How do courts contribute to policy integration? A comparative study of policy integration processes in Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala.

IF 3.8 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Paul Cisneros
{"title":"How do courts contribute to policy integration? A comparative study of policy integration processes in Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala.","authors":"Paul Cisneros","doi":"10.1007/s11077-023-09498-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With Supreme and Constitutional courts or tribunals playing an increasingly significant role in shaping extractive policies in Latin America, scholars should turn their attention to the impacts of judicial decisions on policy processes. This phenomenon is of considerable interest to scholars of policy integration, as constitutional interpretations by the courts have the potential to reframe policy issues and address the effects of policy fragmentation. In this paper, we investigate the influence of high courts on the creation of integrative spaces that seek to convey a commitment to guaranteeing constitutional rights. Our study focuses on Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala where we analyze the role of high courts in initiating policy integration processes. First, it contributes to the processual approach to policy integration by highlighting the role of the courts in initiating policy integration processes. In doing so, we depart from the usual focus on integration as a design of governments, instead highlighting how governments and other actors react to integration mandates issued by the courts. Furthermore, we contribute to current debates on how high courts enhance the State's responses to social conflicts by protecting constitutional rights, identifying the conditions under which judicial decisions can produce effective policy integration. Our research is based on the analysis of court documents gray literature and semi-structured interviews conducted with key informants and country experts. The findings underscore the importance of goal compatibility between high courts and dominant actors within policy subsystems, in mobilizing the resources required to form and operate integrative spaces. Applicable enforcement mechanisms and conflict expansion by policy challengers complete the conditions that allow court decisions to produce effective policy integration. Finally, the strategic and contextual nature of actors' engagement in integration processes suggests that policy integration is no panacea for tackling complex issues and improving policy delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10024010/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-023-09498-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With Supreme and Constitutional courts or tribunals playing an increasingly significant role in shaping extractive policies in Latin America, scholars should turn their attention to the impacts of judicial decisions on policy processes. This phenomenon is of considerable interest to scholars of policy integration, as constitutional interpretations by the courts have the potential to reframe policy issues and address the effects of policy fragmentation. In this paper, we investigate the influence of high courts on the creation of integrative spaces that seek to convey a commitment to guaranteeing constitutional rights. Our study focuses on Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala where we analyze the role of high courts in initiating policy integration processes. First, it contributes to the processual approach to policy integration by highlighting the role of the courts in initiating policy integration processes. In doing so, we depart from the usual focus on integration as a design of governments, instead highlighting how governments and other actors react to integration mandates issued by the courts. Furthermore, we contribute to current debates on how high courts enhance the State's responses to social conflicts by protecting constitutional rights, identifying the conditions under which judicial decisions can produce effective policy integration. Our research is based on the analysis of court documents gray literature and semi-structured interviews conducted with key informants and country experts. The findings underscore the importance of goal compatibility between high courts and dominant actors within policy subsystems, in mobilizing the resources required to form and operate integrative spaces. Applicable enforcement mechanisms and conflict expansion by policy challengers complete the conditions that allow court decisions to produce effective policy integration. Finally, the strategic and contextual nature of actors' engagement in integration processes suggests that policy integration is no panacea for tackling complex issues and improving policy delivery.

法院如何促进政策一体化?哥伦比亚、厄瓜多尔和危地马拉政策一体化进程的比较研究。
随着最高法院和宪法法院或法庭在制定拉丁美洲采掘政策方面发挥着越来越重要的作用,学者们应该将注意力转向司法裁决对政策过程的影响。这一现象引起了政策一体化学者的极大兴趣,因为法院对宪法的解释有可能重新界定政策问题并解决政策碎片化的影响。在本文中,我们调查了高等法院对创建一体化空间的影响,这些空间旨在传达对保障宪法权利的承诺。我们的研究重点是哥伦比亚、厄瓜多尔和危地马拉,我们分析了高等法院在启动政策整合过程中的作用。首先,它通过强调法院在启动政策整合过程中的作用,为政策整合的过程方法做出了贡献。在这样做的过程中,我们偏离了通常将一体化作为政府设计的重点,而是强调了政府和其他行为者对法院发布的一体化授权的反应。此外,我们为目前关于高等法院如何通过保护宪法权利、确定司法裁决能够产生有效政策整合的条件来加强国家对社会冲突的反应的辩论做出了贡献。我们的研究基于对法庭文件灰色文献的分析,以及对关键线人和国家专家进行的半结构化访谈。调查结果强调了高等法院和政策子系统中的主导行为者之间目标兼容性的重要性,在调动形成和运作一体化空间所需的资源方面。适用的执行机制和政策挑战者扩大冲突,为法院裁决产生有效的政策整合创造了条件。最后,行动者参与一体化进程的战略和背景性质表明,政策一体化不是解决复杂问题和改进政策执行的灵丹妙药。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Policy Sciences
Policy Sciences Multiple-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The policy sciences are distinctive within the policy movement in that they embrace the scholarly traditions innovated and elaborated by Harold D. Lasswell and Myres S. McDougal. Within these pages we provide space for approaches that are problem-oriented, contextual, and multi-method in orientation. There are many other journals in which authors can take top-down, deductive, and large-sample approach or adopt a primarily theoretical focus. Policy Sciences encourages systematic and empirical investigations in which problems are clearly identified from a practical and theoretical perspective, are well situated in the extant literature, and are investigated utilizing methodologies compatible with contextual, as opposed to reductionist, understandings. We tend not to publish pieces that are solely theoretical, but favor works in which the applied policy lessons are clearly articulated. Policy Sciences favors, but does not publish exclusively, works that either explicitly or implicitly utilize the policy sciences framework. The policy sciences can be applied to articles with greater or lesser intensity to accommodate the focus of an author’s work. At the minimum, this means taking a problem oriented, multi-method or contextual approach. At the fullest expression, it may mean leveraging central theory or explicitly applying aspects of the framework, which is comprised of three principal dimensions: (1) social process, which is mapped in terms of participants, perspectives, situations, base values, strategies, outcomes and effects, with values (power, wealth, enlightenment, skill, rectitude, respect, well-being, and affection) being the key elements in understanding participants’ behaviors and interactions; (2) decision process, which is mapped in terms of seven functions—intelligence, promotion, prescription, invocation, application, termination, and appraisal; and (3) problem orientation, which comprises the intellectual tasks of clarifying goals, describing trends, analyzing conditions, projecting developments, and inventing, evaluating, and selecting alternatives. There is a more extensive core literature that also applies and can be visited at the policy sciences website: http://www.policysciences.org/classicworks.cfm. In addition to articles that explicitly utilize the policy sciences framework, Policy Sciences has a long tradition of publishing papers that draw on various aspects of that framework and its central theory as well as high quality conceptual pieces that address key challenges, opportunities, or approaches in ways congruent with the perspective that this journal strives to maintain and extend.Officially cited as: Policy Sci
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信