Key crime- and public safety-related results of non-medical cannabis legalization policy in Canada: a targeted evidence summary
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose Cannabis policies are increasingly being liberalized, including the de jure legalization of non-medical cannabis use and supply in Canada (2018) implemented toward improved public health and safety outcomes. While health outcomes have shown mixed results, less attention has been given to crime- and public safety-related outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to provide a targeted literature/data summary on select main crime- and public safety-related outcomes associated with cannabis legalization policy in Canada as implemented in 2018. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a targeted literature/data review focusing on key, publicly available outcome indicators associated with cannabis legalization in Canada in three main domains, obtained from both academic (e.g. journal) and “grey” (e.g. survey/government reports) literature/data sources: cannabis crime and enforcement; cannabis-impaired driving and related motor-vehicle-crash involvement; and cannabis markets and sourcing. The data draw on targeted searches in related areas, are narratively summarized by topic and briefly discussed for implications and knowledge gaps. Findings The results of this study suggest that cannabis – and specifically possession – crimes have substantially decreased; less is known about enforcement patterns for the remaining cannabis offenses or impacts on other potentially cannabis-related crimes. The prevalence of cannabis-impaired driving appears to be declining, while levels of cannabis involvement in motor vehicle crashes appear to have increased. Legal cannabis markets and the legal sourcing of cannabis among consumers have steadily increased to involve approximately three-quarters of acquisition activities, implying major reductions of illegal cannabis retail markets. Conversely, data on the evolution of illegal cannabis production and supply markets in legalization policy contexts is highly limited and may include displacement effects. Practical implications *Cannabis legalization has been implemented toward public health and safety improvement objectives, including in Canada (2018). For key outcomes, legalization has been associated with substantive reductions in enforced cannabis offenses among adults and youth. The prevalence of cannabis-impaired driving may be declining, but levels of cannabis-related motor-vehicle-crashes have been increasing. Cannabis sourcing has gradually but steadily shifted from illegal to legal sources among the majority of consumers; legalization’s effects on cannabis production and supply markets are largely unclear. Data on crime-related outcomes of legalization need to be systematically expanded, as they form an essential aspect of comprehensive policy impact assessments. Originality/value While available data suggest improvements in some (e.g. health-related) areas, there is a need for comprehensively expanded research on legalization’s impacts on key crime- and safety-related indicators, required for consideration in overall, integrated policy assessments.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,312 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».