_Only_ if they are adequately defined (and it's clear what the legal effect is). Two and a half years on from the Brexit referendum, we are still arguing about what it even _means_, and it's not clear if people even want to leave anymore. Ideally, they should be considered advisory only, otherwise you could end up with a tyranny of the majority situation (a very slight majority is probably not a good reason to make sweeping changes), or at least require a supermajority. I'd also say that in a lot of cases people do not understand the implications of what they are voting for, hence my preference for electing a representative to make these decisions, who are at least in theory elected to consider this effects.