Evaluating alternative cannabis regimes.
BACKGROUND
Cannabis policy continues to be controversial in North America, Europe and Australia.


OBJECTIVE
To inform this debate, we examine alternative legal regimes for controlling cannabis availability and use.


METHODS
We review evidence on the effects of cannabis depenalisation in the USA, Australia and The Netherlands. We update and extend our previous (MacCoun & Reuter, 1997) empirical comparison of cannabis prevalence statistics in the USA, The Netherlands and other European nations.


RESULTS
The available evidence indicates that depenalisation of the possession of small quantities of cannabis does not increase cannabis prevalence. The Dutch experience suggests that commercial promotion and sales may significantly increase cannabis prevalence.


CONCLUSIONS
Alternatives to an aggressively enforced cannabis prohibition are feasible and merit serious consideration. A model of depenalised possession and personal cultivation has many of the advantages of outright legalisation with few of its risks.
MacCoun
R
R
Goldman School of Public Policy and Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 2607 Hearst Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94720-7320, USA.
Reuter
P
P
D000293:Adolescent; D002188:Cannabis; D002648:Child; D003042:Cocaine; D003932:Heroin; D006801:Humans; D013287:Illicit Drugs / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D007880:Legislation, Drug; D008385:Marijuana Smoking / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000639:trends; D009426:Netherlands / Q000453:epidemiology; D015995:Prevalence; D014481:United States / Q000453:epidemiology
D013287:Illicit Drugs; D003932:Heroin; D003042:Cocaine