@article{ref1,
title="Acknowledging and monitoring the costs of seriously regulating cannabis",
journal="Addiction",
year="2020",
author="Smart, Rosanna",
volume="ePub",
number="ePub",
pages="ePub-ePub",
abstract="The Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill (CLCB) represents a novel opportunity for New Zealanders to vote on a detailed regulatory framework for establishing a national legal cannabis regime with three primary goals: promoting the wellbeing of New Zealanders, reducing cannabis use over time, and reducing the multiple harms associated with cannabis use. Wilkins and Rychert [1] highlight several challenges with achieving these goals via a commercial market--even one subject to tight regulations--and they propose several further restrictions, including lowering potency limits, levying additional taxes and fees, and establishing minimum pricing.   Restrictive regulatory regimes such as that proposed may well serve to reduce cannabis‐related harms that are a function of use (e.g. cannabis use disorder). Potency limits and potency‐based taxation could discourage use of higher‐potency products that are associated with adverse mental health outcomes [2]. Cultivation caps and high taxes offer mechanisms to keep prices elevated, which may mitigate increases in the prevalence or intensity of use, although it is unclear what the optimal cap or tax rate should be [3]. However, these types of legal market restrictions may unintentionally provide opportunities for illegal market participants to remain, filling the niches outlawed by regulation. Efforts to discourage illegal market participation could result in continued harms from fines or arrests and their collateral consequences, not unlike prohibition...<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0965-2140",
doi="10.1111/add.15274",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.15274"
}