Two and a half years after Germany’s Cannabis Act came into force, the federal government still doesn’t have precise figures on how many cannabis cultivation associations have received approval nationwide. The Green Party faction aims to change this and has submitted a parliamentary inquiry with 30 detailed questions. The document bears the reference number 21/7856 and is dated September 7, 2026.
📑 Inhaltsverzeichnis
What Parliamentary Document 21/7856 Contains
The inquiry was signed by Linda Heitmann, Denise Loop, Karl Bär, Janosch Dahmen, Kirsten Kappert-Gonther, and Johannes Wagner, among others. The inquiry’s title is „Implementation and Further Development of Cannabis Legislation, Cultivation Associations, Scientific Pilot Projects, and Current Perspectives.“ The questions focus on three areas: the status of approvals under § 11 KCanG, the stalemate in scientific pilot projects under § 2 paragraph 4 KCanG, and how limited legal purchase options affect the medical cannabis market.
Noteworthy is the starting point the questioners establish in their preamble. In response to an earlier inquiry (document 21/2862), the federal government stated in late 2025 that it had no independent knowledge of how many cultivation associations had already received approval. It also deferred questions about bureaucratic and legal barriers to the states‘ jurisdiction. Anyone wanting to know how partial legalization is actually functioning must continue to query state authorities individually—as we recently did for Saxony and Lower Saxony.
The Blind Spot in Approval Data
The inquiry tackles this gap precisely. It seeks to know which requirements most frequently trigger formal objections in practice, how differently the states interpret security concepts, distance regulations, reliability checks, prevention officers, and training requirements, and in which federal-state committees this is even discussed. The politically most interesting question comes at the end: whether the federal government believes uniform implementation guidelines or legislative clarifications are necessary.
That interpretations diverge is not speculation. Bavaria effectively blocked communal cultivation via building regulations until the German Hemp Association and a local group pursued legal action—a case we documented with CSC Inntal. In other states, approvals are granted by the dozen. This very disparity is what makes a federal response so valuable: it would make visible in a single document what is currently scattered across sixteen state press offices.
Research Pilot Projects: 65 Applications, Zero Approvals
The second section hits harder. As of November 21, 2025, the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food had not approved a single pilot project filed under § 2 paragraph 4 KCanG. Earlier, document 21/2290 revealed that a total of 65 applications had been submitted, nine of which were already rejected. The remainder remained under review. The federal government also noted that the coalition agreement between CDU, CSU, and SPD does not include the so-called second pillar of regional pilot projects and commercial supply chains.
Thus an instrument explicitly written into law has been effectively suspended in administrative practice. The inquiry therefore asks not only for numbers but for reasons: Why were applications rejected, how many applicants filed objections or sued, and has the federal government’s legal interpretation on the approvability of such projects changed? The concept itself predates the Cannabis Act, as our piece on cannabis pilot projects shows.
Why the Inquiry Links to Medical Cannabis
The Greens explicitly connect both threads. If legal purchase options for recreational consumption remain scarce, their argument goes, demand shifts to private prescriptions. The inquiry cites the government draft to amend the Medical Cannabis Act, which would restrict telemedicine prescriptions and mail delivery, as well as the coalition amendment to the health insurance contribution stabilization law that prioritizes finished pharmaceuticals over flower. They ask what connection the federal government sees between these measures and whether it would make sense to reduce the incentive for private prescriptions through additional regulated purchase channels.
This is the real point of the inquiry. It poses the question often skipped in the tightening debate: whether a constricted medical market without functioning alternatives in the recreational sphere actually achieves the desired outcome or merely shifts the pathways. Similar logic is currently being tested by the Netherlands with its Wiet Experiment, which examines legal supply chains and consumer behavior together.
What an Answer Would Change
A parliamentary inquiry doesn’t change law. However, it forces a written statement, which has become rare in cannabis regulation. If the answer comes within the usual two weeks, it would be the first official assessment since late 2025 on approval practices and pilot projects. Should the federal government again default to the formula that states are responsible, that would also be a result. It would demonstrate that the federal government doesn’t measure the effectiveness of its own legislation. How differently the parties approach these questions was last broken down in our election check for Berlin and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Parliamentary Inquiry?
A parliamentary inquiry is a control mechanism in the legislative process. A parliamentary faction or group of lawmakers submits written questions to the federal government, which must normally respond in writing within two weeks. The response is published as a separate parliamentary document.
How Many Cultivation Associations Currently Exist in Germany?
There is no official federal total. Known figures come from queries to state authorities and surveys by advocacy groups. This information gap is precisely what prompted the inquiry.
What Are the Pilot Projects Under § 2 Paragraph 4 KCanG?
The Cannabis Act permits scientifically monitored projects for controlled cannabis distribution for recreational purposes. These must be applied for at the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food. As of the date cited in the inquiry, none have been approved.
Must the Federal Government Answer Every Question?
It must respond but can cite lack of independent knowledge or state jurisdiction. This has happened multiple times in previous Cannabis Act inquiries. While such a response is technically permissible, it is politically vulnerable.
When Can an Answer Be Expected?
Two weeks from submission to the government is standard. For extensive inquiries with many individual questions, this deadline is regularly extended. An answer in autumn 2026 is likely, though no specific date is set.
Sollte der Bund einheitliche Regeln für Anbauvereinigungen vorgeben?
Source: German Bundestag, Document 21/7856 from September 7, 2026, Parliamentary Inquiry by Representatives Linda Heitmann, Denise Loop, Karl Bär, Janosch Dahmen, Simone Fischer, Kirsten Kappert-Gonther, Johannes Wagner and the Green Party faction; Bundestag Documents 21/2290 and 21/2862.
Branchen-Update
News, Analysen und Reportagen — mehrmals im Monat direkt in dein Postfach.
Folge uns
