Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32621400›Full record

ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2021

Assessing New Zealand's Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill: prospects and challenges.

Chris Wilkins, Marta Rychert

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Legal cannabis-what's in it?Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Chris WilkinsSHORE & Whariki Research Centre, Massey University, P.O. Box 6137, Victoria Street West, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-5564-6226
Marta RychertSHORE & Whariki Research Centre, Massey University, P.O. Box 6137, Victoria Street West, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-4170-1615

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew countries have developed detailed legislative proposals for legalizing cannabis. New Zealand recently released the Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill (CLCB) that will be the subject of a referendum in September 2020.

aimsTo assess the CLCB, drawing on emerging evidence from cannabis legalization overseas, public health research on alcohol and tobacco and the attempt to establish a regulated market for 'legal highs' in New Zealand. DISCUSSION: The CLCB proposes a strictly regulated commercial cannabis market that resembles the Canadian approach, but notably without on-line sales or regional heterogeneity in retail distribution. The objective of the CLCB of lowering cannabis use over time appears at odds with the largely commercial cannabis sector that will focus on expanding sales. The CLCB includes provision for home cultivation and social benefit operators, but it is not clear what priority these operators will receive. A potency cap of 15% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) for cannabis plants is included, and this is at the high end of black-market cannabis. The proposed progressive product tax based on THC will be challenging to implement. There is no formal minimum price, but rather discretionary powers to raise the excise if the price drops too much. The CLCB includes a comprehensive ban on advertising, but non-conventional on-line promotion will be difficult to suppress. The central government cannabis authority is tasked with developing local retail outlet policies. We caution against the temptation to employ an interim regulatory regime following a positive referendum result, because a partially regulated market will expose users to health risks and undermine public support.

conclusionsNew Zealand's Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill's objective of reducing cannabis use via a commercial market will be challenging to achieve. The bill could be strengthened with formal minimum pricing, lower potency cap and greater clarity concerning social benefit operators and the role of local government.

Indexed as

Legislation, DrugCannabisCommerceHumansMarijuana SmokingMarijuana UseNew ZealandPublic HealthTaxesCannabis legalizationcannabis taxationenforcementimplementation‘not-for-profit’ supplyreferendum

Identifiers

PMID32621400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.