While tobacco control and cannabis reform may appear to be divergent phenomena, in many cases thinking is converging around similar regulatory models which seek to minimize social and health harms. The origins of policymaking processes for cannabis reforms in the United States can influence outcomes, with government‐led processes more likely to prioritize public health than activist and industry‐led ballot initiatives.It is certainly the case that the groupings driving the two policy positions identified by Hall & Kozlowski , cannabis legalization and nicotine prohibition, have different sets of priorities. The nicotine prohibitionists overwhelmingly prioritize public health while, among US cannabis reformers, activists are also motivated by a broader spectrum of priorities, including personal freedom, social justice and, in the case of industry, commercial interest. However, while it is interesting to contrast these apparently diverging phenomena within drug policy, generalizations about either grouping may not tell the whole story. By no means all tobacco control advocates call for nicotine prohibition, nor do all cannabis reform advocates support a free market model similar to alcohol. Indeed, many serious and influential voices in both tobacco control and cannabis reform converge around the centre ground, an optimal regulatory space somewhere between the extremes of
Addiction – Wiley
Published: Jan 1, 2018
Keywords: ; ; ; ; ; ;
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud