I got my ‘official’ start as a cannabis activist in the late 1990s when I volunteered with the political campaign to legalize cannabis for medical use in the State of Oregon in the U.S. Generations of my family have been harmed by cannabis prohibition, and in some ways, I have always felt that I was born into cannabis advocacy as a result. But my first measurable entrance into a more formalized manner of cannabis activism was as a volunteer for Oregon’s successful 1998 medical cannabis campaign.

Back then, adult-use cannabis legalization in any jurisdiction seemed like a faraway goal. In fact, the term ‘adult use’ wasn’t even a thing, really. Everyone that I knew called it ‘recreational,’ and it was only a decade and a half later that the term ‘adult use’ started to be used by advocates.

Recreational legalization is something that I, and many others, fought for and daydreamed about all of those decades ago. I often reflect on my mindset back then and what I considered to be the goal of legalization, and thus, what would constitute ‘legalization success.’ For me, it was very straightforward at the time; if adults could cultivate, possess, and consume personal amounts of cannabis without fear of prosecution, that was what ‘the win’ looked like.

As time has gone on, the legalization movement’s goals have evolved, and my mindset and views have evolved along with it. These days, in addition to the personal freedoms component of legalization, there is also an industry component. In the U.S., two dozen states have adopted adult-use cannabis legalization measures, along with Washington, D.C. At a national level, Uruguay, Canada, Malta, Luxembourg, Germany, South Africa, and Czechia have all adopted measures that legalized recreational cannabis activity to one degree or another. Every single one of those jurisdictions has a different legalization model.

With so much variation among legalized jurisdictions, and along with it, individual opinions about each model, it can be very difficult to accurately capture which models are succeeding and which ones are not. It is largely in the eye of the beholder. One of my favorite examples to bring up in discussions is Washington State in the U.S., which, along with Colorado, became the first to adopt a recreational legalization measure back in 2012. Washington’s legalization model differed in one very important way compared to Colorado’s, in that home cultivation was not part of Washington’s measure. Still to this day, home cultivation for non-medical purposes is prohibited in Washington State. Many cannabis advocates inside and outside of Washington do not consider Washington’s model to be true legalization as a result, and, industry or no industry, ‘success’ cannot be achieved because of it.

National legalization models in Europe are hotly debated due to the European Union’s limitations on regulated national cannabis commerce. Malta, Luxembourg, Germany, and Czechia all allow home cultivation, but none of them permit national sales on the level that is allowed in Canada. Instead, cannabis commerce among EU-member nations is limited to noncommercial cannabis associations and pilot trials, and even then, Malta doesn’t permit pilot trials, Luxembourg doesn’t permit cultivation associations or pilot trials, and Czechia also doesn’t permit either form of commerce. Even in Germany, where pilot trials were part of the nation’s adopted legalization model, official approval of a pilot trial application has yet to occur.

The absence of a nationwide, regulated adult-use cannabis commerce system in legalized European countries is often pointed to by cannabis advocates as to why ‘true legalization’ has yet to be achieved. For contextual purposes, consider that when the State of Vermont in the U.S. first approved its legalization measure, making it the first state in the country to legalize via legislative action instead of through a vote by citizens, there was no regulated adult-use commerce allowed. Still, advocates like myself considered it to constitute legalization at the time. Although, to be fair, much has changed since then, with regulated cannabis commerce becoming much more commonplace in the U.S.

Ultimately, I think there is a nuance worth considering, in that there is a difference between legalization ‘succeeding’ and a country’s approach to legalization ‘reaching its full potential.’ No jurisdiction’s approach to cannabis policy modernization will ever reach its full potential without robust commerce, just as no jurisdiction’s approach will ever reach its full potential without allowing home cultivation. Furthermore, even when all of that is allowed, as it currently is in Canada, full potential may not be achieved for a long time.

However, when modernized cannabis policies are compared to the cannabis prohibition policies of the past, clearly, there are examples of success in jurisdictions that have made changes. Progress, albeit not occurring fast enough, is a sign of success. Adults no longer having to worry about prosecution for consuming a beneficial plant is a success. Governments no longer wasting precious public resources enforcing prohibition against individual consumers is a success. The fight will continue until every jurisdiction has an ideal cannabis legalization model, and we must never lose sight of that goal. Yet, we must also balance that against remembering how far we have come and celebrating success wherever we can find it.