• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis.中国与世界卫生组织:非典危机中的行为规范冲突
Int Aff. 2019 May;95(3):535-552. doi: 10.1093/ia/iiz022. Epub 2019 May 1.
2
Huawei, Cyber-Sovereignty and Liberal Norms: China's Challenge to the West/Democracies.华为、网络主权与自由主义规范:中国对西方/民主国家的挑战
J Chin Polit Sci. 2023;28(1):151-167. doi: 10.1007/s11366-022-09814-2. Epub 2022 Jun 3.
3
Global Health Security Demands a Strong International Health Regulations Treaty and Leadership From a Highly Resourced World Health Organization.全球卫生安全需要一项强有力的《国际卫生条例》条约以及资源充足的世界卫生组织发挥领导作用。
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2015 Oct;9(5):568-80. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2015.26. Epub 2015 Feb 18.
4
Energizing and de-motivating effects of norm-conflict.规范冲突的激励和去激励效应。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2013 Jan;39(1):57-72. doi: 10.1177/0146167212464234. Epub 2012 Oct 25.
5
Emotions and actions associated with norm-breaking events.与违反规范事件相关的情绪和行为。
Hum Nat. 2003 Sep;14(3):277-304. doi: 10.1007/s12110-003-1007-z.
6
Civil war, contested sovereignty and the limits of global health partnerships: A case study of the Syrian polio outbreak in 2013.内战、主权争议与全球卫生伙伴关系的局限:以2013年叙利亚脊髓灰质炎疫情为例
Health Policy Plan. 2017 Jun 1;32(5):690-698. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czw148.
7
Why FCTC policies have not been implemented in China: domestic dynamics and tobacco governance.《烟草控制框架公约》政策在中国未得到实施的原因:国内动态与烟草治理
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2014 Jun;39(3):633-66. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2682630. Epub 2014 Mar 6.
8
Fair play: social norm compliance failures in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia.公平竞争:行为变异额颞叶痴呆中的社会规范遵从失败。
Brain. 2016 Jan;139(Pt 1):204-16. doi: 10.1093/brain/awv315. Epub 2015 Oct 26.
9
China engages global health governance: processes and dilemmas.中国参与全球卫生治理:进程与困境
Glob Public Health. 2009;4(1):1-30. doi: 10.1080/17441690701524471.
10
Making sense of the global health crisis: policy narratives, conflict, and global health governance.理解全球健康危机:政策叙述、冲突与全球卫生治理。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2012 Apr;37(2):253-95. doi: 10.1215/03616878-1538620.

引用本文的文献

1
HIV/AIDS, SARS, and COVID-19: the trajectory of China's pandemic responses and its changing politics in a contested world.艾滋病毒/艾滋病、严重急性呼吸综合征(SARS)和 COVID-19:中国应对大流行的轨迹及其在充满争议的世界中不断变化的政治。
Global Health. 2024 Jan 2;20(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12992-023-01011-x.

中国与世界卫生组织:非典危机中的行为规范冲突

China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis.

作者信息

Kreuder-Sonnen Christian

出版信息

Int Aff. 2019 May;95(3):535-552. doi: 10.1093/ia/iiz022. Epub 2019 May 1.

DOI:10.1093/ia/iiz022
PMID:32287368
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7108605/
Abstract

This article studies a conflict over two competing norms in which the actors demonstrated incompatible positions not through arguments, but through actions. During the SARS crisis, China and the World Health Organization (WHO) entered a norm conflict over the precedence of sovereignty or global health security. Both resorted to behavioural, not discursive contestation: while the WHO practically but not rhetorically challenged the sovereignty norm by acting according to the norm of global health security, China-without openly acknowledging it-contravened the basic principles of global health security by acting according to the overlapping sovereignty norm. Why and with what consequences do actors choose to contest norms through actions rather than words? The article accounts for the resort to behavioural contestation by pointing to the strategic advantages it offers for furthering a contentious norm understanding without facing the social costs of making it explicit. It furthermore highlights that behavioural contestation may feed back into and change the odds of discursive contestation as its practical effects provide rhetorical resources to (de-)legitimate one or the other position. The propositions are illustrated in the interactions of China and the WHO during the SARS crisis and the subsequent norm development. This article forms part of the special section of the May 2019 issue of on 'The dynamics of dissent', guest-edited by Anette Stimmer and Lea Wisken.

摘要

本文研究了两种相互竞争的规范之间的冲突,在这种冲突中,行为体并非通过争论,而是通过行动展现出不相容的立场。在非典危机期间,中国和世界卫生组织(WHO)围绕主权优先还是全球卫生安全优先陷入了规范冲突。双方都诉诸行为而非话语上的较量:一方面,世卫组织按照全球卫生安全规范行事,在实际行动中而非口头上挑战了主权规范;另一方面,中国虽未公开承认,但按照重叠主权规范行事,违背了全球卫生安全的基本原则。行为体为何选择通过行动而非言语来争夺规范,又会产生何种后果?本文指出,诉诸行为较量是因为它在推进有争议的规范理解方面具有战略优势,且无需面对明确表达所带来的社会成本。此外,本文还强调,行为较量可能会反馈并改变话语较量的胜负几率,因为其实际效果为(使)一种或另一种立场合法化提供了修辞资源。这些观点在中国与世卫组织在非典危机期间的互动以及随后的规范发展中得到了体现。本文是2019年5月号由安妮特·施蒂默和莉娅·维斯肯客座编辑的关于“异议动态”的特刊的一部分。