Ogrodnik Marysia, Kopp Pierre, Bongaerts Xavier, Tecco Juan M
Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris I), Ecole d'Economie de Paris, Cedex Paris 13, France.
Psychiatr Danub. 2015 Sep;27 Suppl 1:S309-14.
Cannabis is the most widely used illegal drug in European countries. In countries with repressive cannabis policies, prevalence is not lower than in those with tolerant laws. Repressive policies not only have uncertain benefits but they are also expensive. Economists tend to believe that good public policies minimize social costs; that is, they help to improve collective wellbeing at a lower cost.
The paper draws on a review of international literature on cannabis legislative models around the world. After a description of some of the fundamental concepts of a market economy, several existing policy scenarios will be presented and analyzed from an economic perspective. Strength and weaknesses will be summarized for each alternative.
In addition to consumption tolerance in countries such as the Netherlands, recent decriminalization of domestic markets in the Unites States and Uruguay present alternatives to reduce the negative impact of cannabis on society. Earlier initiation age and rise in consumption are unintended potential consequences of decriminalization that need to be addressed by public authorities when designing a liberalized cannabis policy environment. Price is a key variable that needs to be addressed to prevent a rise in consumption.
Repressive cannabis policies are expensive and have limited impact on consumption. Consumption legalization significantly reduces expenses for repression and law enforcement, allowing for the allocation of more resources to other targets such as education and prevention. With legalization of supply along with consumption, repression and law enforcement costs are reduced even further. Moreover, a legal market would create employment and generate tax revenues that could be allocated to the prevention of increased consumption. Legalizing cannabis would not lead to a sudden rise in consumption, providing the duty imposed by the state kept the product at its current price.
大麻是欧洲国家使用最为广泛的非法毒品。在实行严厉大麻政策的国家，其流行率并不低于实行宽容法律的国家。严厉政策不仅益处不明，而且成本高昂。经济学家倾向于认为，良好的公共政策能将社会成本降至最低；也就是说，它们有助于以更低成本提升集体福祉。
本文借鉴了对全球大麻立法模式的国际文献综述。在描述了市场经济的一些基本概念后，将从经济角度呈现并分析几种现有的政策情景。将总结每种选择的优缺点。
除了荷兰等国的消费宽容政策外，美国和乌拉圭近期对国内市场的非刑罪化提供了减少大麻对社会负面影响的替代方案。更早的初次使用年龄和消费增加是合法化可能产生的意外潜在后果，公共当局在设计宽松的大麻政策环境时需要加以应对。价格是一个关键变量，需要加以解决以防止消费增加。
严厉的大麻政策成本高昂且对消费影响有限。消费合法化显著降低了镇压和执法成本，使更多资源能够分配到教育和预防等其他目标上。随着供应与消费一同合法化，镇压和执法成本会进一步降低。此外，合法市场将创造就业并产生税收收入，可用于预防消费增加。大麻合法化不会导致消费突然增加，前提是国家征收的税使产品价格维持在当前水平。
