Trust, Democracy, and Hygiene Theatre: Taiwan’s Evasion of the Pandemic

IF 0.6 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW
R. B. Leflar
{"title":"Trust, Democracy, and Hygiene Theatre: Taiwan’s Evasion of the Pandemic","authors":"R. B. Leflar","doi":"10.1017/als.2022.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Taiwan’s record of preventing infections and deaths from COVID-19 outshines that of almost every other nation, far outstripping the performance of the US, all European countries, and almost all Asian countries. Yet Taiwan is the nation closest to Wuhan, font of the pandemic. Equally importantly, Taiwan’s public health achievement has occurred without the government dictates such as business and residential lockdowns that have aroused controversy and caused economic and psychological distress around the globe. This essay relates the story of Taiwan’s actions during the crucial early months of 2020 and explores the factors—historical, geographical, legal, institutional, strategic, and cultural—accounting for Taiwan’s remarkable success. Prominent among those factors are the legal and institutional infrastructure of preparedness that Taiwan constructed following its unhappy experience with the 2003 SARS outbreak, and the prompt and decisive measures taken upon discovery of the Wuhan outbreak on 31 December 2019. A dialogue between the judiciary and the legislative and executive branches of government following the SARS episode enabled the infrastructure of preparedness to be created through a process consonant with democratic government, respecting principles of individual liberty and fairness. Risk communication techniques were skilfully employed to build public trust in expert advice about measures for infection prevention. Persuasion, not compulsion, was the norm. Cultural factors including customary acceptance of mask-wearing and authoritative advice, and perhaps a high level of risk-aversity, also played an important part. Taiwan’s pandemic control policies have drawn criticism of government overreach. Some recommendations, such as for outdoor masking, bear little rational relation to infection prevention and are best characterized as mere “hygiene theatre.” Nevertheless, early-2020 government measures received a high level of public approval. Taiwan’s successful response to the pandemic illustrates the nation’s nature: a disciplined democracy.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"10 1","pages":"46 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.19","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Taiwan’s record of preventing infections and deaths from COVID-19 outshines that of almost every other nation, far outstripping the performance of the US, all European countries, and almost all Asian countries. Yet Taiwan is the nation closest to Wuhan, font of the pandemic. Equally importantly, Taiwan’s public health achievement has occurred without the government dictates such as business and residential lockdowns that have aroused controversy and caused economic and psychological distress around the globe. This essay relates the story of Taiwan’s actions during the crucial early months of 2020 and explores the factors—historical, geographical, legal, institutional, strategic, and cultural—accounting for Taiwan’s remarkable success. Prominent among those factors are the legal and institutional infrastructure of preparedness that Taiwan constructed following its unhappy experience with the 2003 SARS outbreak, and the prompt and decisive measures taken upon discovery of the Wuhan outbreak on 31 December 2019. A dialogue between the judiciary and the legislative and executive branches of government following the SARS episode enabled the infrastructure of preparedness to be created through a process consonant with democratic government, respecting principles of individual liberty and fairness. Risk communication techniques were skilfully employed to build public trust in expert advice about measures for infection prevention. Persuasion, not compulsion, was the norm. Cultural factors including customary acceptance of mask-wearing and authoritative advice, and perhaps a high level of risk-aversity, also played an important part. Taiwan’s pandemic control policies have drawn criticism of government overreach. Some recommendations, such as for outdoor masking, bear little rational relation to infection prevention and are best characterized as mere “hygiene theatre.” Nevertheless, early-2020 government measures received a high level of public approval. Taiwan’s successful response to the pandemic illustrates the nation’s nature: a disciplined democracy.
信任、民主与卫生剧场:台湾躲过疫情
摘要台湾预防新冠肺炎感染和死亡的记录几乎超过了其他所有国家,远远超过了美国、所有欧洲国家和几乎所有亚洲国家。然而,台湾是距离疫情最严重的武汉最近的国家。同样重要的是,台湾的公共卫生成就是在没有政府指示的情况下取得的,比如商业和住宅封锁,这引发了争议,并在全球范围内造成了经济和心理困扰。本文讲述了台湾在2020年前几个月的行动,并探讨了台湾取得显著成功的历史、地理、法律、制度、战略和文化因素。这些因素中最突出的是台湾在经历2003年SARS疫情后建立的法律和体制准备基础设施,以及在2019年12月31日发现武汉疫情后采取的迅速果断措施。SARS事件发生后,司法部门与政府立法和行政部门之间的对话使准备基础设施能够通过符合民主政府、尊重个人自由和公平原则的程序建立起来。风险沟通技术被巧妙地用于建立公众对感染预防措施专家建议的信任。说服而非强迫是常态。文化因素,包括习惯上接受戴口罩和权威建议,也许还有高度的风险厌恶,也起到了重要作用。台湾的疫情控制政策招致了对政府过度反应的批评。一些建议,如户外口罩,与预防感染没有什么合理的关系,最好被描述为仅仅是“卫生剧场”。然而,20世纪20年代初的政府措施得到了公众的高度认可。台湾成功应对疫情说明了这个国家的本质:一个有纪律的民主国家。
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
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Asian Journal of Law and Society (AJLS) adds an increasingly important Asian perspective to global law and society scholarship. This independent, peer-reviewed publication encourages empirical and multi-disciplinary research and welcomes articles on law and its relationship with society in Asia, articles bringing an Asian perspective to socio-legal issues of global concern, and articles using Asia as a starting point for a comparative exploration of law and society topics. Its coverage of Asia is broad and stretches from East Asia, South Asia and South East Asia to Central Asia. A unique combination of a base in Asia and an international editorial team creates a forum for Asian and Western scholars to exchange ideas of interest to Asian scholars and professionals, those working in or on Asia, as well as all working on law and society issues globally.
×
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