What Does it Mean to Decriminalize Marijuana? A Cross-National Empirical Examination

Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo; MacCoun, Robert J.; Reuter, Peter; Chriqui, Jamie F.; Kilmer, Beau; Harris, Katherine M.; Paoli, Letizia; Schäfer, Carsten

doi:10.1016/s0731-2199(05)16017-8

Cited by 51 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the 1970s, many countries have moved away from prohibition and implemented changes ranging from depenalisation to legalisation of cannabis use (9). Depenalisation refers to the lessening of penalties (criminal or civil) attached to cannabis possession while decriminalisation is form of depenalisation concerned with removing the criminal status (10). Policy changes in European countries 4 such as Netherlands which accommodate the sale and use of small amounts of cannabis align with International Treaties by retaining cannabis as an illegal substance (5,11,12).…”

Section: Changes In the Legal Status Of Cannabis Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of legal status on the uptake of cannabis in young people

Dirisu

Shickle²,

Elsey³

2016

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent findings:There are significant concerns that ongoing policy changes in favour of legalisation will increase the uptake of cannabis by young people. Evidence to support a causal effect of cannabis policy changes on increased uptake by young people is lacking; more time may be needed to assess the impact because the policies are still evolving. Policy changes in favour of legalisation were associated with reduced risk perception although this may be a cause or consequence. The need to situate the impact of these policies in the context of specific policy features, social norms and perceptions about cannabis has been highlighted. Summary:A more nuanced understanding of the impact of the legal status of cannabis on young people is needed to build evidence for future policy options. The impact of these policies may not be immediately apparent but l prioritised during policy deliberations.

show abstract

Section: Changes In the Legal Status Of Cannabis Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of legal status on the uptake of cannabis in young people

Dirisu

Shickle²,

Elsey³

2016

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When it comes to evaluating a change in the law, it may not always be obvious what the 'treatment' is. Indeed, one study finds that the definition of decriminalization was not well understood and some jurisdictions were considered decriminalized when in fact they had not, which potentially led to erroneous conclusions about the impact of decriminalization (Pacula et al 2005). Sometimes treatment refers to a jurisdiction in which a MML or RML was passed and made legally effective.…”

Section: Issues In Defining the Intervention For Marijuana Policy Anamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Legalizing and Regulating Weed: Issues with Study Design and Emerging Findings in the USA

Hunt

Miles

2015

Current Topics in Behavioral Neurosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluations of the impact of medical and recreational marijuana laws rely on quasi- or natural experiments in which researchers exploit changes in the law and attempt to determine the impact of these changes on outcomes. This chapter reviews three key issues of causal inference in observational studies with respect to estimating of impact of medical or recreational laws on marijuana use-intervention definition, outcome measurement, and random assignment of study participants. We show that studies tend to use the same statistical approach (differences-in-differences) and yet find differential impacts of medical marijuana laws on adult use in particular. We demonstrate that these seemingly conflicting findings may be due to different years of analysis, ages of the study sample in each year, and assignment of jurisdictions to the control group versus treatment group.

show abstract

“…More recent studies, summarized by Hall & Pacula, throw doubt on these findings [14]. Not only are the results sensitive to statistical specification, but there is a question as to whether the measures of decriminalization or depenalization capture accurately the relevant changes in penalties faced by users [15]. For example, in the United States cannabis possession arrest rates per capita hardly differ between decriminalization or depenalization states and others.…”

Section: Government Expendituresmentioning

confidence: 99%