• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Overview of "home" cultivation policies and the case for community-based cannabis supply

V. Belackova, M. Roubalova Stefunkova, K. van de Ven,

. 2019 ; 71 (-) : 36-46. [pub] 20190612

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc20023700

BACKGROUND: Cannabis policies should be relevant to communities most impacted by them. Home cultivation policies can engage people who grow cannabis and build on their motivation to supply a safe product. This paper aims to examine the laws pertaining to "home" (i.e. personal, small-scale) cannabis cultivation internationally and their different aspects, and to discuss the potential of these policies to be expanded into community-level cannabis supply models. METHODS: We reviewed relevant laws and regulations in states/countries that legalised, decriminalised or applied other non-prohibitive approaches to home cannabis cultivation. FINDINGS: Non-prohibitive approaches to home cannabis cultivation have been adopted in at least 27 jurisdictions. Twelve jurisdictions "de jure" legalised home cultivation (three U.S. states and Antigua and Barbuda legalised only home cultivation; six U.S. states, Uruguay and Canada legalised commercial sales as well). Eight states/countries "de facto" (Belgium, the Netherlands) or "de jure" decriminalised it (Czech Republic, Spain, Jamaica, and three Australian states). "De jure" depenalisation was in place in Chile and Brazil and recent court rulings yielded "de facto" depenalisation or "de facto" legalisation in five other jurisdictions (South Africa, Mexico, Colombia, Costa Rica and Georgia). Varying number of plants (per person and per property) and the circumstances of cultivation were in place. The key limitations of the regulations included (i) possession thresholds for the produce from home cultivations, (ii) rules about sharing the produce, and (iii) potentially disproportionate sanctions for non-authorised behaviours. Despite currently being limited, home cultivation policies might have the capacity to engage cannabis networks that already exist in the community and like that, enhance their participation in legitimate policy schemes. CONCLUSIONS: Rules around pooled cultivation and sharing could be made fit for purpose to accommodate community supply of cannabis. Home cultivation policies could serve as a basis for community-level cannabis supply models and as such, for more inclusive cannabis policies.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc20023700
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20201214130857.0
007      
ta
008      
201125s2019 ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.05.021 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)31200326
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a Belackova, Vendula $u ResAd - Research and Development, Ltd., Sokolovska 79/81, Prague 8, 186 00, Czech Republic; Uniting Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, Sydney, Australia; Drug Policy Modelling Program, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Australia. Electronic address: belackova.vendula@resad.cz.
245    10
$a Overview of "home" cultivation policies and the case for community-based cannabis supply / $c V. Belackova, M. Roubalova Stefunkova, K. van de Ven,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Cannabis policies should be relevant to communities most impacted by them. Home cultivation policies can engage people who grow cannabis and build on their motivation to supply a safe product. This paper aims to examine the laws pertaining to "home" (i.e. personal, small-scale) cannabis cultivation internationally and their different aspects, and to discuss the potential of these policies to be expanded into community-level cannabis supply models. METHODS: We reviewed relevant laws and regulations in states/countries that legalised, decriminalised or applied other non-prohibitive approaches to home cannabis cultivation. FINDINGS: Non-prohibitive approaches to home cannabis cultivation have been adopted in at least 27 jurisdictions. Twelve jurisdictions "de jure" legalised home cultivation (three U.S. states and Antigua and Barbuda legalised only home cultivation; six U.S. states, Uruguay and Canada legalised commercial sales as well). Eight states/countries "de facto" (Belgium, the Netherlands) or "de jure" decriminalised it (Czech Republic, Spain, Jamaica, and three Australian states). "De jure" depenalisation was in place in Chile and Brazil and recent court rulings yielded "de facto" depenalisation or "de facto" legalisation in five other jurisdictions (South Africa, Mexico, Colombia, Costa Rica and Georgia). Varying number of plants (per person and per property) and the circumstances of cultivation were in place. The key limitations of the regulations included (i) possession thresholds for the produce from home cultivations, (ii) rules about sharing the produce, and (iii) potentially disproportionate sanctions for non-authorised behaviours. Despite currently being limited, home cultivation policies might have the capacity to engage cannabis networks that already exist in the community and like that, enhance their participation in legitimate policy schemes. CONCLUSIONS: Rules around pooled cultivation and sharing could be made fit for purpose to accommodate community supply of cannabis. Home cultivation policies could serve as a basis for community-level cannabis supply models and as such, for more inclusive cannabis policies.
650    _2
$a Cannabis $x růst a vývoj $7 D002188
650    _2
$a obchod $x zákonodárství a právo $7 D003132
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a zákonodárství lékové $7 D007880
650    _2
$a užívání marihuany $x zákonodárství a právo $7 D000074609
650    _2
$a veřejná politika $x zákonodárství a právo $7 D011640
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Roubalova Stefunkova, Michaela $u Institute of Criminology and Social Prevention, Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a van de Ven, Katinka $u Drug Policy Modelling Program, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Australia; Human Enhancement Drugs Network (HEDN), Australia; School of Humanities, Arts, Social Sciences and Education, UNE, Armidale, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/@KatinkavandeVen.
773    0_
$w MED00008614 $t The International journal on drug policy $x 1873-4758 $g Roč. 71, č. - (2019), s. 36-46
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31200326 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20201125 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20201214130856 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1596019 $s 1114376
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2019 $b 71 $c - $d 36-46 $e 20190612 $i 1873-4758 $m The International journal on drug policy $n Int J Drug Policy $x MED00008614
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20201125

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace