ABSTRACT Building on Matland’s ([1995]. “Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-conflict Model of Policy Implementation.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 5 (2): 145–174.) ambiguity-conflict policy processes and implementation matrix, I create a conceptual categorization of limits to expatriates’ voting rights. Limits vary with adoption and implementation timing, and the degree of disenfranchisement they generate. Some limits are included in enfranchisement legislation, while others are adopted years after initial enfranchisement, or are just implemented, without any legal basis, leading to partial or full diaspora disenfranchisement. While not seeking to theorize limits’ origins or causes, I aim to create conceptual categories that are much needed for the study of this rapidly growing phenomenon. Four such categories, drawing on the importance of timing and experience in policy adoption and implementation divide limits according to varying degrees and combinations of ambiguity and conflict. Each category contains examples of limits adopted within the last decade, which may dramatically redefine expatriates’ rights and political participation in the years to come.

中文翻译：

---

对侨民选举权政策的反应性限制：概念分类

摘要建立在 Matland 的 ([1995]. “综合实施文献：政策实施的歧义-冲突模型。” 公共行政研究与理论杂志 5 (2): 145–174。）歧义-冲突政策过程和实施矩阵，我创建了外籍人士投票权限制的概念分类。限制因采用和实施时间以及它们产生的剥夺权利的程度而异。一些限制包含在选举权立法中，而另一些限制是在最初的选举权后数年通过的，或者只是在没有任何法律依据的情况下实施，导致部分或全部侨民被剥夺选举权。虽然不寻求对极限的起源或原因进行理论化，但我的目标是创建研究这种快速增长的现象所急需的概念类别。四个这样的类别，利用政策采纳和实施中时间和经验的重要性，根据模糊和冲突的不同程度和组合划分限制。每个类别都包含在过去十年中采用的限制示例，这可能会在未来几年内重新定义外籍人士的权利和政治参与。