The Power of Policy Entrepreneur in Disability- inclusive Policy-Making

Abstract

This research aims to describe the power of policy entrepreneurs in disability-inclusive policy-making. Disability-inclusive policy in the Jember Regency of East Java, Indonesia, is a result of a thirteen-year- long struggle of the disability groups. Their struggle started as a series of demonstrations, petitions, and hearings with the Regional House of Representatives and the Regent. It then continued with a series of debates and negotiations with the policy-makers. This descriptive- qualitative research utilized Kingdon’s multiple stream framework analysis to capture the stipulation of Regional Regulation Number 7 of 2016 on the Protection and Fulfillment of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The informants were six disabled persons and two former members of the Regional House of Representatives. The study finds that the problem stream was raised through demonstrations, petitions, and hearings; the policy stream was done through efforts to include the draft of the disability act in the regional legislative program. Policy windows took place during the momentum initiated by the stipulation of a nationwide disability-inclusive policy by the state government, and, finally, policy entrepreneurs act through lobbies and negotiations. This study concludes that the disability policy-making process in Jember Regency was influenced by the strong power of policy entrepreneurs. Disability groups and the Regional House of Representatives as a policy entrepreneur force acted quickly to take advantage of the open policy window momentum, and, finally, the policy maker ratifies local regulations regarding the protection and fulfillment of the rights of persons with disabilities.

Policy entrepreneurs are integral in efforts to curb antimicrobial resistance in low and middle income countries

“…Policy entrepreneurs have been instrumental in achieving health reforms in LMICs (49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56). They possess a keen understanding of the political process and are instrumental in building political will to implement health reforms (45)(46)(47)(48)60).…”

“…In several LMICs, policy entrepreneurs have played useful roles in initiating and implementing health reforms (49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56). For example in Nigeria a health Minister successfully championed the implementation of Primary Health Care (49).…”

“…Similarly in Uruguay, in 2007, the President supported by some politicians in government spearheaded health reforms which resulted in a National Integrated Health System (Sistema Nacional Integrado de Salud) designed to provide comprehensive and equitable health coverage for Uruguayans ( 53 , 54 ). There are also examples of individuals outside government, civil society groups, and other non-governmental organizations which have been instrumental in building political will on burning issues ( 55 , 56 ). For example in Kenya, a network of Civil Society Organizations used a combination of litigation and advocacy to ensure the revision of the 2008 Counterfeit Act, which had prohibited people living with HIV from accessing affordable generic drugs ( 55 ).…”

“…For example in Kenya, a network of Civil Society Organizations used a combination of litigation and advocacy to ensure the revision of the 2008 Counterfeit Act, which had prohibited people living with HIV from accessing affordable generic drugs ( 55 ). Similarly in Indonesia, disability groups played a key role in efforts to pass legislation to protect the rights of people with disabilities ( 56 ). Also in China, a private enterprise served as a policy entrepreneur in the adoption of mobile healthcare payment ( 57 ).…”

Finding, distinguishing, and understanding overlooked policy entrepreneurs

“…Scholars look for actors behaving in ways expected from policy entrepreneurs, like networking and strategically using expertise (see Aviram et al, 2020). This widely used approach has documented policy entrepreneurs involved in community cancer care (Petchey et al, 2007); state wetland management (Arnold, 2015); reform of the London healthcare system (Oborn et al, 2011); adoption of vertical greening policies in Shanghai (Lu et al, 2020); efforts to reduce government corruption in Israel (Navot & Cohen, 2015); development of China's minimum livelihood guarantee system (Hammond, 2013); disability policymaking in Indonesia (Setijaningrum & Rahardian, 2022); innovating in local delivery of social services in Israel (Aviv et al, 2021); adoption of social health insurance policies in India (Maurya & Mintrom, 2020); and the development of a European Union biofuels policy (Palmer, 2015). Sometimes, this approach identifies entire units of government which achieved a policy innovation as policy entrepreneurs, including US states that adopt climate policies (Drummond, 2010;Rabe, 2004), countries that adopt a participatory budgeting model (Wampler, 2009), and city governments that implement a new approach to managing refugees (Garcés-Mascareñas & Gebhardt, 2020) and an open government policy (Ruvalcaba-Gomez et al, 2020).…”