Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, USA.
Glob Public Health. 2011;6 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S210-26. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2011.595728. Epub 2011 Aug 15.
Using data from a study of Chinese immigrant religious institutions in New York City (primarily Christian and Buddhist), this paper explores why some religious institutions are more inclined than others to be involved in HIV-related work. Although numerous factors are likely to play a role, we focus on organisations' differing views on social engagement as an explanatory factor. We hypothesise that religious institutions that value social engagement ('civic') will be more inclined towards HIV/AIDS involvement than those that are more inward focused ('sanctuary'). Given that many religious institutions are fundamentally defined by their stance on the appropriateness of social engagement, better understanding of this key characteristic may help to inform community and government organisations aiming to increase religious institutions' involvement in HIV/AIDS-related work. Our analysis suggests that some organisations may be less interested in taking on the challenges of working in HIV/AIDS because of their general view that churches or temples should not be socially engaged. On the other hand, religious institutions that have concerns about social acceptability, fear of infection or lack of capacity--but generally embrace social engagement--may be more open to partnering on HIV/AIDS-related work because of their overriding community service orientation.
本文利用一项针对纽约市中国移民宗教机构(主要是基督教和佛教)的研究数据,探讨了为什么有些宗教机构比其他机构更倾向于参与与艾滋病毒相关的工作。尽管许多因素可能发挥作用,但我们将重点放在组织对社会参与的不同看法上,将其作为一个解释因素。我们假设,重视社会参与(“公民”)的宗教机构将比那些更注重内部事务的机构(“庇护所”)更倾向于参与艾滋病毒/艾滋病。鉴于许多宗教机构的基本定义是基于其对社会参与的适当性的立场,更好地了解这一关键特征可能有助于为旨在增加宗教机构参与艾滋病毒/艾滋病相关工作的社区和政府组织提供信息。我们的分析表明,一些组织可能对参与艾滋病毒/艾滋病相关工作不感兴趣,因为它们普遍认为教堂或寺庙不应该参与社会事务。另一方面,那些对社会可接受性、感染恐惧或能力不足有担忧,但总体上接受社会参与的宗教机构,由于其对社区服务的主导倾向,可能更愿意在艾滋病毒/艾滋病相关工作上开展合作。