Shaw Duncan, Scully Judy
Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Risk Anal. 2024 Dec;44(12):2889-2905. doi: 10.1111/risa.14213. Epub 2023 Sep 2.
COVID-19 demonstrated the complex manner in which discourses from risk science are manipulated to legitimize government action. We use Foucault's theory of Governmentality to explore how a risk science discourse shaped national and local government action during COVID-19. We theorize how national government policymakers and local government risk managers were objectified by (and subjectified themselves to) risk science models, results, and discourses. From this theoretical position we analyze a dataset, including observations of risk science discourse and 22 qualitative interviews, to understand the challenges that national government policymakers, risk scientists, and local government risk managers faced during COVID-19. Findings from our Foucauldian discourse analysis show how, through power and knowledge, competing discourses emerge in a situation that was disturbed by uncertainty-which created disturbed senders (policymakers and risk scientists) and disturbed receivers (risk managers) of risk science. First, we explore the interaction between risk science and policymakers, including how the disturbed context enabled policymakers to select discourse from risk science to justify their policies. This showed government's sociopolitical leveraging of scientific power and knowledge by positioning itself as being submissive to "follow the science." Second, we discuss how risk managers (1) were objectified by the discourse from policymakers that required them to be obedient to risk science, and paradoxically (2) used the disturbed context to justify resisting government objectification through their human agency to subjectify themselves and take action. Using these concepts, we explore the foundation of risk science influence in COVID-19.
新冠疫情表明,风险科学话语被操纵以将政府行动合法化的方式十分复杂。我们运用福柯的治理理论,探讨在新冠疫情期间,一种风险科学话语是如何塑造国家和地方政府行动的。我们构建理论,阐述国家政府政策制定者和地方政府风险管理者是如何被风险科学模型、结果及话语客观化(并使自身屈从于这些)的。基于这一理论立场,我们分析了一个数据集,包括对风险科学话语的观察以及22次定性访谈,以了解国家政府政策制定者、风险科学家和地方政府风险管理者在新冠疫情期间所面临的挑战。我们的福柯式话语分析结果表明,在一个因不确定性而受到干扰的情境中,相互竞争的话语是如何通过权力和知识浮现出来的——这造就了受到干扰的风险科学信息发送者(政策制定者和风险科学家)和接收者(风险管理者)。首先,我们探究风险科学与政策制定者之间的互动,包括这种受到干扰的情境如何使政策制定者从风险科学中选择话语来为其政策辩护。这显示出政府通过将自身定位为服从“遵循科学”,从而在社会政治层面利用科学权力和知识。其次,我们讨论风险管理者是如何:(1)被政策制定者的话语客观化,这些话语要求他们服从风险科学;而矛盾的是,(2)利用这种受到干扰的情境,通过其个人能动性来为抵制政府的客观化进行辩护,从而实现自我主观化并采取行动。运用这些概念,我们探究了风险科学在新冠疫情中产生影响的基础。