Leuven Institute of Criminology, University of Leuven, Belgium.
Institute for Social Drug Research (ISD), Ghent University, Belgium.
Int J Drug Policy. 2015 Mar;26(3):277-89. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2014.12.003. Epub 2014 Dec 24.
Since the 1990s, a shift from the importation of foreign cannabis to domestic cultivation has taken place in Belgium, as it has in many other countries. This shift has prompted Belgian policy-making bodies to prioritize the repression of cannabis cultivation. Against this background, the article aims to systematically map and assess for the first time ever the harms associated with cannabis cultivation, covering the whole spectrum of growers.
This study is based on a web survey primarily targeting small-scale growers (N=1293) and on three interconnected sets of qualitative data on large-scale growers and traffickers (34 closed criminal proceedings, interviews with 32 criminal justice experts, and with 17 large-scale cannabis growers and three traffickers). The study relied on Greenfield and Paoli's (2013) harm assessment framework to identify the harms associated with cannabis cultivation and to assess the incidence, severity and causes of such harms.
Cannabis cultivation has become endemic in Belgium. Despite that, it generates, for Belgium, limited harms of medium-low or medium priority. Large-scale growers tend to produce more harms than the small-scale ones. Virtually all the harms associated with cannabis cultivation are the result of the current criminalizing policies.
Given the spread of cannabis cultivation and Belgium's position in Europe, reducing the supply of cannabis does not appear to be a realistic policy objective. Given the limited harms generated, there is scarce scientific justification to prioritize cannabis cultivation in Belgian law enforcement strategies. As most harms are generated by large-scale growers, it is this category of cultivator, if any, which should be the focus of law enforcement repression. Given the policy origin of most harms, policy-makers should seek to develop policies likely to reduce such harms. At the same time, further research is needed to comparatively assess the harms associated with cannabis cultivation (and trafficking) with those arising from use.
自 20 世纪 90 年代以来,比利时与许多其他国家一样,大麻的进口已逐渐转变为国内种植。这一转变促使比利时的决策机构优先打击大麻种植。在这种背景下,本文旨在首次系统地描绘和评估与大麻种植相关的危害,涵盖所有种植者。
本研究主要基于一项针对小规模种植者(N=1293)的网络调查,以及关于大规模种植者和毒贩的三组相互关联的定性数据(34 起封闭的刑事诉讼、对 32 名刑事司法专家、17 名大规模大麻种植者和 3 名毒贩的采访)。该研究依赖于 Greenfield 和 Paoli(2013)的危害评估框架,以确定与大麻种植相关的危害,并评估这些危害的发生、严重程度和原因。
大麻种植在比利时已经很普遍。尽管如此,它所产生的危害对比利时来说属于中低优先级。大规模种植者往往比小规模种植者产生更多的危害。与大麻种植相关的几乎所有危害都是当前刑事化政策的结果。
鉴于大麻种植的蔓延和比利时在欧洲的地位,减少大麻供应似乎不是一个现实的政策目标。鉴于所产生的危害有限,在比利时执法战略中优先考虑大麻种植的科学依据不足。由于大多数危害是由大规模种植者造成的,因此,如果有任何执法镇压,都应该针对这一类种植者。鉴于大多数危害的政策起源,政策制定者应寻求制定可能减少这些危害的政策。同时,需要进一步研究来比较评估与大麻种植(和贩运)相关的危害与使用所产生的危害。