决策者什么时候听取(更少)专家的意见?瑞士政府在2019冠状病毒病危机期间实施科学建议

IF 4.1 2区 管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Policy Studies Journal Pub Date : 2023-01-30 DOI:10.1111/psj.12494
S. Eichenberger, Frédéric Varone, P. Sciarini, Robin Stähli, Jessica Proulx
{"title":"决策者什么时候听取(更少)专家的意见?瑞士政府在2019冠状病毒病危机期间实施科学建议","authors":"S. Eichenberger, Frédéric Varone, P. Sciarini, Robin Stähli, Jessica Proulx","doi":"10.1111/psj.12494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Under which conditions do politicians listen to scientific experts in a crisis? This study addresses this question by assessing how the Swiss government implemented 186 policy recommendations formulated by the National COVID‐19 Science Task Force (STF) to combat the spread of the virus and alleviate its impact on the health system, society and economy during the first year of the pandemic. Results of multiple regression analyses show that the impact of problem pressure on the propensity of the government to implement experts' recommendations varies over time: it was considerably larger during spring 2020 than afterwards. We argue that this reflects a change in status of the STF during the second phase of the pandemic: it was distanced from the political‐strategic level of the crisis management organization and its epistemic authority was increasingly questioned by political parties and interest groups. Policy scholars should thus give more attention to how rapidly the government's propensity to rely on expert advice can change. (English) [ FROM AUTHOR]","PeriodicalId":48154,"journal":{"name":"Policy Studies Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When do decision makers listen (less) to experts? The Swiss government's implementation of scientific advice during the\\n COVID\\n ‐19 crisis\",\"authors\":\"S. Eichenberger, Frédéric Varone, P. Sciarini, Robin Stähli, Jessica Proulx\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/psj.12494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Under which conditions do politicians listen to scientific experts in a crisis? This study addresses this question by assessing how the Swiss government implemented 186 policy recommendations formulated by the National COVID‐19 Science Task Force (STF) to combat the spread of the virus and alleviate its impact on the health system, society and economy during the first year of the pandemic. Results of multiple regression analyses show that the impact of problem pressure on the propensity of the government to implement experts' recommendations varies over time: it was considerably larger during spring 2020 than afterwards. We argue that this reflects a change in status of the STF during the second phase of the pandemic: it was distanced from the political‐strategic level of the crisis management organization and its epistemic authority was increasingly questioned by political parties and interest groups. Policy scholars should thus give more attention to how rapidly the government's propensity to rely on expert advice can change. (English) [ FROM AUTHOR]\",\"PeriodicalId\":48154,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy Studies Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy Studies Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12494\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Studies Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12494","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在什么情况下,政治家在危机中听取科学专家的意见?这项研究通过评估瑞士政府如何在新冠肺炎疫情的第一年实施国家新冠肺炎科学工作组(STF)制定的186项政策建议来解决这个问题,以遏制病毒的传播并减轻其对卫生系统、社会和经济的影响。多元回归分析的结果表明,问题压力对政府执行专家建议的倾向的影响随着时间的推移而变化:2020年春季的影响比之后大得多。我们认为,这反映了STF在疫情第二阶段的地位变化:它与危机管理组织的政治战略层面相距甚远,其认识权威越来越受到政党和利益集团的质疑。因此,政策学者应该更多地关注政府依赖专家建议的倾向变化的速度。(英文)[发件人]
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
When do decision makers listen (less) to experts? The Swiss government's implementation of scientific advice during the COVID ‐19 crisis
Under which conditions do politicians listen to scientific experts in a crisis? This study addresses this question by assessing how the Swiss government implemented 186 policy recommendations formulated by the National COVID‐19 Science Task Force (STF) to combat the spread of the virus and alleviate its impact on the health system, society and economy during the first year of the pandemic. Results of multiple regression analyses show that the impact of problem pressure on the propensity of the government to implement experts' recommendations varies over time: it was considerably larger during spring 2020 than afterwards. We argue that this reflects a change in status of the STF during the second phase of the pandemic: it was distanced from the political‐strategic level of the crisis management organization and its epistemic authority was increasingly questioned by political parties and interest groups. Policy scholars should thus give more attention to how rapidly the government's propensity to rely on expert advice can change. (English) [ FROM AUTHOR]
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
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: As the principal outlet for the Public Policy Section of the American Political Science Association and for the Policy Studies Organization (PSO), the Policy Studies Journal (PSJ) is the premier channel for the publication of public policy research. PSJ is best characterized as an outlet for theoretically and empirically grounded research on policy process and policy analysis. More specifically, we aim to publish articles that advance public policy theory, explicitly articulate its methods of data collection and analysis, and provide clear descriptions of how their work advances the literature.
期刊最新文献
Manifesting symbolic representation through collaborative policymaking Whose water crisis? How policy responses to acute environmental change widen inequality Narrative spillover: A narrative policy framework analysis of critical race theory discourse at multiple levels Athletic competition between the states: The rapid spread of Name, Image, Likeness laws and why it matters for understanding policy diffusion Editorial introduction: Exploring policy theories, narratives, and policing
×
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