Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, Karlstad University, Sweden.
Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot. 2012;19(3):209-12. doi: 10.1080/17457300.2012.658577. Epub 2012 Feb 6.
Injury prevention is a branch of safety sciences. While comprehensive theoretical developments occurred in the wider field in the last decades, little of these developments reached and influenced the injury prevention community. Instead, a clear retro trend 'back to basics' is seen among injury prevention scholars, especially to Dr William Haddon's pioneering work some 50 years ago. This paper intends to draw attention to this polarisation and discuss possible explanations. It is argued that the strong campaign against the accident concept among leading injury prevention groupings became a serious hindrance for theoretical exchange. The underlying process is interpreted in terms of a struggle for ownership over this truly interdisciplinary field of research, unfortunately at the expense of theoretical stagnation in injury prevention circles and lessened interest in collaboration from other scientific areas. This paper is written as a tribute to Professor Leif Svanström and his scientific contributions, with special regard to his genuine interest in interdisciplinary research.
伤害预防是安全科学的一个分支。尽管在过去几十年中，更广泛的领域取得了全面的理论发展，但这些发展很少能够触及并影响伤害预防领域。相反，伤害预防学者中明显出现了一种明显的“回归基础”的倒退趋势，尤其是对大约 50 年前 William Haddon 博士开创性工作的回归。本文旨在提请人们注意这种两极分化，并讨论可能的解释。有人认为，主要伤害预防团体强烈反对事故概念的运动，成为理论交流的严重障碍。这一过程的潜在过程可以用对这一真正跨学科研究领域的所有权之争来解释，不幸的是，这是以伤害预防界理论停滞不前和其他科学领域合作兴趣降低为代价的。本文是为了向 Leif Svanström 教授及其科学贡献致敬，特别是他对跨学科研究的真正兴趣。
