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.
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 Israel Zumaya Sandoval (Autor/a)
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
