Cargando…

Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Holcombe, Sarah Jane, Kidanemariam Gebru, Saba
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9195348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35698196
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-021-01255-z
_version_ 1784726946422194176
author Holcombe, Sarah Jane
Kidanemariam Gebru, Saba
author_facet Holcombe, Sarah Jane
Kidanemariam Gebru, Saba
author_sort Holcombe, Sarah Jane
collection PubMed
description 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-021-01255-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9195348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91953482022-06-15 Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion Holcombe, Sarah Jane Kidanemariam Gebru, Saba Reprod Health Research 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-021-01255-z. BioMed Central 2022-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9195348/ /pubmed/35698196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-021-01255-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Holcombe, Sarah Jane
Kidanemariam Gebru, Saba
Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
title Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
title_full Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
title_fullStr Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
title_full_unstemmed Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
title_short Agenda setting and socially contentious policies: Ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
title_sort agenda setting and socially contentious policies: ethiopia’s 2005 reform of its law on abortion
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9195348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35698196
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-021-01255-z
work_keys_str_mv AT holcombesarahjane agendasettingandsociallycontentiouspoliciesethiopias2005reformofitslawonabortion
AT kidanemariamgebrusaba agendasettingandsociallycontentiouspoliciesethiopias2005reformofitslawonabortion