Colombini Manuela, Mayhew Susannah H, Hawkins Ben, Bista Meera, Joshi Sunil Kumar, Schei Berit, Watts Charlotte
Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK,
Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Health Policy Plan. 2016 May;31(4):493-503. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czv091. Epub 2015 Sep 26.
Gender-based violence (GBV) has been addressed as a policy issue in Nepal since the mid 1990s, yet it was only in 2010 that Nepal developed a legal and policy framework to combat GBV. This article draws on the concepts of agenda setting and framing to analyse the historical processes by which GBV became legitimized as a health policy issue in Nepal and explored factors that facilitated and constrained the opening and closing of windows of opportunity. The results presented are based on a document analysis of the policy and regulatory framework around GBV in Nepal. A content analysis was undertaken. Agenda setting for GBV policies in Nepal evolved over many years and was characterized by the interplay of political context factors, actors and multiple frames. The way the issue was depicted at different times and by different actors played a key role in the delay in bringing health onto the policy agenda. Women's groups and less powerful Ministries developed gender equity and development frames, but it was only when the more powerful human rights frame was promoted by the country's new Constitution and the Office of the Prime Minister that legislation on GBV was achieved and a domestic violence bill was adopted, followed by a National Plan of Action. This eventually enabled the health frame to converge around the development of implementation policies that incorporated health service responses. Our explicit incorporation of framing within the Kindgon model has illustrated how important it is for understanding the emergence of policy issues, and the subsequent debates about their resolution. The framing of a policy problem by certain policy actors, affects the development of each of the three policy streams, and may facilitate or constrain their convergence. The concept of framing therefore lends an additional depth of understanding to the Kindgon agenda setting model.
自20世纪90年代中期以来,性别暴力在尼泊尔一直被作为一个政策问题来对待,但直到2010年尼泊尔才制定了打击性别暴力的法律和政策框架。本文借鉴议程设置和框架构建的概念,分析性别暴力在尼泊尔成为卫生政策问题的历史进程,并探讨促进和限制机会之窗开启和关闭的因素。所呈现的结果基于对尼泊尔性别暴力政策和监管框架的文件分析。进行了内容分析。尼泊尔性别暴力政策的议程设置历经多年演变,其特点是政治背景因素、行为主体和多种框架相互作用。该问题在不同时期被不同行为主体描述的方式,在将卫生问题纳入政策议程的延迟方面起到了关键作用。妇女团体和权力较小的部委制定了性别平等与发展框架,但只有当该国新宪法和总理办公室推动更具影响力的人权框架时,才实现了性别暴力立法并通过了家庭暴力法案,随后出台了国家行动计划。这最终使卫生框架围绕纳入卫生服务应对措施的实施政策的制定而趋于一致。我们在金登模型中明确纳入框架构建,说明了其对于理解政策问题的出现以及随后关于其解决的辩论有多重要。某些政策行为主体对政策问题的框架构建,会影响三个政策流中每一个的发展,并可能促进或限制它们的趋同。因此,框架构建的概念为金登议程设置模型提供了更深层次的理解。