议程设置与社会争议政策：埃塞俄比亚 2005 年对其堕胎法的改革。
Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia's 2005 reform of its law on abortion.
机构信息
Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Ipas, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
出版信息
Reprod Health. 2022 Jun 13;19(Suppl 1):218. doi: 10.1186/s12978-021-01255-z.
BACKGROUND
In 2005, Ethiopia took a bold step in reforming its abortion law as part of the overhaul of its Penal Code. Unsafe abortion is one of the three leading causes of maternal mortality in low-income countries; however, few countries have liberalized their laws to permit safer, legal abortion.
METHODS
This retrospective case study describes the actors and processes involved in Ethiopia's reform and assesses the applicability of theories of agenda setting focused on internal versus external explanations. It draws on 54 interviews conducted in 2007 and 2012 with informants from civil society organizations, health professionals, government, international nongovernmental organizations and donors, and others familiar with the reproductive health policy context in Ethiopia as well as on government data, national policies, and media reports. The analytic methodology is within-case analysis through process tracing: using causal process observations (pieces of data that provide information about context, process, or mechanism and can contribute to causal inference) and careful description and sequencing of factors in order to describe a novel political phenomenon and evaluate potential explanatory hypotheses.
RESULTS
The analysis of key actors and policy processes indicates that the ruling party and its receptiveness to reform, the energy of civil society actors, the "open windows" offered by the vehicle of the Penal Code reform, and the momentum of reforms to improve women's status, all facilitated liberalization of law on abortion. Results suggest that agenda setting theories focusing on national actors-rather than external causes-better explain the Ethiopian case. In addition, the stronger role for government across areas of policy work (policy specification and politics, mobilization for enactment and for implementation), and the collaborative civil society and government policy relationships working toward implementation are largely internal, unlike those predicted by theories focusing on external forces behind policy adoption.
CONCLUSIONS
Ethiopia's policymaking process can inform policy reform efforts related to abortion in other sub-Saharan Africa settings.
背景
2005 年，埃塞俄比亚在修订其刑法典时采取了大胆举措，改革其堕胎法。不安全堕胎是低收入国家产妇死亡的三个主要原因之一；然而，很少有国家放宽法律以允许更安全、合法的堕胎。
方法
本回顾性案例研究描述了埃塞俄比亚改革中的行为者和过程，并评估了关注内部与外部解释的议程设置理论的适用性。它借鉴了 2007 年和 2012 年与来自民间社会组织、卫生专业人员、政府、国际非政府组织和捐助者以及其他熟悉埃塞俄比亚生殖健康政策背景的人员的 54 次访谈，以及政府数据、国家政策和媒体报道。分析方法是案例内分析，通过过程追踪：使用因果过程观察（提供有关背景、过程或机制信息并有助于因果推理的数据集），以及仔细描述和排列因素，以描述新的政治现象并评估潜在的解释性假设。
结果
对关键行为者和政策过程的分析表明，执政党及其对改革的接受程度、民间社会行为者的活力、刑法典改革提供的“开放窗口”以及提高妇女地位的改革势头，都促进了堕胎法的自由化。结果表明，关注国家行为者的议程设置理论——而不是外部原因——更好地解释了埃塞俄比亚的案例。此外，政府在政策工作的各个领域（政策制定和政治、立法动员和执行动员）中发挥更强的作用，以及朝着执行方向合作的民间社会和政府政策关系在很大程度上是内部的，与那些关注政策采用背后的外部力量的理论不同。
结论
埃塞俄比亚的决策过程可以为其他撒哈拉以南非洲地区与堕胎相关的政策改革努力提供信息。
Zotero 插件