Exploring the role of primary regulation differences for cannabis legalization outcomes – preliminary data from two Canadian provinces

Abstract

Background: Cannabis legalization policy is increasingly implemented to improve public health and safety outcomes, including in Canada (since 2018). Main outcome assessments have primarily focused on categorical (e.g. pre-/post-) legalization policy reform effects, while differential regulation frameworks have been less considered. For this, Canada provides a rich ecology where provinces diversely define many regulation parameters under the federal legalization umbrella, with Alberta and Quebec as the respectively least and most tightly regulated provincial units.Methods: Based on a basic, targeted search, we identified and summarized key publicly available, cross-sectional indicator data for primary health and socio-legal post-legalization outcomes for Alberta and Quebec.Results: Data suggested substantial inter-provincial differences in cannabis use (e.g. among adults and youth) and legal cannabis sourcing levels, with less differences for select cannabis use-related risks/harm (e.g. cannabis-impaired driving, cannabis-related motor-vehicle-crashes). Other specific outcomes (e.g. poisonings, home-cultivation) showed inter-provincial differences that may plausibly relate to distinct provincial regulation frameworks.Discussion: While possible ecological or independent effects may exist, the exploratory data suggest that the different regulatory legalization frameworks in Alberta and Quebec may influence legalization-related health and/or socio-legal outcomes. Related outcome differentials should be systematically examined for causal associations with regulations implemented towards informing evidence-based cannabis legalization policy development.

Keywords:

• Cannabis
• legalization
• policy
• regulation
• outcomes
• Canada

Authors’ contributions

Dr. Fischer, Mrs Robinson and Dr. Jutras-Aswad jointly developed the concept, collected and interpreted related data for the study. Dr. Fischer led the manuscript writing; Mrs. Robinson and Dr. Jutras-Aswad edited/revised the manuscript for substantive intellectual content.

Disclosure statement

Drs. Fischer and Jutras-Aswad have held research grants and contracts in the areas of substance use, health and policy from public funding and government organizations (i.e. public-only sources). Dr. Jutras-Aswad received study material from Cardiol Therapeutics and Exka for clinical trials funded by a public organization. Mrs. Robinson has no competing interests to declare.

Dr. Fischer is partially supported by a Visiting Research Fellowship from the Max-Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law, Freiburg, Germany. Dr. Jutras-Aswad is supported by a Fonds de Recherche du Québec en Santé Scholar Award.

Data availability statement

All data reported and discussed in this Commentary manuscript are accessible in the public domain (e.g. in the form of journal articles, reports, websites).

Additional information

Funding

There was no particular funding support associated with the work featured in this article.