« Markets in everything: lives for sale | Main | The King Monopolist »
The culture that is Dutch
1. As of July 1, the Netherlands will ban smoking in public places.
2. The smoking of cannabis and hashish, however, will be allowed, at least in licensed cafes.
3. The regulation will be that adding tobacco to the smoke (a popular practice) will be forbidden and that only "pure pot" will be allowed.
4. It is noted that "This year, the Chinese have started to come."
That is from "What are the Dutch Smoking," in the 30 June 2008 issue of Business Week. Here is one related article.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on June 22, 2008 at 06:51 AM in Law | Permalink
Comments
There is a licensed cafe literally right across the street from my home in The Hague (I am looking over the top of my computer at it right now). I've been interested in how the cannabis/tobacco ban will affect their sales. It appears to be one of their top-selling products, and the cafe does a very brisk business overall. Given that one can purchase pre-rolled joints of the pure and blended variety or loose marijuana, the ban would seem pretty easy to skirt: just buy the loose stuff and some papers and roll your own. This being Holland, the expectation would be that enforcement will be virtually non-existent. It seems likely that the smoking ban will have little or no effect on the cafe other than to shift the proportion of sales from pre-rolled blends to do-it-yourself materials. Feel free to consider me the Holland bureau chief if you want an update.
I'm curious as well about the unintended consequences that could flow from the ban (Alex's definition of a simple system trying to regulate a complex one would seem to apply). Perhaps awnings, heat lamps, and outdoor seating will increase? Conversion of restaurants into dining clubs? One thing is clear: the Dutch like to smoke.
Posted by: Joseph Logan at Jun 22, 2008 8:01:56 AM
Gestapo-like smoking bans really get my goat. If we are to ban all smoking (except weed, in the case of Holland) in all buildings to protect people from the effects of second-hand smoke, then why not ban all trucks and automobiles from idling their engines next to sidewalks to protect pedestrians from their exhaust fumes! The weed exemption is hilarious, however.
Posted by: Enrique at Jun 22, 2008 8:26:09 AM
Pre-ban in the Netherlands, the approach to where you smoked pot was very practical (IMHO). Smoking pot in coffee shops (or some bars) or your hotel room/private home was tolerated. The Dutch didn't want people smoking on the streets / out in public. You respect us, then we will respect you.
Initially the smoking ban was to also include coffee shops, but the gov didnt want people (tourists) smoking in public so coffee shops were made exempt.
This law may also include hotels (so you are not allowed to smoke in your hotel room?). I dont know the status of this, and it could cause problems (for tourists) if implemented. Some hotels in the Netherlands are already (pre-ban) 100% smoke free.
If you do get stuck on where to smoke some pot, be respectful. (Most Dutch dont smoke pot)
As far as tobacco goes, the Dutch love to smoke and they dont like being told what to do in their private lives. Its going to be interesting to see how well this will be enforced.
The Netherlands has a LOT more to offer than pot. The Dutch are very friendly, have a very rich culture and there is so much to see and do. There are lots of great cities to visit, and the public transport system is excellent (and cheap - but the Dutch would disagree!).
Posted by: Alisdair at Jun 22, 2008 8:42:11 AM
This looks like pretty pure evidence-based policy.
Tobacco smoking kills over 50% of those who do it regularly (roughly equivalent to untreated HIV infection), and endagers other exposed to it. Therfore ban it whewrever you can make that stick. There is no such overwhelming evidence against cannabis and hash, but some indication that these substances are not very good for you. Therefore allow consumption under licence.
Me, I like visiting Holland. (I am too untidy for the Dutch to be happy about my living there.) But the smell of burning marijuana makes me sick at the stomach. I hope they do not licence too many cafes.
Posted by: Diversity at Jun 22, 2008 10:43:34 AM
@ Enrique: Actually in my town (Urbana, IL) there are (new) laws that ban buses and trucks from idling for more than a minute or so...
Posted by: Nick M at Jun 22, 2008 11:28:39 AM
At least in Germany producers of heat lamps can't help themselves making money. Now the same people who favored the ban on smoking (health issues) now try to ban heat lamps (carbon emissions). I always enjoy seeing one of my favorite laws in practice "the law of unintended consequences".
Posted by: Paul at Jun 22, 2008 11:47:04 AM
According to Dutch friend, the country has been moving in the past 10 years, on many fronts, towards a more restrictive Drug policy (especially in Amsterdam where locals are beginning to believe that the tourist dollars aren't worth having to put up with the druggie tourists).
Posted by: thehova at Jun 22, 2008 11:48:07 AM
Just because it's proven to kill people doesn't mean the government should regulate it.
Posted by: BruceM at Jun 22, 2008 1:46:57 PM
Legal weed is a symbol of "Enlightened Dutch Tolerance" in the same way that the Statue of Libery is a symbol of "United States openness to immigrants".
Anti-immigration xenophobes in the U.S. don't want to tear down the Statue of Liberty, even though in reality they oppose everything it represents, because it is such a powerful national symbol.
Likewise, the Dutch who support nannie-state totalitarianism like smoking bans still can't bear to outright reject such a powerful national symbol of Dutch tolerance like legalized marijuana.
Posted by: Rex Rhino at Jun 22, 2008 3:45:42 PM
So... tobacco is legal, but it isn't a hundred percent legal?
I'm sorry. I'll show myself out.
Posted by: Robert at Jun 22, 2008 10:34:44 PM
the amazing von bakel sums up...
http://www.bakelblog.com/nobodys_business/2008/06/pot-shots-hol-1.html
Posted by: checkit at Jun 23, 2008 6:35:43 AM
In "the Tipping Point," Malcolm Gladwell wrote about the "smoking epidemic." I'm beginning to wonder whether we're now seeing a "smoking ban epidemic," considering that second-hand smoke is no more dangerous than 10 years ago, is not significantly associated with mortality rates (the studies have been inconclusive, and concerned non-smokers married to smokers), and is arguably less of a problem now than before (because there are fewer smokers, and because air pollution is less of a problem generally).
In this case, the main tipping point seems to be either Gro Harlem-Brundtland's prioritization of bans (as WHO chief) and/or the State of California (first bar ban in 1998). It's not only the US and EU; Thailand banned all indoor smoking this year, to be followed by Hong Kong (all bars) and Taiwan and Turkey (all restaurants) in 2009. The way I intepret it is as a nationalization of smoking policy from business owners and a redistribution of (mostly) consumer surplus from smokers and tolerant non-smokers to intolerant smokers.
There was a similar epidemic concerning alcohol in the 1920s, with prohibitions, sales restrictions, licensing,opening hours etc., mainly involving the US and northern Europe (Norway, Iceland, Sweden, Finland) and to some extent other English-speaking countries. Makes you wonder whether the long-term effect will be the same.
Posted by: David at Jun 29, 2008 4:44:15 AM
