危机时期的公民身份:新冠肺炎期间奥地利的生物社会国家公民关系。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL
Isabella M Radhuber, Christian Haddad, Katharina Kieslich, Katharina T Paul, Barbara Prainsack, Seliem El-Sayed, Lukas Schlogl, Wanda Spahl, Elias Weiss
{"title":"危机时期的公民身份:新冠肺炎期间奥地利的生物社会国家公民关系。","authors":"Isabella M Radhuber, Christian Haddad, Katharina Kieslich, Katharina T Paul, Barbara Prainsack, Seliem El-Sayed, Lukas Schlogl, Wanda Spahl, Elias Weiss","doi":"10.1057/s41292-023-00304-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drawing upon 152 in-depth qualitative interviews with residents in Austria carried out in the first year of the pandemic, this article discusses how people's experiences with COVID-19 policies reflect and reshape state-citizen relations. Coinciding with a significant government crisis, the first year of COVID-19 in Austria saw pandemic measures justified with reference to a biological, often medical understanding of health that framed disease prevention in terms of transmission reduction, often with reference to metrics such as hospitalisation rates, etc. Instead of using this biomedical frame, our interviewees, however, drew attention to biopsychosocial dimensions of the crisis and problematised the entanglements between economy and health. We call this the emergence of a <i>biosocial</i> notion of citizenship that is attentive to psychological, social and economic dimensions of health. Insights into the biosocial nature of pandemic citizenship open a window of opportunity for addressing long-standing social injustices.</p>","PeriodicalId":46976,"journal":{"name":"Biosocieties","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10201040/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Citizenship in times of crisis: biosocial state-citizen relations during COVID-19 in Austria.\",\"authors\":\"Isabella M Radhuber, Christian Haddad, Katharina Kieslich, Katharina T Paul, Barbara Prainsack, Seliem El-Sayed, Lukas Schlogl, Wanda Spahl, Elias Weiss\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41292-023-00304-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Drawing upon 152 in-depth qualitative interviews with residents in Austria carried out in the first year of the pandemic, this article discusses how people's experiences with COVID-19 policies reflect and reshape state-citizen relations. Coinciding with a significant government crisis, the first year of COVID-19 in Austria saw pandemic measures justified with reference to a biological, often medical understanding of health that framed disease prevention in terms of transmission reduction, often with reference to metrics such as hospitalisation rates, etc. Instead of using this biomedical frame, our interviewees, however, drew attention to biopsychosocial dimensions of the crisis and problematised the entanglements between economy and health. We call this the emergence of a <i>biosocial</i> notion of citizenship that is attentive to psychological, social and economic dimensions of health. Insights into the biosocial nature of pandemic citizenship open a window of opportunity for addressing long-standing social injustices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biosocieties\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10201040/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biosocieties\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-023-00304-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosocieties","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-023-00304-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文根据疫情第一年对奥地利居民进行的152次深入定性采访,讨论了人们对新冠肺炎政策的体验如何反映和重塑国家与公民的关系。在发生重大政府危机的同时,新冠肺炎在奥地利爆发的第一年,根据对健康的生物学、通常是医学理解,大流行措施是合理的,这种理解将疾病预防视为减少传播,通常参考住院率等指标。然而,我们的受访者没有使用这种生物医学框架,引起了人们对危机的生物-心理-社会层面的关注,并使经济和健康之间的纠缠成为问题。我们称之为公民身份的生物社会概念的出现,这种概念关注健康的心理、社会和经济层面。深入了解新冠肺炎公民身份的生物社会性质,为解决长期存在的社会不公正现象打开了机会之窗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Citizenship in times of crisis: biosocial state-citizen relations during COVID-19 in Austria.

Drawing upon 152 in-depth qualitative interviews with residents in Austria carried out in the first year of the pandemic, this article discusses how people's experiences with COVID-19 policies reflect and reshape state-citizen relations. Coinciding with a significant government crisis, the first year of COVID-19 in Austria saw pandemic measures justified with reference to a biological, often medical understanding of health that framed disease prevention in terms of transmission reduction, often with reference to metrics such as hospitalisation rates, etc. Instead of using this biomedical frame, our interviewees, however, drew attention to biopsychosocial dimensions of the crisis and problematised the entanglements between economy and health. We call this the emergence of a biosocial notion of citizenship that is attentive to psychological, social and economic dimensions of health. Insights into the biosocial nature of pandemic citizenship open a window of opportunity for addressing long-standing social injustices.

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
Biosocieties
Biosocieties SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: BioSocieties is committed to the scholarly exploration of the crucial social, ethical and policy implications of developments in the life sciences and biomedicine. These developments are increasing our ability to control our own biology; enabling us to create novel life forms; changing our ideas of ‘normality’ and ‘abnormality’; transforming our understanding of personal identity, family relations, ancestry and ‘race’; altering our social and personal expectations and responsibilities; reshaping global economic opportunities and inequalities; creating new global security challenges; and generating new social, ethical, legal and regulatory dilemmas. To address these dilemmas requires us to break out from narrow disciplinary boundaries within the social sciences and humanities, and between these disciplines and the natural sciences, and to develop new ways of thinking about the relations between biology and sociality and between the life sciences and society. BioSocieties provides a crucial forum where the most rigorous social research and critical analysis of these issues can intersect with the work of leading scientists, social researchers, clinicians, regulators and other stakeholders. BioSocieties defines the key intellectual issues at the science-society interface, and offers pathways to the resolution of the critical local, national and global socio-political challenges that arise from scientific and biomedical advances. As the first journal of its kind, BioSocieties publishes scholarship across the social science disciplines, and represents a lively and balanced array of perspectives on controversial issues. In its inaugural year BioSocieties demonstrated the constructive potential of interdisciplinary dialogue and debate across the social and natural sciences. We are becoming the journal of choice not only for social scientists, but also for life scientists interested in the larger social, ethical and policy implications of their work. The journal is international in scope, spanning research and developments in all corners of the globe. BioSocieties is published quarterly, with occasional themed issues that highlight some of the critical questions and problematics of modern biotechnologies. Articles, response pieces, review essays, and self-standing editorial pieces by social and life scientists form a regular part of the journal.
×
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