处于边缘的拉丁美洲?全球 "卫生的地理和认识范围缩小的影响。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global Public Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-26 DOI:10.1080/17441692.2023.2295443
Amaya Perez-Brumer, David Hill, Richard Parker
{"title":"处于边缘的拉丁美洲?全球 \"卫生的地理和认识范围缩小的影响。","authors":"Amaya Perez-Brumer, David Hill, Richard Parker","doi":"10.1080/17441692.2023.2295443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To explore the narrowing of the concept of 'global' in global health, this article traces how Latin America has held a place of both privilege and power as well as marginalisation in the field. We employ a modified extended case method to examine how Latin America has been 'seen' and 'heard' in understandings of global health, underscoring the region's shifting role as a key site for research and practice in 'tropical medicine' from the mid-nineteenth century through World War II, to a major player and recipient of development assistance throughout the 'international health' era after World War II until the late twentieth century, to a region progressively marginalised within 'global health' since the mid-1980s/1990s. We argue that the progressive marginalisation of Latin America and Southern theory has not only hurt health equity and services, but also demonstrates the fundamental flaws in contemporary 'global' thinking. The narrowing of global health constitutes coloniality of power, with Northern institutions largely defining priority regions and epistemic approaches to health globally, thus impoverishing the field from the intellectual resources, political experience, and wisdom of Latin America's long traditions of social medicine and collective health.</p>","PeriodicalId":12735,"journal":{"name":"Global Public Health","volume":"19 1","pages":"2295443"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Latin America at the margins? Implications of the geographic and epistemic narrowing of 'global' health.\",\"authors\":\"Amaya Perez-Brumer, David Hill, Richard Parker\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17441692.2023.2295443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To explore the narrowing of the concept of 'global' in global health, this article traces how Latin America has held a place of both privilege and power as well as marginalisation in the field. We employ a modified extended case method to examine how Latin America has been 'seen' and 'heard' in understandings of global health, underscoring the region's shifting role as a key site for research and practice in 'tropical medicine' from the mid-nineteenth century through World War II, to a major player and recipient of development assistance throughout the 'international health' era after World War II until the late twentieth century, to a region progressively marginalised within 'global health' since the mid-1980s/1990s. We argue that the progressive marginalisation of Latin America and Southern theory has not only hurt health equity and services, but also demonstrates the fundamental flaws in contemporary 'global' thinking. The narrowing of global health constitutes coloniality of power, with Northern institutions largely defining priority regions and epistemic approaches to health globally, thus impoverishing the field from the intellectual resources, political experience, and wisdom of Latin America's long traditions of social medicine and collective health.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12735,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Public Health\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"2295443\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2023.2295443\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2023.2295443","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了探讨全球卫生中 "全球 "概念的狭隘性,本文追溯了拉丁美洲如何在该领域既拥有特权和权力,又被边缘化。我们采用了一种经过修改的扩展案例法来研究拉丁美洲在全球卫生的理解中是如何被 "看到 "和 "听到 "的,强调了该地区作为 "热带医学 "研究和实践的一个关键地点的角色转变,从十九世纪中叶到第二次世界大战,从第二次世界大战后到二十世纪末的整个 "国际卫生 "时代的主要参与者和发展援助的接受者,到二十世纪八十年代中期/九十年代以来在 "全球卫生 "中逐渐边缘化的地区。我们认为,拉丁美洲和南方理论的逐渐边缘化不仅损害了医疗公平和医疗服务,还表明了当代 "全球 "思维的根本缺陷。全球卫生的狭隘性构成了权力的殖民性,北方机构在很大程度上决定了全球卫生的优先区域和认识方法,从而使该领域失去了拉丁美洲悠久的社会医学和集体卫生传统的智力资源、政治经验和智慧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Latin America at the margins? Implications of the geographic and epistemic narrowing of 'global' health.

To explore the narrowing of the concept of 'global' in global health, this article traces how Latin America has held a place of both privilege and power as well as marginalisation in the field. We employ a modified extended case method to examine how Latin America has been 'seen' and 'heard' in understandings of global health, underscoring the region's shifting role as a key site for research and practice in 'tropical medicine' from the mid-nineteenth century through World War II, to a major player and recipient of development assistance throughout the 'international health' era after World War II until the late twentieth century, to a region progressively marginalised within 'global health' since the mid-1980s/1990s. We argue that the progressive marginalisation of Latin America and Southern theory has not only hurt health equity and services, but also demonstrates the fundamental flaws in contemporary 'global' thinking. The narrowing of global health constitutes coloniality of power, with Northern institutions largely defining priority regions and epistemic approaches to health globally, thus impoverishing the field from the intellectual resources, political experience, and wisdom of Latin America's long traditions of social medicine and collective health.

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
Global Public Health
Global Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: Global Public Health is an essential peer-reviewed journal that energetically engages with key public health issues that have come to the fore in the global environment — mounting inequalities between rich and poor; the globalization of trade; new patterns of travel and migration; epidemics of newly-emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases; the HIV/AIDS pandemic; the increase in chronic illnesses; escalating pressure on public health infrastructures around the world; and the growing range and scale of conflict situations, terrorist threats, environmental pressures, natural and human-made disasters.
期刊最新文献
Hypothetical acceptability of minimally invasive tissue sampling and considerations for practice: A qualitative study in Vietnam Unravelling the nexus of microfinance and women’s non-communicable disease (NCD) health outcomes in Sri Lanka: An exploratory study Can health promotion facilitate development in fragile states?: An instrumental variable estimation with panel data The health workforce conundrum for burn care in Uttar Pradesh, India: a qualitative exploration Access to adolescent sexual and reproductive health services in Accra, Ghana: An exploratory qualitative study
×
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