In Canada, in the early 2000s, the decriminalization of cannabis for recreational use seemed imminent. Between 2003 and 2005, three government decriminalization bills were introduced in the Canadian House of Commons, but none were adopted, and decriminalization efforts were abandoned. Subsequently, Canada went beyond decriminalization and legalized recreational cannabis in 2018. This paper examines why the Canadian decriminalization efforts failed, using the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and ACF policy change theory. Three ACF-based hypotheses to explain the failed reform attempts are developed and investigated, but none are empirically supported. A fourth hypothesis is developed using information processing insights from Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) but adapted to the ACF. This hypothesis is empirically supported showing that Canada’s decriminalization efforts failed, despite a supportive advocacy coalition, favourable conditions in the cannabis policy subsystem and favourable conditions in the Canadian political system, because its systemic advocates did not give it priority relative to other issues from other subsystems. This finding has implications for ACF policy change theory, identifying a necessary condition for major policy change that has been potentially overlooked, and illustrates the potential for cross-fertilization between PET and ACF theories of policy change.

在加拿大，2000 年代初，用于娱乐用途的大麻非刑事化似乎迫在眉睫。 2003年至2005年间，加拿大下议院提出了三项政府非刑事化法案，但均未获得通过，非刑事化努力也被放弃。随后，加拿大于 2018 年超越非刑罪化，将休闲大麻合法化。本文利用倡导联盟框架 (ACF) 和 ACF 政策变革理论，探讨了加拿大非刑罪化努力失败的原因。提出并研究了三个基于 ACF 的假设来解释失败的改革尝试，但没有一个得到实证支持。第四个假设是利用间断平衡理论 (PET) 的信息处理见解提出的，但适用于 ACF。这一假设得到了实证支持，表明加拿大的非刑事化努力失败了，尽管有支持性的倡导联盟、大麻政策子系统的有利条件以及加拿大政治体系的有利条件，因为其系统性倡导者并未将其优先于其他子系统的其他问题。这一发现对 ACF 政策变革理论具有影响，确定了可能被忽视的重大政策变革的必要条件，并说明了 PET 和 ACF 政策变革理论之间交叉融合的潜力。