The Trading Zones of Patient Participation: Public Issue Formation in Nondemocratic Situations

IF 3.1 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL ISSUES
Vlas Nikulkin, Olga Zvonareva
{"title":"The Trading Zones of Patient Participation: Public Issue Formation in Nondemocratic Situations","authors":"Vlas Nikulkin, Olga Zvonareva","doi":"10.1177/01622439241253943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates public issue formation catalyzed by Russian patient organizations (POs) that aim to change healthcare rules and practices following patients’ needs and expectations. Drawing on the socio-ontological approach of science and technology studies, which posits that issues do not exist independently of efforts to address them, we identify three main stages of public issue formation in the studied situation: (1) from individual troubles to systemic problems, (2) from systemic problems to shared concerns, and (3) from shared concerns to public issues. Transforming individual troubles into public issues is neither easy nor straightforward. Yet, as the key actors in the process, POs use events like conferences and roundtables, and consultative spaces like public councils to engage with healthcare experts and state policymakers. We propose to view these events and spaces as trading zones. Facilitating public issue formation through trading zones where collaboration with other healthcare governance actors occurs without consensus over meanings and priorities, POs address suffering among patients in nondemocratic situations where expert knowledge dominates and public participation is generally unwelcome. The resulting issues are public in scope and capability of mobilizing action, yet articulated in a de-publicizing manner that conceals conflicting stakes and commitments.","PeriodicalId":48083,"journal":{"name":"Science Technology & Human Values","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Technology & Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439241253943","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article investigates public issue formation catalyzed by Russian patient organizations (POs) that aim to change healthcare rules and practices following patients’ needs and expectations. Drawing on the socio-ontological approach of science and technology studies, which posits that issues do not exist independently of efforts to address them, we identify three main stages of public issue formation in the studied situation: (1) from individual troubles to systemic problems, (2) from systemic problems to shared concerns, and (3) from shared concerns to public issues. Transforming individual troubles into public issues is neither easy nor straightforward. Yet, as the key actors in the process, POs use events like conferences and roundtables, and consultative spaces like public councils to engage with healthcare experts and state policymakers. We propose to view these events and spaces as trading zones. Facilitating public issue formation through trading zones where collaboration with other healthcare governance actors occurs without consensus over meanings and priorities, POs address suffering among patients in nondemocratic situations where expert knowledge dominates and public participation is generally unwelcome. The resulting issues are public in scope and capability of mobilizing action, yet articulated in a de-publicizing manner that conceals conflicting stakes and commitments.
患者参与的交易区:非民主环境下的公共议题形成
俄罗斯患者组织(POs)旨在根据患者的需求和期望改变医疗保健规则和实践,本文研究了在这些组织的推动下形成的公共问题。科学技术研究的社会本体论方法认为,问题的存在与解决问题的努力无关,我们借鉴了这一方法,确定了所研究情境中公共问题形成的三个主要阶段:(1) 从个人问题到系统问题,(2) 从系统问题到共同关切,(3) 从共同关切到公共问题。将个人问题转化为公共问题既不容易,也不简单。然而,作为这一过程的主要参与者,参与组织利用会议和圆桌会议等活动,以及公共委员会等协商空间,与医疗保健专家和国家政策制定者进行接触。我们建议将这些活动和空间视为交易区。参与组织通过交易区促进公共问题的形成,在交易区,参与组织与其他医疗治理行为者开展合作,但未就意义和优先事项达成共识,参与组织在专家知识占主导地位、公众参与通常不受欢迎的非民主环境中解决患者的痛苦。由此产生的问题在范围和动员行动的能力上都是公开的,但其表达方式却不公开,掩盖了相互冲突的利害关系和承诺。
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
7.70
自引率
6.50%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: As scientific advances improve our lives, they also complicate how we live and react to the new technologies. More and more, human values come into conflict with scientific advancement as we deal with important issues such as nuclear power, environmental degradation and information technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values is a peer-reviewed, international, interdisciplinary journal containing research, analyses and commentary on the development and dynamics of science and technology, including their relationship to politics, society and culture.
×
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