New Zealand recently held the world's first national referendum on cannabis legalisation involving a detailed bill to regulate retail sale and supply of cannabis for recreational (non-medical) adult use (i.e. the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill; CLCB). The referendum generated significant domestic debate and lobbying from both sides of the issue. The CLCB was narrowly defeated, with 48.4% voting to support versus 50.7% opposed. In this commentary, we discuss the referendum campaigns and other political and social factors that may have contributed to the result. Voting patterns appeared to largely follow traditional conservative-liberal, urban–rural and age divides. The referendum format created a public campaigning environment that encouraged persuasion and selective use of evidence rather than rational discussion of all the evidence and related knowledge gaps. The self-imposed neutrality of the centre left Labour Party and its popular leader may have been a decisive factor in the narrow defeat. It did not appear to be the case that anti-CLCB groups outspent the pro-CLCB movement in online promotional advertisements, and the leading digital media appeared largely neutral or mildly in favour of reform. The recent New Zealand experience illustrates the uncertainties of attempting to achieve cannabis law reform via a public referendum vote.

中文翻译：

---

为什么新西兰将休闲大麻合法化的公投失败了？

新西兰最近举行了世界上第一次关于大麻合法化的全国公投，其中涉及一项详细的法案，以规范用于娱乐（非医疗）成人用途的大麻的零售和供应（即大麻合法化和控制法案；CLCB）。公投引发了国内重要的辩论和问题双方的游说。CLCB 以微弱优势被击败，48.4% 的投票支持，50.7% 的反对。在本评论中，我们讨论了可能导致结果的公投运动以及其他政治和社会因素。投票模式似乎在很大程度上遵循传统的保守-自由、城乡和年龄划分。公投形式创造了一个公共竞选环境，鼓励说服和有选择地使用证据，而不是对所有证据和相关知识差距进行理性讨论。中间左翼工党及其民众领袖自我强加的中立可能是导致惨败的决定性因素。反 CLCB 团体在在线宣传广告中的支出似乎并没有超过支持 CLCB 的运动，主要的数字媒体在很大程度上表现出中立或温和地支持改革。新西兰最近的经验表明，试图通过公投来实现大麻法律改革的不确定性。反 CLCB 团体在在线宣传广告中的支出似乎并没有超过支持 CLCB 的运动，主要的数字媒体在很大程度上表现出中立或温和地支持改革。新西兰最近的经验表明，试图通过公投来实现大麻法律改革的不确定性。反 CLCB 团体在在线宣传广告中的支出似乎并没有超过支持 CLCB 的运动，主要的数字媒体在很大程度上表现出中立或温和地支持改革。新西兰最近的经验表明，试图通过公投来实现大麻法律改革的不确定性。