介绍本土批判政策分析:分析公共政策和进程的基于权利的方法

Natalie Bryant
{"title":"介绍本土批判政策分析:分析公共政策和进程的基于权利的方法","authors":"Natalie Bryant","doi":"10.1002/ajs4.350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Institutional racism within Australia, grounded in the country's settler‐colonial structure, has sidelined Indigenous interests in public policymaking since federation. In an attempt to redress this, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was endorsed by the Australian government in 2009. UNDRIP is an authoritative international standard that could inform the ways that governments engage with Indigenous peoples and protect their rights. This paper introduces Indigenist Critical Policy Analysis (ICPA). While mainstream policy evaluation assesses whether policies and processes have met the governments stated objectives, ICPA assesses whether they uphold or violate Indigenous rights. ICPA involves reviewing policy documents against the key principles and specific Articles of UNDRIP. Presenting a worked example of ICPA, the NSW Regional Health Strategic Plan 2022–2032 is assessed against the five phases: (1) Orientation; (2) Close examination; (3) Determination; (4) Strengthening practice; and (5) Indigenous final word. This analysis finds that the Strategic Plan is poorly aligned with UNDRIP. Specifically, there is little evidence that Indigenous values influenced or held any authority in the process. ICPA offers a practical approach to analysing policy for compatibility with Indigenous rights under international law that could be used by Indigenous organisations and policymakers.","PeriodicalId":504799,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Social Issues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introducing Indigenist Critical Policy Analysis: A rights‐based approach to analysing public policies and processes\",\"authors\":\"Natalie Bryant\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ajs4.350\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Institutional racism within Australia, grounded in the country's settler‐colonial structure, has sidelined Indigenous interests in public policymaking since federation. In an attempt to redress this, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was endorsed by the Australian government in 2009. UNDRIP is an authoritative international standard that could inform the ways that governments engage with Indigenous peoples and protect their rights. This paper introduces Indigenist Critical Policy Analysis (ICPA). While mainstream policy evaluation assesses whether policies and processes have met the governments stated objectives, ICPA assesses whether they uphold or violate Indigenous rights. ICPA involves reviewing policy documents against the key principles and specific Articles of UNDRIP. Presenting a worked example of ICPA, the NSW Regional Health Strategic Plan 2022–2032 is assessed against the five phases: (1) Orientation; (2) Close examination; (3) Determination; (4) Strengthening practice; and (5) Indigenous final word. This analysis finds that the Strategic Plan is poorly aligned with UNDRIP. Specifically, there is little evidence that Indigenous values influenced or held any authority in the process. ICPA offers a practical approach to analysing policy for compatibility with Indigenous rights under international law that could be used by Indigenous organisations and policymakers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":504799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Social Issues\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Social Issues\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.350\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.350","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自联邦成立以来,基于澳大利亚定居者殖民结构的制度性种族主义,使土著利益在公共政策制定中处于边缘地位。为了纠正这一现象,澳大利亚政府于 2009 年批准了《联合国土著人民权利宣言》(UNDRIP)。联合国土著人民权利宣言》是一项权威性的国际标准,可为各国政府与土著人民接触并保护其权利提供参考。本文介绍土著批判政策分析 (ICPA)。主流政策评估是对政策和程序是否达到政府既定目标进行评估,而 ICPA 则是对政策和程序是否维护或侵犯土著权利进行评估。ICPA 包括根据《联合国土著人民权利宣言》的主要原则和具体条款审查政策文件。新南威尔士州《2022-2032 年地区卫生战略计划》是 ICPA 的一个实例,根据以下五个阶段进行评估:(1) 定向;(2) 仔细审查;(3) 确定;(4) 加强实践;(5) 土著定论。分析发现,《战略计划》与《联合国土著人民权利宣言》的一致性很差。具体而言,几乎没有证据表明土著价值观影响了这一进程或在这一进程中具有任何权威性。ICPA 提供了一种实用的方法来分析政策是否符合国际法规定的土著权利,可供土著组织和决策者使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Introducing Indigenist Critical Policy Analysis: A rights‐based approach to analysing public policies and processes
Institutional racism within Australia, grounded in the country's settler‐colonial structure, has sidelined Indigenous interests in public policymaking since federation. In an attempt to redress this, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was endorsed by the Australian government in 2009. UNDRIP is an authoritative international standard that could inform the ways that governments engage with Indigenous peoples and protect their rights. This paper introduces Indigenist Critical Policy Analysis (ICPA). While mainstream policy evaluation assesses whether policies and processes have met the governments stated objectives, ICPA assesses whether they uphold or violate Indigenous rights. ICPA involves reviewing policy documents against the key principles and specific Articles of UNDRIP. Presenting a worked example of ICPA, the NSW Regional Health Strategic Plan 2022–2032 is assessed against the five phases: (1) Orientation; (2) Close examination; (3) Determination; (4) Strengthening practice; and (5) Indigenous final word. This analysis finds that the Strategic Plan is poorly aligned with UNDRIP. Specifically, there is little evidence that Indigenous values influenced or held any authority in the process. ICPA offers a practical approach to analysing policy for compatibility with Indigenous rights under international law that could be used by Indigenous organisations and policymakers.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digital futures in mind: Why lived experience collaboration must guide digital mental health technologies “You're on your own, kid”: A critical analysis of Australian universities' international student mental health strategies Addressing employment barriers for humanitarian migrants: Perspectives from settlement services Reflections on making public policy (1977–1996) The Aspire Social Impact Bond: How social impact bond financing can promote positive social and economic outcomes
×
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