Blame avoidance and the implementation of ambiguity in Canadian cannabis legalization

Canadian cannabis legalization was destined to produce implementation gaps: it is a wicked policy issue, imbued with moral connotations, involving multiple levels of government, and formulated in an uncertain context. Those factors all pave the way for policy ambiguities. But why do these ambiguities appear? How do they shape the behavior of policy stakeholders? In this paper, we argue that, in order to manage the unique challenges of cannabis legalization, governments and central agencies rely on preemptive blame avoidance strategies. Ambiguities ensuing from the use of those strategies in turn enhance the responsibilities of implementers, while also limiting their capacity. We narrow down our analysis to the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, who have two contrasting regulatory models. Using data from semi-structured interviews and the grey literature, we highlight how ambiguities over the explicit and implicit objectives of legalization create opportunities to eschew blame. We find that blame avoidance structures policy resources and widens existing implementation gaps. Overall, this paper contributes to a better understanding of the role of blame avoidance in shaping implementation gaps.