Unpacking policy gridlocks in Africa’s development: An evolving agenda

J. Mugwawa, Geoffrey Banda, M. Bolo, S. Kilonzo, C. Mavhunga, V. Mjimba, O. Muza, Z. Teka
{"title":"Unpacking policy gridlocks in Africa’s development: An evolving agenda","authors":"J. Mugwawa, Geoffrey Banda, M. Bolo, S. Kilonzo, C. Mavhunga, V. Mjimba, O. Muza, Z. Teka","doi":"10.1386/TMSD.17.2.115_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Policies are not an end in themselves, but deliberate systems of principles to guide decisions \nand achievement of rational outcomes. Many factors inherent in or transcending policy \nprocesses have dramatic consequences for how policies are interpreted and applied. In this \narticle, we deploy the concept of ‘policy gridlocks’ to better understand factors that facilitate \nor hinder implementation of single or multiple policies in different African policy arenas. We \nargue that minimizing or ameliorating ‘policy gridlocks’ requires stakeholders to quantify and \nmore directly feel the cost of their decisions and actions, while scholars must continue to \nsearch for institutional means to prevent gridlocks, including broadening the array of \nconceptual and analytical tools for understanding policy processes. We conclude that limits \nin financial resources, technical expertise and legislative capacity are the more powerful \ndrivers of policy formulation, implementation and revision gridlocks that need to be \naddressed, than fragmentation of stakeholder interests.","PeriodicalId":38310,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/TMSD.17.2.115_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Policies are not an end in themselves, but deliberate systems of principles to guide decisions and achievement of rational outcomes. Many factors inherent in or transcending policy processes have dramatic consequences for how policies are interpreted and applied. In this article, we deploy the concept of ‘policy gridlocks’ to better understand factors that facilitate or hinder implementation of single or multiple policies in different African policy arenas. We argue that minimizing or ameliorating ‘policy gridlocks’ requires stakeholders to quantify and more directly feel the cost of their decisions and actions, while scholars must continue to search for institutional means to prevent gridlocks, including broadening the array of conceptual and analytical tools for understanding policy processes. We conclude that limits in financial resources, technical expertise and legislative capacity are the more powerful drivers of policy formulation, implementation and revision gridlocks that need to be addressed, than fragmentation of stakeholder interests.
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
破解非洲发展中的政策僵局:一个不断演变的议程
政策本身并不是目的,而是经过深思熟虑的原则体系,用以指导决策和实现理性结果。政策过程中固有的或超越政策过程的许多因素对政策的解释和应用产生了巨大的影响。在本文中,我们运用“政策僵局”的概念,以更好地理解在不同的非洲政策领域促进或阻碍单一或多项政策实施的因素。我们认为,最小化或改善“政策僵局”需要利益相关者量化并更直接地感受到他们的决策和行动的成本,而学者必须继续寻找防止僵局的制度手段,包括扩大理解政策过程的概念和分析工具的范围。我们得出的结论是,财政资源、技术专长和立法能力的限制是需要解决的政策制定、实施和修订僵局的更强大驱动因素,而不是利益相关者利益的分散。
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
International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development
International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development (TMSD) supports new philosophies on technology and development, their relationship to globalization, and the problems of world poverty and environmental degradation. The double-blind peer-reviewed journal explores global, social, economic and environmental conditions in relation to shifts in technology and market paradigms.
期刊最新文献
US foreign direct investment, technology transfer and the productivity of hydrocarbon-dependent economies: The case of Algeria Exploring the willingness to adopt rapid diagnostic tests to improve antimicrobial medicine use amongst Tanzanian livestock farmers Examining the link between information and communication technologies and the UN Sustainable Development Goals Technology intensity and Indian manufacturing industries Carbon emissions, economic growth and trade: Empirical evidence from trading nations
×
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