Suppr超能文献

“家庭”种植政策概述及基于社区的大麻供应案例。

Overview of "home" cultivation policies and the case for community-based cannabis supply.

机构信息

ResAd - Research and Development, Ltd., Sokolovska 79/81, Prague 8, 186 00, Czech Republic; Uniting Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, Sydney, Australia; Drug Policy Modelling Program, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Australia.

Institute of Criminology and Social Prevention, Prague, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Int J Drug Policy. 2019 Sep;71:36-46. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.05.021. Epub 2019 Jun 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cannabis policies should be relevant to communities most impacted by them. Home cultivation policies can engage people who grow cannabis and build on their motivation to supply a safe product. This paper aims to examine the laws pertaining to "home" (i.e. personal, small-scale) cannabis cultivation internationally and their different aspects, and to discuss the potential of these policies to be expanded into community-level cannabis supply models.

METHODS

We reviewed relevant laws and regulations in states/countries that legalised, decriminalised or applied other non-prohibitive approaches to home cannabis cultivation.

FINDINGS

Non-prohibitive approaches to home cannabis cultivation have been adopted in at least 27 jurisdictions. Twelve jurisdictions "de jure" legalised home cultivation (three U.S. states and Antigua and Barbuda legalised only home cultivation; six U.S. states, Uruguay and Canada legalised commercial sales as well). Eight states/countries "de facto" (Belgium, the Netherlands) or "de jure" decriminalised it (Czech Republic, Spain, Jamaica, and three Australian states). "De jure" depenalisation was in place in Chile and Brazil and recent court rulings yielded "de facto" depenalisation or "de facto" legalisation in five other jurisdictions (South Africa, Mexico, Colombia, Costa Rica and Georgia). Varying number of plants (per person and per property) and the circumstances of cultivation were in place. The key limitations of the regulations included (i) possession thresholds for the produce from home cultivations, (ii) rules about sharing the produce, and (iii) potentially disproportionate sanctions for non-authorised behaviours. Despite currently being limited, home cultivation policies might have the capacity to engage cannabis networks that already exist in the community and like that, enhance their participation in legitimate policy schemes.

CONCLUSIONS

Rules around pooled cultivation and sharing could be made fit for purpose to accommodate community supply of cannabis. Home cultivation policies could serve as a basis for community-level cannabis supply models and as such, for more inclusive cannabis policies.

摘要

背景

大麻政策应与受其影响最大的社区相关。家庭种植政策可以让种植大麻的人参与进来,并利用他们提供安全产品的动机。本文旨在审查国际上与“家庭”(即个人、小规模)大麻种植相关的法律及其不同方面,并讨论将这些政策扩大到社区层面大麻供应模式的潜力。

方法

我们审查了在大麻合法化、非刑事化或采取其他非禁止性方法的州/国家的相关法律法规。

结果

至少有 27 个司法管辖区采取了非禁止性的家庭大麻种植方法。12 个司法管辖区“依法”合法化了家庭种植(美国的三个州和安提瓜和巴布达仅合法化家庭种植;六个美国州、乌拉圭和加拿大也合法化了商业销售)。8 个州/国家“事实上”(比利时、荷兰)或“依法”非刑事化了家庭种植(捷克共和国、西班牙、牙买加以及三个澳大利亚州)。智利和巴西实行了“依法”非刑事化,最近的法院裁决在其他五个司法管辖区产生了“事实上”非刑事化或“事实上”合法化(南非、墨西哥、哥伦比亚、哥斯达黎加和格鲁吉亚)。种植的植物数量(每人和每处房产)和种植情况各不相同。法规的主要限制包括:(i)家庭种植生产的产品的拥有量门槛,(ii)关于分享产品的规定,以及(iii)对未经授权行为的潜在不成比例的制裁。尽管目前受到限制,但家庭种植政策可能有能力让已经存在于社区中的大麻网络参与进来,并使他们更积极地参与合法政策计划。

结论

关于 pooled cultivation 和 sharing 的规则可以根据需要进行调整,以适应社区供应大麻的需要。家庭种植政策可以作为社区层面大麻供应模式的基础,从而为更具包容性的大麻政策提供基础。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验