• Español
  • English
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • rss
  • Español
  • English
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • rss
TNI D&D
  • Home
  • About us
    • About us
    • People
    • Partners
    • Researchers
    • Contact us
    • In the media
    • Newsletter
  • Newsroom
    • Press contacts
    • Press releases
    • Resources
    • Drugs in the news
  • Issues
    • Drug policy debate in the Americas
    • Decriminalization
    • Proportionality of sentences
    • Harm reduction
    • Reclassification of substances
    • Safer crack use
    • Human rights
    • Regulation
    • Unscheduling the coca leaf
    • Ending the war on drugs
    • Alternative development
    • Cannabis
    • Producers of Crops
    • Law enforcement
    • ATS, Mild stimulants & NPS
    • European Drug Policy
    • Money Laundering
  • UN Drug
    Control
    • Conventions
    • UNODC
    • CND
    • INCB
    • UNGASS
  • Country
    information
    • Drug Law Reform on the Map
    • Central America
      • El Salvador
      • Guatemala
      • Honduras
      • Costa Rica
    • Latin America
      • Argentina
      • Bolivia
      • Paraguay
      • Brazil
      • Chile
      • Colombia
      • Ecuador
      • Peru
      • Uruguay
      • Venezuela
    • Mexico
    • Caribbean
      • Jamaica
      • Belize
    • Afghanistan
  • Events
    • Expert Seminars
    • Informal Policy Dialogues
    • Public Events
    • Judges for Law Reform
  • Publications
    • Drug Policy Briefings
    • Drug Law Reform
    • Legislative Reform Series
    • The Human Face
    • Drugs & conflict
    • Drugs and the Law (CEDD)
      • Systems overload
    • Drug Markets and Violence
  • Weblog

 

Summary of report Beckley Foundation

‘Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards A Cost Benefit Analysis’

The Beckley report, Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards a Cost-Benefit Analysis, grasps of the economic consequences of a regulated market, as opposed to the current prohibitionist model. This is essential for evaluating the impacts of possible drug policy reform. The report outlines the factors which must be included in further cost-benefit analyses. The report costed 60.000 pounds and 3 years to create. Reliable data was often lacking and more evidence is needed.

One of the key advantages to a cost-benefit analysis is its complete elimination of subjective and emotive processes, which have become an unfortunate mainstay in the drug policy debate - this gives the results an objective credibility.

It is very important to note that by excluding 'internal costs and benefits' the report specifically excludes the reasons why people use cannabis, such as medication, enjoyment and creativity - instead this report takes the perspective of a concerned tax payer, or a budget-focused politician.

An often-used argument surrounding cannabis reform is the concept of the 'gateway effect'; the idea that cannabis use leads to the use of 'harder drugs'. This report not only rejects the idea of a demand side gateway effect (through a thorough assessment of the available data), but also introduces the idea that a regulated market would virtually eliminate another sort of damaging gateway effect, namely the supply-side gateway. This is where social dealers of cannabis come into contact with professional dealers of a larger variety of drugs and thus are more likely to progress to dealing harder drugs.

Another element which has gained much attention in recent history is the mental health costs of cannabis brought about by the increased ratio of THC to CBD. One of the many advantages of a regulated market is that through health-education, labelling and variable tax rates, strains of cannabis with a high CBD ratio can be encouraged, particularly for vulnerable users.

The main conclusion is that there would be a net social benefit to reform of some­where between 280 and 460 million pounds. This means that even when we ignore the experiential benefits claimed by cannabis users and just focus on the financial effects on society at large, the argument for reform remains robust, compelling and increasingly difficult for policy makers to ignore.

On top of the financial benefit there are of course many other advantages. These include increased respect of human rights, the avoidance of discrimination in the enforcement of prohibition, the minimisation of the blighting effect of a criminal record on a person’s life and the increased accessibility to health information and treatment. The current criminalization of cannabis users sacrifices the credibility of health campaigns. Moreover, based on US evidence it is expected that access to cannabis for teenagers would probably decrease.

Because taxes are a transfer, rather than a net social gain, they are not included in the report’s cost benefit analysis. However, a conservative estimation is made of what the tax revenue might be following reform.

The authors aim to bring the price of cannabis to lower than the illicit price, whilst aiming to keep it high enough to deter the expansion of use due to low price, particularly by the young. This would be achieved by a tax rate of around 70%, which is lower than the 83% on cigarettes and closer to the 72% on high alcohol beer.

The report predicts a small increase in cannabis quantity [+15% - +40%] due to a decreased cannabis price. The price elasticity of cannabis is estimated between [-0.2, -0.7]. The cross-price elasticity is important to consider: will alcohol consumption decrease if the price of cannabis decreases and cannabis consumption increases? According to a study of Clements and Zhao (2005), a4% increase in cannabis consumption would lead to a decrease of alcohol consumption (-1% beer, -2% wine, -4% spirits).

The authors assumed a cap on THC levels of 10% for licensed cannabis. By creating this limitation it leaves higher THC strains of cannabis in the illicit market. It would probably be better to keep all strains of cannabis within the licit market, and use taxation intelligently to make more potentially risky or harmful strains of cannabis less financially attractive. Campaigns could move users away from combining tobacco and cannabis.

The authors estimate that the government would gain in budgetary terms by something around one billion pounds a year, roughly three quarters of which would come from tax revenues rather than expenditure savings. In these times of economic hardship cost-benefit analyses with positive results should surely begin to play a key role in government.

The report

Mark Bryan, Emilia Del Bono, Stephen Pudney, Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards a Cost-Benefit Analysis, Institute for Social and Economic Research (Iser), University of Essex & Beckley Foundation, September 2013

  • Labels
    teen use | gateway theory | UK | regulation | cannabis

Drugs in the News

  • Drug deaths: ‘Scotland should decriminalise and dare Westminster to block it’
    15.01.2021
  • Appeals Court overturns ruling that legalized SCS; Safehouse fights on
    13.01.2021
  • Mexico moves to create world’s largest legal cannabis market
    12.01.2021
  • Cuomo vows New York 'will legalize adult-use recreational cannabis'
    11.01.2021
  • Blown off: Amsterdam will ban foreign tourists from coffeeshops in future
    08.01.2021
  • CDC and NIDA will finally study potential of safe consumption sites
    07.01.2021
More news

Weblog

    A new EU Drug Strategy is being repared by the German presidencyA new EU Drug Strategy is being repared by the German presidency
    08.10.2020
More weblog

Hilites

Balancing Treaty Stability and Change

balancing hilite

Inter se modification of the UN drug control conventions to facilitate cannabis regulation


Connecting the dots...

connecting dots hilite

Human rights, illicit cultivation and alternative development


Morocco and Cannabis

morocco cannabis hilite

Reduction, containment or acceptance


The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition

rise decline hilite

The History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options For Reform


Tags

10-year Review  20 1998 UNGASS  26 2005 CND debate  8 2016 UNGASS  126 2019 HLM  5 activism  19 afghanistan  24 show all

Tags

10-year Review  20 1998 UNGASS  26 2005 CND debate  8 2016 UNGASS  126 2019 HLM  5 activism  19 afghanistan  24 hide
africa  7 albania  11 alternative development  112 alternatives to policing  2 amnesty  61 appellation of origin  3 argentina  32 asean  9 ATS  15 australia  93 ayahuasca  5 bahamas  4 ballot 2012  155 banking  43 barbados  11 belgium  32 belize  10 bermuda  4 bolivia  115 brazil  92 brownfield doctrine  24 burma  42 california  199 cambodia  12 canada  492 cannabinoids  88 cannabis  2753 cannabis clubs  185 cannabis industry  362 caribbean  133 caricom  33 cbd oil  1 central america  5 chile  21 china  46 civil society  37 CND  126 coca  212 cocaine  59 coffee shop  210 cognitive decline  30 colombia  147 colorado  159 compulsary detention  19 conflict  3 conventions  249 corporate capture  6 costa rica  10 crack  50 craft cannabis  27 crime  67 czech republic  30 dark net  4 death penalty  2 decertification  1 decriminalization  814 deforestation  8 denmark  119 drug checking  35 drug consumption rooms  176 drug courts  22 drug markets  133 drug testing  7 drug trade  48 e-cigarettes  1 e-joint  2 ecstasy  59 ecuador  22 egypt  16 el salvador  2 environment  14 eradication  125 essential medicines  25 estonia  1 eswatini  4 european drug policy  67 expert advisory group  9 extrajudicial killings  92 fair trade  13 fentanyl  74 france  96 fumigation  25 gateway theory  29 georgia  2 germany  151 ghana  16 global commission  46 greece  18 guatemala  31 guatemala initiative  47 harm reduction  329 hemp  39 heroin  126 heroin assisted treatment  77 HIV/AIDS  61 home cultivation  72 honduras  3 human rights  246 incarceration  51 INCB  135 india  87 indonesia  32 informal drug policy dialogues  22 inter se modification  13 iran  14 ireland  15 israel  55 italy  34 jamaica  161 japan  2 kava  3 kazakhstan  5 ketamine  27 khat  36 kratom  26 kyrgyzstan  1 laos  2 latin american debate  115 law enforcement  377 lebanon  41 legal highs  63 legalization  1346 lesotho  6 luxembourg  32 malaysia  7 malta  13 medical cannabis  594 mental health  43 methamphetamine  40 mexico  201 Mid-Term Review  1 mild stimulants  37 money laundering  53 morocco  88 naloxone  12 nepal  6 netherlands  285 new york  20 new zealand  64 NIDA  5 nitrous oxide  6 norway  15 NPS  10 opinion polls  115 opioids  129 opium  90 oregon  29 overdose kits  4 pakistan  9 panama  5 paraguay  4 pardon  2 patents  18 peace  22 peru  41 peyote  3 philippines  85 pleasure  5 police pacification  18 portugal  66 potency  2 precursors  6 prevention  3 prison situation  92 producers  117 prohibition  140 proportionality  110 psychedelics  11 psychosis  53 puerto rico  3 racism  24 reclassification  116 recriminalisation  36 regulation  1187 russia  36 sacramental use  11 safe supply  18 safer crack  28 scheduling  24 scientific research  135 sdg  2 security  14 senegal  1 sentencing  65 singapore  6 social justice  47 south africa  62 spain  76 st lucia  7 st vincent and grenadines  29 substance-use disorder  18 substitution treatment  30 sweden  26 switzerland  133 synthetic cannabinoids  30 taxation  38 teen use  43 thailand  52 thresholds  37 tramadol  17 treatment  22 trinidad & tobago  14 tunisia  5 UK  248 UN drug control  422 UNGASS  58 UNODC  107 uruguay  143 US drug policy  1105 vaping  2 venezuela  5 vietnam  5 violence  131 WHO  60 world drug report  11

This website

UN Drug Control

In 2011 the 1961 UN Single Convention on drugs will be in place for 50 years. In 2012 the international drug control system will exist 100 years since the International Opium Convention was signed in 1912 in The Hague. Does it still serve its purpose or is a reform of the UN Drug Conventions needed? This site provides critical background.

Drug Law Reform on the map

dlronthemap_und

Copyright © 2016 Drug Law Reform in Latin America

Website by WebWolf