首页> 外文期刊>Contemporary drug problems >“The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Weed”: How Consumers in Four Different Policy Settings Define the Quality of Illicit Cannabis
【24h】

“The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Weed”: How Consumers in Four Different Policy Settings Define the Quality of Illicit Cannabis

机译:“好的,坏的和丑陋的杂草”:四个不同的政策环境中的消费者如何定义非法大麻的质量

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

With proliferating efforts to regulate the quality of cannabis on legalized markets, and recent discussions about drug quality assessment by darknet buyers, it seems timely to explore definitions of the quality of cannabis among consumers. An inductive analysis of in-depth interviews with people who had used cannabis in the past 12 months was conducted, which focused on the respondents’ subjective definitions and assessments of the quality of cannabis. The data are drawn from convenience samples in four localities (Florida [United States], Czechia, Spain, and New South Wales [Australia]) where cannabis was illegal or decriminalized. The findings suggest that the respondents across all four localities used a range of visual and sensory indicators to assess the quality of cannabis. For many respondents, these were independent indicators of the quality of cannabis suggesting that cannabis was not merely an “experience” good. For others, visual and sensory assessments were used as indirect indicators of quality in that they represented the effect of the cannabis. The desired effect was more complex than simple potency (strength) and several respondents preferred mild and not-sedating cannabis. Across the four localities, the respondents also included “proxy” indicators of the safety of cannabis in their definitions of quality. In other words, high-quality cannabis was defined as not causing excessive intoxication or physical harm. Altogether, cannabis was a specific “credence” good when its quality was seen as a result of cultivation techniques, production location, or producers’ (profit) motivations - depending on the locality. These findings suggest that cannabis policies that regulate the cultivation process can be relevant to people who use cannabis. Given that consumers take the safety of cannabis into consideration when assessing its quality, their involvement in the development of quality standards is warranted. Consumer-led self-regulation should also be considered in policies that seek to regulate cannabis supply.
机译:通过扩大努力来规范大麻的质量,并最近关于Darknet买家的药物质量评估的讨论,它似乎及时探讨了消费者中大麻质量的定义。对过去12个月进行了对曾经使用大麻的人进行的归纳分析,这一侧重于受访者的主观定义和对大麻质量的评估。在四个地方(佛罗里达州[美国],捷克亚,西班牙和新南威尔士州[澳大利亚])中,这些数据来自于四个地方(佛罗里达州[美国]),其中大麻是非法的或减刑的。调查结果表明,所有四个地方的受访者都使用一系列视觉和感官指标来评估大麻的质量。对于许多受访者来说,这些是大麻质量的独立指标,暗示大麻不仅仅是“经验”的好处。对于其他人来说,视觉和感官评估被用作质量的间接指标,因为它们代表了大麻的效果。所需的效果比简单的效力(强度)更复杂,几种受访者优选温和和不镇静的大麻。跨越四个地方,受访者还包括“代理”指标在质量定义中大麻的安全。换句话说,高质量的大麻被定义为没有引起过度的毒害或身体伤害。完全,大麻是一种特定的“债实”,当由于培养技术,生产位置或生产者(利润)动机而被视为其质量 - 取决于地方。这些调查结果表明,规范培养过程的大麻政策可能与使用大麻的人有关。鉴于消费者在评估其质量时考虑大麻的安全性,有必要考虑其对质量标准的发展的参与。在寻求规范大麻供应的政策中也应考虑消费者领导的自我规定。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号