Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Diffusion of Local Regulatory Innovations: The San Francisco Cedaw Ordinance and the New York City Human Rights Initiative

Stacy Laira Lozner
Columbia Law Review
Vol. 104, No. 3 (Apr., 2004), pp. 768-800
DOI: 10.2307/4099330
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4099330
Page Count: 33
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Diffusion of Local Regulatory Innovations: The San Francisco Cedaw Ordinance and the New York City Human Rights Initiative
Preview not available

Abstract

San Francisco was the first city in the country to address public sector discrimination through a local ordinance inspired by the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). This Note situates the San Francisco CEDAW ordinance within developing experimentation in the field of domestic regulatory law. Its participatory approach to public problem solving engages citizens and governmental actors in the formulation of regulatory solutions, requiring city agencies to assess their practices in order to identify discriminatory trends or patterns in terms of gender, race, and other identities, and to remedy any discriminatory practices identified. As other cities-most notably New York City-consider enacting a similar ordinance, effective strategies for diffusion of San Francisco's regulatory innovation must be considered. Communication and information pooling between participants in the San Francisco process and innovators in other localities are essential to the success of subsequent CEDAW ordinance experiments. However, this Note argues that mere replication of San Francisco's regulatory design will be unworkable. Other cities must tailor their ordinances to local political and social contexts.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
768
    768
  • Thumbnail: Page 
769
    769
  • Thumbnail: Page 
770
    770
  • Thumbnail: Page 
771
    771
  • Thumbnail: Page 
772
    772
  • Thumbnail: Page 
773
    773
  • Thumbnail: Page 
774
    774
  • Thumbnail: Page 
775
    775
  • Thumbnail: Page 
776
    776
  • Thumbnail: Page 
777
    777
  • Thumbnail: Page 
778
    778
  • Thumbnail: Page 
779
    779
  • Thumbnail: Page 
780
    780
  • Thumbnail: Page 
781
    781
  • Thumbnail: Page 
782
    782
  • Thumbnail: Page 
783
    783
  • Thumbnail: Page 
784
    784
  • Thumbnail: Page 
785
    785
  • Thumbnail: Page 
786
    786
  • Thumbnail: Page 
787
    787
  • Thumbnail: Page 
788
    788
  • Thumbnail: Page 
789
    789
  • Thumbnail: Page 
790
    790
  • Thumbnail: Page 
791
    791
  • Thumbnail: Page 
792
    792
  • Thumbnail: Page 
793
    793
  • Thumbnail: Page 
794
    794
  • Thumbnail: Page 
795
    795
  • Thumbnail: Page 
796
    796
  • Thumbnail: Page 
797
    797
  • Thumbnail: Page 
798
    798
  • Thumbnail: Page 
799
    799
  • Thumbnail: Page 
800
    800