festivals and their attendees in four European cities with different national cannabis policies

Kostas Skliamis

Bonger Institute of Criminology, University of Amsterdam

ESSD 30th Annual Conference, 26 – 28 September 2019, Riga Cannabis Framework

• Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug worldwide and 3.8% of the global population used cannabis at least once in 2017. • In EU, 87.6 million adults have used cannabis at least once in their lifetime. • In EU, 24 million people used cannabis in the last year. • Around 1 % of European adults are daily or almost daily cannabis users. Around three quarters are male. • Despite its broad use, cannabis remains prohibited under the UN drug control conventions. • In the European Union, there is no harmonized law on cannabis use. The criminal or administrative response to drug use offenses is the responsibility of EU Member States, not of the European Union. • Therefore, national cannabis policies differ significantly across the EU, from liberal to restrictive prohibitionist approaches. 4 capital cities in Europe Cannabis Festivals

 Cannabis festivals can be understood as a representation of the wider social phenomenon of festivals and events

 Political or cultural events against cannabis prohibition  Commercial fairs (Cannabis Expositions)

 “Cannabis festivals are social gatherings organized by civic societies movements, where people congregate to oppose cannabis prohibition, advocate and celebrate ” (Skliamis & Korf, 2019) AIMS

1. Contextualize the aims / characteristics of cannabis festivals; 2. Assess characteristics of participants; 3. Identify reasons to attend cannabis festivals; 4. Explore to which extent cannabis festivals contribute to the social acceptance of cannabis; Research Methods

1. Interviews with the organizers (n = 4) 2. Observation 3. Survey among 1355 participants

Amsterdam (Cannabis Bevrijdingsdag 2016) = 387  ( 2016) = 341  Rome (Million March 2017) = 251  Athens (Cannabis Protestival 2017) = 376

Interviews and Observations  Berlin and Rome were self-defined as political events VS Amsterdam and Athens were accorded as cultural/music festivals.  Berlin and Rome had a style of rally/parade combined with a music site VS Amsterdam and Athens had a style of music festival.  Differences in organizational characteristics.  Differences in symbolism.  Differences in commercialization and politicization.  The most prominent common features are the celebration of cannabis culture and the opposition against the current drug laws. Celebration of Cannabis Culture

 Two cannabis holidays: (1st weekend of May) & 4/20.  Cannabis culture refers to a social context of associated social behaviors and beliefs.  They mainly depend on and the support of cannabis legalization.  Cannabis culture has evolved its own specific language, etiquette, art, literature and music (Brownlee, 2002).  Besides the differences in terminology, ethics, and rituals; globally there are commonly recognized cannabis culture features that constitute symbolic characteristics of ‘cannabis culture’. Protest

 Cannabis movement is a network of informal interactions between a plurality of individuals, groups and/or organizations.  Global Marijuana March: Activist organizations share this global informal platform  Activist groups or organizations (bottom-up approaches) with an activist character, trying to educate and mobilize the masses in favor of cannabis legalization by organizing collective actions that can construct collective identity and collective behavior. Survey Results Demographic and cannabis use characteristics

 Close to two-thirds were male (62.8 percent).  Age ranged from 14 to 70 years (mean age 24.9 years).  Overall, 18–24-year-old respondents constituted the largest age category, followed by 25–34-year-olds.  The vast majority of respondents had used cannabis at least once in their lifetime, and nine out of ten had used cannabis in the past month.  Over half of respondents were daily cannabis users.  Eight out of ten respondents used cannabis at the festival. Survey Results (Reason of Attendance)

 The most prevalent reason for participating in cannabis festivals was “entertainment/leisure” or “protest/activism”.  Respondents were more likely to choose protest / activism with increasing age.  ‘Entertainment’ was more prevalent among younger adults (18-34).  Locals more often reported ‘protest’ than expats and tourists, who most often chose ‘entertainment’.  Frequent cannabis users were more likely to report ‘protest’ than non-frequent users, who were more likely to report ‘entertainment’. Survey Results (Reason of Attendance II)  Our hypothesis that (i) in the cities with restrictive / punitive policy, the participants will attend mainly for protest; (ii) in the cities liberal cannabis policy, the participants will attend mainly for entertainment, was not confirmed.  On contrary, the style of the festival affects the main reason of attendance.  However, in Amsterdam, where cannabis is sold in Coffeeshops, the percentage of participants who attended for entertainment was very high (44.7%) while less than 1 out 5 attended for protest. Survey Results (Social Acceptance)

 A large majority of respondents thought that the cannabis festival they attended affects positively the social and cultural acceptance of cannabis.  Most often in Amsterdam and Berlin, the cities with the more liberal policies Conclusions

 The organizers aim to protest against current cannabis policies and at the same time to celebrate cannabis culture.  These 4 festivals have common features but also maintain and reproduce local, social and cultural characteristics.  The style of the festival affects the main reason for attendance.  Furthermore, increasing age, residency and the high frequency of cannabis use are factors that led the participants to attend for protest.  If we hypothesize that Amsterdam and Berlin are the liberal cases, then our hypothesis that the more liberal the policies, the participants will attend for entertainment, is not confirmed.  However, if we isolate Amsterdam, only one out of five respondents attended for protest, confirming our hypothesis.  Although our study guaranteed some variation in national drug policies, future research could include more variation. Thank you !