IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v57y2024i3d10.1007_s11077-024-09545-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Please Wait, Your Policy is Important to Us” issue prioritization, the ACF, and Canada’s failed attempts at cannabis decriminalization, 2003–2005

Author

Listed:
  • B. Timothy Heinmiller

    (Brock University)

Abstract

In Canada, in the early 2000s, the decriminalization of cannabis for recreational use seemed imminent. Between 2003 and 2005, three government decriminalization bills were introduced in the Canadian House of Commons, but none were adopted, and decriminalization efforts were abandoned. Subsequently, Canada went beyond decriminalization and legalized recreational cannabis in 2018. This paper examines why the Canadian decriminalization efforts failed, using the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and ACF policy change theory. Three ACF-based hypotheses to explain the failed reform attempts are developed and investigated, but none are empirically supported. A fourth hypothesis is developed using information processing insights from Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) but adapted to the ACF. This hypothesis is empirically supported showing that Canada’s decriminalization efforts failed, despite a supportive advocacy coalition, favourable conditions in the cannabis policy subsystem and favourable conditions in the Canadian political system, because its systemic advocates did not give it priority relative to other issues from other subsystems. This finding has implications for ACF policy change theory, identifying a necessary condition for major policy change that has been potentially overlooked, and illustrates the potential for cross-fertilization between PET and ACF theories of policy change.

Suggested Citation

  • B. Timothy Heinmiller, 2024. "“Please Wait, Your Policy is Important to Us” issue prioritization, the ACF, and Canada’s failed attempts at cannabis decriminalization, 2003–2005," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(3), pages 621-638, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:57:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11077-024-09545-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-024-09545-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-024-09545-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-024-09545-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sabatier, Paul A., 1986. "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 21-48, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ogada, Maurice Juma, 2012. "Forest Management Decentralization in Kenya: Effects on Household Farm Forestry Decisions in Kakamega," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126319, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Yi, Fangxin & Deng, Dong & Zhang, Yanjiang, 2020. "Collaboration of top-down and bottom-up approaches in the post-disaster housing reconstruction: Evaluating the cases in Yushu Qinghai-Tibet Plateau of China from resilience perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Van de Graaf, Thijs, 2018. "Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 317-324.
    4. repec:ocp:rpaper:pp-1704 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Hildebrand Sean, 2015. "Coerced Confusion? Local Emergency Policy Implementation After September 11," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 273-298, June.
    6. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Spilsbury, Michael J. & Nasi, Robert, 2006. "The interface of policy research and the policy development process: challenges posed to the forestry community," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 193-205, March.
    8. Fleury, Marie-Josée & Grenier, Guy & Vallée, Catherine & Hurtubise, Roch & Lévesque, Paul-André, 2014. "The role of advocacy coalitions in a project implementation process: The example of the planning phase of the At Home/Chez Soi project dealing with homelessness in Montreal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 42-49.
    9. Xiao Tang & Zhengwen Liu & Hongtao Yi, 2016. "Mandatory Targets and Environmental Performance: An Analysis Based on Regression Discontinuity Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Philip Wenzel, 2007. "Public-sector transformation in South Africa," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 7(1), pages 47-64, January.
    11. Adam Wellstead, 2017. "Plus ça Change, Plus C’est La Même Chose? A review of Paul Sabatier’s “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein”," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 549-561, December.
    12. Li Yu & Wei Xu, 2022. "Institutional conformity, entrepreneurial governance and local contingency: Problematizing central-local dynamics in localizing China's low-income housing policy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(3), pages 508-532, May.
    13. Mladen Djuric & Jovan Filipovic & Stefan Komazec, 2020. "Reshaping the Future of Social Metrology: Utilizing Quality Indicators to Develop Complexity-Based Scientific Human and Social Capital Measurement Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 535-567, April.
    14. Pissourios Ioannis A., 2014. "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Urban and Regional Planning: Towards a Framework for The Use of Planning Standards," European Spatial Research and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 21(1), pages 1-17, May.
    15. Daniel Dramani Kipo-Sunyehzi, 2023. "Implementation Research in Developed and Developing Countries: an Analysis of the Trends and Directions," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1259-1273, September.
    16. Wang, Dan & Ap, John, 2013. "Factors affecting tourism policy implementation: A conceptual framework and a case study in China," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 221-233.
    17. Feitelson, Eran, 2018. "Shifting sands of planning in Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 695-706.
    18. Adedayo Michael Awoniyi & Ana Maria Barreto & Hernan Dario Argibay & Juliet Oliveira Santana & Fabiana Almerinda G. Palma & Ana Riviere-Cinnamond & Gauthier Dobigny & Eric Bertherat & Luther Ferguson , 2024. "Systematic surveillance tools to reduce rodent pests in disadvantaged urban areas can empower communities and improve public health," Post-Print hal-04498188, HAL.
    19. Martha Isabel Gómez Lee, 2016. "Biodiversidad y políticas públicas: coaliciones de causa en las políticas de acceso a los recursos genéticos en Colombia," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Finanzas, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales, number 105.
    20. Mathilde Collinet-Ourthe & David Carassus & Pierre Marin, 2017. "Vers un nouveau cadre collaboratif du pilotage des politiques sociales locales," Post-Print hal-02142211, HAL.
    21. Federico Ferretti & Harro van Lente, 2022. "The promise of the Maker Movement: policy expectations versus community criticisms [Self-Help, Social Work and Empowerment]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 18-27.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:57:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11077-024-09545-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.