Revisiting the Birthplace of the Cannabis Social Club Model and the Role Played by Cannabis Social Club Federations

• Author: Laurent Jansseune,Mafalda Pardal,Òscar Parés Franquero,Tom Decorte
• Date: 01 April 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/0022042618815690
• Published date: 01 April 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042618815690

Journal of Drug Issues

2019, Vol. 49(2) 338 –354

© The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0022042618815690

journals.sagepub.com/home/jod

Article

Revisiting the Birthplace of the

Cannabis Social Club Model and

the Role Played by Cannabis Social

Club Federations

Laurent Jansseune1, Mafalda Pardal1, Tom Decorte1,

and Òscar Parés Franquero2

Abstract

Cannabis Social Clubs (CSCs) are a nonprofit model for the supply of cannabis originating in

Spain. This article aims to provide an overview of current CSC practices in Barcelona, exploring

the role played by CSC Federations in shaping them. This analysis draws on 32 semistructured

interviews with CSC managers (n = 15) and with other stakeholders in Barcelona (n = 17). We

build also on field observations at other CSCs based in Barcelona. We found a heterogeneity

of CSC practices, some of which were not in line with the self-regulatory codes developed by

the CSC Federations. In applying an earlier CSC typology, we identified also country-specific

CSC features. While the CSC Federations have contributed to unifying the cannabis movement

and made efforts to homogenize CSCs’ practices, in the absence of (government) cannabis

regulation, their efforts have to some extent been undermined.

Keywords

Cannabis Social Club, federation, cannabis, supply, Barcelona, qualitative research

Introduction

Cannabis Social Clubs (hereinafter CSCs or clubs) are typically registered nonprofit associations,

which collectively organize the cultivation and distribution of cannabis among their adult mem-

bers (Decorte et al., 2017; Pardal, 2016). The model emerged during the 1990s in Spain and has

since been implemented by activists in other European countries (Decorte & Pardal, 2017).

Although CSCs have been present in that country for over two decades, the CSC model has not

been regulated by the Spanish legislature at the national level. The CSCs have nevertheless

exploited the particularities of the domestic legal context to pursue their activities. Key to their

claims has been the fact that possession of cannabis for personal consumption is not punishable

under Spanish criminal law, as well as the doctrine of “shared consumption”—which equates

“possession for shared consumption amongst a closed circle of drug consumers within the concept

of non-criminal personal consumption” (Decorte et al., 2017; F. A. García & Manjón-Cabeza,

1Universiteit Gent, Belgium

2International Center for Ethnobotanical Education, Research & Service, Barcelona, Spain

Corresponding Author:

Mafalda Pardal, Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid, Universiteit Gent, Universiteitstraat 4, 9000 Gent, Belgium.

Email: mafalda.pardal@ugent.be

815690JODXXX10.1177/0022042618815690Journal of Drug IssuesJansseune et al.

research-article2018

Jansseune et al. 339

2009; Manzanera et al., 2000; Marks, 2017, p. 10). In this article, we explore the case of CSCs in

Barcelona, which given the historical roots and long-standing presence of the model in the region

of Catalonia (Decorte et al., 2017), constitutes an interesting setting for analysis. The objective of

this article is twofold. First, we seek to shed light onto how current CSCs in Barcelona are operat-

ing. Second, we focus on whether and how CSCs’ affiliation with a CSC Federation has shaped

their practices. In particular, this exploratory study aims to uncover the differences and similarities

between federated and nonfederated CSCs and investigates whether Federated CSCs adhere in

practice to their respective codes of conduct. To better contextualize the potential variance in

terms of CSC practices, we refer to the CSC classification developed by Pardal (2018).

Key Milestones in the Emergence and Development of the Model in Spain

Several scholars situate the emergence of a cannabis activist movement in Spain in the early

1990s (Arana & Montañés, 2011; Barriuso, 2011; Calafat et al., 2000; Marín, 2008; Marín &

Hinojosa, 2017). Accordingly, the passage of the “Law Corcuera” (Law 1/1992), which intro-

duced administrative sanctions for the public consumption and possession of cannabis may have

been a precipitating factor for the development of the movement as “the vast majority of users

considered it deeply illegitimate” (Marín, 2008, p. 163, own translation). The establishment of

the Ramon Santos Association for Cannabis Studies (“Asociación Ramón Santos de Estudios

Sobre el Cannabis” [ARSEC]) in Barcelona was another important mark for the start of the

movement. This association achieved an important breakthrough in 1993: the so-called “Catalan

breach” (Parés & Bouso, 2015). At the time, the association enquired of the public prosecutor

whether it would constitute a crime to cultivate and share cannabis for personal use. In response,

the public prosecutor noted that if the cultivation was limited to small amounts, the activity

would not constitute a criminal action (Arana & Montañés, 2011; Bewley-Taylor, Blickman, &

Jelsma, 2014; Marín, 2008; Montañés, 2017). The association then set up the first cannabis cul-

tivation which would have been distributed among the members of the association (Decorte

et al., 2017). Although a few months later that cultivation was confiscated by Spanish law

enforcement agents, in the following years several new associations were established following

ARSEC’s initiative (Barriuso, 2012c; Kilmer, Kruithof, Pardal, & Caulkins, 2013).

Another important milestone was the legal analysis by Muñoz and Soto (2000). This analysis

explored in detail whether and how it would be possible, in the context of the applicable Spanish

legislation, to create an association where members would be able to obtain cannabis for personal

use (Muñoz & Soto, 2000).1 Accordingly, Muñoz and Soto (2000) highlighted a number of

detailed criteria such associations should meet to operate within that framework (e.g., CSCs

should seek to reduce the harms associated with the consumption of cannabis, CSCs’ premises

should be closed to the general public, etc.). Some of the active associations at the time, which

followed ARSEC’s denomination as “associations for cannabis studies,” seem to have adhered to

the guidelines included in Muñoz and Soto’s (2000) legal analysis, adopting also the denomina-

tion of CSCs. The first officially registered CSC of this new wave was the Barcelona’s Cannabis

Taster’s Club (“Club de Catadores de Cannabis de Barcelona” [CCCB]), founded in 2001

(Barriuso, 2011). For the first time, these associations explicitly included in their official bylaws

the goal of producing and using cannabis, as well as offering a private consumption space to their

members (Marín, 2008).

As the movement evolved and the number of CSCs increased, in 2003, 21 CSCs came together

forming a supraorganization that would represent them: the Federation of Cannabis Clubs

(“Federación de Asociaciones Cannábicas” [FAC]; Barriuso, 2011; Martínez, 2015; Montañés,

2017).2 The FAC’s main stated goal is to gather CSCs, cannabis users, growers, researchers, and

activists to share ideas, debate, and strive for a change in drug policy (FAC, 2016). Due to the

growing popularity of the model and the increasing demand for information about how to create