rethinkTHC Search
Menu
Study breakdown

Community and professional stakeholders support taxing high-THC products, but industry opposes

Mixed MethodsN/A evidence
The takeaway

A concept mapping study in Washington State found community members and professionals supported taxation and age restrictions on high-THC products, while cannabis industry advocates opposed taxation and favored lower-impact measures like education.

People interested in cannabis policy, particularly regulation of high-potency products.

Cannabis concentrates range from 50-90% THC

What the researchers found

Community and professional stakeholders supported environmental policy changes like THC-based taxation, raising the minimum age for high-concentration products, and advertising restrictions. Cannabis industry stakeholders rejected THC-content taxation, proposed lowering taxes instead, and favored low-population-impact measures like educating parents and youth.

Why it matters

This study provides a structured overview of what different stakeholders actually want regarding high-THC regulation. The clear divide between industry and non-industry perspectives helps policymakers understand the political landscape.

The numbers in context

Three stakeholder groups: community, professionals, cannabis advocates. Multiple policy ideas generated through concept mapping. Study was legislatively mandated by Washington State.

How the study worked

Concept mapping, a mixed-methods approach combining qualitative brainstorming with quantitative analysis, was used to explore stakeholder perspectives. Participants were categorized into community members, professionals, and cannabis advocates. The study was requested by the Washington State Legislature.

What this study cannot tell us

Washington State-specific findings may not generalize to other jurisdictions. Self-selected stakeholders may not represent broader populations. Concept mapping captures perspectives but does not evaluate policy effectiveness.

How to read the evidence

Mixed-methods stakeholder analysis. This is policy research documenting perspectives rather than testing health outcomes, so traditional evidence grading does not apply.

When this study was published

Published in 2024 based on a study mandated by the Washington State Legislature.

The bigger picture

High-potency cannabis concentrates (50-90% THC) are an increasingly common product category that some researchers link to elevated health risks. Understanding which regulatory approaches have broad stakeholder support is essential for crafting politically viable policies.

Questions still open

  • Would THC-based taxation actually reduce consumption of high-potency products? What is the optimal minimum age for purchasing concentrates? How do industry actors from other states compare to those in Washington?

Common questions

What policies do most stakeholders support for high-THC products?
Community members and professionals supported taxation based on THC content, raising the minimum purchase age for concentrates, and restricting advertising. Cannabis industry representatives opposed these and favored education-focused approaches.
Why regulate high-potency cannabis specifically?
Cannabis concentrates can contain 50-90% THC, far exceeding traditional flower. Research links higher potency to increased risks of cannabis use disorders, psychotic symptoms, and accidental poisonings.

Read the original research

Identifying policy options to regulate high potency cannabis: A multiple stakeholder concept mapping study in Washington State, USA.

The International journal on drug policy, 123, 104270

Citation

Carlini, Beatriz H; Garrett, Sharon B; Matos, Patrick; Nims, Lexi N; Kestens, Yan. (2024). Identifying policy options to regulate high potency cannabis: A multiple stakeholder concept mapping study in Washington State, USA.. The International journal on drug policy, 123, 104270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104270