Constructing the accountability of food safety as a public problem in China: a document analysis of Chinese scholarship, 2008–2018

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Chinese Governance Pub Date : 2020-07-22 DOI:10.1080/23812346.2020.1796160
Ronghui Yang, K. Horstman, B. Penders
{"title":"Constructing the accountability of food safety as a public problem in China: a document analysis of Chinese scholarship, 2008–2018","authors":"Ronghui Yang, K. Horstman, B. Penders","doi":"10.1080/23812346.2020.1796160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Incessant food safety scandals in China have given rise to a loss of public trust in food safety, stimulating a series of studies focussing on food safety governance, accountability, and trust restoration. Against this backdrop, Chinese scholars are keen to reflect on different strategies for ensuring food safety public accountability and credibility, presenting different perspectives on issues like responsibility, trust, risk communication, and transparency. In this paper, we aim to get more in-depth insight into how Chinese scholarly debates co-construct public accountability for food safety as a public issue. We selected 51 articles from 10,790 candidates drawn from four Chinese academic databases for content analysis. Drawing from political theories on public accountability as well as science and technology studies, the analysis shows that arguments for a specific public accountability model (more or less centralised, more or less stakeholder participation) are intertwined with the specific role of scientific expertise (more or less authoritative, more or less democratising). As such, the analysis shows how scholarly debates on public accountability for food safety in China co-construct a public forum for discussing supervision and accountability, risk assessment, and transparency.","PeriodicalId":45091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Governance","volume":"7 1","pages":"236 - 265"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23812346.2020.1796160","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2020.1796160","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: 3

Abstract

Abstract Incessant food safety scandals in China have given rise to a loss of public trust in food safety, stimulating a series of studies focussing on food safety governance, accountability, and trust restoration. Against this backdrop, Chinese scholars are keen to reflect on different strategies for ensuring food safety public accountability and credibility, presenting different perspectives on issues like responsibility, trust, risk communication, and transparency. In this paper, we aim to get more in-depth insight into how Chinese scholarly debates co-construct public accountability for food safety as a public issue. We selected 51 articles from 10,790 candidates drawn from four Chinese academic databases for content analysis. Drawing from political theories on public accountability as well as science and technology studies, the analysis shows that arguments for a specific public accountability model (more or less centralised, more or less stakeholder participation) are intertwined with the specific role of scientific expertise (more or less authoritative, more or less democratising). As such, the analysis shows how scholarly debates on public accountability for food safety in China co-construct a public forum for discussing supervision and accountability, risk assessment, and transparency.
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
食品安全问责制在中国的建构:中国学术文献分析,2008-2018
摘要中国不断发生的食品安全丑闻导致公众对食品安全的信任丧失,引发了一系列关注食品安全治理、问责和信任恢复的研究。在这种背景下,中国学者热衷于反思确保食品安全公共问责制和公信力的不同策略,在责任、信任、风险沟通和透明度等问题上提出了不同的观点。在本文中,我们旨在更深入地了解中国学术辩论如何将食品安全的公共问责作为一个公共问题来构建。我们从四个中国学术数据库中的10790名候选人中挑选了51篇文章进行内容分析。根据关于公共问责的政治理论以及科学和技术研究,分析表明,支持特定公共问责模式(或多或少集中,或多或少利益相关者参与)的论点与科学专业知识的特定作用(或多或少权威,或多或少民主化)交织在一起。因此,该分析表明,关于中国食品安全公共问责的学术辩论如何共同构建一个讨论监督和问责、风险评估和透明度的公共论坛。
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