CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyLegal and Constitutional Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cannabis policies in Canada: How will we know which is best?

Shanahan, Marian, Cyrenne, Philippe·2021·International Journal of Drug Policy
DOI 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.09.004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background The recent legalisation of cannabis in Canada by the Federal Government, along with the accompanying laws and regulations of provincial and territorial governments provides an opportunity to assess the expected benefits and harms of legalisation. While the legislative changes have been initiated by the federal government, much of the responsibility for the implementation falls onto the provinces and territories. These jurisdictions are responsible for regulating the wholesale distribution, retail structures, cannabis consumption, as well as a host of other regulations. Methods Key characteristics of policies outlined are categorised according to a framework previously developed by the authors (2018). The categories are: (1) government regulation or control, (2) social costs that accompany its use, and (3) legal sanctions that accompany its production and use. Towards that end, we develop a framework for a cost benefit analysis (CBA) outlining in some detail the data that is needed to undertake a credible economic evaluation of cannabis policies. Results Key data issues discussed include consumer surplus, government receipts including legal and regulatory costs, impact on substitutes, change in profits to firms (growers, wholesalers, and retailers), incomes earned in the industry, health and other costs incurred by cannabis users. Discussion This paper presents a summary of the expected categories of costs and benefits given the various provincial cannabis policies. Additionally, it provides a framework for subsequent cost benefit analyses which can quantify said harms and benefits.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.09.004

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The lower production costs from legalization were passed on to consumers in the form of lower cannabis prices.

    “These were passed on to consumers in the form of lower cannabis prices [10, 17].”

    From The implementation and public health impacts of cannabis legalization in Canada: a systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

  • The decline in cannabis prices is plausibly a result of legalization, which lowered production costs because it permitted larger scale, more efficient legal production of cannabis.

    “The decline in cannabis prices is plausibly a result of legalization, which lowered production costs because it permitted larger scale, more efficient legal production of cannabis.”

    From The implementation and public health impacts of cannabis legalization in Canada: a systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

  • In the NCS, the estimated prevalence of cannabis use among people under the legal age to purchase cannabis fluctuated (20% in 2018, 10% in 2019 and 19% in 2020) but these estimates did not differ significantly.

    “The estimated prevalence of use among people under the legal age to purchase cannabis [15, 16, 17] fluctuated (20% in 2018, 10% in 2019 and 19% in 2020) but these estimates did not differ significantly, possibly because of the small sample sizes in these age groups.”

    From The implementation and public health impacts of cannabis legalization in Canada: a systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Spence, 1976, Prodcut differentiation and welfare, The American Economic Review, 66, 407

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Shanahan, M., & Cyrenne, P.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Winnipeg (CA)
Corresponding author
Shanahan, Marian
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Drug Policy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-05
Volume
91
Pages
102556
ISSN
0955-3959 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.09.004
OpenAlex
W2976963732
Cited by
18
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Drug Policy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Department of Health, Australian Government
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Legal and Constitutional Studies
Keywords
cannabis legalization, cannabis policy, cost-benefit analysis, government regulation, legal sanctions, consumer surplus, regulatory costs, Canada
MeSH terms
Canada, Cannabis, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Government, Health Policy, Humans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review