El camino suramericano del cannabis: etnografía inmersiva de consumos, mercados y disputas sociopolíticas en la costa pacífica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71068/7gcfsa05Palabras clave:
Cannabis, Etnografía, Regulación, Reducción de riesgos.Resumen
Introducción: Este estudio analiza las dinámicas sociales, territoriales, económicas y políticas asociadas al cannabis mediante un recorrido etnográfico por ciudades de la costa pacífica sudamericana. Estas prácticas se examinan como configuraciones históricas, morales, institucionales y geográficas específicas. Objetivo: Caracterizar comparativamente cómo se configuran las prácticas de consumo, los mercados y las disputas sociopolíticas en torno al cannabis recreativo en ciudades de Chile, Perú, Ecuador y Colombia. Metodología: Se desarrolló una etnografía inmersiva y multisituada entre febrero y mayo de 2026, combinando observación participante y no participante, entrevistas informales y conversaciones de campo. El corpus reunió interacciones con 59 personas vinculadas con las escenas cannábicas y registros de espacios urbanos, comerciales, institucionales y fronterizos. La información se organizó mediante codificación temática y comparación entre ciudades. Resultados: Los hallazgos evidenciaron configuraciones diferenciadas. Chile combinó tolerancia social con control discrecional; Perú presentó discreción, estigma y redes cerradas; Ecuador mostró circuitos formales, grises e informales; y Colombia destacó por alta visibilidad y disputa regulatoria. La formalización del mercado y la normalización social no avanzaron necesariamente en la misma dirección. Conclusiones: El cannabis constituye un objeto social relacional y territorialmente variable. Su regulación cotidiana depende de redes de confianza, moralidades locales, infraestructura comercial, capacidades de formalización y formas situadas de control estatal. Las políticas públicas deben reconocer estas diferencias y evitar modelos regulatorios uniformes.
Descargas
Referencias
1. Queirolo R, Kilmer B, Repetto L, Pardal M, Sotto B, Alvarez E. Intended and unintended effects of cannabis regulation in Uruguay. Policy Polit. 2024;1-18. https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000051
2. Pardal M, Queirolo R, Repetto L, Rychert M. A decade of regulated Cannabis Social Clubs in Uruguay: five key developments and challenges ahead. Int J Drug Policy. 2026;151:105213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2026.105213.
3. Barry RA. Challenges achieving horizontal coherence across health and public security policies in formulating Uruguay's cannabis regulation. Health Promot Int. 2024;39(5):daae136. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daae136.
4. Durán-Martínez A, Pennell C. Change from above or pressure from below? The diffusion of cannabis reform in Latin America. Bull Lat Am Res. 2024;43:347-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/blar.13580.
5. Manthey J, Jacobsen B, Hayer T, Kalke J, López-Pelayo H, Pons-Cabrera MT, et al. The impact of legal cannabis availability on cannabis use and health outcomes: a systematic review. Int J Drug Policy. 2023;116:104039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104039.
6. Nazif-Munoz JI, Domínguez-Cancino K, Martínez P, Jauffret-Roustide M. Uneven effects of twenty years of Chile's cannabis policy implementation in cannabis onset. Int J Drug Policy. 2024;127:104395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104395.
7. Bogren A, Castillo D. Beyond networks and institutions: rethinking the role of organization in illicit drug market interaction. Crime Media Cult. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958241289361
8. Repetto L, Queirolo R, Alonso J, Pardal M, Atuesta L, Kilmer B, et al. Conceptualizing cannabis grey markets: a typology based on the Uruguayan case. Int J Drug Policy. 2025;145:105020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.105020.
9. Donnan JR, Howells R, Farooq S, Maillet M, Harris-Lane LM. Bridging the gap: exploring consumer experiences and motivations for transitioning between illicit and regulated cannabis markets. Int J Drug Policy. 2024;134:104644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104644.
10. Maillet MA. Individual differences in legal and illicit cannabis purchasing behaviour in British Columbia, Canada: findings from a 2021 cross-sectional survey. Int J Drug Policy. 2024;126:104363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104363.
11. Queirolo R, Rychert M, Pardal M. Market revenues and economic opportunities in the legal cannabis market in Uruguay. J Illicit Econ Dev. 2025;7(2):25-38. https://doi.org/10.31389/jied.250.
12. Durán-Martínez A, Fakhoury R. Who influences whom? Elite and citizen preferences regarding marijuana and drug legalisation in Latin America. J Politics Lat Am. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802X251369520
13. Rivera-Vélez L, Díaz MC. Constructing policy paradigms through implementation: medical cannabis reforms in Colombia and Argentina. Lat Am Policy. 2025;16(4):e70031. https://doi.org/10.1111/lamp.70031.
14. Wong-Salgado P, Moya-Salazar J, Contreras-Pulache H, Pardo-Villarroel C. The regulatory and scientific context in the study of the medicinal use of cannabis in Peru. Front Med. 2025;12:1598227. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2025.1598227.
15. Castillo-Carniglia A. National profile on substance use, substance use-related problems and policy: the case of Chile. Addiction. 2025;120(7):1466-1474. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70031.
16. del Rio Forero D, Marín CP, Sastre MTM, et al. Mapping Colombians' positions on national policies to control tobacco and marijuana consumption: a pilot study. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2025;20:16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-025-00646-w.
17. Bedoya Sandoval JF, Arroyo Valencia LD, Molano Agudelo PA. Knowledge and attitudes toward medical cannabis among medicine, nursing, and physiotherapy students at a Colombian university: a cross-sectional study with multivariate analysis. J Cannabis Res. 2026;8:61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-026-00423-x.
18. Müller F, Rasmussen N. Cultural stigmatization and police corruption: cannabis, gender, and legalization in Mexico. Contemp Justice Rev. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2021.2004089
19. Ferreyra FG, Mosqueira M. Drugs and religion in Latin America: a narrative literature review. Contemp Drug Probl. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/00914509251314203
20. Bathish R, Madden A, Duff C, Ritter A. Guiding principles for breaking down drug-related stigma in academic writing. Int J Drug Policy. 2024;131:104515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104515.
21. Holland A, Freeman TP, Nicholls J, Burke C, Howkins J, Harris M, et al. Making sense of drug use and dependence: a scoping review of mass media interventions intended to reduce stigma towards people who use drugs. Int J Drug Policy. 2024;132:104543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104543.
22. Santos JM, Teixeira ZM, Soliz M, Guerra MM. Consumo de cannabis, grau de risco e policonsumos numa amostra de adultos portugueses. Rev Enferm Ref. 2022;6(1):e21152. https://doi.org/10.12707/RV21152.
23. Buschner M, Heckel N, Dürler P, Engeli EJ, Schneider S, Havelka EM, et al. The Züri Can study: can regulated cannabis sales promote lower-risk cannabis use? Mini-review and study protocol. Int J Drug Policy. 2024;133:104610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104610.
24. DeJonckheere M, Vaughn LM, James TG, Schondelmeyer AC. Qualitative thematic analysis in a mixed methods study: guidelines and considerations for integration. J Mix Methods Res. 2024;18(3):258-269. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898241257546.
25. Naeem M, Ozuem W, Howell K, Ranfagni S. A step-by-step process of thematic analysis to develop a conceptual model in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 2023;22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789
26. Byrne D. A worked example of Braun and Clarke's approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Quant. 2022;56:1391-1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y.
27. Olmos-Vega FM, Stalmeijer RE, Varpio L, Kahlke R. A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Med Teach. 2023;45(3):241-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287.
28. Vanke A. Multi-sited ethnography: developing avant-garde methodology for creative research into everyday lives. Sociol Res Online. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/13607804251345915
29. Prasad A, Shadnam M. Balancing breadth and depth in qualitative research: conceptualizing performativity through multi-sited ethnography. Organ Stud. 2023;44(5). https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406221145655
30. Warren A, Gibson C. Follow the labour process: constructing explanations and making a difference through multi-sited ethnographic methods. Environ Plan A Econ Space. 2026;58(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X251326393
31. LoParco CR, Speer M, Chakraborty R, Yang YT, Berg CJ. Cannabis social equity initiatives among U.S. states with legal nonmedical cannabis retail: a review and recommendations. Am J Prev Med. 2026;70(6):108218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2025.108218.
32. Han J, Durand-Morat A. Does sin tax on the legal market facilitate the illicit market? An ex-ante assessment on the US cannabis market. J Agric Appl Econ Assoc. 2024;3(2):330-345. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaa2.114.
33. Wu G, Durante KA, Melton HC, Roddy AL. Marijuana legalization and racial disparities in prison incarceration in Colorado and Washington State: a quasi-experimental study. J Exp Criminol. 2025;21:325-348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-023-09590-w.
34. Rivera-Vélez L. Dissenting implementation of cannabis policies in Mexico: a strategy of outlaw resistance. Bull Lat Am Res. 2025;44(4):310-323. https://doi.org/10.1111/blar.70000.
35. Hammond D, Hong D, Rundle S, Iraniparast M, Kilmer B, Wadsworth E. Transitions to legal cannabis markets: legal market capture of cannabis expenditures in Canada following federal cannabis legalization. Int J Drug Policy. 2025;142:104828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104828.
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Jorge Raúl Tene Chinlli
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
