Drug Legalization, Elite Support, and Government Effectiveness in Latin America

• Author: Xavier Fernández-i-Marín,Asbel Bohigues
• Published date: 01 April 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/00220426211055434
• Date: 01 April 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Journal of Drug Issues

2022, Vol. 52(2) 250–267

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00220426211055434

journals.sagepub.com/home/jod

Drug Legalization, Elite

Support, and Government

Effectiveness in Latin America

Asbel Bohiguesand Xavier Fern ´

andez-i-Mar´

ın

Abstract

In Latin America, the legalization of drugs—where it occurred—has been driven mainly by elites,

although much attention has been placed on public opinion. Considering that efforts toward

legalization have been top-down, analysis should concentrate on opinions of the governing elites.

To undertake such an analysis, we draw on data from surveys conducted in 18 Latin American

parliaments (2012–2018), and we examine elite perspectives on the legalization of all drugs.

Results from a Bayesian hierarchical logistic analysis show that in countries where the government

is less effective, and where public health problems persist, legislators are less likely to support

legalization. We argue that this is due to a lack of trust by MPs in legalization as a solution to

traff‌icking. Wherever those concerned with drug traff‌icking see the current government as

problematic, they will be less likely to support so challenging and complex a policy as drug

legalization.

Keywords

Drug legalization, drug traff‌icking, government effectiveness, elite surveys, Latin America

Introduction

Among the many alternatives surrounding drug policies, legalization is one that has gained

considerable support in recent years. The long-standing approach has been criminalization, but

that paradigm is being increasingly questioned (von Hoffmann, 2016: 30). Over the past decade,

several U.S. states and a number of Latin American countries have chosen to follow the le-

galization path, usually limited to marijuana and to specif‌ic types of consumption and production.

Back in 2013, Uruguay legalized the production, consumption, and distribution of marijuana

through pharmacies. Since then, the country has encountered problems with the details and

provision of the law and with related scrutiny of its banks. This reform and the process that led to it

have had an international dimension and an impact far beyond the region, with foreign actors

University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Corresponding Author:

Asbel Bohigues, University of Valencia, Valencia, 46022, Spain.

Email: asbel.bohigues@uv.es

working for and against the legislation (von Hoffmann, 2016). But Uruguay is not the only

country in Latin America that has chosen the legalization path. In September of 2019, both

Paraguay and Ecuador legalized the use and cultivation of cannabis for therapeutic or medicinal

purposes, joining Chile (2016), Mexico (2016), Argentina (2017), and Peru (2017). In Colombia,

medical marijuana has been legal since 2016, and at the time of writing, new legislation is being

discussed in that country’s parliament to go a step further and legalize marijuana completely. In

Panama, cannabis is allowed for medical reasons, while in Costa Rica and Brazil, consumption is

illicit but not penalized, although de facto prohibition prevails in the case of Brazil. The case of

Mexico is remarkable in that legalization was advanced by the Judicial branch: the Supreme Court

in 2018 authorized the production and consumption of marijuana for recreational purposes. This

was the latest of many judicial decisions in line with legalization—although without commer-

cialization, as is the case in Uruguay.

In the remaining Latin American countries, drug consumption is strictly prohibited: Bolivia,

Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

Furthermore, in these countries, there is not so much as a public debate around the legalization of

drugs.

There seems to be a consensus in the literature that the process of drug legalization in Latin

America (where it has occurred) has been top-down (Cruz et al., 2016), enacted either through

legislation passed by the parliaments or by judicial decision (López Daza and Gómez Garc´

ıa,

2017). This dynamic is very different from that seen in the United States, where legalization has

followed a bottom-up process at the state level, usually by way of popular referenda on medical

and/or recreational use of marijuana. Currently, 32 U.S. states have authorized medical marijuana,

while 10 states have further legalized recreational use. Among these, 17 medical marijuana laws

(53%) and nine recreational marijuana laws (90%) have been enacted by popular vote (Frendreis

& Tatalovich, 2020: 1). The f‌lip-side of this coin is that policy on other drugs has not changed

(Reuter, 2013).

Meanwhile, in Uruguay, top-down moves to legalize drugs have resulted in a paradox: the

country’s pioneering legislation does not enjoy majority support from citizens (Kilmer et al.,

2013). Moreover, “public opinion in Uruguay remains skeptical and divided”(Cruz et al., 2018:

5); “people are increasingly questioning drug policies in Latin America […and] there is no public

consensus regarding future policies and measures for each country”(Mendiburo-Seguel et al.,

2017: 13). On the other hand, opinions on drug legalization in the United States have improved

(Subbaraman & Kerr, 2016;Felson et al., 2019).

Drug legalization has many implications and, consequently, many approaches in terms of

academic research. However, Cruz et al. (2016: 2) have suggested that “public opinion about drug

policy has actually been noticeably absent in the research literature.”This presents an interesting

puzzle in the Latin American case: if in Latin America, the path toward legalization has been top-

down, then its analysis from the perspective of elites should prove more pertinent than analysis of

public opinion. That is, accepting the top-down approach, academic research should focus on the

top (elites, legislators) rather than the down (public opinion). By identifying what drives elites’

opinions on this matter, we should better understand the reasons behind such legislation being

passed without clear majoritarian support. That is, under what conditions elites drive the im-

plementation of such policy.

To pursue this analysis, we use data from surveys conducted in 18 Latin American parliaments

(lower houses in the case of bicameral systems) between 2012 and 2018: Argentina, Bolivia,

Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala,

Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Additionally,

we look at the opinions of parliamentary elites around the legalization of not only of marijuana, but

of all drugs. In this way, this paper offers three main contributions. First, it provides empirical

Bohigues and Fern´

andez-i-Mar´

ın251