Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Government monopoly as an instrument for public health and welfare: Lessons for cannabis from experience with alcohol monopolies
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Public Health Sciences. La Trobe University, Australia.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5618-385X
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Public Health Sciences, Centre for Social Research on Alcohol and Drugs (SoRAD).ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2702-6553
2019 (English)In: International journal on drug policy, ISSN 0955-3959, E-ISSN 1873-4758, Vol. 74, p. 223-228Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Government monopolies of markets in hazardous but attractive substances and activities have a long history, though prior to the late 19th century often motivated more by revenue needs than by public health and welfare.

METHODS: A narrative review considering lessons from alcohol for monopolization of all or part of legal markets in cannabis as a strategy for public health and welfare.

RESULTS: A monopoly can constrain levels of use and harm from use through such mechanisms as price, limits on times and places of availability, and effective implementation of restrictions on who can purchase, and less directly by replacing private interests who would promote sales and press for greater availability, and as a potential test-bed for new policies. But such monopolies can also push in the opposite direction, particularly if revenue becomes the prime consideration. Drawing on the alcohol experience in recent decades, the paper discusses issues relevant to cannabis legalization in monopolization of different market levels and segments - production, wholesale, import, retail for off-site and for on-site use - and choices about the structuring and governance of monopolies and their organizational location in government, from the perspective of maximizing public health and welfare interests.

CONCLUSION: While the historical record is mixed for government monopolies of attractive but hazardous commodities, experience with alcohol in recent decades shows that for public health and welfare public monopolization is generally a preferable option.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 74, p. 223-228
Keywords [en]
Alcohol, Cannabis, Control system, Government monopoly, Market control
National Category
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology
Research subject
Public Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-178152DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.10.008ISI: 000504779500029PubMedID: 31698164OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-178152DiVA, id: diva2:1386975
Available from: 2020-01-20 Created: 2020-01-20 Last updated: 2020-02-03Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Room, RobinCisneros Örnberg, Jenny
By organisation
Department of Public Health SciencesCentre for Social Research on Alcohol and Drugs (SoRAD)
In the same journal
International journal on drug policy
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 18 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf