on the use of alcohol in the United States or Canada. SEARCH RESULTS: The initial search identified 3,446 unique monographs. Of these, 23 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the review, and five captured simultaneous or concurrent use of alcohol and cannabis. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Associations between cannabis policy liberalization and alcohol use, alcohol-related outcomes, and the co-use of alcohol and cannabis were inconclusive, with studies finding positive associations, no associations, and negative associations. Although several studies found that cannabis policy liberalization was associated with decreases in alcohol use measures, these same studies showed no impact of the cannabis policy on cannabis use itself. The lack of a consistent association was robust to subject age, outcome measure (e.g., use, medical utilization, driving), and type of cannabis policy; however, this may be due to the small number of studies for each type of outcome. This paper discusses several notable limitations of the evidence base and offers suggestions for improving consistency and comparability of research going forward, including a stronger classification of cannabis policy, inclusion of measures of the alcohol policy environment, verification of the impact of cannabis policy on cannabis use, and consideration of mediation effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: There is little information on consumption patterns across the diverse range of cannabis product types. This paper examines trends in consumption patterns in Canada and the United States (US) between 2018-2020.Design: Repeat cross-sectional surveys were conducted as part of the International Cannabis Policy Study online survey in 2018 (n=27,024), 2019 (n=45,426), and 2020 (n=45,180).Setting: Respondents were recruited from commercial panels in Canada and US states that had and had not legalized non-medical cannabis (US 'legal' and 'illegal' states, respectively).Participants: Respondents were male and female participants aged 16-65 years.Measurements: Data on frequency and consumption amounts were collected for nine types of cannabis products, including dried flower and processed products (e.g., oils and concentrates). Consumers were also asked about mixing cannabis with tobacco. Socio-demographic information was collected.Findings: Dried flower was the most commonly used product, although use in the past 12 months declined between 2018 and 2020 in Canada (81% to 73%), US legal (78% to 72%) and illegal states (81% to 76%; p<0.05 for all). Prevalence of past 12-month use increased for virtually all other product forms, although prevalence of daily use remained stable across years. In 2020, edibles and vape oils were the most commonly used products after flower. Use of non-flower products was highest in US legal states, although similar trends were observed in all jurisdictions. Males were more likely to report using processed products, and vape oils were the most commonly processed product among 16-20-year-olds. Daily use of cannabis flower increased in US legal and illegal states, and average joint size increased across all jurisdictions over time.Conclusions: Dried flower remains the dominant product in Canada and the US; however, use of processed cannabis products has increased, with the largest increases observed in legal cannabis markets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]