Search results

This paper aims to discuss the effect of Canada’s regulatory framework on the strategies of entrepreneurial businesses during the first phase of legalization of the recreational cannabis industry. Decriminalization of cannabis required a host of regulatory changes at the federal, provincial and municipal levels. Each province developed legal markets independently, differentially impacting entrepreneurial strategies. This paper describes the value chain that emerged in the first phase of the nascent industry, focusing on the actions of the businesses.

The authors develop a qualitative narrative analysis using government publications, press articles (especially from the business press) and personal communications of industry insiders speaking in public settings. The paper includes four short case studies to illustrate the emerging value chain of the nascent industry.

The study’s findings highlight the effect of regulatory frameworks on entrepreneurial strategies. We find that public policies had a significant impact on entrepreneurs and startup strategies. Inter-jurisdictional differences limited expansion into different provinces, with implications for regional economic development. Achieving public policy goals was delayed as a result of regulatory challenges that impacted industry development.

The authors’ findings show enterprises may develop growth strategies that comply with regulations when participating in nascent industries, but they must cope with extra risks, capital costs and uncertainty. The analysis also illustrates the value of engaging in government-industry collaboration to improve emerging regulatory frameworks.

The originality of this research consists of the detailed description of the first phase of Canada’s legalized recreational cannabis industry and the insight gained into the dynamics of nascent industries.

Despite 2016 legalization of recreational cannabis cultivation and sale in California with the passage of Proposition 64, many cannabis businesses operate without licenses. Furthermore, federal regulations disincentivize financial institutions from banking and lending to licensed cannabis businesses. The authors explore the impact of legal cannabis business activity on California financial institutions, the barriers to banking faced by cannabis businesses, and the nontraditional sources of financing used by the industry.

The authors use a mixed methods approach. The authors utilize call data for banks and credit unions headquartered in California and state cannabis licensing data to estimate the impact of the extensive and intensive margins of licensed cannabis activity on key banking indicators using difference-and-difference and fixed effects regressions. The qualitative data come from interviews with industry stakeholders in northern California's “Emerald Triangle” and add important context.

The quantitative results show economically and statistically significant impacts of licensed cannabis activity on banking indicators, suggesting both direct and spillover effects from cannabis activity to the financial sector. However, cannabis businesses report substantial barriers to accessing basic financial services and credit, leading to nontraditional financing arrangements.

The results suggest opportunities for cannabis businesses and financial institutions if regulations are eased and important avenues for further study.

The authors contribute to the nascent literature on cannabis economics and the literature on banking regulation and nontraditional finance.

This chapter looks at the past, present and future of international cannabis control required by the UN drug control conventions in the post-2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session era with an eye on the next High Level Ministerial Segment (HLMS) at the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in 2019, and beyond. From a policy analysis perspective, the author meanders through the increasing tendency to legally regulate recreational cannabis markets notwithstanding the obligation enshrined in the UN drug control conventions to limit cannabis exclusively for ‘medical and scientific’ purposes. Taking into account relevant national and international developments, the chapter describes how the growing discomfort with the status of cannabis and the prohibitive and punitive approach stemming from the international drug control regime went through a process from soft to hard defections of the treaty obligations. The case of the Netherlands demonstrates the difficulty faced by reform-minded states in reconciling their wish for a different cannabis control mechanism with their obligations under international law, resulting in an incomplete regulation of its coffee-shop system, where small amounts of cannabis are tolerated for sale, but where the illicit supply to the shops remained unregulated. Subsequent more wide-ranging reforms to regulate cannabis from seed to sale in Uruguay, several US States and – in 2018 – in Canada, are clearly violating the obligations of the UN drug control conventions. Nevertheless, the HLMS will likely leave the elephant in the room untouched. The emerging paradigm shift regarding cannabis shows that a modernisation of the UN drug control regime is long overdue. This chapter discusses some of the options available.

International policy approaches to cannabis production and use are changing rapidly, and within the Irish context, alternatives to prohibition are being considered. This study aims to explore policymaker’s attitudes towards the decriminalisation and legal regulation of cannabis for recreational use in the midst of an unfolding policy process, examining the degree which a “policy window” might be open for the implementation of cannabis policy change.

Semi-structured interviews were held with eight key informants within the policy field in Dublin, Ireland. Kingdon’s (2014) Multiple Streams framework was used to consider whether the problems, policy and political streams were aligning to support progressive policy change.

Irish policymakers indicated broad support for the decriminalisation of cannabis. The legal regulation of cannabis received more qualified support. Existing policy was heavily criticised with criminalisation identified as a clear failure. Of particular interest was the willingness of policymakers to offer opinions which contrasted with the policy positions of their organisations. While a policy window did open – and close – subsequent governmental commitments to examine the issue of drugs policy in a more deliberative process in the near future highlight the incremental nature of policy change.

This study provides unique insight into the opinions of policymakers in the midst of a prolonged period of policy evolution. A latent aspiration for historical policy change was situated within the realpolitik of more traditional approaches to policy development, demonstrating that the alignment of Kingdon’s (2014) problem, policy and political streams are essential for change in cannabis policy.

The purpose of this paper is to interrogate if the legal status of a cannabis affects money laundering activity. The legal status of cannabis continues to evolve globally; at the same time, its market remains enormous. Much of this market represents dirty money from criminal acts, which often requires laundering. In the context of changing cannabis regulations, legislation, and policies, the authors propose the possible implications such changes may have on the extent of money laundering.

This paper proposes the implications of the evolution of cannabis regulations on money laundering activities, using the theoretical underpinning of rational choice. Using Australia as a replicable critical case study, the paper, using the Walker gravity model and using United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime-reported prices of cannabis from 2003 to 2017 and Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission reports empirically validates the effects of cannabis regulations on the proceeds available for laundering.

This study finds support for the argument that prohibitive measures toward cannabis use contribute to increases in the need to launder generated proceeds.

The findings can be replicated in other countries and may contribute to novel propositions within the debate on the legalization of cannabis use, which has, thus, far primarily focused on the areas of health, crime, taxation and education.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study has yet attempted to provide an economic analysis of the effects of cannabis policy changes on money laundering.

The Swiss drug policy once was very progressive in the 1990s when the harm related to drug use was most visible to the public. Failure of repression opened the room for more innovative harm reduction approaches. In 2008, the four-pillar model including the legal basis for substitution and heroin-assisted treatment of opioid use disorders as well as for other harm reduction facilities was approved by the population that had learned about the success of these measures. Less violence, better health outcomes among people who use drugs and less stigma supported the change of attitudes in the population towards a public health-based approach when dealing with drug use. Switzerland first received heavy criticism for the autonomous policy change at the international level while it is nowadays often cited as best practice example for dealing with people with an opioid use disorder. Otherwise, the country has usually been quiet in drug policy discussions at the UN level. Nevertheless, Switzerland’s reappointment to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the central drug policy-making body within the United Nations for a period of four years starting in 2018 is promising, given their unblemished recommendation for human rights-based drug policies including the abolition of the death penalty for drug offences, among other things. Alongside cannabis policy changes at the international level, Switzerland witnessed an unexpected development in cannabis availability and sales. However, the country is still rather conservative with regard to current cannabis policies, although cannabis with less than 1% of THC can be sold legally and the possession of up to 10 g will be followed by a fine only, if at all. Switzerland is open to experiment with new regulations but only if the law allows for that. To conclude, the strong sense of connectedness with the international community may support Switzerland’s next steps towards public health and evidence-based harm reduction.

Both Bolivia and Uruguay broke ranks with the global drug prohibition regime by introducing novel drug policies. State control of the production and supply of coca and cannabis represents a clear departure from both the spirit and the letter of the international drug conventions. Although, the rationale, processes and outcomes of policy change were distinctive in many regards, this chapter posits that there are conceptual resemblances. In both countries, the leadership of a charismatic and idiosyncratic president has to be considered. Furthermore, in both countries, mobilisation and activism were also decisive. Lastly, in both countries novel drug policy responded to specific problems that decision-makers faced. Approaching drug policy reforms in Bolivia and Uruguay in terms of personal leadership, mobilisation and policy problems provides a useful analytical first-cut to assess the continuity and change in drug policy observable elsewhere. Additionally, scrutinising the reasons and motivations for undertaking drug policy reform also allows to better understand each country’s behaviour on the international stage.

The purpose of this paper to examine laws and regulations applicable to cannabis in the USA and the UK, including legal reforms and international treaty obligations.

This study relies on primary data from statutes and secondary data from online and offline resources, including relevant case studies.

Federal laws in the USA and existing UK cannabis legal regime generally prohibit recreational use of cannabis. Increasingly, various individual states in the USA have enabled the use of cannabis health-related uses, thereby challenging the status of the UN treaties on drug enforcement. As the USA struggles to reconcile the conflicts between federal law on cannabis and individual states within its borders, much of the rest of the world, including the UK, are struggling with how best to reconcile their domestic positions with their UN treaty obligations.

Recent disclosures of past recreational use of prohibited drugs by several candidates vying to be the UK Prime Minister suggests why understanding the laws governing the use of cannabis is useful and relevant to the general public.

This paper provides a general but integrated review of national laws in the USA and the UK, as well as international treaties governing the use of cannabis.

This chapter explores the historical context of drug control in the United States, the ongoing regulation of the cannabis market at the State level and the role of the United States in the international negotiations related to the United Nations General Assembly Special Sessions (UNGASS) on drugs in 1998 and 2016. We continue by analysing the position, allies and activities of the United States before and during UNGASS 2016 to provide an understanding of possible scenarios related to the 2009 Political Declaration and Plan of Action review to take place via a High-level Ministerial Segment within the 2019 Commission on Narcotic Drugs meeting. While US drug policy is not expected to positively shift in the next few years, State-level regulation of cannabis is expected to continue and create pressure from below.

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it investigates the characteristics of Hanfparade 2022 – the biggest prolegalization festival in Germany – and its visitors, as well as the main reason for participation in Hanfparade. Findings are compared to those from Hanfparade 2016 to explore whether the main reason for festival attendance has changed since the legalization of medical cannabis in 2017 and since the announcement of plans for cannabis legalization. Second, this paper assesses Hanfparade participants’ views on cannabis legalization in Germany, in particular their opinions on and their preferences for retail supply options.

This study is a replication of a research conducted in 2016 at the same festival in Berlin, with a slightly adapted questionnaire. In this study, a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods was used: observation at the festival, interviews before and after the festival with the organizer and a survey among festival attendees (n = 183).

Protest still looks relevant for the participants at Hanfparade, and the announcement of plans for legalization does not seem to downgrade this feeling. The participants have positive opinions about self-supply through home cultivation, noncommercial supply through Cannabis Social Clubs (CSCs) and commercial supply through stores similar to Dutch coffee shops. However, positive opinions do not necessarily reflect a personal preference, e.g. CSCs were very low in personal preferences. The options of home cultivation and CSCs were more popular among daily users.

This study contributes to the ongoing debate in Germany, focusing on views of cannabis users.