Background: Globally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy-relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms.

Objectives: This evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps.

Search Methods: We comprehensively searched for eligible English-language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020.

Selection Criteria: The conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population-level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer-term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws.

Data Collection And Analysis: Both dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2.

Main Results: The EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws-including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs-are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid-related harms (3), and alcohol-related outcomes (1). Moreover, we have limited confidence in the reviews, as five were appraised as minimal quality and two as low quality.

Authors’ Conclusions: More primary and systematic research is needed to better understand the effects of cannabis liberalization laws on longer-term-and arguably more salient-health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes. Since most research concerns MCLs and RCLs, there is a critical need for research on the societal impacts of industrial hemp production, medical CBD products, and decriminalized cannabis cultivation. Future research should also prioritize understanding the heterogeneous effects of these laws given differences in specific provisions and implementation across jurisdictions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10616541PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1362DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cannabis liberalization
24
safety socioeconomic
16
cannabis
15
health safety
12
cannabis laws
12
laws
10
liberalization laws
8
evidence gap
8
gap map
8
primary systematic
8

Similar Publications

Background: Evidence supporting cannabis substitution along with liberalized cannabis laws have left recovery homes such as sober living houses (SLHs) in a difficult position regarding policies relating to cannabis use among SLH residents. Moreover, there are few studies of cannabis use among SLH residents that can be used to inform cannabis use policies. Here we assess whether cannabis is related to alcohol use among SLH residents.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

In 2013, Uruguay became the first country to regulate the legal production, distribution and sale of recreational cannabis. While key officials have framed Uruguay's landmark legislation as part of the government's strategy to regulate cannabis, tobacco and alcohol, there is limited empirical research exploring the political considerations that influenced its approach. Drawing on the concept of policy coherence-the process by which policymakers seek to minimize conflicts and maximize synergies across policy agendas-this study explores the extent to which Uruguay's cannabis regulation was influenced by the promotion of policy coherence within health and across other policy spheres.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Maternal Cannabis Use During Pregnancy and Maternal and Neonatal Adverse Outcomes.

J Clin Psychiatry

October 2024

Department of Psychiatry, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India; Department of Clinical Psychopharmacology and Neurotoxicology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bangalore, India

Article Synopsis
  • Cannabis use among women of reproductive age has become more common, with over 5% reportedly using it during pregnancy, often for self-treatment of various conditions.
  • Women using cannabis during pregnancy may be unaware of its associated risks, which include impacts on the placenta and fetal brain development.
  • Research indicates that maternal cannabis use is linked to increased risks of adverse outcomes such as gestational hypertension, preterm birth, low birth weight, and even fetal death, leading many health professionals to discourage its use during pregnancy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Aim: The evidence-based policy paradigm has been criticized for poorly representing drug and other health policy processes, with evidence showing various social forces influencing knowledge translation. However, less research has examined the social forces influencing knowledge production. Applying a social constructivist lens, this study investigates how politics, power, economics, philosophy, and discourse influence the evidence generating processes related to drug policy.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!