Research Paper
Consumer agency in cannabis supply – Exploring auto-regulatory documents of the cannabis social clubs in Spain

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.12.018Get rights and content

Abstract

Background

There is growing experience with the not-for-profit, consumer-driven cannabis social club (CSC) model that builds on self-supply, self-organization and harm-reduction; these are principles upon which people who use drugs (PWUD) have been engaging for decades. Recent legalization of cannabis in a number of jurisdictions and the related challenges in regulating production, sale, taxation and health-related matters have raised interest in non-commercial models of cannabis supply. The “codes of conduct” (CsoC) of CSC federations in Spain might reveal whether a consumer-based model could overcome these challenges.

Methods

To examine the content of the CSC auto-regulatory documents, an online search using key terms to identify the CsoC was conducted. Six documents were found; analysis of the main thematic categories and overarching themes was conducted. It was discussed how these corresponded to the areas of cannabis policy regulation and what the main limitations of the CSC model were.

Results

The CsoC detailed the rules for CSC administration, not-for-profit aims, “invitation only” and other conditions of membership, collective cultivation and security as well as for operation of the consumption venue and health-related initiatives. The themes in the CsoC overlapped with cannabis regulatory areas as outlined internationally. Concern over cannabis prices and potency was missing in the CsoC. The potential strengths of the CSC model might include safe environment for peer-delivered harm reduction practice, preventing illicit transactions, quality control, shifting economic surplus to the consumers and increased consumer responsibility. The limitations of the CSC model include high threshold, disguised motives, tax revenue and the risk of both under- and over-regulation.

Conclusion

CSCs represent an opportunity to enhance consumer agency and responsibility. The right “to be self-supplied” with psychoactive substances can be granted to consumer associations – but authorities need to provide a framework to facilitate this voluntary self-organization, including minimum standards around public health and safety, and to involve consumers in the development of these regulations.

Introduction

People who use drugs (PWUD) and activists around the world have been actively seeking drug policy approaches which allow for user self-determination and self-organization and, at the same time, for abolishment of prohibition and establishing alternative means of drug supply (ENCOD, 2011; INPUD, 2016). Among these alternatives has been the user-initiated, self-regulated and non-profit “cannabis social club” (CSC) model. A commonly shared definition of CSCs is that they are not-for-profit associations of cannabis users that are officially registered; their main aim has been to supply their members with cannabis and its derivatives for their own consumption (ENCOD, 2011). Beyond cannabis production, in some countries, CSCs operate as consumption venues too (Decorte et al., 2017). The CSCs seem to have the potential to address harms related to cannabis use via educational activities and informal harm reduction (e.g. sharing information about the effects of the different cannabis strains), via controlled use (i.e. restricted, planned and regularly dispensed cannabis supply per each individual) or via reduction of stigma around cannabis use (Barriuso, 2005, Barriuso, 2011; Belackova, Tomkova, & Zabransky, 2016; Coombes, 2014).

CSCs have operated worldwide as users “grass-root” initiatives that emerged within the boundaries of cannabis decriminalisation (Kilmer & Pacula, 2016). In line with the U.N. drug conventions, cultivation for personal use could be treated non-criminally, the same as drug possession for one’s own use (Bewley-Taylor, Blickman, & Jelsma, 2014; Kilmer, Kruithof, Pardal, Caulkins, & Rubin, 2013). The establishment of CSCs thus seems feasible in countries where the national legislation “tolerates” personal cannabis cultivation together with sharing the drug among fellow users (Arana & Sánchez, 2011; Decorte, 2015). As such, cannabis social clubs have been experimented with in Belgium (Decorte, 2015), Chile, Colombia, Argentina, the United Kingdom, and France (Bewley-Taylor et al., 2014) for recreational purposes, and in Slovenia, Switzerland, New Zealand, and Italy for medicinal purposes (Decorte, 2015). CSCs are also a supply option under the legal cannabis regime in Uruguay (Coombes, 2014).

The largest application (and the origins) of the CSC model, however, can be found in Spain where the first CSC was established in 2001 and hundreds of them are now in operation, the majority of which are in Catalonia and in the Basque country (Barriuso, 2011; Blickman, 2014). The regulatory framework governing CSCs in such settings has been limited to laws around the civic associative practice (Decorte et al., 2017), to the sparse health-related recommendations issued by some local authorities (Parés & Bouso, 2015) and, predominantly, to the CSC self-regulatory practice, though guided by interpretation of the existing laws (Muñoz & Soto, 2001).

In Spain, six federations of CSCs joined the initiative “Responsible Regulation” in 2015 which was established in order to promote the health and wellbeing of cannabis users and to advocate for national-level regulation of cannabis production and consumption. These federations have been providing frameworks for self-regulation of CSCs and have represented their members in seeking legal recognition from authorities for over a decade. They associate a range of CSCs in terms of size, location and aims, and have diverse origins and objectives. Firstly, Federacion de Associaciones Cannabicas (FAC) was founded in 2003; it‘s local divisions with their regional aims are CATFAC (Catalonia) and EUSFAC (Basque Country). Over time, the diversity of views has led to the emergence of less “restrictive” approaches in these localities including higher limits on the amount of cannabis dispensed to members, bigger budgets, more hierarchical organizational structures, and venues that looked more like lounges or bars (Parés & Bouso, 2015). Other federations were formed, namely EKHEEF in the Basque country, FEDCAC in Catalonia and CANAFAC in the Balearic Islands. The members of the latter three federations (EKHEEF, FEDCAC and CANAFAC) have formed the Platform of Federation of Associated Cannabis Users (PAUC) – a counterpart to the initial FAC.

CSCs can be seen as a remarkable demonstration of consumer agency in cannabis production and distribution. While CSCs seem as a rather new model in the formal cannabis policy debate, and not a widely evaluated one (possibly due to its grass-roots nature), consumer engagement in cannabis supply and peer self-organization to minimise the harms of drug use have been well documented. This paper applies the term “consumer” in line with its meaning as active recipient role in designing (mental) health care (Lammers & Happell, 2003), and builds on its recent applications onto PWUD who engage in the drug policy process (Lancaster, Seear, Treloar, & Ritter, 2017). We use this term interchangeably with terms like “peer” or “people with lived experience” that have arisen in similar contexts (Crofts & Herkt, 1995; Treloar & Rhodes, 2009). As the term “consumer” has a conventional meaning in lay language related to marketing (Solomon, 1994), it seems to be even more relevant when discussing legal and regulated cannabis markets and the role of users “consuming” cannabis products.

Section snippets

Consumer engagement in cannabis and other illicit drug supply

Self-supply with cannabis has been widespread across the globe. In an online survey that collected information about European drug markets, cannabis cultivation was reported by approximately one fifth of Czech, Italian and Swedish last year cannabis users, as well as among 9% of cannabis users in the UK and 5% in the Netherlands (Belackova, Maalsté, Zabransky, & Grund, 2015; Trautmann, Kilmer, & Turnbull, 2013). An international survey of cannabis cultivators from Canada, U.S., Belgium,

Methods

In order to collect all relevant, publicly available auto-regulatory documents of cannabis social clubs in Spain, a search on the surface web was conducted with the following key words: “federation”; “cannabis users”; “cannabis social club”; “code of conduct”; “Spain”; “Catalonia”; “Basque Country” in May 2016 (both Spanish and English equivalents were used). All search outcomes were screened for their content; items that contained aims and/or regulations of CSC federations and that were

Findings

Five major themes that were related to the organization and rules in CSCs, to the cannabis cultivation and to the use of cannabis in the clubs were identified in the CsoC.

  • (i)

    aims and administration of CSCs

All the federations declared that they acted on a not-for-profit basis (in two CsoC, salary limits to employees were explicitly mentioned). Related to this, a broad range of aims that the CSCs were trying to achieve (rather than profit) were provided (e.g. self-regulation, avoidance of the black

Discussion

The CsoC published online by the CSC federations focused on five major themes: (i) aims and administration of CSCs, (ii) conditions for membership and for allocating collective cultivation, (iii) collective cultivation and operation guidelines, (iv) regulation of the consumption venue, and on (v) health-related measures. These self-proclaimed aims were in line with several areas of cannabis policy regulation that had been identified by scholars to date.

Conclusions

Cannabis users have self-supplied themselves and others with cannabis as a way to avoid the illegal market; cultivating and sharing cannabis also has social and health motivations. Recently, cannabis consumers in different places around the world, notably in Spain, have organized into cannabis social clubs (CSCs). Beyond cannabis production, CSCs offer a unique space for both formal and informal dissemination of health-related information and education. In this respect, the CSCs can be

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Oscar Parés for comments to the initial version of this manuscript. No specific funding was received for this publication.

References (86)

  • K. Lancaster et al.

    The productive techniques and constitutive effects of evidence-based policy and consumer participation discourses in health policy processes

    Social Science & Medicine

    (2017)
  • G.A. Marlatt

    Harm reduction: Come as you are

    Addictive Behaviors

    (1996)
  • A. O’Gorman et al.

    Peer, professional, and public: An analysis of the drugs policy advocacy community in Europe

    International Journal of Drug Policy

    (2014)
  • R. Queirolo et al.

    Cannabis clubs in Uruguay: The challenges of regulation

    International Journal of Drug Policy

    (2016)
  • T. Rhodes

    The ‘risk environment’: a framework for understanding and reducing drug-related harm

    International Journal of Drug Policy

    (2002)
  • A. Ritter

    Illicit drugs policy through the lens of regulation

    International Journal of Drug Policy

    (2010)
  • T. Subritzky et al.

    Issues in the implementation and evolution of the commercial recreational cannabis market in Colorado

    International Journal of Drug Policy

    (2016)
  • T. Subritzky et al.

    Into the void: Regulating pesticide use in Colorado’s commercial cannabis markets

    International Journal of Drug Policy

    (2017)
  • ASA

    Patient focused certification program

    (2017)
  • X. Arana et al.

    Cannabis Cultivation in Spain ? The Case of Cannabis Social Clubs

  • M.A. Barriuso

    Propuesta de modelo legal para el cannabis en el estado español

    Eguzkilore, Revista del Instituto Vasco de Criminología

    (2005)
  • M.A. Barriuso

    Cannabis social clubs in Spain: A normalizing alternative underway

    (2011)
  • V. Belackova et al.

    Assessing the users‘ risks in the shift towards indoor cannabis cultivaiton – The case of the Czech Republic

    Adiktologie

    (2014)
  • D. Bewley-Taylor et al.

    The rise and decline of cannabis prohibition. The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform

    (2014)
  • T. Blickman

    Cannabis policy reform in europe: Bottom up rather than top down

    Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies

    (2014)
  • D.A. Bright et al.

    Just doing a favor for a friend: The social supply of ecstasy through friendship networks

    Journal of Drug Issues

    (2017)
  • CANAFAC

    Presentación y proyecto de Canafac

    (2014)
  • CATFAC

    Código de Buenas Prácticas para Asociaciones Cannàbicas

    (2014)
  • J.P. Caulkins et al.

    Considering marijuana legalization: Insights for vermont and other jurisdictions

    (2015)
  • K.J. Chronister et al.

    Evaluation of a peer naloxone distribution project In Sydney, Australia, 2012–2014

    Drug and Alcohol Review

    (2014)
  • R. Coomber et al.

    Arenas of drug treansaction: adolescent cannabis transactions in England–social supply

    Journal of Drug Issues

    (2007)
  • R. Coomber et al.

    Reflections on three decades of research on'social supply'in the UK

  • R. Coombes

    Cannabis regulation: High time for change?

    BMJ: British Medical Journal

    (2014)
  • N. Crofts et al.

    A history of peer-based drug-user groups in Australia

    Journal of Drug Issues

    (1995)
  • K.L. Dehne et al.

    The HIV/AIDS epidemic among drug injectors in Eastern Europe: Patterns, trends and determinants

    Journal of Drug Issues

    (1999)
  • J.K. Dolan et al.

    Drug consumption facilities in Europe and the establishment of supervised injecting centres in Australia

    Drug and Alcohol Review

    (2000)
  • EKHEEF

    Propuesta de regulacion de EKHEEF

    (2014)
  • EMCDDA

    Drug policy advocacy organizations in Europe

    (2013)
  • ENCOD

    Code of conduct for European cannabis social clubs

    (2011)
  • EUSFAC

    Federacion Vasca de Associaciones Cannabicas –Filosofía

    (2016)
  • FEDCAC

    Manual de Buenas Prácticas de la FEDCAC –Propuesta Modelo de Asociacón Cannábica

    (2016)
  • T.P. Freeman et al.

    Just say ‘know’: How do cannabinoid concentrations influence users' estimates of cannabis potency and the amount they roll in joints?

    Addiction

    (2014)
  • V. Grover et al.

    Six myths of information and markets: Information technology networks, electronic commerce, and the battle for consumer surplus

    MIS Quarterly

    (1999)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text