Big data on a big new market: Insights from Washington State’s legal cannabis market

Caulkins, Jonathan P.; Bao, Yilun; Davenport, Steven; Fahli, Imane; Guo, Yutian; Kinnard, Krista; Najewicz, Mary; Renaud, Lauren; Kilmer, Beau

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.031

Cited by 73 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These data offer a sharp contrast to those observed in Washington State, where prices have continued to drop since the advent of legal sales [31,32]. These data offer a sharp contrast to those observed in Washington State, where prices have continued to drop since the advent of legal sales [31,32].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 72%

“…Cannabis price increased from 2006 to 2016, and these trends persisted after adjusting for inflation in consumer prices. These data offer a sharp contrast to those observed in Washington State, where prices have continued to drop since the advent of legal sales [31,32]. Experimental studies suggest that both price and potency may influence purchasing behaviour and consumption [33][34][35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Price is another key aspect of cannabis markets, and has been found to be positively correlated with potency, both in illicit [28,30] and legal markets [31,32]. Data collected since the advent of legal sales in Washington State indicate that the retail price of cannabis has continued to fall over time [31,32]. As changes in both potency and price may influence purchasing behaviour and consumption [33][34][35], combined measures may be informative; one such measure is the quantity of THC that can be purchased with a fixed unit of price (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Increasing potency and price of cannabis in Europe, 2006–16

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To quantify changes in (i) potency (concentration of Δ9‐tetrahydrocannabinol; %THC), (ii) price (euros/g of cannabis) and (iii) value (mg THC/euro) of cannabis resin and herbal cannabis in Europe. Design Repeated cross‐sectional study. Setting and participants Data collected from 28 European Union (EU) member states, Norway and Turkey by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Measurements Outcome variables were potency, price and value for cannabis resin and herbal cannabis in Europe, 2006–16. Inflation was estimated using the Harmonised Indices of Consumer Prices. Mixed‐effects linear regression models were used to estimate linear and quadratic time trends, with a random intercept and slope fitted to account for variation across countries. Findings Resin potency increased from a mean [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 8.14% THC (6.89, 9.49) in 2006 to 17.22 (15.23, 19.25) in 2016. Resin price increased from 8.21 euros/g (7.54, 8.97) to 12.27 (10.62, 14.16). Resin increased in value, from 11.00 mg THC per euro (8.60, 13.62) to 16.39 (13.68, 19.05). Quadratic time trends for resin potency and value indicated minimal change from 2006 to 2011, followed by marked increases from 2011 to 2016. Herbal cannabis potency increased from 5.00% THC (3.91, 6.23) to 10.22 (9.01, 11.47). Herbal price increased from 7.36 euros/g (6.22, 8.53) to 12.22 (10.59, 14.03). The value of herbal cannabis did not change from 12.65 mg of THC per euro (10.18, 15.34) to 12.72 (10.73, 14.73). All price trends persisted after adjusting for inflation. Conclusions European cannabis resin and herbal cannabis increased in potency and price from 2006 to 2016. Cannabis resin (but not herbal cannabis) increased in the quantity of Δ9‐tetrahydrocannabinol per euro spent. Marked increases in resin potency and value from 2011 to 2016 are consistent with the emergence of new resin production techniques in European and neighbouring drug markets.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Increasing potency and price of cannabis in Europe, 2006–16

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, cannabis advertising and availability has been associated with greater likelihood of use . The use of cannabis concentrates, developed by large firms following pressure from retailers to make high‐potency products has also been linked to heavier use . Lobbying by large cannabis firms is also a concern, with well‐organised industry interests influencing legislation .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding motivations for large US cannabis firms' participation in the cannabis space: Qualitative study exploring views of key decision‐makers

Kumar

Puljević

Heimer

2020

Drug and Alcohol Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and Aims. Large for-profit firms supply the majority of US state-legal cannabis stores and some firms have attempted to shape cannabis-related policies. Understanding firms' motivations for participation in the cannabis space is critical, given firms' possible links to cannabis usage patterns. Key decision-makers (KDM) in the cannabis space may have information unavailable to lower ranking staff, and may influence firm decision-making and consequently US cannabis usage practises. We present the findings of a qualitative study investigating the views of KDMs in the cannabis market, on large cannabis firms' motivations for participation in the space. Design and Methods. Data were collected through 37 semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of KDMs in the US cannabis space, representing both for-profit and nonprofit organisations. Thematic analysis, with an inductive approach, was used to analyse the data. Results. KDMs reported three non-exclusive motivations for large cannabis firms' participation in the space; to seek profit, to mitigate social inequity and to provide cannabis as medicine. Within the theme relating to profit, findings suggest that for-profit and non-profit organisations in the space may be cognisant of the other's goals, representing a symbiotic relationship. Discussion and Conclusions. We suggest that firms may have reasons to enter the space not necessarily centred on increasing use. Although non-profits and for-profits have different agendas, the bottom line for both groups is to expand access. Policy-makers should be aware of that fact, and set policies which consider the two groups as a unified whole. [Kumar N, Puljevi c C, Heimer R. Understanding motivations for large US cannabis firms' participation in the cannabis space: Qualitative study exploring views of key decision-makers. Drug Alcohol Rev 2020;39: [347][348][349][350][351][352][353][354][355]

show abstract

A clinician survey of use assessment, documentation, and education about cannabis in persons with cystic fibrosis

Muirhead

Palmrose

Condren

et al. 2021

Pediatric Pulmonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: To help open the clinician dialogue regarding cannabis use in persons with cystic fibrosis (CF) in the United States, we aimed to describe current practices of use assessment and documentation processes related to cannabis. Methods: A cross-sectional, anonymous survey study was distributed via email to CF directors and coordinators and to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (CFF) listservs of nurse, pharmacist, dietitian, social worker, and psychology care team members. The survey tool included multiple choice, scaled, and open-ended items, which assessed participants' awareness of current cannabis laws in their state, prescribing practices for medical marijuana, screening and documentation practices, knowledge of and what indications participants believe cannabis and cannabidiol (CBD) could be beneficial. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.Results: There were 282 survey participants, with majority as providers (28%) and social workers (29%), representing all US regions. Participants varied in terms of frequency of evaluating cannabis use, with 15.4% "always," 48.4% "sometimes," and 41% "rarely," or "never" asking about it. Regarding recreational versus medical cannabis use, 55.4% and 62.5% reported documentation of each type in the medical record, respectively. Participants reported appetite, pain, and nausea as the top three advocated indications for use. About 35% and 72% of participants felt "slightly" or "not at all" prepared to answer patient/family questions about cannabis and CBD, respectively. Conclusions:The approach to cannabis use assessment, documentation, and education across CF care centers is variable. There is a need for care team and patient/ caregiver education materials about cannabis/CBD and CF.

show abstract

Big data on a big new market: Insights from Washington State’s legal cannabis market

Cited by 73 publications

References 32 publications

Increasing potency and price of cannabis in Europe, 2006–16

Increasing potency and price of cannabis in Europe, 2006–16

Understanding motivations for large US cannabis firms' participation in the cannabis space: Qualitative study exploring views of key decision‐makers

A clinician survey of use assessment, documentation, and education about cannabis in persons with cystic fibrosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About