危机中的政策执行:菲律宾的经验教训

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES
Steven T. Zech, Joshua Eastin, Matteo Bonotti
{"title":"危机中的政策执行:菲律宾的经验教训","authors":"Steven T. Zech,&nbsp;Joshua Eastin,&nbsp;Matteo Bonotti","doi":"10.1002/app5.378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Like many countries, the Philippines faced severe economic, social, and political challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020 President Duterte issued an executive order announcing a national state of emergency that introduced a highly restrictive system for community quarantine and lockdown. While these measures led international observers to rank the Philippinesʼ pandemic response among the worldʼs most stringent, it is unclear whether subsequent health outcomes were sufficient to justify the severity. In this article, we evaluate discrepancies between COVID-19 policy goals and outcomes in the Philippines via a compelling but under-utilized method of democratic deliberation, the ‘mini-public’. The mini-public that we held brought together a random sample of citizens who heard testimony from local public health experts and political leaders, and then used this information in conjunction with their own experiences to identify policy shortcomings and develop recommendations for policymakers. The most substantial challenges to the governmentʼs pandemic response were reported to be inadequate enforcement and under-resourcing of government officials tasked with policy implementation. These challenges created a disconnect between policy objectives and their performance in practice. We conclude by summarizing the mini-public participantsʼ recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":45839,"journal":{"name":"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies","volume":"10 1-3","pages":"28-45"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/app5.378","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Policy implementation in crisis: Lessons from the Philippines\",\"authors\":\"Steven T. Zech,&nbsp;Joshua Eastin,&nbsp;Matteo Bonotti\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/app5.378\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Like many countries, the Philippines faced severe economic, social, and political challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020 President Duterte issued an executive order announcing a national state of emergency that introduced a highly restrictive system for community quarantine and lockdown. While these measures led international observers to rank the Philippinesʼ pandemic response among the worldʼs most stringent, it is unclear whether subsequent health outcomes were sufficient to justify the severity. In this article, we evaluate discrepancies between COVID-19 policy goals and outcomes in the Philippines via a compelling but under-utilized method of democratic deliberation, the ‘mini-public’. The mini-public that we held brought together a random sample of citizens who heard testimony from local public health experts and political leaders, and then used this information in conjunction with their own experiences to identify policy shortcomings and develop recommendations for policymakers. The most substantial challenges to the governmentʼs pandemic response were reported to be inadequate enforcement and under-resourcing of government officials tasked with policy implementation. These challenges created a disconnect between policy objectives and their performance in practice. We conclude by summarizing the mini-public participantsʼ recommendations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies\",\"volume\":\"10 1-3\",\"pages\":\"28-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/app5.378\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app5.378\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app5.378","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与许多国家一样,菲律宾在新冠肺炎大流行期间面临着严峻的经济、社会和政治挑战。2020年3月,杜特尔特总统发布了一项行政命令,宣布全国进入紧急状态,并引入了严格限制的社区隔离和封锁制度。尽管这些措施使国际观察员将菲律宾的疫情应对措施列为世界上最严格的措施之一,但尚不清楚随后的健康结果是否足以证明其严重性。在这篇文章中,我们通过一种引人注目但未充分利用的民主审议方法,即“小型公众”,评估了菲律宾新冠肺炎政策目标和结果之间的差异。我们召集的小型公众随机抽取了一些公民样本,他们听取了当地公共卫生专家和政治领导人的证词,然后将这些信息与他们自己的经历结合起来,以确定政策缺陷,并为决策者制定建议。据报道,政府应对疫情的最重大挑战是执行不力,负责政策执行的政府官员资源不足。这些挑战造成了政策目标与其在实践中的表现之间的脱节。最后,我们总结了小型公众参与者的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Policy implementation in crisis: Lessons from the Philippines

Policy implementation in crisis: Lessons from the Philippines

Like many countries, the Philippines faced severe economic, social, and political challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020 President Duterte issued an executive order announcing a national state of emergency that introduced a highly restrictive system for community quarantine and lockdown. While these measures led international observers to rank the Philippinesʼ pandemic response among the worldʼs most stringent, it is unclear whether subsequent health outcomes were sufficient to justify the severity. In this article, we evaluate discrepancies between COVID-19 policy goals and outcomes in the Philippines via a compelling but under-utilized method of democratic deliberation, the ‘mini-public’. The mini-public that we held brought together a random sample of citizens who heard testimony from local public health experts and political leaders, and then used this information in conjunction with their own experiences to identify policy shortcomings and develop recommendations for policymakers. The most substantial challenges to the governmentʼs pandemic response were reported to be inadequate enforcement and under-resourcing of government officials tasked with policy implementation. These challenges created a disconnect between policy objectives and their performance in practice. We conclude by summarizing the mini-public participantsʼ recommendations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
19
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies is the flagship journal of the Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University. It is a peer-reviewed journal that targets research in policy studies in Australia, Asia and the Pacific, across a discipline focus that includes economics, political science, governance, development and the environment. Specific themes of recent interest include health and education, aid, migration, inequality, poverty reduction, energy, climate and the environment, food policy, public administration, the role of the private sector in public policy, trade, foreign policy, natural resource management and development policy. Papers on a range of topics that speak to various disciplines, the region and policy makers are encouraged. The goal of the journal is to break down barriers across disciplines, and generate policy impact. Submissions will be reviewed on the basis of content, policy relevance and readability.
×
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