Skip to main content
Canna~Fangled Abstracts

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

By June 16, 2019June 18th, 2019No Comments
2019 Jun 11;71:36-46. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.05.021.
[Epub ahead of print]

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.

KEYWORDS: Cannabis legalisation, Cannabis policy, Community supply, Community-level policy, Home/small-scale cannabis cultivation

Leave a Reply