协调大麻和环境政策

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Evan Mills
{"title":"协调大麻和环境政策","authors":"Evan Mills","doi":"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Policy fragmentation contributes to the myriad environmental impacts of the cannabis industry and impedes solutions. Examination of how this plays out in the context of the US provides real-world examples, further complicated by the lack of a robust overarching federal policy framework. A key determinant of environmental problems is whether cannabis cultivation is conducted indoors (greenhouses or windowless plant factories) or outdoors in open fields. For example, emissions of greenhouse gases are ∼100-times greater for indoor cultivation, and water use is higher when accounting for water associated with power production. Other distinct spheres of impact involve land use, waste production, air pollution, ecosystem degradation, and adverse indoor environmental quality conditions faced by workers. Some consequences are differentially burdensome for marginalized populations, suggesting an overlay of environmental justice considerations. Relevant but uncoordinated regulatory entities include those focused formally on cannabis regulation, law enforcement, energy supply and demand, building codes, air quality, climate change, water supply and quality, waste management, fish and wildlife, occupational safety, public health, and urban planning. While criminalization has contributed to environmental concerns, both legal and illicit operations are problematic. Cannabis legalization enables improved policy coordination, but is not a panacea or intrinsic solution. The potential for policymaker collaboration and regulatory coordination includes removing barriers to improved practices and, in particular, providing incentives for lower-impact outdoor cultivation. However, politics often stands as an impediment to otherwise pragmatic policy solutions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48364,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Drug Policy","volume":"143 ","pages":"Article 104923"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Harmonizing cannabis and environmental policy\",\"authors\":\"Evan Mills\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104923\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Policy fragmentation contributes to the myriad environmental impacts of the cannabis industry and impedes solutions. Examination of how this plays out in the context of the US provides real-world examples, further complicated by the lack of a robust overarching federal policy framework. A key determinant of environmental problems is whether cannabis cultivation is conducted indoors (greenhouses or windowless plant factories) or outdoors in open fields. For example, emissions of greenhouse gases are ∼100-times greater for indoor cultivation, and water use is higher when accounting for water associated with power production. Other distinct spheres of impact involve land use, waste production, air pollution, ecosystem degradation, and adverse indoor environmental quality conditions faced by workers. Some consequences are differentially burdensome for marginalized populations, suggesting an overlay of environmental justice considerations. Relevant but uncoordinated regulatory entities include those focused formally on cannabis regulation, law enforcement, energy supply and demand, building codes, air quality, climate change, water supply and quality, waste management, fish and wildlife, occupational safety, public health, and urban planning. While criminalization has contributed to environmental concerns, both legal and illicit operations are problematic. Cannabis legalization enables improved policy coordination, but is not a panacea or intrinsic solution. The potential for policymaker collaboration and regulatory coordination includes removing barriers to improved practices and, in particular, providing incentives for lower-impact outdoor cultivation. However, politics often stands as an impediment to otherwise pragmatic policy solutions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Drug Policy\",\"volume\":\"143 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104923\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Drug Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095539592500221X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Drug Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095539592500221X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

政策碎片化加剧了大麻产业对环境的无数影响,并阻碍了解决办法。在美国的背景下,对这种情况如何发挥作用的研究提供了现实世界的例子,由于缺乏强有力的总体联邦政策框架,情况进一步复杂化。环境问题的一个关键决定因素是大麻种植是在室内(温室或没有窗户的植物工厂)还是在室外的开阔地带进行。例如,室内种植的温室气体排放量是室内种植的100倍,如果考虑到与电力生产相关的水,用水量更高。其他不同的影响领域包括土地利用、废物产生、空气污染、生态系统退化和工人面临的不利室内环境质量条件。一些后果对边缘人群来说是不同程度的负担,表明环境正义考虑的叠加。相关但不协调的监管实体包括那些正式侧重于大麻监管、执法、能源供应和需求、建筑规范、空气质量、气候变化、供水和质量、废物管理、鱼类和野生动物、职业安全、公共卫生和城市规划的实体。虽然刑事定罪引起了环境问题,但合法和非法的操作都是有问题的。大麻合法化可以改善政策协调,但不是灵丹妙药或内在的解决办法。决策者合作和监管协调的潜力包括消除改进做法的障碍,特别是为影响较小的户外种植提供激励。然而,政治往往成为务实政策解决方案的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Harmonizing cannabis and environmental policy
Policy fragmentation contributes to the myriad environmental impacts of the cannabis industry and impedes solutions. Examination of how this plays out in the context of the US provides real-world examples, further complicated by the lack of a robust overarching federal policy framework. A key determinant of environmental problems is whether cannabis cultivation is conducted indoors (greenhouses or windowless plant factories) or outdoors in open fields. For example, emissions of greenhouse gases are ∼100-times greater for indoor cultivation, and water use is higher when accounting for water associated with power production. Other distinct spheres of impact involve land use, waste production, air pollution, ecosystem degradation, and adverse indoor environmental quality conditions faced by workers. Some consequences are differentially burdensome for marginalized populations, suggesting an overlay of environmental justice considerations. Relevant but uncoordinated regulatory entities include those focused formally on cannabis regulation, law enforcement, energy supply and demand, building codes, air quality, climate change, water supply and quality, waste management, fish and wildlife, occupational safety, public health, and urban planning. While criminalization has contributed to environmental concerns, both legal and illicit operations are problematic. Cannabis legalization enables improved policy coordination, but is not a panacea or intrinsic solution. The potential for policymaker collaboration and regulatory coordination includes removing barriers to improved practices and, in particular, providing incentives for lower-impact outdoor cultivation. However, politics often stands as an impediment to otherwise pragmatic policy solutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.40%
发文量
307
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Drug Policy provides a forum for the dissemination of current research, reviews, debate, and critical analysis on drug use and drug policy in a global context. It seeks to publish material on the social, political, legal, and health contexts of psychoactive substance use, both licit and illicit. The journal is particularly concerned to explore the effects of drug policy and practice on drug-using behaviour and its health and social consequences. It is the policy of the journal to represent a wide range of material on drug-related matters from around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信