Cannabis policies and user practices: Market separation, price, potency, and accessibility in Amsterdam and San Francisco

References 

1. Alasutari P. Desire and craving: A cultural theory of alcoholism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press; 1992;
2. Bieleman B, Goeree P. Coffee shops geteld: Aantallen verkooppunten van cannabis in Nederland [Coffee shops counted: Numbers of points of sale of cannabis in the Netherlands]. Groningen, NL: Stichting Intraval; 2000;
3. Bieleman B, Naayer H. Coffeeshops in Nederland: Aantallen coffeeshops en gemeentelijk beleid 1999–2005 [Coffee shops in the Netherlands: Number of coffee shops and local policy 1999–2005]. Groningen, NL: Stichting Intraval; 2006;
4. Cohen P, Kaal H. The irrelevance of drug policy: Patterns and careers of experienced cannabis users in the populations of Amsterdam, San Francisco, and Bremen. Amsterdam, NL: University of Amsterdam, Centre for Drug Research; 2001;
5. Cohen P, Sas A. Cannabis use in Amsterdam. Amsterdam, NL: University of Amsterdam, Centre for Drug Research; 1998;
6. Dallas Morning News. (1995, May 21). Interview with Lee Brown.
7. Dorn N, Murji K, South N. Traffickers: Drug markets and law enforcement. London: Routledge; 1992;
8. Drug Enforcement Administration. (1993). U.S. drug threat assessment, 1993 (p. 63). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
9. Drug Enforcement Administration. (2005). Drugs of abuse, 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/abuse/7-pot.htm.
10. Earleywine M. Understanding marijuana: A new look at the scientific evidence. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002;
11. EMCDDA, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2006). Table PPP5: Potency of cannabis products at retail level. EMCDDA Statistical Bulletin 2006. Lisbon, Portugal. http://stats06.emcdda.europa.eu/en/elements/pptab05a-en.html.
12. Engelsman EL. Dutch policy on the management of drug-related problems. British Journal of Addiction. 1989;84:211–218
    • MEDLINE
13. Heishman SJ, Stitzer ML, Yingling JE. Effects of tetrahydrocannabinol content on marijuana smoking behaviour, subjective reports and performance. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behaviour. 1989;34:173–179
14. Kilmer, B. (2002). Do cannabis possession laws influence cannabis use? Cannabis 2002 Report (pp. 101–123). Brussels, Belgium: Ministry of Public Health.
15. Korf DJ, Benschop A, Wouters M. Differential responses to cannabis potency: A typology of users based on self-reported consumption behavior. International Journal of Drug Policy. 2007;18:168–176
16. Leuw E, Marshall I. Between prohibition and legalization: The Dutch experiment in drug policy. Amsterdam: Kugler; 1994;
17. Levine HG. The birth of American alcohol control: Prohibition, the power elite, and the problem of lawlessness. Contemporary Drug Problems. 1985;12:63–115
18. Levine HG. Global drug prohibition: Its uses and crises. International Journal of Drug Policy. 2003;14:145–153
19. Levine HG, Reinarman C. Alcohol prohibition and drug prohibition. In:  Fish J editors. Drugs and society: U.S. public policy. New York: Rowman and Littlefield; 2006;p. 43–76
20. MacAndrew C, Edgerton R. Drunken comportment: A social explanation. Chicago, IL: Aldine; 1969;
21. MacDonald DI. Drugs, drinking, and adolescence. Chicago, IL: Yearbook Medical Publishers; 1984;
22. Miron JA, Zweibel J. Alcohol consumption during prohibition. American Economic Review. 1991;81:242–247
23. Morgan JP. Prohibition is perverse policy: What was true in 1933 is true now. In:  Kraus MB,  Lazeare EP editor. Searching for alternatives: Drug control policy in the US. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press; 1991;
24. National Drug Intelligence Center. (2006). “Marijuana,” [U.S.] National Drug Threat Assessment, 2007. http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs21/21137/marijuana.htm#start.
25. Niesink RJM, Rigter S, Hoek J, Goldschmidt H. THC-concentraties in wiet, nederwiet en hasj in Nederlandse coffeeshops (2006–2007). Utrecht, NL: Trimbos Institute; 2007;
26. Office of National Drug Control Policy. (2002, October 7). An open letter to parents about marijuana. New York Times (p. A5).
27. Pijlman FTA, Rugter SM, Hoek J, Goldschmidt HJM, Niesink RJM. Strong increase in total delta-THC in cannabis preparations sold in coffee shops. Addiction Biology. 2005;10(2):171–180
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
28. Reinarman C, Cohen P. Law, culture, and cannabis: Comparing use patterns in Amsterdam and San Francisco. In:  Earleywine M editors. Pot politics: Cannabis and the costs of prohibition. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007;p. 113–137
29. Reinarman, C., & Cohen, P. (in press). Lineaments of cannabis culture: Rules regulating cannabis use in Amsterdam and San Francisco. Contemporary Justice Review, 10.
30. Reinarman C, Cohen P, Kaal H. The limited relevance of drug policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and San Francisco. American Journal of Public Health. 2004;94:836–842
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
31. SAMHSA, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration . Preliminary estimates from the 1994 national household survey on drug abuse. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies; 1995;
32. Sandwijk PJ, Cohen PDA, Musterd S, Langemeier MPS. Licit and illicit drug use in Amsterdam. Vol. II. Amsterdam, NL: University of Amsterdam, Centre for Drug Research; 1995;
33. Scheerer S. The new Dutch and German drug laws: Social and political conditions for criminalization and decriminalization. Law and Society Review. 1978;12:585–606
34. Warburton C. The economic results of prohibition. New York: Columbia University Press; 1932;
35. Westermeyer J. The pro-heroin effects of anti-opium laws in Asia. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1976;33:1135–1139
    • MEDLINE