Understanding psychedelic legality starts with one basic fact: the rules are changing fast. What landed someone in jail five years ago might be perfectly fine in your city today. What’s still illegal at the federal level could be completely legal for therapy in your state. The laws change depending on where you live, which substance you’re talking about, and what you plan to do with it.
Right now we’re seeing a major shift away from total prohibition. New research comes out almost every month. Cities are passing new measures. Entire countries are rethinking how they handle these substances. But you need solid information to understand where things actually stand.
This guide breaks down the current legal status of psychedelics in different places, explains what decriminalization actually means versus full legalization, and shows what these changes mean for regular people. The laws might be messy, but getting a handle on them doesn’t have to be.
Current Legal Status of Psychedelics in North America
The legal situation for psychedelics in North America is all over the place. Federal laws say one thing while states, provinces, and cities often do something completely different. This creates real confusion for anyone trying to figure out what’s actually legal where they live.
United States Federal Classification
At the federal level, most psychedelics fall under Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. This means the government views them as highly addictive, medically useless, and unsafe even with doctor supervision. Psilocybin, LSD, DMT, and MDMA all sit in this category.
Schedule I status comes with serious problems. Making, selling, or just having these substances can get you federal charges, huge fines, and years in prison. Even scientists have a tough time studying them because they need special DEA licenses to work with Schedule I drugs.
This classification stays in place despite mounting evidence that shows it doesn’t match reality. Clinical trials keep showing therapeutic value. Safety research demonstrates lower addiction risk than legal stuff like alcohol. But changing federal law needs Congress to act, and that takes forever.
Canadian Federal Regulations
Canada handles things similarly but with slightly more flexibility. The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act puts most psychedelics on Schedule III. Psilocybin, LSD, and MDMA all land here, making it illegal to produce, distribute, or possess them without special permission.
Health Canada can grant exemptions for specific situations. They’ve approved Section 56 exemptions for some patients who need psilocybin therapy for end-of-life anxiety. They’ve also let researchers study these substances under controlled settings. These exemptions stay rare but they represent openings that didn’t exist before.
The Special Access Programme offers another way in. Doctors can request unauthorized drugs for patients with serious conditions when standard treatments fail. Some physicians have successfully gotten psilocybin this way for patients dealing with treatment-resistant depression or terminal illness anxiety.
State and Provincial Variations
Several U.S. states have broken away from federal policy by creating their own rules. Oregon passed Measure 109 in 2020, which set up a regulated psilocybin therapy program. Adults can access psilocybin at licensed service centers with trained guides. The program focuses on therapeutic use, not recreational access.
Colorado came next with Proposition 122 in 2022. This decriminalized personal possession and use of psilocybin and psilocin. The measure also created a regulated system for healing centers where adults can use these substances with professional support. The program started rolling out in 2024.
California, Massachusetts, and several other states have active proposals moving through their legislatures. Some aim for statewide decriminalization. Others want to set up therapeutic access programs like Oregon’s. Each state designs its own approach based on local needs and political realities.
Canadian provinces generally stick closer to federal law than U.S. states do. Provincial governments haven’t created their own psychedelic policies separate from federal rules. But some city governments have taken independent steps.
Municipal Decriminalization Efforts
Cities often move way faster than state or federal governments. Over a dozen U.S. cities have decriminalized personal possession of various psychedelics, usually through ballot votes or city council decisions. These moves don’t make psychedelics legal but they tell police to stop prioritizing enforcement.
Denver led the way by decriminalizing psilocybin mushrooms in 2019. Oakland and Santa Cruz quickly followed, expanding their measures to cover more plant-based psychedelics. Seattle, Detroit, and Washington D.C. have joined this growing list.
City-level decriminalization creates a weird legal space. Federal and state laws stay the same, so technically these substances remain illegal. But local police won’t arrest you for personal possession, and prosecutors won’t file charges. How much this matters depends on how seriously local cops took these cases before.
Canadian cities have moved slower. Vancouver became the first major Canadian city to ask for federal decriminalization of simple possession for all drugs in 2021. Health Canada granted a temporary exemption in 2023, though this covers all drugs rather than just psychedelics.
Decriminalization vs. Legalization: Understanding the Difference
People mix up these terms all the time, but they mean very different things. The difference matters because it determines what’s actually allowed, who gets in trouble, and how access gets controlled.
What Decriminalization Actually Means
Decriminalization removes criminal penalties for certain activities while keeping the ban in place. Having small amounts for yourself won’t get you arrested, but the substance stays illegal. You might get a civil fine like a parking ticket, or maybe nothing at all depending on where you are.
Think about jaywalking. Most places prohibit crossing the street outside crosswalks, but police rarely arrest anyone for it. You might get a ticket if a cop feels like enforcing it, but you won’t get a criminal record. Decriminalization treats drug possession the same way.
Making and selling stay completely illegal under decriminalization. Growing mushrooms, making MDMA, or selling any psychedelic to someone else remains a serious crime. Only personal possession gets deprioritized. This approach tries to reduce harm to users without creating legal commercial markets.
How well it works depends entirely on implementation. Some places truly stop enforcing these laws and redirect resources elsewhere. Others keep the laws on the books while police continue making arrests out of habit. Real decriminalization needs clear instructions to law enforcement and consistent application.
Full Legalization and Regulation
Legalization goes much further by removing bans completely and creating legal systems for production, distribution, and sales. Cannabis in Canada and several U.S. states shows what this looks like. Licensed businesses can legally grow, process, and sell products. Consumers can legally buy and possess them. Government agencies regulate quality, testing, and marketing.
No place has fully legalized classic psychedelics the way cannabis got legalized. Oregon’s psilocybin program sits somewhere in the middle. Psilocybin stays illegal to buy and take home, but adults can legally use it at licensed service centers with supervision. This model prioritizes therapeutic settings over recreational access.
Full recreational legalization would look completely different. You’d see retail stores selling psychedelic products, quality testing requirements, age limits, and taxes similar to alcohol or cannabis. Some advocates push for this while others worry about commercialization encouraging irresponsible use.
Medical legalization offers yet another option. Doctors would prescribe psychedelics and patients would get them from pharmacies, just like other prescription drugs. Some researchers and doctors prefer this model because it keeps medical oversight while providing access to people who might benefit therapeutically.
Therapeutic Access Programs
Several places have created special programs that fall between decriminalization and full legalization. These programs typically require professional supervision, trained guides, and specific safety rules. They aim to provide therapeutic access without opening recreational markets.
Oregon’s model requires extensive training for anyone guiding psilocybin sessions. Service centers must meet specific operational standards. Clients pay for sessions that include preparation, the psilocybin experience itself, and follow-up support. The substance never leaves the licensed facility.
This approach recognizes that context matters hugely for psychedelic experiences. Professional guides can screen for health problems, provide emotional support during tough moments, and help clients process their experiences afterward. The structured setting reduces risks that come with uncontrolled use.
Critics say these programs stay too restrictive and expensive. Sessions can cost several thousand dollars, putting them out of reach for many people who might benefit. Geography limits access too since rural residents must travel long distances. Insurance typically won’t cover costs because psychedelics lack FDA approval for specific medical uses.
International Perspectives on Psychedelic Policy
Countries worldwide take wildly different approaches to psychedelic legality. Some maintain strict bans while others have adopted more progressive policies. Looking at international examples shows the range of possibilities and outcomes.
Portugal’s Decriminalization Model
Portugal decriminalized personal possession of all drugs in 2001, including psychedelics. Anyone caught with small amounts faces no criminal charges. Instead, they might get referred to a “dissuasion commission” that can recommend treatment, impose administrative fines, or do nothing at all.
The Portuguese model treats drug use as a public health issue rather than a criminal justice problem. Data from the past two decades shows major decreases in drug-related deaths, HIV infections among drug users, and incarceration rates. Drug use rates stayed stable or dropped slightly, proving wrong the fears that decriminalization would increase consumption.
Portugal still bans production and distribution. The policy targets users rather than dealers or manufacturers. This matters because people can’t legally get psychedelics, but they won’t face criminal penalties for having small amounts.
Portugal’s success influenced drug policy debates around the world. Many advocates point to Portugal when arguing for decriminalization elsewhere. But Portugal didn’t just decriminalize. They also expanded treatment services and harm reduction programs. The policy works as part of a bigger public health strategy, not as a standalone fix.
Netherlands’ Pragmatic Approach
The Netherlands technically bans psilocybin mushrooms, but fresh psilocybin truffles stay legal due to a regulatory loophole. Truffles contain the same active compounds as mushrooms but grow underground instead of above it. They escaped the 2008 mushroom ban because lawmakers didn’t specifically include them.
Smart shops throughout Amsterdam and other Dutch cities openly sell psilocybin truffles. Staff provide information about effects, dosing, and safety. Products come in standardized packages with clear labels. This creates a semi-legal market operating in plain sight.
The Dutch approach reflects their broader philosophy of gedoogbeleid, or tolerance policy. Rather than strict enforcement, authorities tolerate certain activities that technically break the law. This practical stance aims to minimize harm by bringing underground activities into the open where they can be monitored.
Jamaica’s Traditional and Tourism Markets
Jamaica never criminalized psilocybin mushrooms because they weren’t included in the country’s Dangerous Drugs Act. This oversight created a legal loophole that retreat centers and tour operators now use. Multiple businesses offer psilocybin retreats where participants can legally consume mushrooms in guided settings.
The Jamaican market operates without formal regulation. No licensing requirements exist for guides. Quality control standards stay minimal. Safety rules vary by operator. This hands-off approach provides access but raises concerns about participant safety and professional standards.
Tourism drives much of Jamaica’s psychedelic industry. International visitors come specifically for mushroom retreats, bringing money into local communities. Some operators partner with traditional Rastafarian healers who have used cannabis and other plant medicines ceremonially for decades. Others take a more secular, wellness-focused approach.
Australia’s Recent Medical Approvals
Australia became the first country to recognize MDMA and psilocybin as medicines in 2023. The Therapeutic Goods Administration reclassified both substances, allowing authorized psychiatrists to prescribe them for specific conditions. MDMA can be prescribed for PTSD while psilocybin can be used for treatment-resistant depression.
This represents a major shift in global drug policy. Australia moved beyond research and compassionate use to create a formal medical pathway. Patients who meet diagnostic criteria and find an authorized prescriber can legally access these substances as part of their treatment.
Implementation has been slow. Few psychiatrists have sought authorization to prescribe these medicines. Treatment costs stay high because insurance won’t cover unapproved therapies. Access remains limited to major cities where specialized clinics operate. But the policy establishes a framework that other countries are watching closely.
Understanding Substance-Specific Regulations
Different psychedelics face different legal restrictions. Understanding these distinctions matters for anyone trying to figure out psychedelic legality accurately.
Psilocybin and Psilocin Status
Psilocybin and psilocin, the active compounds in magic mushrooms, get the most attention in current reform efforts. They’re Schedule I federally in the U.S. and Schedule III in Canada. But multiple cities and some states have created exceptions specifically for these substances.
The natural occurrence of psilocybin mushrooms creates interesting legal questions. Mushrooms grow wild in many regions. People can stumble across them accidentally while hiking. Some places ban possession of the mushrooms themselves while others only prohibit the extracted compounds. This distinction rarely matters in practice but creates technical legal gray areas.
Spores present another complication. Psilocybin mushroom spores don’t contain psilocybin or psilocin themselves. The compounds only develop as the mushroom grows. Many places haven’t specifically banned spores, creating a legal market for them when sold for microscopy purposes. Growing the spores into mushrooms stays illegal, but getting and possessing spores often isn’t.
MDMA Legal Classifications
MDMA faces strict bans almost everywhere despite promising research results for PTSD treatment. The substance became widely associated with rave culture in the 1990s, leading to emergency scheduling and ongoing prohibition. That reputation continues affecting policy discussions even as scientific understanding has evolved.
No cities or states have decriminalized MDMA the way some have for psilocybin. The substance doesn’t benefit from associations with traditional or religious use. Being synthetic rather than naturally occurring changes the conversation around prohibition. And concerns about neurotoxicity at high doses or with frequent use make policymakers more cautious.
FDA approval for MDMA-assisted therapy could change everything dramatically. Clinical trials have shown strong results for PTSD treatment. If approved, MDMA would become a legal prescription medicine for that specific use. Patients meeting diagnostic criteria could access it through authorized therapists. That would represent the first legal pathway for MDMA use since it was banned in 1985.
LSD and DMT Regulations
LSD and DMT remain firmly illegal almost everywhere. Neither substance has gained traction in current reform movements the way psilocybin has. LSD carries cultural baggage from the 1960s counterculture. DMT, while naturally occurring in many plants, has a reputation for intensity that makes policymakers nervous.
Some indigenous communities in South America use DMT-containing ayahuasca in traditional ceremonies. A few countries provide religious exemptions for this use. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that União do Vegetal, a Brazilian church, could use ayahuasca in religious ceremonies. Similar exemptions exist for Santo Daime churches. But these exceptions stay narrow and don’t extend to secular or recreational use.
Research into these substances continues but with major barriers. Scientists need special licenses and security measures to work with Schedule I substances. Funding often proves difficult to get. The regulatory framework assumes these drugs have no legitimate use, making it harder to study potential benefits.
Ketamine’s Unique Position
Ketamine sits in a different legal category than classic psychedelics. It’s a Schedule III controlled substance in the U.S., meaning it has accepted medical uses but potential for abuse. Doctors can legally prescribe it, and some clinics offer ketamine infusions for treatment-resistant depression.
This legal status makes ketamine the most accessible psychedelic-adjacent substance currently available. Patients don’t need to join clinical trials or get compassionate use exemptions. They simply need to find a doctor willing to prescribe it and afford treatment. Insurance sometimes covers it when used for depression.
The growth of ketamine clinics raises questions about appropriate use and oversight. Some clinics operate with strict protocols and comprehensive patient care. Others function more like pill mills, providing ketamine with minimal screening or support. The medical community continues debating appropriate standards for ketamine-assisted therapy.
What Legal Changes Mean for Individuals
Policy changes sound abstract until you think about their practical effects. Understanding how evolving psychedelic legality affects real people in everyday situations matters way more than theoretical legal differences.
Personal Possession Considerations
Decriminalization in your city doesn’t give you a free pass. State and federal laws stay in effect. Federal agents can still arrest you even in places that have deprioritized enforcement. This rarely happens for simple possession, but the legal risk exists.
Traveling with psychedelics carries serious risks regardless of local policies. Crossing state lines turns simple possession into drug trafficking under federal law. International travel presents even bigger dangers. Many countries impose harsh penalties for drug possession, including lengthy prison sentences.
The amount matters a lot. Decriminalization typically applies only to quantities considered for personal use. Having larger amounts can trigger presumption of intent to distribute, which stays a serious crime everywhere. Different places define personal use differently, so what’s decriminalized in one city might not be in another.
Job consequences persist regardless of criminal charges. Most employers can still fire workers who test positive for controlled substances, even in places where possession is decriminalized. Professional licenses in fields like healthcare, law, or education face extra scrutiny. A drug possession charge, even without conviction, can affect your career.
Accessing Therapeutic Programs
Legal therapeutic programs offer the safest way to have psychedelic experiences but come with major barriers. Cost represents the biggest obstacle for most people. Oregon’s psilocybin sessions typically cost between two and four thousand dollars. Insurance won’t cover these expenses because psilocybin lacks FDA approval.
Geography limits participation too. Licensed service centers cluster in cities. Rural residents might need to travel hundreds of miles and arrange overnight stays. This creates extra costs and logistical problems that make programs inaccessible to many potential participants.
Screening requirements can exclude people who might benefit. Most programs won’t accept individuals with certain psychiatric conditions, particularly psychosis or severe personality disorders. People taking certain medications face exclusion. These restrictions aim to protect participants but they limit who can access legal services.
The application process itself creates barriers. Some programs require referrals from healthcare providers. Others mandate preliminary consultations or intake sessions. Wait times can stretch for months as demand exceeds available slots. These hurdles mean having a legal program in your area doesn’t guarantee you can actually participate.
Growing and Cultivation Questions
Growing your own psychedelic mushrooms stays illegal even in most places that have decriminalized possession. The law typically treats cultivation as production or manufacturing, which remains criminalized under decriminalization frameworks. Only full legalization or therapeutic programs that allow home cultivation change this.
Some places create confusion around personal cultivation. If possession is decriminalized, authorities might deprioritize small-scale growing operations. But this represents a gray area rather than clear legality. Police can still arrest cultivators, and prosecutors can still charge them.
The internet has made cultivation information widely available. Detailed guides explain techniques for growing psilocybin mushrooms at home. Online vendors sell spores legally in many places. Complete growing kits are readily available. This accessibility doesn’t change the legal status but it does make enforcement harder.
Risk assessment becomes personal. Some people in decriminalized areas choose to grow small amounts for personal use, calculating that the legal risk stays low. Others avoid cultivation entirely because the consequences of arrest could devastate their lives. This decision depends on individual circumstances, risk tolerance, and local enforcement patterns.
Future Directions in Psychedelic Policy
The legal situation keeps shifting rapidly. Understanding where things might go helps people make informed decisions and participate in policy discussions.
Pending Legislation and Ballot Measures
Multiple states have active proposals or ballot measures addressing psychedelic legality. California voters may see a measure on a future ballot. Massachusetts legislators have introduced bills to decriminalize certain plant-based psychedelics. New York, Connecticut, and several other states have similar proposals under consideration.
These measures take different approaches. Some focus narrowly on psilocybin while others include multiple substances. Some emphasize decriminalization while others aim to create therapeutic access programs. The variety reflects ongoing debates about the best policy framework.
Success rates vary. Ballot measures tend to perform better than legislative proposals because they bypass elected officials and go directly to voters. But even successful ballot measures face implementation challenges. Oregon passed Measure 109 in 2020 but didn’t launch its program until 2023. Creating regulatory frameworks takes time and resources.
Federal proposals remain unlikely in the near term. Bills to deschedule psychedelics or create research pathways have been introduced but none have advanced much. The political climate around drug policy stays contentious. State and local action will likely continue leading federal policy rather than the reverse.
FDA Approval Pathways
MDMA and psilocybin are both in Phase 3 clinical trials, the final stage before potential FDA approval. MAPS completed its MDMA trials for PTSD treatment and submitted data to the FDA. Several research groups are conducting psilocybin trials for depression, anxiety, and other conditions.
FDA approval would completely change the legal situation for approved uses. Doctors could prescribe these substances just like any other medication. Insurance would likely cover treatments, dramatically improving access. Production and distribution could happen through standard pharmaceutical channels.
But approval for one condition doesn’t create blanket legality. MDMA might be approved for PTSD while remaining Schedule I for other uses. Psilocybin could be legal by prescription for depression but illegal for recreational use. This would create a two-tier system where the same substance is both legal medicine and prohibited drug depending on context.
The medical model has critics. Some worry it medicalizes experiences that people have safely self-administered for centuries. Others fear pharmaceutical companies will monopolize access and drive up costs. Many advocates prefer broader decriminalization or legalization rather than keeping these substances exclusively in medical hands.
Harm Reduction and Public Health Approaches
Some places are moving toward treating drug use as a public health issue rather than a criminal justice problem. This approach emphasizes services over punishment. Drug checking programs, safe consumption sites, and outreach programs replace arrests and jail time.
Drug checking services have expanded in some areas. Organizations offer to test substances for purity and composition without legal consequences for possession. This lets people make informed decisions about what they’re taking. Testing catches dangerous adulterants that could cause serious harm.
Peer support programs provide another harm reduction strategy. Trained volunteers offer non-judgmental support to people using psychedelics. Some organizations operate trip-sitting services or hotlines for people having difficult experiences. These programs acknowledge that prohibition doesn’t stop use and focus on reducing negative outcomes.
Public education represents another shift. Rather than “just say no” messaging, modern campaigns provide accurate information about effects, risks, and safer use practices. This approach respects individual choice while equipping people to make informed decisions. Research shows that honest, evidence-based education works better than fear-based campaigns.
Commercial Market Development
If legalization expands, commercial markets will likely follow. Companies are already positioning themselves for this possibility. Some have developed standardized products ready for legal markets. Others are training facilitators or establishing service center networks.
Commercial markets bring both benefits and concerns. Professional production ensures consistent quality and accurate dosing. Regulation can prevent contamination and mislabeling. Legal businesses can provide customer service and educational resources.
But commercialization also raises issues. Marketing could encourage inappropriate use or overconsumption. Profit motives might conflict with responsible use principles. Corporate consolidation could squeeze out community-based providers or traditional practitioners. Price pressure could lead to corner-cutting on safety or quality.
Finding the right balance between access and responsibility will challenge policymakers. Cannabis legalization provides lessons, both positive and negative. Some places created thoughtful frameworks that prioritize public health. Others rushed implementation and faced problems with youth access, impaired driving, and predatory marketing.
Making Informed Decisions About Psychedelic Use
Understanding the legal situation helps people make better choices. But legal status represents just one factor in responsible decision-making around psychedelics.
Assessing Personal Legal Risk
Your specific situation determines your level of legal risk. Consider your location, your profession, your personal circumstances, and your risk tolerance. Someone living in Denver faces different legal realities than someone in Alabama. A teacher faces different consequences than a software developer.
Research local laws and enforcement patterns. Decriminalization on paper doesn’t guarantee changed police behavior. Some places actively embraced reform while others maintain aggressive enforcement despite policy changes. Local news coverage and community reports can provide insight into actual practices.
Think about consequences beyond criminal penalties. Professional licenses, housing, child custody, immigration status, and educational opportunities can all be affected by drug charges. Even dismissed charges create records that might appear in background checks. These impacts often exceed direct legal penalties.
Document everything if you choose to participate in legal programs. Keep records of consultations, payments, and any medical recommendations. This documentation could prove essential if legal questions arise later. It also helps track your experiences for personal reflection and integration.
Prioritizing Safety Over Legal Status
Legal availability doesn’t guarantee safety. Underground markets persist even in places with legal options because legal programs stay expensive or restrictive. But illegal sources carry serious risks that legal products don’t.
Substance testing should be non-negotiable if you get psychedelics from illegal sources. Testing strips or services can identify dangerous adulterants like fentanyl. They verify that what you think you have actually matches reality. This simple step prevents many serious complications.
Context matters enormously for psychedelic experiences. The legal situation forms part of that context. Worrying about legal consequences during an experience can trigger anxiety or paranoia. Choosing settings where you feel safe and secure improves outcomes regardless of technical legal status.
Having trusted people present provides important support. Experienced sitters can help navigate difficult moments during intense experiences. They can call for help if medical intervention becomes necessary. They serve as anchors to reality when experiences become confusing or overwhelming.
Staying Informed About Changes
Psychedelic legality keeps evolving. Staying current requires active effort. Following reliable sources helps you track changes that might affect you.
Here are the best ways to stay updated:
- Follow advocacy organizations like MAPS, the Psychedelic Science Funders Collaborative, and local decriminalization initiatives that announce legal changes as they happen
- Track academic research by following major research institutions or subscribing to newsletters from organizations studying psychedelics
- Read local news coverage since city councils and state legislatures often debate these issues before changes happen
- Connect with local communities through online forums and in-person groups that share experiences with legal programs and enforcement patterns
This information supplements official sources and reveals how policies actually play out in real life.
Conclusion
The legal status of psychedelics continues transforming across North America and globally. Old frameworks based on total prohibition are giving way to more varied approaches that recognize therapeutic potential while still addressing legitimate safety concerns.
Current psychedelic legality varies dramatically by location, substance, and intended use. Federal prohibition stays in place across the U.S. and Canada, but state, provincial, and city governments are creating their own policies. Some places have decriminalized personal possession while others have built therapeutic access programs. A few countries have taken even bolder steps toward full medical integration.
These changes create opportunities but also complexity. People trying to understand their legal rights and risks must deal with multiple layers of potentially conflicting laws. What’s legal in your city might violate state or federal law. What’s decriminalized for possession might stay fully illegal for cultivation or distribution.
The direction of change seems clear even if the pace stays uncertain. More places will likely create pathways for legal access, whether through decriminalization, therapeutic programs, or medical prescribing. Research will continue building the evidence for therapeutic applications. Cultural attitudes are shifting as more people learn about potential benefits and as prohibition’s failures become harder to ignore.
But change won’t happen uniformly or quickly. Some places will maintain strict bans for years or decades. Legal access will stay limited by cost, geography, and eligibility criteria even where programs exist. Federal law will likely lag behind state and local innovation.
Making informed choices requires understanding where things stand now and where they’re heading. It means assessing your personal situation honestly and evaluating risks carefully. It means prioritizing safety regardless of legal status and staying current as policies evolve.
The legal landscape of psychedelics will keep shifting. Understanding these changes helps you make better decisions for yourself while participating constructively in ongoing policy discussions. The laws are changing because people are speaking up, voting, and demanding better approaches. Your voice and your choices contribute to that transformation.
