Paradoxes of Ratification: The Nagoya Protocol and Brazilian State Transformations

This article explores the paradoxical behaviour of Brazil in relation to its national and international approaches to the regulations of access to genetic resources and benefits sharing with indigenous and other traditional communities. Brazil was one of the leaders in the international negotiations that led to the UN Nagoya Protocol but only ratified it 11 years later, after remarkable transformations of its internal biodiversity laws. We suggest that the seemingly contradictory behaviour has been shaped by the country’s internal political and ideological changes. This transformation goes hand in hand with substantial changes in state–society relations, particularly with regard to the balance of coalitions’ power between indigenous groups and industrial and agrarian elites. The article builds on the literature on state transformations and relies on the Advocacy Coalition Framework to show the importance of considering the impact of national-level politics on the fate of international agreements.

Foreign Policy Change from an Advocacy Coalition Framework Perspective

Why does a state change its foreign policy objectives and who is responsible for instigating such change? According to Hermann, four primary change agents are central to this process: leaders, bureaucracies, changes in domestic constituencies, and external shocks. This paper argues that the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) is a complementary policy process framework that can explain foreign policy change (FPC) and that accounts for all four of these primary change agents. Additionally, it is a broader framework of the policy process that facilitates a more comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing FPC than traditional FPC research. The ACF has the potential to broaden our understanding of FPC by emphasizing the intersection of the international system with domestic politics and focusing on a myriad of policy actors coordinating their advocacy efforts to influence FPC. To support this argument, the paper discusses how FPC can benefit from the ACF and reviews past applications. It proposes a research agenda using the ACF to study FPC and draws conclusions about future challenges and directions.

Promoting and Challenging Immigration Detention in Canada: Understanding the Role of Advocacy Coalition Groups in Canada’s Immigration Detention Policy Subsystem

Advocacy coalition groups such as closed border supporters and open border advocates play a role in Canada’s immigration detention policy subsystem. Using political mobilization, they exploit pathways of policy change to promote policy objectives which favour or limit policy changes relating to the detention of asylum seekers and irregular migrants for immigration purposes in Canada. This paper investigates the role of actors from opposing advocacy coalition groups in promoting or challenging immigration detention in Canada. The paper adopts the theoretical underpinnings of “Advocacy Coalition Framework” as a lens of analysis to trace the role of advocacy coalition groups in recent history of Canada’s immigration detention policy subsystem. This paper assumes an actor-centric approach with an aim to contribute to current body of knowledge on Canada’s immigration detention policy subsystem. Keywords: immigration detention; open border advocates; closed border supporters; advocacy coalition groups; advocacy coalition framework; Canada; policy subsystem

Advocacy Coalition Framework of Ultra Micro Loan Policymaking in Indonesia

Advocating the Ultra Micro-lending concept of Indonesia's Ministry of Finance in 2017 was a tumultuous nine-year process. The present paper aims to examine the Ultra Micro-lending (UMi) program conducted by the Ministry of Finance of Republic of Indonesia using Advocacy Coalition Framework. This paper showed that Advocacy Coalition Framework could moderate the interest groups' disagreement through seven steps as follows. First, relatively stable parameters of poverty need alleviation using better financial access with empowerment. Second, the external system is inspired by Grameen Bank as the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. Third, removing constraints and resources of subsystem actors from the internal Ministry of Finance and the Parliaments. Fourth, creating consensus for getting the Ministry of Bureaucratic Reform's permit. Fifth, policy subsystem that coalesces the need of market-rate and subsidized rate to cater to 46.7 million grassroots entrepreneurs as a 'win-win' arrangement to complement the bank-based People's Business Credit (KUR). Sixth, policy outputs as the legal product of the UMi with a 7 Trillion State budget. Seventh, policy impact's measurement after one year piloting before UMi's scaling up. This paper has a significant contribution to enhancing the efficacy of UMi program, and as a continuous effort to ensure the economic development of the country.

Teorias das elites e análises de políticas públicas

Este trabalho tem por objetivo realizar um paralelo teórico, destacando similaridades e divergências entre as teorias das elites e as teorias de análise de políticas públicas, essencialmente a Advocacy Coalition Framework – ACF. Resgatando as contribuições de autores clássicos como Mosca, Pareto, Michels, Schumpeter, Mills e Dahl este artigo constitui-se como um trabalho exploratório na direção de traçar paralelismos e propor aproximações com as contribuições de Sabatier e Jenkins-Smith no Modelo de Coalizões de Defesa. Como resultado, o trabalho destaca a similaridade dos subsistemas de políticas públicas do ACF com as elites pluralistas e propõem a aproximação entre as áreas através da incorporação de modelos de pesquisa e objetos de análise relacionados. Submetido em: 22/07/2020Aprovado em: 11/05/2021

Exploring mechanisms that explain how coalition groups are formed and how they work to sustain political priority for maternal and child health in Nigeria using the advocacy coalition framework

Background The unacceptably high rate of maternal and child mortality in Nigeria prompted the government to introduce a free maternal and child health (MCH) programme, which was stopped abruptly following a change in government. This triggered increased advocacy for sustaining MCH as a political priority in the country and led to the formation of advocacy coalitions. This study set out to explain the process involved in the formation of advocacy coalition groups and how they work to bring about sustained political prioritization for MCH in Nigeria. It will contribute to the understanding of the Nigerian MCH sector subsystem and will be beneficial to health policy advocates and public health researchers in Nigeria. Methods This study employed a qualitative case study approach. Data were collected using a pretested interview guide to conduct 22 in-depth interviews, while advocacy events were reviewed pro forma. The document review was analysed using the manual content analysis method, while qualitative data audiotapes were transcribed verbatim, anonymized, double-coded in MS Word using colour-coded highlights and analysed using manual thematic and framework analysis guided by the advocacy coalition framework (ACF). The ACF was used to identify the policy subsystem including the actors, their belief, coordination and resources, as well as the effects of advocacy groups on policy change. Ethics and consent approval were obtained for the study. Results The policy subsystem identified the actors and characterized the coalitions, and described their group formation processes and resources/strategies for engagement. The perceived deep core belief driving the MCH agenda is the right of an individual to health. The effects of advocacy groups on policy change were identified, along with the factors that enabled effectiveness, as well as constraints to coalition formation. External factors and triggers of coalition formation were identified to include high maternal mortality and withdrawal of the free MCH programme, while the contextual issues were the health system issues and the socioeconomic factors affecting the country. Conclusion Our findings add to an increasing body of evidence that the use of ACF is beneficial in exploring how advocacy coalitions are formed and in identifying the effects of advocacy groups on policy change.