Comparing social responses to Ebola and Covid-19 in Sierra Leone: an institutional analysis.

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Paul Richards, Foday Kamara, Esther Mokuwa, Marion Nyakoi
{"title":"Comparing social responses to Ebola and Covid-19 in Sierra Leone: an institutional analysis.","authors":"Paul Richards, Foday Kamara, Esther Mokuwa, Marion Nyakoi","doi":"10.1017/S002193202400021X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper compares community responses to Ebola and Covid-19 in two regions of southern and eastern Sierra Leone with reference to the theory of institutional dynamics proposed by the anthropologist Mary Douglas. Institutions, Douglas argued, are conveyed by styles of thought, shaped by the ways human communities, through everyday practices, reinforce systems of classification and denotation. Pandemic advice to 'follow the science' proved problematic, since there is no single institution of science, and institutions never stand alone but are bundled with other institutions, reflecting the manifold and intertwined practices of human social life. The paper explores some of the ways a traumatic epidemic of Ebola Virus Disease in Sierra Leone shaped a distinctive local response to this deadly infectious disease in the absence of an effective vaccine. This local approach emphasised social rules based on ideas about sequestration and testing. Communities then proposed to continue this rules-based approach to the pandemic of Covid-19 and showed little initial enthusiasm for vaccination. With Ebola, the adoption of rules resulted in dramatic drops in infection rates. But Covid-19 spreads in different ways, and good results from the application of social rules were much less apparent. The paper shows how communities began to grapple with this new situation. In some cases, vaccine hesitation was overcome by treating the requirement for vaccination as a new form of social discipline. More generally, it is concluded that epidemiologists need to pay specific attention to institutions and institutional dynamics in order to better understand and anticipate public reactions to new disease threats.</p>","PeriodicalId":47742,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biosocial Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7616509/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biosocial Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S002193202400021X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper compares community responses to Ebola and Covid-19 in two regions of southern and eastern Sierra Leone with reference to the theory of institutional dynamics proposed by the anthropologist Mary Douglas. Institutions, Douglas argued, are conveyed by styles of thought, shaped by the ways human communities, through everyday practices, reinforce systems of classification and denotation. Pandemic advice to 'follow the science' proved problematic, since there is no single institution of science, and institutions never stand alone but are bundled with other institutions, reflecting the manifold and intertwined practices of human social life. The paper explores some of the ways a traumatic epidemic of Ebola Virus Disease in Sierra Leone shaped a distinctive local response to this deadly infectious disease in the absence of an effective vaccine. This local approach emphasised social rules based on ideas about sequestration and testing. Communities then proposed to continue this rules-based approach to the pandemic of Covid-19 and showed little initial enthusiasm for vaccination. With Ebola, the adoption of rules resulted in dramatic drops in infection rates. But Covid-19 spreads in different ways, and good results from the application of social rules were much less apparent. The paper shows how communities began to grapple with this new situation. In some cases, vaccine hesitation was overcome by treating the requirement for vaccination as a new form of social discipline. More generally, it is concluded that epidemiologists need to pay specific attention to institutions and institutional dynamics in order to better understand and anticipate public reactions to new disease threats.

比较塞拉利昂社会对埃博拉病毒和 Covid-19 的反应:制度分析。
本文参照人类学家玛丽-道格拉斯(Mary Douglas)提出的制度动力学理论,比较了塞拉利昂南部和东部两个地区社区对埃博拉病毒和 Covid-19 病毒的反应。道格拉斯认为,制度是由思维方式传达的,是由人类社区通过日常实践强化分类和指称系统的方式形成的。事实证明,"跟着科学走 "的流行建议是有问题的,因为不存在单一的科学体制,体制从来都不是孤立的,而是与其他体制捆绑在一起的,反映了人类社会生活的多方面和相互交织的实践。本文探讨了塞拉利昂的埃博拉病毒疫情如何在缺乏有效疫苗的情况下,在当地形成了应对这一致命传染病的独特方法。这种地方性方法强调基于隔离和检测理念的社会规则。随后,各社区提议继续采用这种基于规则的方法来应对科维德-19 大流行病,但最初对疫苗接种的热情并不高。在埃博拉疫情中,规则的采用导致感染率急剧下降。但 Covid-19 的传播方式不同,应用社会规则的良好效果并不明显。论文展示了社区如何开始应对这一新情况。在某些情况下,通过将疫苗接种要求视为一种新的社会纪律形式,克服了疫苗接种的犹豫不决。总之,本文认为流行病学家需要特别关注制度和制度动态,以便更好地理解和预测公众对新疾病威胁的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
108
期刊介绍: Journal of Biosocial Science is a leading interdisciplinary and international journal in the field of biosocial science, the common ground between biology and sociology. It acts as an essential reference guide for all biological and social scientists working in these interdisciplinary areas, including social and biological aspects of reproduction and its control, gerontology, ecology, genetics, applied psychology, sociology, education, criminology, demography, health and epidemiology. Publishing original research papers, short reports, reviews, lectures and book reviews, the journal also includes a Debate section that encourages readers" comments on specific articles, with subsequent response from the original author.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信