The split ladder of policy problems, participation, and politicization: constitutional water change in Ecuador and Chile

Margot Hurlbert, Joyeeta Gupta
{"title":"The split ladder of policy problems, participation, and politicization: constitutional water change in Ecuador and Chile","authors":"Margot Hurlbert, Joyeeta Gupta","doi":"10.1007/s10784-024-09644-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is debate about whether complex problems should be addressed technocratically or whether they should be politicized. While many tend to favour technocratic decision-making and evidence based policy, for others politicization of policy problems is fundamental for significant policy change. But politicization does not always lead to problem solving. Nor is it always necessary. This paper addresses the question: Under what circumstances should problems be politicized, and what is the effect of such politicization? It adds politicization, through windows of opportunity, to the split ladder of participation to assess policy change through two case studies: successful and unsuccessful constitutional change in Ecuador (2008) and Chile respectively (2022). It argues that where there is no agreement on either science or policy, politicization is required to address lack of consensus in values, but constitutional protection is needed to protect minorities and the vulnerable, their access and human right to water. De-politicization stymies policy change potentially harming democracy. This paper argues for a citizen engaged exploration of the complex problem of climate change and its impacts on water, but a targeted politicization coincident with, but developed well in advance of, windows of opportunity. Moreover, policy framing correlated with complex problems continues to be a key consideration. Furthermore, alliances of disparate actors, elections of new political leaders and considerations of property rights and justice issues are paramount. Significant constitutional policy change reflects social learning, but subsequent court actions by policy entrepreneurs is required to effectively implement this change. Framing constitutional change to protect rights to water and effect international agreements (including the Warsaw International Mechanism under the climate change regime) advances water justice and may increase success.</p>","PeriodicalId":47272,"journal":{"name":"International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-024-09644-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is debate about whether complex problems should be addressed technocratically or whether they should be politicized. While many tend to favour technocratic decision-making and evidence based policy, for others politicization of policy problems is fundamental for significant policy change. But politicization does not always lead to problem solving. Nor is it always necessary. This paper addresses the question: Under what circumstances should problems be politicized, and what is the effect of such politicization? It adds politicization, through windows of opportunity, to the split ladder of participation to assess policy change through two case studies: successful and unsuccessful constitutional change in Ecuador (2008) and Chile respectively (2022). It argues that where there is no agreement on either science or policy, politicization is required to address lack of consensus in values, but constitutional protection is needed to protect minorities and the vulnerable, their access and human right to water. De-politicization stymies policy change potentially harming democracy. This paper argues for a citizen engaged exploration of the complex problem of climate change and its impacts on water, but a targeted politicization coincident with, but developed well in advance of, windows of opportunity. Moreover, policy framing correlated with complex problems continues to be a key consideration. Furthermore, alliances of disparate actors, elections of new political leaders and considerations of property rights and justice issues are paramount. Significant constitutional policy change reflects social learning, but subsequent court actions by policy entrepreneurs is required to effectively implement this change. Framing constitutional change to protect rights to water and effect international agreements (including the Warsaw International Mechanism under the climate change regime) advances water justice and may increase success.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
政策问题、参与和政治化的分裂阶梯:厄瓜多尔和智利的水资源宪法改革
关于复杂的问题是应该用技术手段解决,还是应该政治化的问题,一直存在争论。许多人倾向于技术官僚决策和循证政策,而另一些人则认为,政策问题的政治化是重大政策变革的根本。但政治化并不总能解决问题。政治化也并非总是必要的。本文探讨了这一问题:在什么情况下应该将问题政治化,政治化的效果如何?本文通过厄瓜多尔(2008 年)和智利(2022 年)分别成功和失败的宪法改革这两个案例研究,将政治化(通过机会之窗)添加到参与的分裂阶梯中,以评估政策变革。该报告认为,在科学或政策方面无法达成一致的情况下,需要政治化来解决价值观缺乏共识的问题,但需要宪法保护来保护少数群体和弱势群体,保护他们获得水资源的权利和人权。非政治化阻碍了政策的改变,可能会损害民主。本文主张公民参与探讨气候变化及其对水的影响这一复杂问题,但有针对性的政治化应与机会窗口相吻合,并在机会窗口到来之前提前制定。此外,与复杂问题相关的政策框架仍然是一个重要的考虑因素。此外,不同参与者之间的联盟、新政治领导人的选举以及对产权和公正问题的考虑都是至关重要的。重大的宪法政策变革反映了社会学习,但需要政策制定者随后采取法院行动来有效实施这一变革。为保护水权和实施国际协议(包括气候变化制度下的华沙国际机制)而制定宪法变革框架,可促进水正义,并可能提高成功率。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
26.50%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal that focuses on the theoretical, methodological and practical dimensions of achieving cooperative solutions to international environmental problems. The journal, which is published four times each year, emphasizes both formal legal agreements (such as multilateral treaties) and less formal cooperative mechanisms (such as ministerial declarations and producer-consumer agreements). The journal''s scope encompasses the full range of environmental and natural resource issues, including (but not limited to) biosafety, biodiversity loss, climate change, desertification, forest conservation, ozone depletion, transboundary pollutant flows, and the management of marine and fresh-water resources. The editors welcome contributions that consider stakeholder initiatives and the role of civil society in the definition and resolution of environmental conflicts. The journal provides a forum on the role of political, economic, and legal considerations in the negotiation and implementation of effective governance strategies. Special emphasis is attached to the following substantive domains: The normative aspects and political economy of treaty negotiations and multilateral agreements, including equity considerations; Methodologies for evaluating the effectiveness of alternative governance mechanisms; The role of stakeholder initiatives and civil society in the definition and resolution of environmental conflicts; The harmonization of environmental strategies with prevailing social, political, and economic institutions.
期刊最新文献
The environmental rule of law and the protection of human rights defenders: law, society, technology, and markets Should we regulate forests through free trade agreements? Arctic wetlands, an evaluation of progress towards implementation of the Ramsar convention on wetlands: 1978–2022 The split ladder of policy problems, participation, and politicization: constitutional water change in Ecuador and Chile Pathways of scientific input into intergovernmental negotiations: a new agreement on marine biodiversity
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1