Striking a balance between science and politics: understanding the risk-based policy-making process during the outbreak of COVID-19 epidemic in China

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Chinese Governance Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI:10.1080/23812346.2020.1745412
Peng Liu, Xiao Zhong, Suyang Yu
{"title":"Striking a balance between science and politics: understanding the risk-based policy-making process during the outbreak of COVID-19 epidemic in China","authors":"Peng Liu, Xiao Zhong, Suyang Yu","doi":"10.1080/23812346.2020.1745412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic in China is, essentially, a public health emergency. Therefore, it becomes a critical issue to make policies by using scientific knowledge in a highly uncertain and unpredictable context. The key issue of risk-based decision-making (RBDM) is how to strike a balance between science and politics. After reviewing existing literature and practice, three main approaches to risk-based decision-making (RBDM) can be summarized: politics-based, science-led, and the integration and negotiation of science and politics. On the basis of public reports from current mass media, this article focuses on the time period from the releasing of the first COVID-19 case in Wuhan to the lockdown policy made by Wuhan municipal government, and we divide important stakeholders in early stage into two groups:scientist group and politician group. It finds that the RBDM process of Wuhan municipal government against COVID-19 demonstrated that politics intertwined tightly with science. Its RBDM process could be categorized into three phases: politics-based, science-involved, and science-led. We conclude six main characteristics of RBDM mechanisms in contemporary China. Finally, we argue that Chinese governments should establish institutionalized mechanisms for the negotiation and cooperation of science and politics in its RBDM process like COVID-19 epidemic. Five policy recommendations have been discussed to improve its RBDM quality in China’s context.","PeriodicalId":45091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Governance","volume":"5 1","pages":"198 - 212"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23812346.2020.1745412","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2020.1745412","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Abstract The outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic in China is, essentially, a public health emergency. Therefore, it becomes a critical issue to make policies by using scientific knowledge in a highly uncertain and unpredictable context. The key issue of risk-based decision-making (RBDM) is how to strike a balance between science and politics. After reviewing existing literature and practice, three main approaches to risk-based decision-making (RBDM) can be summarized: politics-based, science-led, and the integration and negotiation of science and politics. On the basis of public reports from current mass media, this article focuses on the time period from the releasing of the first COVID-19 case in Wuhan to the lockdown policy made by Wuhan municipal government, and we divide important stakeholders in early stage into two groups:scientist group and politician group. It finds that the RBDM process of Wuhan municipal government against COVID-19 demonstrated that politics intertwined tightly with science. Its RBDM process could be categorized into three phases: politics-based, science-involved, and science-led. We conclude six main characteristics of RBDM mechanisms in contemporary China. Finally, we argue that Chinese governments should establish institutionalized mechanisms for the negotiation and cooperation of science and politics in its RBDM process like COVID-19 epidemic. Five policy recommendations have been discussed to improve its RBDM quality in China’s context.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在科学与政治之间寻求平衡:理解新冠肺炎疫情在中国爆发期间基于风险的决策过程
摘要新冠肺炎疫情在中国的爆发本质上是一场突发公共卫生事件。因此,在高度不确定和不可预测的背景下,利用科学知识制定政策成为一个关键问题。基于风险的决策(RBDM)的关键问题是如何在科学和政治之间取得平衡。在回顾现有文献和实践的基础上,可以总结出基于风险的决策(RBDM)的三种主要方法:基于政治的、科学主导的以及科学与政治的整合和协商。本文在当前大众媒体公开报道的基础上,重点研究了从武汉第一例新冠肺炎病例发布到武汉市政府制定封锁政策的时间段,并将早期的重要利益相关者分为两个群体:科学家群体和政治家群体。研究发现,武汉市政府抗击新冠肺炎的RBDM过程表明,政治与科学紧密交织在一起。其RBDM过程可分为三个阶段:以政治为基础、科学参与和科学主导。我们总结了当代中国RBDM机制的六个主要特征。最后,我们认为,中国政府应该像新冠肺炎疫情一样,在RBDM进程中建立科学与政治协商与合作的制度化机制。讨论了在中国背景下提高RBDM质量的五项政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
Reconceptualizing policy change in China: from soft to harder forms of law in the household registration system reform Administrative states as moral hazards: four dimensions Party-led public participation in neighborhood governance: a comparative analysis of two forms of social networks Beyond state law: everyday rules and the fragile public Does china’s national carbon market function well? A perspective on effective market design
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1