全球治理专门知识生产的排他性和循环性:“全球心理健康”知识的形成

IF 3.5 2区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Annabelle Littoz-Monnet
{"title":"全球治理专门知识生产的排他性和循环性:“全球心理健康”知识的形成","authors":"Annabelle Littoz-Monnet","doi":"10.1093/ips/olab035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Global mental health expertise favors biomedical explanations of mental disorders that conceive such disorders as stable entities, which can be diagnosed according to universal categories. Following this logic, universal and standardized solutions can also be applied throughout the world, regardless of context. Despite its assumptions and data being contested within the field of psychiatry itself, global mental health expertise has been highly stable. How is such expertise produced? Through what mechanisms are its products, such as reports, studies, or numbers, made and replicated? The article proposes a model of expertise production in global governance that discloses specific mechanisms of circularity and exclusivity in knowledge-making processes, which result in the circular and exclusive character of expertise itself. These include the circulation of profesionals and data across spheres and organizations, as well as the role played by several sites such as boundary expert groups, influential research clusters, and “policy-scientific” journals, which operate as powerful centers of knowledge production at the intersection of the policy, scientific or private spheres. Such sites not only act as loci where people's circulation operates at its best but also as autonomous mechanisms that produce, cement, and perpetuate the circularity and exclusivity of expertise beyond the role of specific individuals.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exclusivity and Circularity in the Production of Global Governance Expertise: The Making of “Global Mental Health” Knowledge\",\"authors\":\"Annabelle Littoz-Monnet\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ips/olab035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Global mental health expertise favors biomedical explanations of mental disorders that conceive such disorders as stable entities, which can be diagnosed according to universal categories. Following this logic, universal and standardized solutions can also be applied throughout the world, regardless of context. Despite its assumptions and data being contested within the field of psychiatry itself, global mental health expertise has been highly stable. How is such expertise produced? Through what mechanisms are its products, such as reports, studies, or numbers, made and replicated? The article proposes a model of expertise production in global governance that discloses specific mechanisms of circularity and exclusivity in knowledge-making processes, which result in the circular and exclusive character of expertise itself. These include the circulation of profesionals and data across spheres and organizations, as well as the role played by several sites such as boundary expert groups, influential research clusters, and “policy-scientific” journals, which operate as powerful centers of knowledge production at the intersection of the policy, scientific or private spheres. Such sites not only act as loci where people's circulation operates at its best but also as autonomous mechanisms that produce, cement, and perpetuate the circularity and exclusivity of expertise beyond the role of specific individuals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olab035\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olab035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

全球心理健康专业知识支持对精神障碍的生物医学解释,这些解释将这些障碍视为稳定的实体,可以根据通用类别进行诊断。遵循这一逻辑,通用和标准化的解决方案也可以在世界各地应用,无论上下文如何。尽管其假设和数据在精神病学领域本身存在争议,但全球心理健康专业知识一直高度稳定。这种专业知识是如何产生的?它的产品,如报告、研究或数字,是通过什么机制制作和复制的?本文提出了一个全球治理中的专业知识生产模型,揭示了知识制造过程中的循环性和排他性的具体机制,这导致了专业知识本身的循环性与排他性。其中包括跨领域和组织的专业人员和数据流通,以及边界专家组、有影响力的研究集群和“政策科学”期刊等几个网站所发挥的作用,这些网站是政策、科学或私人领域交叉点上强大的知识生产中心。这些网站不仅是人们流通发挥最佳作用的场所,而且是产生、巩固和延续特定个人角色之外的专业知识的循环性和排他性的自主机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exclusivity and Circularity in the Production of Global Governance Expertise: The Making of “Global Mental Health” Knowledge
Global mental health expertise favors biomedical explanations of mental disorders that conceive such disorders as stable entities, which can be diagnosed according to universal categories. Following this logic, universal and standardized solutions can also be applied throughout the world, regardless of context. Despite its assumptions and data being contested within the field of psychiatry itself, global mental health expertise has been highly stable. How is such expertise produced? Through what mechanisms are its products, such as reports, studies, or numbers, made and replicated? The article proposes a model of expertise production in global governance that discloses specific mechanisms of circularity and exclusivity in knowledge-making processes, which result in the circular and exclusive character of expertise itself. These include the circulation of profesionals and data across spheres and organizations, as well as the role played by several sites such as boundary expert groups, influential research clusters, and “policy-scientific” journals, which operate as powerful centers of knowledge production at the intersection of the policy, scientific or private spheres. Such sites not only act as loci where people's circulation operates at its best but also as autonomous mechanisms that produce, cement, and perpetuate the circularity and exclusivity of expertise beyond the role of specific individuals.
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
4.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: International Political Sociology (IPS), responds to the need for more productive collaboration among political sociologists, international relations specialists and sociopolitical theorists. It is especially concerned with challenges arising from contemporary transformations of social, political, and global orders given the statist forms of traditional sociologies and the marginalization of social processes in many approaches to international relations. IPS is committed to theoretical innovation, new modes of empirical research and the geographical and cultural diversification of research beyond the usual circuits of European and North-American scholarship.
×
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