National Coordination Centre for Communicable Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Aug;8(8). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012875.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, public groups mobilised themselves in civil-society engagement practices (CSEPs) aiming to improve or suggest alternative epidemic management. This study explores the motivation to establish CSEPs and their perceived contributions to epidemic management, to gain insight whether integrating views of CSEPs could add value. A systematic online search was executed to identify CSEPs focused on COVID-19 management between January 2020 and January 2022 in the Netherlands. In order to create a comprehensible overview of the identified CSEPs, relevant characteristics were gathered and mapped, for example, local or national scope, subject of action and goals. A selection of CSEPs was interviewed between April and June 2022 to study their motivators to start the CSEPs and perceived contributions to management. The search resulted in the identification of 22 CSEPs, of which members of 14 CSEPs were interviewed. These members indicated several issues that motivated the start of their CSEP, namely; shortage of equipment, sense of solidarity, and a perceived lack of governmental action, lack of democratic values and lack in diversity of perspectives in epidemic management. All respondents believed to have contributed to policy or society, by influencing opinions, and occasionally by altering policy. However, respondents encountered obstacles in their attempts to contribute such as inability to establish contact with authorities, feeling unheard or undermined, and complications due to the interplay of political interests. In conclusion, CSEPs have fulfilled various roles such as providing alternative management policies, producing equipment, representing the needs of vulnerable populations, and supporting citizens and providing citizens with other viewpoints and information. The identified motivators to establish CSEPs in this study uncover room for improvements in policy. These insights, together with the identified perceived barriers of CSEPs, can be used to improve the connection between (future) epidemic management and public priorities and interests.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间，公众团体在公民社会参与实践（CSEP）中动员起来，旨在改善或提出替代疫情管理的方案。本研究旨在探讨建立 CSEP 的动机及其对疫情管理的感知贡献，以了解整合 CSEP 的观点是否能增加价值。本研究在 2020 年 1 月至 2022 年 1 月期间在荷兰进行了一项系统的在线搜索，以确定专注于 COVID-19 管理的 CSEP。为了对确定的 CSEP 有一个全面的了解，收集并映射了相关特征，例如，本地或国家范围、行动主题和目标。2022 年 4 月至 6 月期间，对一些 CSEP 进行了采访，以研究他们建立 CSEP 的动机以及对管理的感知贡献。搜索结果确定了 22 个 CSEP，其中 14 个 CSEP 的成员接受了采访。这些成员指出了几个促使他们启动 CSEP 的问题，即设备短缺、团结感、以及对政府行动的感知缺乏、民主价值观的缺乏以及在疫情管理中缺乏多样性的观点。所有受访者都认为他们通过影响意见并偶尔改变政策，对政策或社会做出了贡献。然而，受访者在试图做出贡献时遇到了障碍，例如无法与当局建立联系、感到被忽视或被破坏，以及由于政治利益的相互作用而导致的复杂情况。总之，CSEP 发挥了多种作用，例如提供替代管理政策、生产设备、代表弱势群体的需求、支持公民并提供公民其他观点和信息。本研究确定的建立 CSEP 的动机揭示了政策改进的空间。这些见解，以及确定的 CSEP 感知障碍，可以用来改善（未来）疫情管理与公众优先事项和利益之间的联系。
