1. Introduction Until recently, the production, distribution and use of cannabis1 was criminalized and threatened with 1 Throughout the whole study, the term ‘cannabis’ is used to describe all psychoactive products based on the Cannabis plant, e.g., marijuana and hashish. imprisonment in almost all countries of the world. However, under growing pressure from their socie- ties, many countries have commuted penalties for the possession and use of cannabis. Some of the countries have even allowed for the commercial sale and consumption of cannabis under controlled conditions. For example, cannabis can be legally consumed for therapeutic, but also recreational Journal of Geography, Politics and Society 2021, 11(3), 1–13 https://doi.org/10.26881/jpgs.2021.3.01 TourISm of PolISh cannabIS conSumerS Andrzej Matczak (1), Przemysław A. Pawlicki (2) (1) Institute of Urban Geography, Tourism Studies and Geoinformation, Faculty of Geographical Sciences, University of Lodz, Kopcińskiego 31, 90–142 Łódź, Poland, ORCID: 0000-0002-9509-5879 e-mail: andrzej.matczak@geo.uni.lodz.pl (corresponding author) (2) Institute of Urban Geography, Tourism Studies and Geoinformation, Faculty of Geographical Sciences, University of Lodz, Kopcińskiego 31, 90–142 Łódź, Poland e-mail: przemyslaw.adam.pawlicki@gmail.com citation Matczak A., Pawlicki P.A., 2021, Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers, Journal of Geography, Politics and Society, 11(3), 1–13. abstract The aim of this study is to characterize the tourism activity of Polish cannabis consumers in terms of (i) the level of their par- ticipation in tourism, (ii) parameters describing this participation, (iii) the effect of legal access to cannabis on choosing tour- ism destinations. The study is based on an anonymous online survey in which 886 voluntary respondents answered a series of questions about their tourist travels, their attitude to cannabis consumption, and their demographic, socio-economic and geographic metrics. Results of the survey were analyzed using several statistical indicators of variability, structure, correlation, and structure similarity. For the respondents declaring cannabis consumption, the level of their participation in tourism is close to the national level. Other parameters describing the domestic and foreign tourism of these respondents differ quite signifi- cantly from those reported for the general public of Poland. This indicates that the possibility of cannabis consumption signifi- cantly affects the nature and directions of travels undertaken by tourists interested in cannabis. Furthermore, there is a strong connection between the respondents’ personal preferences and the nature of their tourism, especially the destinations of their foreign trips. The conclusions from this study mostly apply to current and recent cannabis consumers because the vast majority of respondents (90%) rank among such kinds of cannabis users. Key words tourism, cannabis, cannabis consumers, Poland. received: 20 August 2021 accepted: 08 November 2021 Published: 29 November 2021 2 Andrzej Matczak, Przemysław A. Pawlicki purposes in Dutch ‘coffee shops’, in several states of the USA,2 Canada and Uruguay. The legal status of cannabis production, distribution and use varies from country to country, which results in an increas- ing number of travels oriented towards cannabis consumption. The growing cannabis tourism tends to make a multi-sided impact on society, economy, politics, etc. in many countries and their regions. From a geographical perspective, cannabis tourism and the associated cultural transformations have only recently become the focus of in-depth research (Kang et al., 2016). It is evident today that a number of tourist trav- els are associated with an opportunity for cannabis consumption. Such travels can be either domestic or outbound to a neighboring country (e.g., German tourists in the Netherlands, Polish tourists in the Czech Republic, US tourists in Mexico) or to a more distant country (e.g., UK tourist in the Spanish is- land of Ibiza) (Valdez, Sifaneck, 1997; Bellis et al., 2000; Briggs, Turner, 2012; EMCDDA, 2012; Cherpitel et al., 2015). The trip duration ranges from a week- end break to backpacking trips lasting up to several months. In Poland, a relatively large group of citizens ad- mits to consuming cannabis.3 According to a report prepared by the Public Opinion Research Center Foundation commissioned by the Polish Ministry of Health (Sierosławski et al., 2015), it can be esti- mated at around 1.5 million. Many of the users make tourist trips. Thus, the aim of the present study is to characterize the tourist activity of Polish cannabis consumers, and its determinants. First, the level of their participation in tourism is estimated. Next, this participation is quantified using several parameters (such as the trip date, the length of stay, traveling companions, etc.) Finally, the effect of demographic, socio-economic and geographic features of voivode- ships4 on the participation of Polish cannabis con- sumers in tourism is explored. 2. literature review The phenomenon of drug consumption during tour- ist travels first attracted interest of researchers in the 2 Despite the federal ban, several states (e.g., Colorado in 2012) legalized cannabis consumption for recreational pur- poses. 3 The purchase of cannabis for medical purposes was legal- ized in 2017. The first deliveries to pharmacies were made in 2019. 4 Voivodship is an administrative region of Poland that cor- responds to a province in many other countries. There are 16 voivodships in Poland (Fig. 1). 1970s. This phenomenon was initially ascribed to a specific type of tourists who were termed ‘drifters’ (Cohen, 1973). Such a viewpoint was supported by subsequent studies on the drifter subculture on the beaches of Goa (India) and Koh Pha Ngan (Thailand) (Westerhausen, 2002). Drug tourism was defined as “the phenomenon by which persons become attract- ed to a particular location because of the accessibil- ity of licit or illicit drugs and related services” (Valdez, Sifaneck, 1997, p. 880). This definition resulted from the study of drug tourism on the USA-Mexico bor- der. Later, the important role of cross-border mobil- ity in drug consumption among the Mexican-Amer- ican residents living on the USA-Mexico border was suggested (Cherpitel et al., 2015). Drug tourism was also formulated as “the phenomenon by which the tourist experience involves all of the awareness, con- sumption, and usage of drugs that are considered to be illegal in either the visited destination or the tourist’s country of origin” (Uriely, Belhassen, 2005, p. 239). Motivations for the drug tourism of American and European tourists in the Amazonia region were thoroughly analyzed in a series of studies (DeRios, 1994; Winkelman, 2005; Tupper, 2008; Holman, 2011; Prayag et al., 2015; Kavenská & Simonová, 2015). One of the reasons for those travels was an opportunity to consume the ayahuasca brew, which is made of plants containing psychoactive substances. The aya- huasca brew was consumed by the tourists seeking profound experiences while they were participating in all-night religious ceremonies conducted by local shamans. In contrast to the ayahuasca tourists, some other types of drug tourists, exemplified by British tourists in Ibiza (Bellis et al., 2000; Briggs, Turner, 2012; van Havere et al., 2011) and American students on their spring break (Josiam et al., 1998), were main- ly motivated by the need for entertainment and lei- sure. Nevertheless, the trips of drug tourists to the Netherlands were taken due to the liberalism of the Dutch towards drugs, the commercial availability of high-quality and relatively cheap drugs in the Neth- erlands, as well as access to local health care services in case of drug indisposition or drug addiction (van den Brink, 1996; Korf, 2002; Monshouwer et al., 2011; EMCDDA, 2012). The aforementioned studies of drug tourism are limited to only several tourist destinations where (i) some drugs are legally and commercially available and (ii) some niche forms of tourism, such as back- packing, drifting, tramping, participation in music festivals, etc. are supported. The conclusions drawn from these studies apply, in principle, to specific groups of tourists. The research approach to drug tourism in these studies is mostly constructed around the concept of trips associated with addiction (the Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers 3 so-called deviant entertainment), which is due to the negative social connotations of drug use. Thus, the phenomenon of drug tourism still seems to be rather far away from being fully characterized (Hoff- mann, 2014; Pinheiro Dias Pereira, de Paula, 2016; Kang et al., 2016). In the field of drug tourism, cannabis attracts in- creasing attention due to its prevalence over other drugs consumed worldwide (UNODC, 2019). The ex- tant literature on cannabis tourism usually stresses its negative perception as a marginal subculture (Uriely, Belhassen, 2005). Such a perception seems not to provide an unbiased and in-depth picture of this kind of drug tourism. A recent study indicated that, in the light of cannabis legalization in several states of the USA, cannabis use can be perceived as a recreational activity for modern Western societies (Kang et al., 2016). Moreover, cannabis consumption is largely used as a pastime and to cope with the challenges and demands of living in modern West- ern societies (Liebregts et al., 2015; Osborne, Fogel, 2008). Therefore, the unilateral view on cannabis consumption as a deviant tourist behavior cannot be held any longer. Nowadays, people are beginning to accept cannabis as a tourist attraction that they can experience during their holidays. They do not construe cannabis as a marginalized tourist interest or a mere extension of their daily habit (Kang et al., 2016). Cannabis tourism is inevitably associated with the process of cultural changes in the modern world, especially in the West. This process affects people’s attitude towards cannabis. Thus, the sociological aspect of cannabis is also present in the studies of cannabis tourism (Belhassen et al., 2007; Kang et al., 2016; Keul, Eisenhauer, 2019; Wen et al., 2018). The legalization of recreational cannabis cre- ates opportunities for the development of tourism and hospitality. A better understanding of this de- velopment requires in-depth studies on cannabis tourism, the supply and demand for it, its economic and social impact, the relation between cannabis tourists and the locals, and policies and regulations governing the cannabis tourism market. The last few years have indeed seen a number of studies in these fields. First, there were attempts to formulate the very definition of cannabis tourism (Motyka, 2016; Taylor, 2019). Next, the motivations for this kind of tourism (Osborne, Fogel, 2008; Wen et al., 2018) and the segmentation of cannabis tourists were identi- fied and analyzed (Wen et al., 2020). Issues connect- ed with governing the liberalization of cannabis for recreational purposes in Colorado were specified in a series of studies (Kang et al., 2016; Kang, Lee, 2018; Keul, Eisenhauer, 2019). The effect of cannabis tour- ism on the overall tourism income was estimated for the Amsterdam metropolitan area5 and the US state of Colorado (Kang et al., 2016; van Loon, Rouwen- dal, 2017). The positive economic effect of cannabis tourism in Colorado resulted in the growing support of the locals for this kind of tourism (Kang, Lee, 2018; Kang, 2019). Finally, such cannabis-related events as cannabis festivals and their attendees were charac- terized from a tourism perspective (Skliamis, Korf, 2019; Kang et al., 2019). It was reported in previous studies that the cat- egory of drug tourists mostly includes people at the age between 15 and 34 who study and/or work (Uriely, Belhassen, 2005; Grobe, Lűer, 2011; EMCD- DA, 2012; Motyka, 2016; Matczak, Pawlicki, 2016). Males are twice as likely as females to become drug tourists. In principle, drug tourists are usually well- educated and they can afford to travel. They are not addicted to drugs, but they have previous experi- ences with their consumption. They are usually well integrated into the society, fulfilling basic social roles and life tasks. For them, drug consumption during tourist trips is usually part of their tourist experience (Grobe, Lűer, 2011; Motyka, 2016). It was also shown that the youth who visited clubs, music festivals and dance events were more experienced in drug use than other young people (Measham et al., 2001; van Havere et al., 2011). For example, Ibiza, which is fa- mous for its nightlife and electronic music events, is recognized as a place where drug use is accom- panied by extensive clubbing and partying (van Ha- vere et al., 2011; Briggs, Turner, 2012). 3. Data and methods Data were obtained from an anonymous online sur- vey conducted in March 2016. Answers to 14 ques- tions were collected for 886 respondents who de- clared cannabis consumption (aged 15–64) and lived in Poland at that time. The respondents answered nine questions about their attitude to cannabis consumption and the characteristics of their tour- ist trips. There were also five questions to provide the demographic, socio-economic and geographic metrics of the respondents (gender, age, education, source of income, place of residence). There are two methodological issues associat- ed with the survey. The first is the date of the sur- vey. Year 2016 was one of the last years of intense discussions in the mass media, developing social 5 The expenses of tourists visiting Amsterdam mostly for cannabis consumption were higher than those of all other tourists. This suggests an unexpectedly large contribution of cannabis to the municipal economy. 4 Andrzej Matczak, Przemysław A. Pawlicki movements to legalize cannabis consumption, and the liberalization of cannabis use despite the strin- gent law on drugs in Poland. Therefore, there was much interest in the survey among cannabis users at that time. Thus, the date of the survey could be regarded as an advantage. The second issue arises from the fact that the online survey form was spon- taneously filled in by a large group of voluntary re- spondents who came across a hyperlink to the sur- vey while browsing the Internet (the hyperlinks were placed in social networks, websites and discussion groups). The subject of the survey was interesting to the respondents who were convinced that the sur- vey concerned them directly, and it could have an influence on public opinion. Because of the volun- tary participation in the survey, its results should be treated with some caution. Results of the survey are analyzed by means of such essential statistical indicators as the coeffi- cient of variation (V), Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rs) and the concordation coefficient (rk) (Runge, 2006, p. 503). The V coefficient is expressed in percentage points using the following formula: x S V where S is the standard deviation and is the arithme- tic mean. The value of V indicates that the variability of a parameter is small (V < 20%), average (20% < V < 40%), high (40% < V < 100%) or very high (V > 100%). The rs and rk coefficients are calculated according to the formulas: nn d r n i i s – –= � = 6 1 )1( 312 22 222 –× ×- = � ( + 1) N j = 1 j k where di denotes the rank difference, n is the number of elements in a series, R is the sum of ranks, and m is the number of features. The statistical significance of rk is verified by the χ 2 test (χ2 = m(n – 1)rk). The rk coef- ficient is a normalized correlation measure (0 ≤ rk ≤ 1). The closer the rk coefficient is to unity, the more con- sistent ordering a series of features shows. The similarity of voivodeships with respect to the tourist motives and travel destinations of respond- ents is analyzed by means of the structural differ- ence index (Ws) (Rogacki, 2009, p. 214): � where ai and bi denote the shares of voivodeships a and b, respectively, in a given group of motives and travel destinations. The values of Ws fall in the range from 0 to 1, and the former signals an identi- cal structure. The higher the Ws value is, the greater the difference is between two voivodeships in their structure. The model of arithmetic means (Msr) is also used to distinguish the main elements determining individual structural groups (Runge, 2006, p. 232). � � � oj gj sr X x M where xgj stands for the arithmetic mean of the j-th feature in a group, Xoj is the arithmetic mean of the j-th feature in the entire matrix, j = 1, ..., m. 4. results The demographic, socio-economic and geographic characteristics of respondents participating in the survey were presented in our previous paper (Mat- czak, Pawlicki, 2019). Below, the main findings of that paper are summarized to provide the background to the present study. The vast majority of respondents belong to the Y generation, aged 15–34 at the time of the survey. Respondents born in the 1970s (the so-called X gen- eration) constitute merely a share of 4.4%. Within the Y generation, the respondents at the age of 15–29 dominate, amounting to 88.5% of all respondents. The group of male respondents is much more nu- merous (72.6%) than that of women. The age struc- ture of respondents shows some differences be- tween both genders. The shares of younger age, 20–24 in particular, mainly contribute to the group of all female respondents. There is a significant de- crease in the shares of older women. For the male respondents, the share of age under 25 is clearly smaller than the corresponding share of women. For this reason, the shares of older male respondents decrease much slowly. Respondents are essentially characterized by a high level of education. The high- est share is represented by those having secondary or higher education. For the male respondents, the share of secondary education is greater than that of higher education. In contrast, there are more female respondents having higher education than those with secondary education. Due to their young age, many respondents may continue education and in- crease the level of their education in the near future. The young age of many respondents also indicates a significant level of family participation in their livelihood. Nearly half of male respondents declare their own source of income, while only one third Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers 5 of women do so. Over one third of all respondents admit that they depend exclusive on family for their livelihood. On the other hand, similar shares of male and female respondents declare a combination of family support and their own source of income. Such respondents most often work and/or study. More than half of the respondents (62.7%) are classified as the current cannabis consumers, that is, they consumed cannabis during the 30 days preceding the survey (EMCDDA, 2008). 28.6% of re- spondents declare regular consumption (practically every day) and 34.1% claim frequent use. 27.2% of respondents are identified as recent cannabis con- sumers, that is, they used cannabis during the 12 months preceding the survey (EMCDDA, 2008). Oc- casional experimenting with cannabis in a lifetime is indicated by 10.1% of respondents (the so-called ever users). One third of the ever users gave up can- nabis consumption. The share of male respondents is triple as many as the share of female respondents. This applies to both current and recent cannabis consumers. By contrast, there are almost identical shares of male and female ever users. The respondents’ age is an- other factor differentiating the frequency of can- nabis consumption. The share of current consump- tion decreases with the respondents’ age. A similar trend can be found for recent users. Interestingly, the share of cannabis experimenters increases with their age. An increase in the level of education is as- sociated with the diminishing share of current con- sumption and with the growing shares of recent use and experimentation. Current users more often de- clare their own source of income than their partial or total dependence on family support. By contrast, recent consumers and experimenters often depend on family for their livelihood. In the survey there are respondents from each voivodeship of Poland. On average, 53.1 respondents can be assigned to each voivodeship, with a stand- ard deviation of 38.2 and a high value of the varia- tion coefficient (71.9%). Small numbers of respond- ents come from three less populated voivodeships (Świętokrzyskie, Opolskie, Lubuskie). Two thirds of respondents live in the voivodeships with over 0.5 million inhabitants and large cities (Dolnośląskie, Łódzkie, Małopolskie, Mazowieckie, Wielkopolskie) or being highly urbanized (Śląskie, Pomorskie). Large cities (Warsaw, Kraków, Łódź, Wrocław and Poznań) are the place of residence for 36.5% of respondents. Each of these cities has over 0.5 million inhabitants and well-developed services offering the best pros- pects for work and education, and they provide vari- ous kinds of entertainment, including nightlife and stimulants. Very few respondents live in small towns or rural areas (3.3%). 4.1. Participation in tourism The results of the survey show that the level of re- spondents’ participation in tourism is slightly higher than that of the Polish society (56.4 vs. 54.0%) (GUS, 2016). The former is clearly differentiated between the voivodeships of Poland (V = 75.2%). The re- spondents living in the eastern voivodeships, which are less economically developed, declare a higher level of participation in tourism. It appears that the lower level of social acceptance of cannabis con- sumption in these regions results in the necessity for tourist travels to consume cannabis. Foreign trav- els are more popular than domestic trips; the latter are taken by less than one third of the respondents. This is much different from the trips of the Polish in general; ca. 80% of the Polish spend holidays in Po- land (GUS, 2016). One third of the respondents de- claring domestic trips simultaneously participate in foreign travels. The average frequency of traveling is high (3.6 trips per respondent) and it varies among voivodeships (V = 76.7%). For the respondents resid- ing in the southern and northern voivodeships, the frequency of their traveling is above the average. 4.2. characteristics of tourism Table 1 presents the complete characteristics of respondents’ tourism. From this table it can be de- duced that the respondents’ domestic trips are es- sentially short-term. For 56.2% of the respondents, their domestic trips take no longer than four days. Foreign travels are longer and 60.4% of respondents spend at least five days on such travels. Respond- ents most often travel with friends, especially when going abroad (61.2%). Respondents on domestic trips are accompanied by family members (14.9%) or a partner (13.4%). The share of foreign travels with family is only of 4.4% and that with a partner amounts to 26.4%. 7.5% of the respondents partici- pate in domestic and foreign group travels. 3% and 13.2% of the respondents travel on their own within the country and abroad, respectively. Cars (55.4%) and railway (35.4%) are two most popular means of transport for domestic trips. Respondents travel abroad by car (39.1%), plane (28.9%) or bus (25%). Rail transport and unconventional forms of trans- port, such as hitchhiking or by bicycle, are marginal. Respondents on their tourist trips stay at relatively cheap accommodation facilities. Respondents on domestic trips use private accommodation (22.9%), tents and camping houses (31.5%), summer houses (29.9%) and hotels (15.7%). Respondents on for- eign trips mainly use hotels (38.5%) or other hotel 6 Andrzej Matczak, Przemysław A. Pawlicki Tab. 1. The characteristics of tourist trips made by the survey respondents. For comparison, tourist trips made by the Pol- ish society in 2015 are also characterized. All values are expressed in percentage points except for the values of expenses in PLN Trip characteristics Trips of respondents 1 Trips of the Polish 2 Domestic Foreign Domestic Foreign Date of trip 1st quarter of year 3.0 13.1 20.4 18.0 2nd quarter of year 9.0 13.1 20.3 23.2 3rd quarter of year 71.6 53.1 40.1 38.3 4th quarter of year 16.4 20.7 19.0 20.5 Length of stay 2–4 days 51.4 34.2 60.8 19.2 5 days and more 48.6 65.8 39.2 80.8 Traveling companion Friends 61.2 48.3 ND 3 ND Family 14.9 4.4 ND ND Partner 13.4 26.4 ND ND Group 7.5 7.7 ND ND None 3.0 13.2 ND ND Means of transport Car 55.4 39.1 74.0* 32.6* Coach/bus 9.2 25.0 14.5* 17.4* Train 35.4 3.1 11.0* 0.7* Plane - 28.9 -* 48.3* Other - 3.9 0.5* 1.0* Type of accommodation facility all hotel facilities 15.7 45.7 22.2 50.1 only hotels 5.7 38.5 - - private accommodation/guest room 22.9 7.2 9.2 7.7 hostel - 6.5 2.4 1.8 campsite, camping site, bungalow 31.5 18.8 3.6 2.5 summer house, etc. 29.9 21.8 62.6 37.9 Average expenses per person domestic short-term trip 388.8 - 264.0 - domestic long-term trip 1017.0 - 823.0 - foreign one-day trip - 257.5 - 344.0 foreign short-term trip - 897.9 - 1151.0 foreign long-term trip - 3281.1 - 2347.0 Destination in Poland within the voivodeship of residence 36.4 - ND - neighboring voivodeships 30.0 - ND - more distant voivodeships 33.6 - ND - abroad Czech Republic - 24.2 - 5.4 Netherlands - 46.5 - 1.6 other European countries - 24.8 - 78.5 non-European countries - 4.5 - 14.5 1 Based on own survey data. 2 According to (GUS, 2014; GUS, 2016). 3 The abbreviation ‘ND’ stands for no data. * Means of transport used in 2013 for domestic trips taking at least five days or foreign trips with at least one night’s accommodation. Source: own survey data. Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers 7 facilities (13.7%), tents and camping houses (18.8%) and accommodation with family and friends (21.8%). Respondents spend relatively little money on tourist travels. Nearly half of the respondents spend up to €100 on domestic trips. The rest of the respondents spend more than €100 but less than €750. Greater expenses are spent on foreign trips. Almost 75% of respondents spend up to €750 on such trips. 4.3. cannabis consumption as a travel motive The respondents’ tourist trips are partially condi- tioned by the willingness to consume cannabis. Nearly one third of respondents indicate that can- nabis consumption is a primary motive for traveling. However, 55.1% of the respondents claim that can- nabis consumption on a trip is an additional factor widening their tourism experience. Cannabis con- sumption is a minor motive for traveling for 12.8% of the respondents. The importance of cannabis consumption as a motive for traveling varies among the voivode- ships of Poland. The Ws index allows dividing the voivodeships into five structural groups accord- ing to the importance of cannabis consumption as a travel motive (groups I–V in Table 2 and Figure 1). The travel motives determining these groups are identified by means of the arithmetic means model. Cannabis consumption is the primary travel mo- tive for the respondents residing in the following voivodeships: Podkarpackie, Warmińsko-Mazurskie and Świętokrzyskie. Respondents coming from the Śląskie, Opolskie and Pomorskie voivodeships reveal two mutually exclusive motives; many respondents make trips mainly to consume cannabis and many others consider cannabis consumption as a minor motive for traveling. Cannabis consumption is an ad- ditional motive (that is, equally important as other motives) for the respondents living in the Lubelskie, Lubuskie, Podlaskie, and Wielkopolskie voivode- ships. The respondents of the Kujawsko -Pomorskie, Zachodniopomorskie, Dolnośląskie, Łódzkie voivodeships indicate cannabis consumption as a minor motive for their domestic tourist trips. There is a strong similarity between the voivode- ships of the respondents’ residence if the frequency of cannabis consumption is compared with the motives for traveling, especially for foreign trips. The voivodeships of the current cannabis users’ residence (that is, those consuming cannabis during the 30 days preceding the survey (EMCDDA, 2008)) closely correspond to the voivodeships in which cannabis is regarded as the additional (rs  =  0.96) or primary (rs = 0.94) motive for a tourist trip. Similarly, the voivodeships of the residence of recent canna- bis users (that is, those consuming cannabis dur- ing the 12  months preceding the survey (EMCDDA, 2008)) correlate with the voivodeships in which the respondents consider cannabis as the addi- tional motive for a tourist trip (rs = 0.94). Respond- ents experimenting with cannabis usually share the same voivodeships with the respondents declaring cannabis as the additional motive for a tourist trip (rs = 0.875). Tab. 2. The structure of the importance of cannabis consumption as a travel motive. Group Voivodeships Msr 1 I Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Zachodniopomorskie, Dolnośląskie, Łódzkie 1.59 – minor 0.999 – additional 0.76 – primary II Podkarpackie, Warmińsko-Mazurskie, Świętokrzyskie 1.69 – primary 0.72 – additional 0.54 – minor III Mazowieckie, Małopolskie 1.16 – primary 1.019 – additional 0.516 – minor IV Śląskie, Opolskie, Pomorskie 1.175 – primary 1.039 – minor 0.889 – additional V Lubelskie, Lubuskie, Podlaskie, Wielkopolskie 1.303 – additional 0.741 – primary 0.346 – minor 1 The scale of motive importance ranges from ‘primary’ to ‘additional’ and to ‘minor’. Source: own survey data. 8 Andrzej Matczak, Przemysław A. Pawlicki 4.4. Tourist destinations 4.4.1. Domestic tourist trips Results of the survey essentially show similar shares of respondents traveling within the voivodeship of residence, to the neighboring voivodeships and to more distant voivodeships. Frequent short-term trips to destinations with good environmental conditions for recreation (lakes, beaches, etc.) and in the vicinity of the place of residence are favored. Trips to more distant voivodeships are less frequent, but the stays take longer and then recreation is combined with sightseeing and various forms of entertainment. As shown in Table 3, the respondents living in the Lubuskie, Zachodniopomorskie, Podlaskie and Kujawsko-Pomorskie voivodeships mainly travel within the voivodeship of their residence (termed by ‘intra’ in Table 3). Respondents from the Opolskie, Podkarpackie and Warmińsko-Mazurskie voivode- ships mostly travel to the neighboring voivodeships, while those from the Łódzkie and Dolnośląskie voivodeships mainly go on trips to more distant voivodeships. Respondents from the remaining sev- en voivodeships (group II in Table 3) willingly travel both within the voivodeship of their residence and to more distant voivodeships. The voivodeships exhibiting high tourist at- tractiveness tend to hold their residents for rec- reation, with the exception of respondents living in the Dolnośląskie voivodeship. On the other hand, I II III IV V Fig 1. Five groups of voivodeships distinguished using the Ws index for the structure of the importance of cannabis con- sumption as a travel motive Source: data taken from Table 2. Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers 9 the respondents coming from highly urbanized voivodeships and inhibiting large cities, prefer trave- ling to neighboring and more distant voivodeships. The respondents who spend holidays in Poland take cannabis from their place of residence and consume it on a trip, regarding it as a form of leisure activities and integration with friends. 4.4.2. foreign tourist trips The choice of individual foreign tourist destina- tions by the respondents is related to the possibil- ity of cannabis consumption in the destinations. The Netherlands is the most often visited country (46.5% of the respondents traveling abroad), and the Czech Republic is the second most popular destination (24.2%). Other European destinations account for 24.8% of foreign tourist trips. These destinations include, among others, Spain, Germany and Great Britain (ca. 4% each). Few trips are reported to non- European destinations (e.g., Egypt, India, the USA, Mexico, Thailand, Vietnam, Uruguay). Cannabis is easily accessible in these countries. The respondents living in individual voivodeships show quite different preferences for the destination of their foreign tourist trip. Five structural groups (I–V in Table 4) are distinguished by means of the Ws index. Within each group, the dominant tourist des- tinations are identified using the model of arithme- tic means (Msr in Table 4). The respondents of nearly two thirds of voivodeships favor traveling to the Netherlands. The Czech Republic is a popular des- tination for the respondents residing in the border voivodeships. Only the respondents of the Lubuskie and Łódzkie voivodeships visit the Czech Repub- lic more often than the Netherlands. Respondents living in the northern voivodeships of Poland prefer other European destinations to the Netherlands and the Czech Republic. The residents of only a few most urbanized voivodeships (Łódzkie, Małopolskie, Ma- zowieckie, Śląskie and Wielkopolskie) declare trips outside Europe. The main reason for visiting the aforementioned destinations is the possibility of legally purchasing cannabis (advertised as feeling the taste of freedom) and trying many varieties of cannabis on a tourist or business trip. Amsterdam and Prague are sometimes visited in transit, e.g., while traveling to the Alps. 4.5. effect of regional differentiation of demographic, socio-economic and geographic parameters on tourist trips The effect of demographic, socio-economic and ge- ographic parameters on tourist trips is estimated by comparing the spatial distribution of the voivode- ship of respondents’ residence with such parameters as the distribution of city inhabitants aged 16–44, the number of inhabitants of large cities (population larger than 100,000), the level of education (only secondary and higher), and the size of the gross domestic product. The rs coefficient calculated for all tourist trips, domestic trips and foreign trips is in the ranges of 0.88–0.94, 0.73–0.93 and 0.82–0.91, re- spectively. The rk coefficient adopts high values: 0.95 for all tourist trips (χ2 = 85.29), 0.93 for domestic trips (χ2 = 83.79) and 0.94 for foreign trips (χ 2  =  84.15). All the three calculated χ2 values are greater than the expected value of χ2 = 24.996, and therefore, they suggest a significant interrelation (α  = 0.05 is taken for the χ2 test). The spatial distribution of the voivodeship of the respondents’ residence is Tab. 3. The structure of domestic tourist destinations Group Voivodeships Msr 1 I Łódzkie, Dolnośląskie 1.802 – distant 0.673 – neighboring 0.540 – intra II Mazowieckie, Lubelskie, Wielkopolskie, Śląskie, Małopolskie, Świętokrzyskie, Pomorskie 1.061 – intra 1.048 – distant 0.870 – neighboring III Lubuskie, Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Podlaskie, Zachodniopomorskie 2.534 – intra 0.210 – neighboring 0.000 – distant IV Opolskie, Podkarpackie, Warmińsko-Mazurskie 1.875 – neighboring 0.843 – intra 0.393 – distant 1 Domestic tourist destinations are termed as ‘intra’, ‘neighboring’ and ‘distant’, depending on the distance between the voivodeship of domicile and the voivodeship of a tourist destination. ‘Intra’ means tourist trips within the voivodeship of residence. Source: own survey data. 10 Andrzej Matczak, Przemysław A. Pawlicki strongly conditioned by the spatial distribution of young, well-educated people living in large cities and in rich, well-developed regions. The effect of parameters varies among the des- tinations of foreign tourist trips. In the case of the Netherlands, the rs coefficient falls in a range of 0.8–0.9 and the rk coefficient is of 0.929 (χ 2 = 83.61). A similar range of rs is obtained for the remaining destinations and the rk coefficient amounts to 0.945 (χ2 = 85.05). For tourist trips to the Czech Republic, the spatial distributions of parameters are character- ized by a much lower degree of similarity. Then, the rs coefficients are at an average level of 0.5–0.53 and rk = 0.823 (χ 2 = 74.07). This indicates that the demo- graphic, socio-economic and geographic structure of respondents traveling to the Czech Republic is somewhat different from that of respondents visit- ing the Netherlands. Respondents residing in the voivodeships bordering the Czech Republic and de- claring cannabis consumption on a tourist trip more often choose the Czech Republic to be the destina- tion of their trip. The rs coefficient between the dis- tances of the voivodeship of respondents’ residence from the border crossing in Cieszyn adopts a nega- tive value of -0.6. The place of the respondents’ residence poorly corresponds to the place of residence of the Polish declaring drug consumption in general (Czapiński, Panek, 2015). The rs coefficient between the two spatial distributions is equal to 0.238, 0.178 and 0.397 for all tourist trips, domestic trips and for- eign trips, respectively. This suggests that cannabis consumers and users of other drugs are different in their demographic, socio-economic and geographic nature. The respondents declaring cannabis consump- tion on a domestic tourist trip usually prefer the re- gion in which they currently live. It seems that the distance to a vacation spot and the length of stay are the most important, hence the low value rs = 0.282 between the place of respondents’ residence and the tourist attractiveness of this place. On the other hand, relatively high rs values can be observed between the destination region and its tourist at- tractiveness (0.679) and the volume of tourist traffic (0.703). This indicates that the respondents take the tourist attractiveness of a destination into account while planning a tourist trip. 5. Discussion and conclusions The present study proves that online surveys, de- spite their inherent limitations, are able to provide the demographic (gender, age), socio-economic (level of education, source of livelihood), geograph- ic (place of residence) and cannabis consumption characteristics of respondents making tourist trips. Tab. 4. The structure of foreign tourist destinations Group Voivodeships Msr 1 I Dolnośląskie, Opolskie, Podlaskie 1.892 – The Czech Republic 1.162 – The Netherlands 0.168 – other European countries 0.000 – non-European countries II Łódzkie, Lubuskie 1.959 – The Czech Republic 1.058 – non-European countries 0.728 – The Netherlands 0.628 – other European countries III Lubelskie, Małopolskie, Śląskie 1.103 – The Netherlands 1.000 – The Czech Republic 0.953 – non-European countries 0.842 – other European countries IV Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Pomorskie, Warmińsko-Mazurskie, Mazowieckie, Świętokrzyskie 1.780 – other European countries 0.767 – The Czech Republic 0.727 – The Netherlands 0.326 – non-European countries V Wielkopolskie, Podkarpackie, Zachodniopomorskie 1.532 – The Netherlands 1.000 – other European countries 0.077 – The Czech Republic 0.077 – non-European countries 1 Foreign tourist destinations are termed according to the country of a tourist destination. Source: own survey data. Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers 11 On the one hand, the analysis of motives for the re- spondents’ participation in tourism indicates that cannabis consumption is an additional tourist at- traction for the majority of the respondents. On the other hand, one third of the respondents consider cannabis consumption as the primary motive for their tourist trips. This shows that, to a large extent, the respondents equate their travels with the con- sumption of cannabis, which is in line with results of other studies (Motyka, 2016; EMCDDA, 2012; Grobe, Lűer, 2011). The respondents’ tourist activ- ity and travel motives are conditioned by the fact that many respondents are current and recent can- nabis consumers. The frequency of cannabis con- sumption declared by our respondents differs from the findings reported in the literature, according to which 16.3% of the Polish aged 15–64 admit to using cannabis at least once in a lifetime, 4.6% in the last year and 2.1% in the last month (Sierosławski et al., 2015, p. 219). The present survey shows significant shares of respondents consuming cannabis during the last month (62.7%) and year (27.2%) preceding the survey. It means that mostly current and recent cannabis consumers were interested in participating in the survey. Thus, the results of the survey mainly concern such groups of cannabis users. The tourism activity of respondents declaring current and recent cannabis consumption has a dif- ferent nature from the tourism activity of the Polish society in general. While the level of participation in tourism does not differentiate our respondents from the Polish society in general, other parameters characterizing their tourist activity show evident dif- ferences. For foreign tourist trips, the respondents prefer those countries where cannabis is easily ac- cessible and its consumption is legal or at least toler- ated. This shows a strong influence of the respond- ents’ personal preferences on the nature of their travels. The statistical analysis of the survey data (rs and rk) confirms the previous finding that cannabis tourists come from a group of young people with secondary and higher education, living in large cities and rich regions (Motyka, 2016; EMCDDA, 2012; Grobe, Lűer, 2011). Therefore, a cannabis tourist is a person with a low/medium level of addiction and simultaneously rich enough to afford a tourist trip. Participation in cannabis tourism, previously treated as a deviant or marginal behavior, results from in-depth cultural changes in the modern world (Wen et al., 2018; Ying et al., 2019). Western societies rapidly change and they start taking positive atti- tude towards wide cannabis consumption for relaxa- tion (Wen et al., 2018). This also applies to the Pol- ish society. The consent to cannabis consumption is largely conditioned by a regional cultural context. This is illustrated by the geographic differentiation of the socio-economic environment in which Polish cannabis consumers undertaking tourist trips exist. The present study seems to be another proof that cannabis tourism becomes a field of growing interest among tourism researchers. The worldwide trend to legalize the production, distribution and consumption of cannabis for recreational purposes results in changes in the tourism and hospitality of many regions. Geography can contribute important knowledge to monitoring these changes. references Belhassen Y., Santos C.A., Uriely N., 2007, Cannabis usage in tourism: a sociological perspective, Leisure Studies, 26(3), 303–319. doi: 10.1080/02614360600834958 Bellis M.A., Hale G., Bennett A., Chaudry M., Kilfoyle M., 2000, Ibiza uncovered: changes in substance use and sexual be- haviour amongst young people visiting an international night-life resort, International Journal of Drug Policy, 11(3), 235–244. doi: 10.1016/S0955-3959(00)00053-0 Briggs D., Turner T., 2012, Understanding British youth be- haviors on holiday in Ibiza, International Journal of Cul- ture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 6(1), 81–90. doi: 10.1108/17506181211206270 Cherpitel C.J., Ye Y., Zemore S.E., Bond J., Borges G., 2015, The effect of cross-border mobility on alcohol and drug use among Mexican-American residents living at the U.S.–Mexico border, Addictive Behaviors, 50, 28–33. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.06.008 Cohen E., 1973, Nomads from affluence: notes on the phenomenon of drifter-tourism, International Jour- nal of Comparative Sociology, 14(1–2), 89–103. doi: 10.1177/002071527301400107 Czapiński J., Panek T., 2015, Diagnoza społeczna 2015. Warun- ki i jakość życia Polaków (Eng. Social diagnosis 2015. The objective and subjective quality of life in Poland), Con- temporary Economics, 9(4), 1–545. DeRios M.D., 1994, Drug tourism in the Amazon, Anthropology of Consciousness, 5(1), 16–19. doi: 10.1525/ac.1994.5.1.16 EMCDDA, 2008, A cannabis reader: global issues and local ex- periences, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Lisbon. doi: 10.2810/13807 EMCDDA, 2012, Travel and drug use in Europe: a short review, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addic- tion, Lisbon. Grobe A., Lűer J., 2011, Drug tourism, [in:] A. Papathanassis (ed.), The long tail of tourism: holiday niches and their im- pact on mainstream tourism, Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden, 137–147. GUS, 2014. Turystyka i wypoczynek w gospodarstwach domo- wych w 2013 roku (Eng. Tourism and leisure in households in 2013), Central Statistical Office, Statistical Office in Rzeszów, Rzeszów. 12 Andrzej Matczak, Przemysław A. Pawlicki GUS, 2016, Turystyka w 2015 r. (Eng. Tourism in 2015), Central Statistical Office, Statistical Office in Rzeszów, Rzeszów. Hoffmann B., 2014, Drug consumption tourism as a social phenomenon, Trakia Journal of Sciences, 12(4), 455–460. doi: 10.15547/tjs.2014.04.017 Holman C., 2011, Surfing for a shaman: analyzing an Ayahuas- ca Website, Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 90–109. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2010.05.005 Josiam B.M., Hobson J.C.P., Dietrich U.C., Smeaton G., 1998, An analysis of the sexual, alcohol and drug related be- havioural patterns of students on spring break, Tour- ism Management, 19(6), 501–513. doi: 10.1016/S0261- 5177(98)00052-1 Kang S., Miller J., Lee J., 2019, The cannabis festival: quality, satisfaction, and intention to return, International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 10(3), 267–283. doi: 10.1108/IJEFM-04-2019-0029 Kang S.K., 2019, Place attachment, image, and support for mar- ijuana tourism in Colorado, SAGE Open, 9(2), article num- ber 2158244019852482. doi: 10.1177/2158244019852482 Kang S.K., Lee J., 2018, Support of marijuana tourism in Colo- rado: a residents’ perspective using social exchange the- ory, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 9, 310–319. doi: 10.1016/j.jdmm.2018.03.003 Kang S.K., O’Leary J., Miller J., 2016, From forbidden fruit to the goose that lays golden eggs: marijuana tourism in Colora- do, SAGE Open, 6(4), article number 2158244016679213. doi: 10.1177/2158244016679213 Kavenská V., Simonová H., 2015, Ayahuasca tourism: partici- pants in shamanic rituals and their personality styles, mo- tivation, benefits and risks, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 47(5), 351–359. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2015.1094590 Keul A., Eisenhauer B., 2019, Making the high country: can- nabis tourism in Colorado USA, Annals of Leisure Research, 22(2), 140–160. doi: 10.1080/11745398.2018.1435291 Korf D.J., 2002, Dutch coffee shops and trends in cannabis use, Addictive Behaviors, 27(6), 851–866. doi: 10.1016/ S0306-4603(02)00291-5 Liebregts N., van der Pol P., van Laar M., de Graaf R., van den Brink W., Korf D.J., 2015, The role of leisure and delinquen- cy in frequent cannabis use and dependence trajectories among young adults, International Journal of Drug Policy, 26(2), 143–152. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2014.07.014 Matczak A., Pawlicki P.A., 2016, Cannabis indica as a motiva- tion for foreign travel by Polish citizens, Tourism, 26(2), 49–56. doi: 10.1515/tour-2016-0013 Matczak A., Pawlicki P.A., 2019, Cannabis consumers in Po- land, Journal of Geography, Politics and Society, 9(2), 32– 43. doi: 10.26881/jpgs.2019.2.04 Measham F., Aldridge J., Parker H., 2001, Dancing on drugs: risk, health, and hedonism in the British club scene, Free As- sociation Books, London. Monshouwer K., van Laar M., Vollebergh W.A., 2011, Buying cannabis in ‘coffee shops’. Drug and Alcohol Review, 30(2), 148–156. doi: 10.1111/j.1465-3362.2010.00268.x Motyka M., 2016, Turystyka narkotykowa (Eng. Drug tourism), Hygeia Public Health, 51(1), 31–38. Osborne G.B., Fogel C., 2008, Understanding the motiva- tions for recreational marijuana use among adult Cana- dians, Substance Use and Misuse, 43(3–4), 539–572. doi: 10.1080/10826080701884911 Pinheiro Dias Pereira T.F., de Paula L.B., 2016, Drug tourism: general overview, case studies and new perspectives in the contemporary world, European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 7(3), 188–202. doi: 10.1515/ ejthr-2016-0021 Prayag G., Mura P., Hall M., Fontaine J., 2015, Drug or spiritu- ality seekers? Consuming ayahuasca, Annals of Tourism Research, 52, 175–177. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2015.03.008 Rogacki H., 2009, Dynamika i przekształcenia strukturalne turystycznej bazy noclegowej w Polsce w ujęciu prze- strzennym (Eng. Dynamics and structural transformation of the tourist accommodation base in Poland: a regional approach), Folia Turistica, 21, 203–220. Runge J., 2006, Metody badań w geografii społeczno-ekono- micznej – elementy metodologii, wybrane narzędzia ba- dawcze (Eng. Research methods in socio-economic ge- ography – elements of methodology, selected research tools), Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, Katowice. Sierosławski J., Malczewski A., Misiurek A., Strzelecka A., Ję- druszak Ł., Leszczyńska M., 2015, Substancje psychoak- tywne – postawy i zachowania. Raport z ogólnopolskich badań zrealizowanych w 2014 r. (Eng. Psychoactive sub- stances - attitudes and behavior. Report on national sur- veys carried out in 2014), [in:] Estimating the prevalence of selected addictions and the behavioral analysis of the cor- relation between the occurrence of behavioral addictions and the use of psychoactive substances, CSO Foundation, Warszawa, 195–273. Skliamis K., Korf D.J., 2019, Cannabis festivals and their at- tendees in four European cities with different national cannabis policies, International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 10(2), 138–154. doi: 10.1108/ IJEFM-08-2018-0049 Taylor L.L., 2019, Defining marijuana tourism, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 43(3), 438–446. doi: 10.1177/1096348018804610 Tupper K.W., 2008, The globalization of ayahuasca: harm reduction or benefit maximization? International Jour- nal of Drug Policy, 19(4), 297–303. doi: 10.1016/j.drug- po.2006.11.001 UNODC, 2019, World Drug Report 2019, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Vienna. Uriely N., Belhassen Y., 2005 Drugs and tourists’ experi- ences. Journal of Travel Research, 43(3), 238–246. doi: 10.1177/0047287504272024 Valdez A., Sifaneck S.J., 1997, Drug tourists and drug policy on the U.S.-Mexican border: an ethnographic investigation of the acquisition of prescription drugs, Journal of Drug Is- sues, 27(4), 879–898. doi: 10.1177/002204269702700413 van den Brink W., 1996, Heroin in Amsterdam, Jellinek Quar- terly, 3(4), 6–7. van Havere T., Vanderplasschen W., Lammertyn J., Broekaert E., Bellis M., 2011, Drug use and nightlife: more than just dance music, Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 6, article number 18. doi: 10.1186/1747-597X-6-18 van Loon R., Rouwendal J., 2017, Travel purpose and expendi- ture patterns in city tourism: evidence from the Amster- Tourism of Polish cannabis consumers 13 dam Metropolitan Area, Journal of Cultural Economics, 41(2), 109-127. doi: 10.1007/s10824-017-9293-1 Wen J., Meng F., Ying T., Belhassen Y., 2020, A study of segmen- tation of cannabis-oriented tourists from China based on motivation, Current Issues in Tourism, 23(1), 36–51. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2019.1584608 Wen J., Meng F., Ying T., Qi H., Lockyer T., 2018, Drug tourism motivation of Chinese outbound tourists: Scale develop- ment and validation, Tourism Management, 64, 233–244. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2017.08.001 Westerhausen K., 2002, Beyond the beach: an ethnography of modern travellers in Asia, White Lotus Co. Ltd., Bangkok. Winkelman M., 2005, Drug tourism or spiritual healing? Aya- huasca seekers in Amazonia, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 37(2), 209–218. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2005.10399803 Ying T., Wen J., Shan S., 2019, Is cannabis tourism deviant? A theoretical perspective, Tourism Review International, 23, 71–77. doi: 10.3727/154427219x15561098338303