{"title":"揭示指标在全球疫苗接种治理中的作用","authors":"Anna Pichelstorfer, K. Paul","doi":"10.1093/ips/olab031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Recent efforts by intergovernmental actors, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), to foster collaboration on vaccine-preventable diseases stand in stark contrast to the contextually contingent nature of national immunization programs: vaccination schedules and delivery differ greatly, and so do the ways in which these programs are assessed by means of coverage rates—a key metric in global health governance. These divergences, we show, are sidelined and resolved diplomatically in WHO assessment practices: here, seemingly standardized metrics and practices of datafication function to translate political differences into technical discussions about “data quality.” Using a practice-based approach, we conceptualize data practices as a form of health diplomacy and their infrastructures as constitutive of global health governance. Drawing on document analysis and interviews, we examine the WHO’s practices of producing coverage rates provided by member states. We argue that these metrics are performative inasmuch as they help frame vaccination as a global concern and mediate between global norms and local practices. We show how datafication is both an effect of, and a means for, health diplomacy and helps sustain the authority of the WHO. Our research further demonstrates the need to attend to practices of datafication and their political implications.","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":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unpacking the Role of Metrics in Global Vaccination Governance\",\"authors\":\"Anna Pichelstorfer, K. Paul\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ips/olab031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Recent efforts by intergovernmental actors, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), to foster collaboration on vaccine-preventable diseases stand in stark contrast to the contextually contingent nature of national immunization programs: vaccination schedules and delivery differ greatly, and so do the ways in which these programs are assessed by means of coverage rates—a key metric in global health governance. These divergences, we show, are sidelined and resolved diplomatically in WHO assessment practices: here, seemingly standardized metrics and practices of datafication function to translate political differences into technical discussions about “data quality.” Using a practice-based approach, we conceptualize data practices as a form of health diplomacy and their infrastructures as constitutive of global health governance. Drawing on document analysis and interviews, we examine the WHO’s practices of producing coverage rates provided by member states. We argue that these metrics are performative inasmuch as they help frame vaccination as a global concern and mediate between global norms and local practices. We show how datafication is both an effect of, and a means for, health diplomacy and helps sustain the authority of the WHO. Our research further demonstrates the need to attend to practices of datafication and their political implications.\",\"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\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olab031\",\"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/olab031","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Unpacking the Role of Metrics in Global Vaccination Governance
Recent efforts by intergovernmental actors, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), to foster collaboration on vaccine-preventable diseases stand in stark contrast to the contextually contingent nature of national immunization programs: vaccination schedules and delivery differ greatly, and so do the ways in which these programs are assessed by means of coverage rates—a key metric in global health governance. These divergences, we show, are sidelined and resolved diplomatically in WHO assessment practices: here, seemingly standardized metrics and practices of datafication function to translate political differences into technical discussions about “data quality.” Using a practice-based approach, we conceptualize data practices as a form of health diplomacy and their infrastructures as constitutive of global health governance. Drawing on document analysis and interviews, we examine the WHO’s practices of producing coverage rates provided by member states. We argue that these metrics are performative inasmuch as they help frame vaccination as a global concern and mediate between global norms and local practices. We show how datafication is both an effect of, and a means for, health diplomacy and helps sustain the authority of the WHO. Our research further demonstrates the need to attend to practices of datafication and their political implications.
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.