Politicisation and coalition magnets in policy making: A comparative study of food sovereignty and agricultural reform in Nepal and Ecuador
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Politicisation and coalition magnets in policy making : A comparative study of food sovereignty and agricultural reform in Nepal and Ecuador. / Sharma, Puspa; Daugbjerg, Carsten.
In: Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, Vol. 23, No. 5-6, 2021, p. 592-606.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Politicisation and coalition magnets in policy making
T2 - A comparative study of food sovereignty and agricultural reform in Nepal and Ecuador
AU - Sharma, Puspa
AU - Daugbjerg, Carsten
N1 - Issue 5-6: Issue politicization and policy change: Lesson drawing from the case of agriculture-food policy process
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Politicisation can be a strategy in which reform advocates use new ideas with coalition magnet attributes to engage a broad range of actors in setting the agenda for policy reform. Comparing the cases of Ecuador and Nepal, the article shows that the generally appealing but ambiguous idea of food sovereignty is a coalition magnet. Through politicisation, agriculture reform advocates in the two countries used the idea to form coalitions of diverse groups supporting reform. But due to the idea’s ambiguities, a coherent set of reform measures is lacking. This has impeded policy reforms in the two countries.
AB - Politicisation can be a strategy in which reform advocates use new ideas with coalition magnet attributes to engage a broad range of actors in setting the agenda for policy reform. Comparing the cases of Ecuador and Nepal, the article shows that the generally appealing but ambiguous idea of food sovereignty is a coalition magnet. Through politicisation, agriculture reform advocates in the two countries used the idea to form coalitions of diverse groups supporting reform. But due to the idea’s ambiguities, a coherent set of reform measures is lacking. This has impeded policy reforms in the two countries.
KW - coalition magnet
KW - Ecuador
KW - food sovereignty
KW - Nepal
KW - politicisation
U2 - 10.1080/13876988.2020.1760716
DO - 10.1080/13876988.2020.1760716
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85085027791
VL - 23
SP - 592
EP - 606
JO - Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis
JF - Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis
SN - 1387-6988
IS - 5-6
ER -
ID: 242606938