Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Prevention 3/2017

01-06-2017 | Original Paper

Early Impacts of Marijuana Legalization: An Evaluation of Prices in Colorado and Washington

Authors: Priscillia Hunt, Rosalie Liccardo Pacula

Published in: Journal of Prevention | Issue 3/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Following the legalization and regulation of marijuana for recreational purposes in states with medical markets, policymakers and researchers seek empirical evidence on how, and how fast, supply and demand changed over time. Prices are an indication of how suppliers and consumers respond to policy changes, so this study uses a difference-in-difference approach to exploit the timing of policy implementation and identify the impacts on marijuana prices 4–5 months after markets opened. This study uses unique longitudinal survey data of prices paid by consumers and a web-scraped dataset of dispensary prices advertised online for three U.S. medical marijuana states that all eventually legalized recreational marijuana. Results indicate there were no impacts on the prices paid for medical or recreational marijuana by state-representative residents within the short 4- to 5-months window following legalization. However, there were differences in how much people paid if they obtained marijuana for recreational purposes from a recreational store. Further analysis of advertised prices confirms this result, but further demonstrates heterogeneous responses in prices across types of commonly advertised strains; prices either did not change or increased depending on the strain type. A key implication of our findings is that there are both supply and demand responses at work in the opening of legalized markets, suggesting that evaluations of immediate effects may not accurately reflect the long run impact of legalization on consumption.
Footnotes
1
Defined as “used for pleasure instead of for medical purposes” (“Recreational,” n.d.).
 
2
When the CO Department of Public Safety produced its required mandatory report to the Senate in March 2016, it only could analyze data up to 2014 because that was all that were publicly available. Recognizing that the administrative data lagged substantially behind the roll out of the stores, and in light of the clear growth in the volume of plants sold subsequent to 2014, the CO Department of Public Safety suggests that findings contained within its report of the public safety effect be viewed more as a baseline assessment of where things stood before commercialization of the recreational marijuana market (CO Department of Public Safety, 2016).
 
3
Monopoly markets.
 
4
Note that during this period medical marijuana dispensaries were open in some cities in both California and CO, but neither state legally protected the dispensaries during the period being evaluated.
 
5
Typically stores sell the flowers (or “buds”) of the marijuana plant rather than the whole plant, as these are the parts of the plant containing the most THC. Hence, the Colorado Department of Revenue actually tracks sales in terms of bud/flower sold even though it tracks cultivation in terms of whole plants.
 
6
Tier 1 allows for 2000 square feet or less of dedicated plant canopy; Tier 2 is 2000–10,000 sq. ft.; and Tier 3 is 10,000–30,000 sq. ft. (Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board, n.d.).
 
7
In the United States, the term “marijuana” is more commonly used to reference various cannabis material, and hence survey questions (and the name of the survey) reflect the common nomenclature used here.
 
8
A study on how to handle missing data focusing on marijuana prices paid using this survey also supports **this (Hunt & Miles, 2015).
 
9
The NIDA funded project began scraping prices from Weedmaps in January of 2012 and continued through 2014, to overlap with the timing of the RAND West Coast States Survey.
 
10
Due to a change in how dispensary menus were posted on the web starting in the summer of 2014, the original web-scraping techniques being used missed some menus that were posted by dispensaries in all states for several months. This error was not identified until mid-October 2014, making data for that month incomplete and unusable.
 
11
This includes common misspellings and additional text.
 
12
Shake refers to the loose leaves, seeds and stems, at the bottom of a bag containing marijuana.
 
13
We separately calculate the Monte Carlo estimate for the overall model and each strain to determine the number of imputations for each model.
 
14
Results are available from authors upon request.
 
Literature
go back to reference Anderson, M., Hansen, B., & Rees, D. I. (2013). Medical marijuana laws, traffic fatalities, and alcohol consumption. Journal of Law and Economics, 56(2), 333–369.CrossRef Anderson, M., Hansen, B., & Rees, D. I. (2013). Medical marijuana laws, traffic fatalities, and alcohol consumption. Journal of Law and Economics, 56(2), 333–369.CrossRef
go back to reference Cambron, C., Guttmannova, K., & Fleming, C. B. (2017). State and national contexts in evaluating cannabis laws: A case study of Washington State. Journal of Drug Issues, 47(1), 74–90.CrossRefPubMed Cambron, C., Guttmannova, K., & Fleming, C. B. (2017). State and national contexts in evaluating cannabis laws: A case study of Washington State. Journal of Drug Issues, 47(1), 74–90.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Caulkins, J. P., & Bond, B. M. (2012). Marijuana price gradients implications for exports and export-generated tax revenue for California after legalization. Journal of Drug Issues, 42(1), 28–45.CrossRef Caulkins, J. P., & Bond, B. M. (2012). Marijuana price gradients implications for exports and export-generated tax revenue for California after legalization. Journal of Drug Issues, 42(1), 28–45.CrossRef
go back to reference Caulkins, J. P., & Pacula, R. L. (2006). Marijuana markets: Inferences from reports by the household population. Journal of Drug Issues, 36(1), 173–200.CrossRef Caulkins, J. P., & Pacula, R. L. (2006). Marijuana markets: Inferences from reports by the household population. Journal of Drug Issues, 36(1), 173–200.CrossRef
go back to reference Caulkins, J. P., & Reuter, P. (1998). What price data tell us about drug markets. Journal of Drug Issues, 28(3), 593–612.CrossRef Caulkins, J. P., & Reuter, P. (1998). What price data tell us about drug markets. Journal of Drug Issues, 28(3), 593–612.CrossRef
go back to reference Caulkins, J. P., & Reuter, P. (2010). How drug enforcement affects drug prices. Crime and Justice, 39(1), 213–271.CrossRef Caulkins, J. P., & Reuter, P. (2010). How drug enforcement affects drug prices. Crime and Justice, 39(1), 213–271.CrossRef
go back to reference Davenport, S. S., & Caulkins, J. P. (2016). Evolution of the United States marijuana market in the decade of liberalization before full legalization. Journal of Drug Issues, 46(4), 411–427.CrossRef Davenport, S. S., & Caulkins, J. P. (2016). Evolution of the United States marijuana market in the decade of liberalization before full legalization. Journal of Drug Issues, 46(4), 411–427.CrossRef
go back to reference Davis, A. J., Geisler, K. R., & Nichols, M. W. (2016). The price elasticity of marijuana demand: Evidence from crowd-sourced transaction data. Empirical Economics, 50(4), 1171–1192.CrossRef Davis, A. J., Geisler, K. R., & Nichols, M. W. (2016). The price elasticity of marijuana demand: Evidence from crowd-sourced transaction data. Empirical Economics, 50(4), 1171–1192.CrossRef
go back to reference Galenianos, M., Pacula, R. L., & Persico, N. (2012). A search-theoretic model of the retail market for illicit drugs. Review of Economic Studies, 79, 1239–1269.CrossRef Galenianos, M., Pacula, R. L., & Persico, N. (2012). A search-theoretic model of the retail market for illicit drugs. Review of Economic Studies, 79, 1239–1269.CrossRef
go back to reference Ghosh, T. S., Van Dyke, M., Maffey, A., Whitley, E., Erpelding, D., & Wolk, L. (2015). Medical marijuana’s public health lessons—implications for retail marijuana in Colorado. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(11), 991–993.CrossRefPubMed Ghosh, T. S., Van Dyke, M., Maffey, A., Whitley, E., Erpelding, D., & Wolk, L. (2015). Medical marijuana’s public health lessons—implications for retail marijuana in Colorado. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(11), 991–993.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Graham, J. W., Olschowski, A. E., & Gilreath, T. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of Multiple Imputation Theory. Prevention Science, 8(3), 206–213.CrossRefPubMed Graham, J. W., Olschowski, A. E., & Gilreath, T. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of Multiple Imputation Theory. Prevention Science, 8(3), 206–213.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hansen, B., Miller, K., & Weber, C. (2016). A legal market for recreational marijuana: Evidence from Washington. Paper presented at the Cannabis science & policy summit conference, New York City, April 17–18, 2016. Hansen, B., Miller, K., & Weber, C. (2016). A legal market for recreational marijuana: Evidence from Washington. Paper presented at the Cannabis science & policy summit conference, New York City, April 17–18, 2016.
go back to reference Kilmer, B., Caulkins, J., Pacula, R., MacCoun, R., & Reuter, P. (2010). Altered state? Assessing how marijuana legalization in California could influence marijuana consumption and public budgets. RAND Occasional Paper OP315. Retrieved from Santa Monica, CA: Kilmer, B., Caulkins, J., Pacula, R., MacCoun, R., & Reuter, P. (2010). Altered state? Assessing how marijuana legalization in California could influence marijuana consumption and public budgets. RAND Occasional Paper OP315. Retrieved from Santa Monica, CA:
go back to reference Miles, J., & Hunt, P. (2015). A practical introduction to methods for analyzing longitudinal data in the presence of missing data using a marijuana price survey. Journal of Criminal Psychology, 5(2), 137–148.CrossRef Miles, J., & Hunt, P. (2015). A practical introduction to methods for analyzing longitudinal data in the presence of missing data using a marijuana price survey. Journal of Criminal Psychology, 5(2), 137–148.CrossRef
go back to reference Pacula, R. L., Grossman, M., Chaloupka, F. J., O’Malley, P., Johnston, L. D., & Farrelly, M. C. (2001). Marijuana and Youth. In J. Gruber (Ed.), Risky behavior among youths: An economic analysis (pp. 191–193). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pacula, R. L., Grossman, M., Chaloupka, F. J., O’Malley, P., Johnston, L. D., & Farrelly, M. C. (2001). Marijuana and Youth. In J. Gruber (Ed.), Risky behavior among youths: An economic analysis (pp. 191–193). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
go back to reference Pacula, R. L., Kilmer, B., Grossman, M., & Chaloupka, F. J. (2010). Risks and prices: The role of user sanctions in marijuana markets. The B.E. Journal of. Economic Analysis & Policy, 10(1), 1–38. doi:10.2202/1935-1682.1992. Pacula, R. L., Kilmer, B., Grossman, M., & Chaloupka, F. J. (2010). Risks and prices: The role of user sanctions in marijuana markets. The B.E. Journal of. Economic Analysis & Policy, 10(1), 1–38. doi:10.​2202/​1935-1682.​1992.
go back to reference Pacula, R. L., & Lundberg, R. (2014). Why changes in price matter when thinking about marijuana policy: A review of the literature on the elasticity of demand. Public Health Reviews, 35(2), 1–18.PubMedPubMedCentral Pacula, R. L., & Lundberg, R. (2014). Why changes in price matter when thinking about marijuana policy: A review of the literature on the elasticity of demand. Public Health Reviews, 35(2), 1–18.PubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Reuter, P., & Kleiman, M. A. (1986). Risks and prices: An economic analysis of drug enforcement. Crime and Justice, 7, 289–340.CrossRef Reuter, P., & Kleiman, M. A. (1986). Risks and prices: An economic analysis of drug enforcement. Crime and Justice, 7, 289–340.CrossRef
go back to reference Sevigny, E., Pacula, R. L., & Heaton, P. (2014). The effects of medical marijuana laws on potency. International Journal of Drug Policy, 25(2), 308–319.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sevigny, E., Pacula, R. L., & Heaton, P. (2014). The effects of medical marijuana laws on potency. International Journal of Drug Policy, 25(2), 308–319.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Sun, C. (2016). Report: Marijuana related DUI citations in CO dropped slightly in 2015. The Gazette. Sun, C. (2016). Report: Marijuana related DUI citations in CO dropped slightly in 2015. The Gazette.
go back to reference United Nations. (2016). The International drug control conventions: Single convention on narcotic drugs of 1961 as amended by the 1972 protocol. New York: United Nations. United Nations. (2016). The International drug control conventions: Single convention on narcotic drugs of 1961 as amended by the 1972 protocol. New York: United Nations.
go back to reference Warren, T. (2015). It may be legal, but keep it away from kids, school officials say. Washington Post News Services. Warren, T. (2015). It may be legal, but keep it away from kids, school officials say. Washington Post News Services.
go back to reference White, I. R., Royston, P., & Wood, A. M. (2011). Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice. Statistics in Medicine, 30(4), 377–399.CrossRefPubMed White, I. R., Royston, P., & Wood, A. M. (2011). Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice. Statistics in Medicine, 30(4), 377–399.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Williams, J. (2004). The effects of price and policy on marijuana use: What can be learned from the Australian experience? Health Economics, 13(2), 123–137.CrossRefPubMed Williams, J. (2004). The effects of price and policy on marijuana use: What can be learned from the Australian experience? Health Economics, 13(2), 123–137.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Williams, J., Pacula, R. L., Chaloupka, F. J., & Wechsler, H. (2004). Alcohol and marijuana use among college students: Economic complements or substitutes? Health Economics, 13(9), 825–843. doi:10.1002/hec.859.CrossRefPubMed Williams, J., Pacula, R. L., Chaloupka, F. J., & Wechsler, H. (2004). Alcohol and marijuana use among college students: Economic complements or substitutes? Health Economics, 13(9), 825–843. doi:10.​1002/​hec.​859.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Early Impacts of Marijuana Legalization: An Evaluation of Prices in Colorado and Washington
Authors
Priscillia Hunt
Rosalie Liccardo Pacula
Publication date
01-06-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Prevention / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 2731-5533
Electronic ISSN: 2731-5541
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-017-0471-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Journal of Prevention 3/2017 Go to the issue