Palabras clave
innovación. Autor: diseño de políticas
seguimiento de procesos
rentas petroleras
Categorías
Cómo citar
Resumen
Este artículo analiza la innovación de políticas públicas en Colombia, a través de la adopción de un nuevo sistema centralizado de manejo de rentas petroleras en 2011, tras veinte años de políticas descentralizadas de regalías. Aplicando un marco analítico basado en el diseño de políticas, identificamos un mecanismo causal relacionando la apertura de una ventana de oportunidad con un cambio de políticas públicas, como resultado de una combinación de la aparición de una nueva red de política, la adopción de un nuevo paradigma de políticas y la selección de una nueva mezcla de instrumentos. Con base en las estadísticas bayesianas, las once pruebas aplicadas al mecanismo causal muestran la importancia de los recursos estatales de información, poder, hacienda y organización para explicar el cambio de políticas públicas.
Citas
Acosta, Amylkar.2012. La reforma al régimen de regalías y su impacto en las finanzas territoriales.Bogota: Impregon.
Altshuler, Alan.1997. “Public Innovation and Political Incentives: The Innovations in American Government Program”. Massachusetts: Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Harvard Kennedy School. https://www.innovations.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/2595.pdf
Altshuler, Alan and MarcZegans. 1997. “Innovation and Public Management: Notes from the State House and City Hall.” In Innovation in American Government: Challenges, Opportunities, and Dilemmas, edited by AlanAltschuler and RobertBehn, 68-80 Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Armstrong, Jim and RobinFord. 2001. “Public Sector Innovations and Public Interest Issues.” The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal 6 (1): 1-22.
Ballart, Xavier.2001. Innovación en la gestión pública y en la empresa privada.Madrid: Diaz de Santos.
Baumgartner, Frank.2013. “Ideas and Policy Change.” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions 26 (2): 239-258.
Baumgartner, Frank and BryanJones. 2002. Policy Dynamics.London: The University of Chicago Press.
Beach, Derek and Rasmus BrunPedersen. 2013. Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines.Michigan: University of Michigan.
Beach, Derek and Rasmus BrunPedersen. 2014. “Let the Evidence Speak: A Two-Stage Evidence Assessment Framework for Making Transparent the Process of Translating Empirical Material into Evidence.” American Political Science Association Annual Meeting. Washington. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2451899
Béland, Daniel and Robert HenryCox. 2013. “Introduction to Special Issue: The Politics of Policy Paradigms.” Governance 26 (2): 193-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gove.12034
Befani, Barbara and JohnMayne. 2014. “Process Tracing and Contribution Analysis: A Combined Approach to Generative Causal Inference for Impact Evaluation.” IDS Bulletin 45 (6): 17-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-5436.12110
Benavides, Juan, AlbertoCarrasquilla, Juan GonzaloZapata, Andrés MauricioVelasco, MichelleLink. 2000. Impacto de las regalías en la inversión de las entidades territoriales.Bogota: Fedesarrollo. http://gidrot.com/materials/docs/est/est49.pdf
Bennett, Andrew and JeffreyCheckel. 2015. Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bingham, Richard.1978. “Innovation, Bureaucracy and Public Policy: A Study of Innovation Adoption by Local Government.” The Western Political Quarterly 31 (2):178-205. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/447811
Bonet, Jaime and JoaquínUrrego. 2014. “El Sistema General de Regalías: ¿mejoró, empeoró o quedó igual?” Documentos de trabajo sobre economía regional 198. http://www.banrep.gov.co/es/dtser-198
Borins, Sandford. 2016. “La persistencia de la innovación en el gobierno: una guía para funcionarios públicos innovadores”. En La Innovación en el Sector Público: tendencias internacionales y experiencias mexicanas, edited by GuillermoCejudo, MauricioDaussage and CynthiaMichel, 85-132. Mexico: CIDE-INAP.
Campbell, John. 1998. “Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy.” Theory and Society 27: 377-409.
Campbell, John. 2002. “Ideas, Politics, and Public Policy.” Annual Review of Sociology 28 (1): 21-38.
Cejudo, Guillermo, MauricioDaussage and CynthiaMichel. 2016. La Innovación en el Sector Público: tendencias internacionales y experiencias mexicanas.Mexico: CIDE-INAP.
CIA. 2005. “Intelligence Report: Bayes’ Theorem in the Korean War.” Directorate of Intelligence. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol16no2/html/v16i2a03p_0001.htm
Cohen, Michael, JamesMarch and JohanOlsen. 1972. “A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice.” Administrative Science Quarterly 17 (1): 1-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392088
Considine, Mark, JennyLewis and AlexanderDamon. 2009. Networks, Innovation and Public Policy.London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Corte Constitucional de Colombia. 1997. Sentencia C-221/97. Sentencias de la Corte Constitucional.Bogotá: CCC.
Crudotransparente. 2015. “Informe especial: el reto de comprender el Sistema Nacional de Regalías.” Retrieved 3 April 2016, from Crudotransparente.com: http://goo.gl/qtXbr6
Daglio, M., GersonD., KitchenH.2015. “Building Organisational Capacity for Public Sector Innovation.” Background Paper prepared for the OECD Conference Innovating the Public Sector: from Ideas to Impact, Paris, 12-13 November 2014. http://www.oecd.org/innovating-the-public-sector/Background-report.pdf
Echeverry, Juan Carlos, Gloria AlonsoMasmela y AmparoGarcía. 2011. ¿Por qué es necesaria la creación de un Sistema General de Regalías? Ministerios de Hacienda y Crédito Público, Notas Fiscales2.
Fairfield, Tasha and AndrewCharman. 2016. “Formal Bayesian Process Tracing: Guidelines, Opportunities, and Caveats.” The London School of Economics and Political Science. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/62368/1/Fairfield_Formal%20Bayesian%20process%20tracing.pdf
Fedesarrollo. 2015. “Informe de coyuntura petrolera.” Bogota: La imprenta editores S.A.
Fontaine, Guillaume2007. El precio del petróleo. Conflictos socio-ambientales y gobernabilidad en la región amazónica.Quito: FLACSO – IFEA.
Fontaine, Guillaume, IvánNarvaez and SusanVelasco. 2017. “Explaining a Policy Paradigm Shift: A Comparison of Resource Nationalism in Bolivia and Peru.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice. Online version:1-16 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2016.1272234
Fundación Foro Nacional por Colombia. 2013. La normativa minera en países de América Latina: un estudio sobre Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, México y Perú.Bogota: Foro.
George, Alexander and AndrewBennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences.Massachusetts: Belfer Center Studies in International Security.
Hall, Peter. 1986. Governing the Economy: The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hall, Peter. 1993. “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain.” Comparative Politics 25 (3): 275-296.
Hall, Peter. 2003. “Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Politics.” In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, edited by JamesMahoney and DietrichRueschemeyer, 373-404. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, Peter. 2013. “Brother, Can You Paradigm?” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 26 (2): 189-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gove.12031
Hartley, Jean. 2005. “Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present.” Public Money and Management 25 (1)27-34.
Hildén, Mikael, AndrewJordan and TimRayner. 2014. “Climate Policy Innovation: Developing an Evaluation Perspective.” Environmental Politics 23 (5): 884-905 : http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.924205
Hood, Christopher. 1983. The Tools of Government: Public Policy and Politics.London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Howlett, Michael. 2009. “Governance Modes, Policy Regimes and Operational Plans: A Multi-Level Nested Model of Policy Instrument Choice and Policy Design.” Policy Sciences 42 (1): 73-89.
Howlett, Michael. 2011. Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments.New York: Routledge.
Howlett, Michael. 2014. “Why Are Policy Innovations Rare and So Often Negative? Blame Avoidance and Problem Denial in Climate Change Policy-Making.” Global Environmental Change 29: 395-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.12.009
Howlett, Michael and BenjaminCashore. 2009. “The Dependent Variable Problem in the Study of Policy Change: Understanding Policy Change as a Methodological Problem.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 11 (1): 33-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13876980802648144
Howlett, Michael and Rayner, Jeremy.2013. “Patching Vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design.” Politics and Governance 1 (2): 170-182.
Howlett, Michael, M.Ramesh and AnthonyPerl. 2009. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Subsystems.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Howson, Colin and PeterUrbach. 2006. Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach.Illinois: Carus Publishing Company.
Humphreys, Macartan and AlanJacobs. 2015. “Mixing Methods: A Bayesian Approach.” American Political Science Review 109 (4): 653-673. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055415000453
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus.2016. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics. London: Routledge.
Jordan, Andrew and DaveHuitema. 2014a. “Policy Innovation in a Changing Climate: Sources, Patterns and Effects.” Global Environmental Change 29: 387-394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.09.005
Jordan, Andrew and DaveHuitema. 2014b. “Innovations in Climate Policy: Conclusions and New Directions.” Environmental Politics 23 (5): 906- 925. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.924209
Kingdon, John. 1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies.New York: Longman.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1971. La estructura de las revoluciones científicas.Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Lascoumes, Pierre and Patrick LeGalès. 2007. “Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments from the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instruments.” International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 20 (1): http://dx.doi.org/1-21.10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00342.x
Lynn, Laurence. 1997. “Innovation and the Public Interest: Insights from the Private Sector.” In Innovation in American Government: Challenges, Opportunities, and Dilemmas, edited by AlanAltschuler and RobertBehn, 83-103. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Mackie, J. L.1965. “Causes and Conditions.” American Philosophical Quarterly 2 (4): 245–264.
Mahoney, James. 2000. “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology.” Theory and Society 29 (4): 507-548.
Mejía, Luis Bernardo. 2014. The Changing Role of the Central Planning Offices in Latin America: A Comparative Historical Analysis Perspective (1950-2013).Maastricht: Boekenplan.
Moore, Mark, MalcomSparrow and WilliamSpelman. 1997. “Innovation in Policing: From Production Lines to Jobs Shops.” In Innovation in American Government: Challenges, Opportunities, and Dilemmas, edited by AlanAltshuler and RobertBehn, 274-298. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
OECD. 2005. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data.Paris: OECD Publishing.
OEC. 2016. “Exportaciones Colombia.”http://goo.gl/OYR9AF
O’Hagan, Anthony and MikeWest (eds.). 2010. The Oxford Handbook of Applied Bayesian Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Paz, Bayron and EdwinAlvarado. 2016. “Documento de trabajo: Anotaciones para un protocolo de formalización bayesiana de inferencia causal en process tracing.” Grupo de investigación en políticas públicas comparadas. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales-Ecuador.
Powell, Walter and PaulDimaggio. 1999. El nuevo institucionalismo en el análisis organizacional.Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Polsby, Nelson. 1984. Political Innovation in America.New Haven: Yale University Press.
Rogers, Everett. 1983. Diffusion of Innovations.New York: Free Press.
Reta, Carlos. 2016. “Presentación.” In La Innovación en el Sector Público: tendencias internacionales y experiencias mexicanas, edited by GuillermoCejudo, MauricioDaussage and CynthiaMichel, 11-16. Mexico: CIDE – INAP.
Schaffrin, André, SebastianSewerin and SibylleSeubert. 2014. “The Innovativeness of National Policy Portfolios – Climate Policy Change in Austria, Germany, and the UK.” Environmental Politics 23 (5): 860-883.
Schumpeter, Joseph. 1997. Teoría del desenvolvimiento económico.México: Fondo de Cultura Económica. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.924206
Setnikar, Cankar and VeronikaPetkovšek. 2013. “Private and Public Sector Innovation and the Importance of Cross-Sector Collaboration.” The Journal of Applied Business Research 29 (6): 1597-1605.
Thelen, Kathleen Ann. 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
True, James, BryanJones and FrankBaumgartner. 2007. “Punctuated-equilibrium Theory: Explaining Stability and Change in Public Policymaking.” In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by PaulSabatier, 155-187. Cambridge: Westview Press.
Walker, Jack.1969. “The Diffusion of Innovations among States.” The American Political Science Review 63 (3): 880-899.
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.