Price and Enforcement Effects on Cocaine and Marijuana Demand

DeSimone, Jeff; Farrelly, Matthew C.

doi:10.1093/ei/41.1.98

Cited by 108 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the ideal measure to capture enforcement would be possession arrests per unit of consumption, annualized consumption information is not available at the county level. DeSimone and Farrelly (2003) demonstrate with data from the 1990-1997 National Household Surveys on Drug Abuse that the effect of the probability of arrest on selfreported use rates for adults is negative regardless of whether they denominated by number of users or number of Index I arrests. Thus, we believe marijuana arrests as a fraction of all arrests in a county is a reasonable proxy for the probability of being arrested for possession.…”

Section: Data and Empirical Modelmentioning

confidence: 73%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risks and Prices: The Role of User Sanctions in Marijuana Markets

Pacula¹,

Kilmer²,

Grossman³

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Data and Empirical Modelmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…11 Almost 88 percent of arrestees in the analysis sample live in states where possession of 10 grams can be conditionally discharged. We focus on fines and allowances for conditional discharges because they have been shown to be correlated with demand in previous studies DeSimone and Farrelly, 2003;Pacula et al, 2003).…”

Section: Data and Empirical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risks and Prices: The Role of User Sanctions in Marijuana Markets

Pacula¹,

Kilmer²,

Grossman³

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…10 Drug price and purity are important determinants for illicit drug use-and, consequently, for health services utilization-and for the magnitude of the pharmacological effect of the drugs used. [11][12][13][14] In recent years, a key debate in national drug policy and legislation has been whether drug abusers, especially heavy drug users, are responsive to changes in drug prices. [13][14][15] There is limited research examining the relationship between cocaine prices and ED visits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation between Cocaine Prices and Purity with Trends in Emergency Department Visits in a Major Metropolitan Area

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Illicit drug use not only causes acute and chronic adverse health outcomes but also results in a significant burden to health care providers. The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between cocaine prices and purity with emergency department (ED) visits for the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet metropolitan area. Our primary outcome was number of cocaine-related ED visits per quarter provided by the Drug Abuse Warning Network. The predictor variables of cocaine purity and price were provided by the System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence database. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) regressions were used to estimate the effects of cocaine price and purity on cocaine-related ED visits. Although cocaine prices did not change substantially over time, cocaine purity decreased by over 30 % between 2006 and 2010. ARIMA regression results suggest that cocaine-related ED visits were not significantly associated with powder or crack cocaine prices; however, a decrease in powder cocaine purity was associated with 2,081 fewer ED visits overall from 2007 to 2010. The cocaine trade continues to be a major public health and law enforcement threat to large metropolitan cities like Chicago. Regular monitoring of cocaine purity levels may provide early warning of impending changes in cocaine-related ED visits for law enforcement and health care providers.

show abstract

“…Desimone and Farrelly (2003), There are some inconsistencies in the findings for youth with respect to the effects of decriminalization, which may be due a combination of weak analytic approaches, the nonuniqueness of this policy in terms of actual penalties faced by users, and the apparent lack of knowledge about these policies Room et al, 2008;Pacula, Chriqui and King, 2003). As there has been very little variation in decriminalization policies since the late 1970s and in light of what has been learned about identifying causal effects, it is truly difficult to infer anything from results with respect to the decriminalization status variable.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They find an annual participation elasticity for individuals 18-20 of -0.16 and an annual participation elasticity among 21 -24 year olds of -0.26, suggesting that the older group is even more sensitive to changes in price. DeSimone and Farrelly (2003) estimate models of annual prevalence and frequency of marijuana use among 18-39 year olds from the 1990-1997 NSDUH, which they compare to results for 12-17 year olds from the same survey years. Their models include measures of the monetary price of marijuana in addition to enforcement risk, represented as the number of marijuana arrests divided by the number of marijuana users within the state.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Impact of Marijuana Legalization on Marijuana Consumption: Insights from the Economics Literature

Pacula¹

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central question in the debate regarding the legalization of marijuana in California is whether consumption would rise and by how much. In this report, we review the economics literature which provides insights regarding how consumption might change and why. A key finding of the review is that the current state of the literature is limited, having not yet fully explored how average consumption among existing users will change in response to changes in price and legal risks. However, information regarding the prevalence of marijuana, both in terms of new users as well as regular users, is available. A review of this literature is considered in terms of the responsiveness of marijuana initiation, regular use and heavy use to changes in the price of marijuana, enforcement risk, decriminalization and other legal risks. From this review it is clear that total consumption will rise in response to legalization due to increases in the number of new users, increases in the number of regular and heavy users, and probable increases in the duration in which marijuana is consumed for average users. 2 I. IntroductionA vast literature has developed over the past twenty years examining the etiology of and factors influencing marijuana consumption. A variety of disciplines have contributed to the development of this literature, including sociology, psychology, epidemiology, criminology, and economics, all emphasizing different factors that are important for influencing the decision to use marijuana. The economics literature, in particular, has focused on examining the relative importance of changes in price and income as determinants of the decision to use marijuana and length of use careers. Now, with the current debate regarding the legalization of marijuana in California, the findings from this economics literature in particular have found themselves at the center of the debate, as it lends important insights into what could happen to marijuana consumption in California if the voters decide to legalize marijuana. Legalization is expected to significantly influence the monetary price people have to pay to obtain marijuana, as currently with the prohibition, there is a black market risk premium that is added to the cost of providing marijuana to the market and this risk premium will no longer exist (see Caulkins 2010 for a careful description of this). So, with the expected decline in the price consumers have to pay for marijuana, how is consumption likely to change?The price elasticity of demand is typically used by economists to describe how consumption changes in response to a change in the price of any good or service. In particular, it tells you the percent change in consumption associated with a 1% change in price, and is derived by examining small changes along a single market demand curve. Market demand curves represent the aggregation of individual choices of quantities of the good consumed at various price points that could be observed in the market, holding all non-price determinants of consumption constant...

show abstract

Price and Enforcement Effects on Cocaine and Marijuana Demand

Cited by 108 publications

References 19 publications

Risks and Prices: The Role of User Sanctions in Marijuana Markets

Risks and Prices: The Role of User Sanctions in Marijuana Markets

Correlation between Cocaine Prices and Purity with Trends in Emergency Department Visits in a Major Metropolitan Area

Examining the Impact of Marijuana Legalization on Marijuana Consumption: Insights from the Economics Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About