双重民主束缚:颁布任务和打击误导的挑战》。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frida Boräng, Ruth Carlitz
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:富裕国家在为其人口接种 COVID-19 疫苗方面的能力差异很大。尤其是民主国家,由于其制度对公民自由和个人自由的保护,它们在执行疫苗接种任务的能力方面受到了限制。尽管学者们已经开始探讨疫苗强制接种的民主限制,但较少有人关注民主国家在限制疫苗错误信息传播--尤其是网上传播的错误信息--方面所面临的额外挑战:本研究结合了大范围跨国分析和德国案例研究,以说明民主国家在遏制疾病传播和通过社交媒体传播错误信息时所面临的 "双重约束":跨国分析证实,民主国家不太可能强制推行疫苗接种,而且在限制人们在网上查看和分享信息方面也相对更加犹豫不决。德国的案例研究强调了此类决定背后的规范和程序限制:这些研究结果表明,资源往往不是有效控制疾病的约束条件,这就对高收入民主国家有效应对未来公共卫生突发事件的能力提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
46
审稿时长
>12 weeks
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.
×
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