Skip to main content


Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Why Changes in Price Matter When Thinking About Marijuana Policy: A Review of the Literature on the Elasticity of Demand


Recent debates regarding liberalization of marijuana policies often rest on assumptions regarding the extent to which such policy changes would lead to a change in marijuana consumption and by whom. This paper reviews the economics literature assessing the responsiveness of consumption to changes in price and enforcement risk and explicitly considers how this responsiveness varies by different user groups. In doing so, it demonstrates how most of the research has examined responsiveness to prevalence of use, which is a composite of different user groups, rather than level of consumption among regular or heavy users, which represent the largest share of total quantities consumed. Thus, it is not possible to generate reliable estimates of the impact of liberalizing policies on either tax revenues or harms, as these outcomes are most directly influenced by the amounts consumed by regular or heavy users, not prevalence rates.


  1. 1.

    Caulkins JP, Pacula RL. Marijuana markets: inferences from reports by the household population. J Drug Issues. 2006;36:173–200.

  2. 2.

    Kilmer B, Pacula RL. Estimating the size of the global drug market: a demand-side approach. RAND Technical Report TR-711. Santa Monica (CA): RAND Corporation; 2009.

  3. 3.

    Kilmer B, Caulkins JP, Pacula RL, Reuter P. Bridging perspectives to illicit markets: estimating the size of the U.S. marijuana market. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;119:153–60.

  4. 4.

    Office of National Drug Control Policy. The economic costs of drug abuse in the United States, 1992–2002. Washington (DC): Executive Office of the President, ONDCP; 2004.

  5. 5.

    Kilmer B, Everingham S, Caulkins JP, Midgette G, Reuter P, et al. What America’s users spend on illicit drugs: 2000–2010. Office of National Drug Control Policy; In press.

  6. 6.

    Kilmer B, Caulkins JP, Pacula RL, MacCoun RJ, Reuter PH. Altered state? Assessing how marijuana legalization in California could influence consumption and public budgets. RAND report OP-315. Santa Monica (CA): RAND Corporation; 2010.

  7. 7.

    Gieringer D. Practical experience with legalized cannabis. Addiction. 2012;107:875–6.

  8. 8.

    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Results from the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: national findings. Office of Applied Studies, NSDUH Series H-36, HHS Publication No. SMA 09-4434. Rockville (MD): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2009.

  9. 9.

    Bachman JG, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM. Explaining recent increases in students’ marijuana use: impacts of perceived risks and disapproval, 1976 through 1996. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:887–92.

  10. 10.

    Bachman JG, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM. Smoking, drinking and drug use among American high school seniors: correlates and trends, 1975–1979. Am J Public Health. 1981;71:59–69.

  11. 11.

    Pacula RL, Grossman M, Chaloupka FJ, O’Malley P, Johnston LD, Farrelly MC. Marijuana and youth. In: Gruber J, (editor). Risky Behavior among Youths: An Economic Analysis. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 2001. p.271–326.

  12. 12.

    Pacula RL, Chriqui J, King J. Decriminalization in the United States: what does it mean? NBER Working Paper 9690. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 2003

  13. 13.

    Jacobson M. Baby booms and drug busts: trends in youth drug use in the United States 1975–2000. Q J Econ. 2005;119:1481–512.

  14. 14.

    van Ours JC, Williams J. Cannabis prices and dynamics of cannabis use. J Health Econ. 2007;26:578–96.

  15. 15.

    Bretteville-Jensen AL, Williams J. Decriminalization and initiation into cannabis. Presented at 4th annual meetings of the International Society for the Study of Drug Policy, Santa Monica, CA. 2010.

  16. 16.

    Johnston L, O’Malley P, Bachman J. Marijuana decriminalization: the impact on youth 1975–1980. Ann Arbor (MI): Institute for Social Research; 1981.

  17. 17.

    DiNardo J, Lemieux T. Alcohol, marijuana and American youth: the unintended consequences of government regulation. J Health Econ. 2001;20:991–1010.

  18. 18.

    Markowitz S, Tauras J. Substance use among adolescent students with consideration of budget constraints. Rev Econ Household. 2009;7:423–46.

  19. 19.

    Pacula RL. Can increasing the beer tax reduce marijuana consumption? J Health Econ. 1998;17:557–86.

  20. 20.

    Chaloupka FJ, Grossman M, Tauras JA. The demand for cocaine and marijuana by youth. In: Chaloupka FJ, Grossman M, Bickel W, Saffer H, (editors). The Economic Analysis of Substance Use and Abuse: An Integration of Econometric and Behavioral Economic Research. NBER Conference Report Series. Chicago (IL) and London: University of Chicago Press; 1999. p.133–55.

  21. 21.

    Chaloupka FJ, Pacula RL, Farrelly MC, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM. Do higher cigarette prices encourage youth to use marijuana? NBER Working Paper 6939. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 1999.

  22. 22.

    Farrelly M, Bray J, Zarkin G, Wendling B. The joint demand for cigarettes and marijuana. Evidence from the National Household Surveys on Drug Abuse. J Health Econ. 2001;20:51–68.

  23. 23.

    MacCoun, R, Pacula RL, Chriqui JF, Harris K, Reuter P. Do citizens know whether their state has decriminalized marijuana? Assessing the perceptual component of deterrence theory. Rev Law Econ. 2009;5:347–71.

  24. 24.

    Room R, Fischer B, Hall W, Lenton S, Reuter P. Cannabis policy: moving beyond the stalemate. The Global Cannabis Commission report. Oxford: The Beckley Foundation; 2008.

  25. 25.

    Nisbet CT, Vakil F. Some estimates of the price and expenditure elasticities of demand for marijuana among U.C.L.A. students. Rev Econ Statistics. 1972;54:473–5.

  26. 26.

    Williams J, Pacula RL, Chaloupka FJ, Wechsler H. Alcohol and marijuana use among college students: economic complements or substitutes. Health Econ. 2004;13:825–43.

  27. 27.

    Williams J, Pacula RL, Chaloupka FJ, Wechsler H. College students’ use of cocaine. Subst Use Misuse. 2006;41:489–509.

  28. 28.

    Thies C, Register C. Decriminalization of marijuana and the demand for alcohol, marijuana and cocaine. Soc Sci J. 1993;30:385–99.

  29. 29.

    Saffer H, Chaloupka FJ. The demand for illicit drugs. Econ Inquiry. 1999;37:401–11.

  30. 30.

    Saffer H, Chaloupka FJ. Demographic differentials in the demand for alcohol and drugs. In: Chaloupka FJ, Grossman M, Bickel W, Saffer H, (editors). The Economic Analysis of Substance Use and Abuse. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 1999.

  31. 31.

    Farrelly MC, Bray JW, Zarkin GA, Wendline BW, Pacula RL. The effects of prices and policies on the demand for marijuana: evidence from the National Household Surveys on Drug Abuse. NBER Working Paper 6940. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 1999.

  32. 32.

    DeSimone J, Farrelly MC. Price and enforcement effects on cocaine and marijuana demand. Econ Inquiry. 2003;41:98–115.

  33. 33.

    Rhodes W, Johnson P, Han S, McMullen Q, Hozik L. Illicit drugs: price elasticity of demand and supply. Cambridge (MA): Abt Associates Inc.; 2001.

  34. 34.

    Clements K, Zhao X. Economics and marijuana. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.

  35. 35.

    Ramful P, Zhao X. Participation in marijuana, cocaine and heroin consumption in Australia: a multivariate probit approach. Applied Econ. 2009;41:481–96.

  36. 36.

    Williams J, Mahmoudi P. Economic relationship between alcohol and cannabis revisited. Econ Record. 2004;80:36–48.

  37. 37.

    Clements K, Daryal M. The economics of marijuana consumption. In: Selvanathan E, Selvanathan S, (editors). The Demand for Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana and other Evils. London: Ashgate; 2003.

  38. 38.

    Cameron L, Williams J. Substitutes or complements? Alcohol, cannabis and tobacco. Econ Record. 2001;77:19–34.

  39. 39.

    Williams J. The effects of price and policies on cannabis consumption. Health Econ. 2004;13:123–37.

  40. 40.

    Zhao X, Harris M. Demand for marijuana, alcohol and tobacco: participation, levels of consumption and cross-equation correlations. Econ Record. 2004;80:394–410.

  41. 41.

    Gallet CA. Can price get the monkey off our back? A meta-analysis of illicit drug demand. Health Econ. 2014;23:55–68.

  42. 42.

    Model K. The effect of marijuana decriminalization of hospital emergency room drug episodes: 1975–1978. J Am Statistical Assoc. 1993;88:737–47.

  43. 43.

    Makkai T, Fitzgerald J, Doak P. Drug use among police detainees. Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice. Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research; 1996.

  44. 44.

    Pacula RL, Kilmer B. Marijuana and crime: is there a connection beyond prohibition? NBER Working Paper 10046. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 2003.

  45. 45.

    Grossman M. Individual behaviors and substance use: the role of price. In: Lindgren B, Grossman M, (editors). Substance Use: Individual Behaviour, Social Interactions, Markets and Politics. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2005.

  46. 46.

    van Ours JC. Dynamics in the use of drugs. Health Econ. 2006;15:1283–94.

  47. 47.

    Pudney S. Keeping off the grass? An econometric model of cannabis consumption in Britain. J Applied Econometrics. 2004;19:435–53.

  48. 48.

    Manning WG, Blumberg L, Moulton L. The demand for alcohol: the differential response to price. J Health Econ. 1995;14:123–48.

  49. 49.

    Grossman M, Chaloupka FJ, Saffer H, Laixuthai A. Effects of alcohol price policy on youth: a summary of economic research. J Res Adolescence. 1994;4:347–64.

  50. 50.

    Kenkel DS. Drinking, driving and deterrence: the effectiveness and social costs of alternative policies. J Law Econ. 1993;36:877–913.

  51. 51.

    Chaloupka FJ, Wechsler H. Price, tobacco control policies and smoking among young adults. J Health Econ. 1997;16:359–73.

  52. 52.

    Chaloupka FJ, Grossman M. Price, tobacco control policies and youth smoking. NBER Working Paper 5740 Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 1996.

  53. 53.

    Lewit E, Coate D. The potential for using excise taxes to reduce smoking. J Health Econ. 1982;1:121–45.

  54. 54.

    Harris JE, Chan SW. The continuum-of-addiction: cigarette smoking in relation to price among Americans aged 15–29. Health Econ. 1999;8:81–6.

  55. 55.

    Chaloupka FJ, Warner KE. The economics of smoking. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP, (editors). Handbook of Health Economics. First Edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2000. Vol.1, Ch.29, p.1539–627.

  56. 56.

    Hseih CR. Health risk and the decision to quit smoking. Applied Econ. 1998;30:795–804.

  57. 57.

    Hu TW, Sung HY, Keeler TE. Reducing cigarette consumption in California: tobacco taxes vs an anti-smoking media campaign. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:1218–22.

  58. 58.

    Chaloupka FJ, Pacula RL. Economics and anti-health behavior: the economic analysis of substance use and abuse. In: Bickel W, Vuchinich R, (editors). Reframing Health Behavior Change with Behavioral Economics. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 2000. p.89–111.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Rosalie Liccardo Pacula PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pacula, R.L., Lundberg, R. Why Changes in Price Matter When Thinking About Marijuana Policy: A Review of the Literature on the Elasticity of Demand. Public Health Rev 35, 2 (2013).

Download citation

Key Words

  • Marijuana
  • price
  • price elasticity of demand