{"title":"双重民主束缚:颁布任务和打击误导的挑战》。","authors":"Frida Boräng, Ruth Carlitz","doi":"10.1215/03616878-10910233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Wealthy countries vary considerably in terms of how well they have been able to inoculate their populations against COVID-19. In particular, democracies have been constrained in their abilities to implement vaccine mandates, given enshrined protections of civil liberties and individual freedom in such regimes. While scholars have begun addressing the democratic constraint on vaccine mandates, less attention has been paid to the additional challenges democracies face in constraining the spread of vaccine misinformation-particularly misinformation that spreads online.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study combines large-N cross-country analysis with a case study of Germany to illustrate the \"double bind\" that democracies face when it comes to containing both the spread of disease and the spread of misinformation through social media.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The cross-national analysis confirms that democracies have been less likely to enact vaccine mandates, and they have also been relatively more hesitant to restrict what people can see and share online. The case study of Germany highlights the normative and the procedural constraints underlying such decisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings show that resources are often not the binding constraint on effective disease control, raising questions regarding the ability of high-income democracies to respond effectively to future public health emergencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"189-215"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Double Democratic Bind: Challenges to Enacting Mandates and Combating Misinformation.\",\"authors\":\"Frida Boräng, Ruth Carlitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/03616878-10910233\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Wealthy countries vary considerably in terms of how well they have been able to inoculate their populations against COVID-19. In particular, democracies have been constrained in their abilities to implement vaccine mandates, given enshrined protections of civil liberties and individual freedom in such regimes. While scholars have begun addressing the democratic constraint on vaccine mandates, less attention has been paid to the additional challenges democracies face in constraining the spread of vaccine misinformation-particularly misinformation that spreads online.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study combines large-N cross-country analysis with a case study of Germany to illustrate the \\\"double bind\\\" that democracies face when it comes to containing both the spread of disease and the spread of misinformation through social media.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The cross-national analysis confirms that democracies have been less likely to enact vaccine mandates, and they have also been relatively more hesitant to restrict what people can see and share online. The case study of Germany highlights the normative and the procedural constraints underlying such decisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings show that resources are often not the binding constraint on effective disease control, raising questions regarding the ability of high-income democracies to respond effectively to future public health emergencies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"189-215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10910233\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10910233","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Double Democratic Bind: Challenges to Enacting Mandates and Combating Misinformation.
Context: Wealthy countries vary considerably in terms of how well they have been able to inoculate their populations against COVID-19. In particular, democracies have been constrained in their abilities to implement vaccine mandates, given enshrined protections of civil liberties and individual freedom in such regimes. While scholars have begun addressing the democratic constraint on vaccine mandates, less attention has been paid to the additional challenges democracies face in constraining the spread of vaccine misinformation-particularly misinformation that spreads online.
Methods: This study combines large-N cross-country analysis with a case study of Germany to illustrate the "double bind" that democracies face when it comes to containing both the spread of disease and the spread of misinformation through social media.
Findings: The cross-national analysis confirms that democracies have been less likely to enact vaccine mandates, and they have also been relatively more hesitant to restrict what people can see and share online. The case study of Germany highlights the normative and the procedural constraints underlying such decisions.
Conclusions: These findings show that resources are often not the binding constraint on effective disease control, raising questions regarding the ability of high-income democracies to respond effectively to future public health emergencies.
期刊介绍:
A leading journal in its field, and the primary source of communication across the many disciplines it serves, the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy and analyzes the relations between government and health—past, present, and future.