Politicisation and Coalition Magnets in Policy Making

A Comparative Study of Food Sovereignty and Agricultural Reform in Nepal and Ecuador

Datos Bibliográficos

ID12626770
AutoresPuspa Raj Sharma (0000-0003-0166-7109, South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Environment, Kathmandu, Nepal), Carsten Daugbjerg (0000-0003-3869-6034, University of Copenhagen, autor de correspondencia)
Año2020
Volumen23
Número5-6
Páginas592-606
Fecha de publicación2020-05-14
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1387-6988 • E-ISSN: 1572-5448
EditorialRoutledge (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/13876988.2020.1760716
OpenAlexW3025863137
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas6
Referencias citadas41

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

Agriculture · Economics · Food policy · Food security · Food sovereignty · Geography · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sovereignty · Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development · Human Rights and Development · International Development and Aid · Law · Public Administration

Herramientas

Abrir DOISci-Hub