2017
DOI: 10.1111/psj.12211
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Defiant Innovation: The Adoption of Medical Marijuana Laws in the American States

Abstract: Diffusion research often characterizes the role of the federal government in innovation adoption as a supportive one, either increasing the likelihood of adoption or its speed. We examine the adoption of medical marijuana laws (MMLs) from 1996 to 2014 to shed light on what motivates states to adopt innovations that are in explicit defiance of federal law. Furthermore, we examine whether federal signals have any influence on the likelihood of adoption. In doing so, we utilize implementation theory to expand our… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

4
53
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
4
53
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Another strand of diffusion research focuses more on the internal resources and obstacles to diffusion. For example, slack resources allow states to be more innovative (Boehmke and Skinner 2012a), more professionalized legislatures have greater capacity for innovation (Squire 2012), initiatives can pave the way for and legitimize new ideas (Hannah and Mallinson 2018), and liberal and Democratic states are expected to be more innovative (Matisoff 2008). Divided government, on the other hand, can stifle innovation via gridlock (Sellers 2017).…”
Section: Diffusion Theory and The Case-by-case Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another strand of diffusion research focuses more on the internal resources and obstacles to diffusion. For example, slack resources allow states to be more innovative (Boehmke and Skinner 2012a), more professionalized legislatures have greater capacity for innovation (Squire 2012), initiatives can pave the way for and legitimize new ideas (Hannah and Mallinson 2018), and liberal and Democratic states are expected to be more innovative (Matisoff 2008). Divided government, on the other hand, can stifle innovation via gridlock (Sellers 2017).…”
Section: Diffusion Theory and The Case-by-case Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, the first five initiatives (passed in 1996 and 1998) passed with less than 60 percent of the vote. 4 Analyzing the adoption of MMLs through 2014, Hannah and Mallinson (2018) found that states with direct democracy were three times as likely to adopt an MML, even after controlling for states' ideology, evangelical population, and neighbor adoptions.…”
Section: Direct Democracy and Policy Diffusion In Ohiomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To close this issue, our final two articles provide new means and methodologies for policy diffusion research (e.g., see Collingwood, El‐Khatib, and O’Brien, 2019; Hannah & Mallinson 2020; Mitchell, 2018). Boehmke et al (2020) address the current issue within policy diffusion research regarding the heavy reliance on case studies confined to single‐policy domains, an issue which confounds generalization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%