Politicizing Global Governance Institutions in Times of Crisis

IF 0.6 3区 社会学 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Global Governance Pub Date : 2022-09-19 DOI:10.1163/19426720-02803004
Hai Yang
{"title":"Politicizing Global Governance Institutions in Times of Crisis","authors":"Hai Yang","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02803004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines the politicization of the World Health Organization (WHO) over the course of the coronavirus pandemic (January–December 2020), a paradigmatic case of politicization of global governance institutions. During the pandemic, the WHO was subjected to considerable scrutiny and contestation. This research focuses on politicization at the level of behavior and discourse. Conceptually, it leverages the analytic purchase of politicization and framing. Empirically, it is based on a corpus comprising 505 texts gathered from key actors involved. The analysis not only lays bare the varying demands and arguments vis-à-vis the WHO, but foregrounds the broad consensus among the actors examined (barring the Donald Trump administration) on the imperative to support the organization. Additionally, seven distinct frames on the WHO are identified: Puppet, Handcuffed, Scapegoat, Irreplaceable, Botched, Comme il faut, and Battleground. Together, they offer a holistic overview of the diverse perspectives on the WHO and its pandemic response.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02803004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the politicization of the World Health Organization (WHO) over the course of the coronavirus pandemic (January–December 2020), a paradigmatic case of politicization of global governance institutions. During the pandemic, the WHO was subjected to considerable scrutiny and contestation. This research focuses on politicization at the level of behavior and discourse. Conceptually, it leverages the analytic purchase of politicization and framing. Empirically, it is based on a corpus comprising 505 texts gathered from key actors involved. The analysis not only lays bare the varying demands and arguments vis-à-vis the WHO, but foregrounds the broad consensus among the actors examined (barring the Donald Trump administration) on the imperative to support the organization. Additionally, seven distinct frames on the WHO are identified: Puppet, Handcuffed, Scapegoat, Irreplaceable, Botched, Comme il faut, and Battleground. Together, they offer a holistic overview of the diverse perspectives on the WHO and its pandemic response.
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
危机时期全球治理机构政治化
本文探讨了世界卫生组织(世界卫生组织)在冠状病毒大流行期间(2020年1月至12月)的政治化,这是全球治理机构政治化的典型案例。在大流行期间,世界卫生组织受到了相当大的审查和质疑。本研究的重点是行为和话语层面的政治化。从概念上讲,它利用了对政治化和框架化的分析购买。从经验上讲,它是基于一个语料库,该语料库包括从主要参与者那里收集的505篇文本。该分析不仅揭示了对世界卫生组织的不同要求和论点,还突出了所审查的行为者(除了唐纳德·特朗普政府)对支持世卫组织的必要性的广泛共识。此外,世界卫生组织还确定了七个不同的框架:Puppet、Handcuffed、Scapegoat、Unreplicable、Botched、Comme il faut和Battleground。它们共同提供了对世界卫生组织及其应对疫情的不同观点的全面概述。
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
Global Governance
Global Governance INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
China and the ITU Unmapping the 21st Century: Between Networks and the State , by Nicholas Michelsen and Neville Bolt An Early Assessment of the General Assembly’s 2022 Veto Initiative Cognitive Third Force The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Securing Actors’ Compliance with the International Anti-Money Laundering/Counterterrorist Financing Regime
×
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:604180095
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