How do courts contribute to policy integration? A comparative study of policy integration processes in Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala

With Supreme and Constitutional courts or tribunals playing an increasingly significant role in shaping extractive policies in Latin America, scholars should turn their attention to the impacts of judicial decisions on policy processes. This phenomenon is of considerable interest to scholars of policy integration, as constitutional interpretations by the courts have the potential to reframe policy issues and address the effects of policy fragmentation. In this paper, we investigate the influence of high courts on the creation of integrative spaces that seek to convey a commitment to guaranteeing constitutional rights. Our study focuses on Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala where we analyze the role of high courts in initiating policy integration processes. First, it contributes to the processual approach to policy integration by highlighting the role of the courts in initiating policy integration processes. In doing so, we depart from the usual focus on integration as a design of governments, instead highlighting how governments and other actors react to integration mandates issued by the courts. Furthermore, we contribute to current debates on how high courts enhance the State’s responses to social conflicts by protecting constitutional rights, identifying the conditions under which judicial decisions can produce effective policy integration. Our research is based on the analysis of court documents gray literature and semi-structured interviews conducted with key informants and country experts. The findings underscore the importance of goal compatibility between high courts and dominant actors within policy subsystems, in mobilizing the resources required to form and operate integrative spaces. Applicable enforcement mechanisms and conflict expansion by policy challengers complete the conditions that allow court decisions to produce effective policy integration. Finally, the strategic and contextual nature of actors’ engagement in integration processes suggests that policy integration is no panacea for tackling complex issues and improving policy delivery.