Expected impacts of the Cannabis Infringement Notice scheme in Western Australia on regular users and their involvement in the cannabis market.

The effect on the cannabis market is one area of interest in the evaluation of the new 'prohibition with civil penalties' scheme for minor cannabis offences in WA. One goal of the scheme is to reduce the proportion of cannabis consumed that is supplied by large-scale suppliers that may also supply other drugs. As part of the pre-change phase of the evaluation, 100 regular (at least weekly) cannabis users were given a qualitative and quantitative interview covering knowledge and attitudes towards cannabis law, personal cannabis use, market factors, experience with the justice system and impact of legislative change. Some 85% of those who commented identified the changes as having little impact on their cannabis use. Some 89% of the 70 who intended to cultivate cannabis once the CIN scheme was introduced suggested they would grow cannabis within the two non-hydroponic plant-limit eligible for an infringement notice under the new law. Only 15% believed an increase in self-supply would undermine the large scale suppliers of cannabis in the market and allow some cannabis users to distance themselves from its unsavoury aspects. Only 11% said they would enter, or re-enter, the cannabis market as sellers as a result of the scheme introduction. Most respondents who commented believed that the impact of the legislative changes on the cannabis market would be negligible. The extent to which this happens will be addressed in the post-change phase of this research. Part of the challenge in assessing the impact of the CIN scheme on the cannabis market is that it is distinctly heterogeneous.

Cannabis law reform in Western Australia: an opportunity to test theories of marginal deterrence and legitimacy.

'Marginal deterrence' refers to deterrence of a more harmful act because its expected sanction exceeds that for a less harmful act. 'Legitimacy of the law' predicts that laws perceived as fair will generate compliance and laws perceived as unfair will generate defiance. The introduction of the Cannabis Infringement Notice (CIN) scheme in Western Australia provided an opportunity to test these theories by assessing whether perceptions of certainty, severity and fairness of punishments dictated by the CIN scheme would affect how regular cannabis users intended to obtain cannabis after legislative change. One hundred Perth residents (mean age 32.2 years; two-thirds male) who reported using cannabis at least once a week were given semi-structured interviews before the CIN scheme came into effect. There was limited opportunity for the CIN scheme to effect marginal deterrence, as most of the sample were already purchasing or growing within the lower penalty thresholds. However, of the minority who were purchasing and growing outside the CIN scheme, a significant proportion reported intending to change their behaviour to fit within the scheme, including the only purchaser of more than 30 g and six of 14 non-hydroponic growers of three or more plants. Perceived certainty, severity and fairness of penalties were not as important in determining purchasing and growing behaviour as factors such as 'meeting needs', 'cost' and 'preference'. The results suggest that under the CIN scheme, marginal deterrence and legitimacy will probably play only a small or selective role in decisions about obtaining cannabis, although in some areas, such as the numbers of non-hydroponic plants, marginal deterrence may be evident.