Same Intentions, Different Outcomes: Divergent Paths and Implementation Gaps in Cannabis Legalization in North America
Over the past decade, cannabis legalization has undergone dynamic developments in North America. The debate was previously framed by considerations regarding the feasibility of legalization: it is now focused on how to regulate cannabis effectively, in an international environment where production and commerce remain legally constrained. A great variety of policy options is being implemented, trapped between public health and economic development objectives, bringing different and possibly unexpected outcomes. Together with political science academics, the French Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (OFDT) launched a study dedicated to investigating cannabis legalization in practice, as a new policy sector under construction, with a special attention to the implementation gaps arising from the different regulatory options currently experimented.
Our comparative study examines the regulatory issues and the implementation challenges as experienced by local stakeholders in six jurisdictions : 3 in the United States (Washington, Oregon, California), 3 in Canada (British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec). Our results are based on 71 semi-structured individual or group interviews (2020-2023) with state/provincial and municipal regulatory authorities and policymakers, public health and law enforcement administrations, economic operators, combined with direct observations (i.e. visits to industrial cannabis cultivation or processing sites, informal discussions with retail outlets managers, observation of inspections by the regulatory authority, etc.).
Inspired by the repertoires of tobacco and alcohol policies, cannabis regulation holds together conflicting goals : protect youths and transition to a legal, sustainable economy. Beyond an overview of the discrepancies in the regulatory options pursuing this twofold objective, we argue that the implementation gaps reported by the policy-makers derive from a multi-level regulation framework that has created practical hurdles for both regulators and industry stakeholders. First, the persistant international classification of cannabis has created practical issues but also a context of ‘blame avoidance’ that went with restraining rules undermining the process of transitioning to a legal market. In the US, the federal ban has entailed constraints for state authorities, while the cities and counties opt-out has contributed to fuel the illegal market. In Canada, the “regulatory patchwork” developed in response to the federal legalization has stifled business growth and created additional complications. Based on examples, we show how non-cooperative practices contributed to adverse consequences, creating new challenges for regulators.
Our findings suggest that cannabis legalization is a typical case of how a controversial decision, related to a policy topic framed as a moral issue and bringing together interdependent stakeholders with disparate visions, is likely to create implementation gaps and contradictions.
