首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Health Policy and Management >Politics or Technocracy – What Next for Global Health?
【2h】

Politics or Technocracy – What Next for Global Health?

机译:政治还是技术专家制–全球卫生下一步要做什么?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Politics play a central part in determining health and development outcomes as Gorik Ooms highlights in his recent commentary. As health becomes more global and more politicized the need grows to better understand the inherently political processes at all levels of governance, such as ideological positions, ideas, value judgments, and power. I agree that global health research should strengthen its contribution to generating such knowledge by drawing more on political science, such research is gaining ground. Even more important is – as Ooms indicates – that global health scholars better understand their own role in the political process. It is time to acknowledge that expert-based technocratic approaches are no less political. We will need to reflect and analyse the role of experts in global health governance to a greater extent and in that context explore the links between politics, expertise and democracy.
机译:正如戈里克·奥姆斯(Gorik Ooms)在最近的评论中强调的那样,政治在决定健康和发展成果方面发挥着核心作用。随着健康变得更加全球化和政治化,人们越来越需要更好地理解各级治理的内在政治过程,例如意识形态立场,思想,价值判断和权力。我同意全球卫生研究应通过更多地利用政治科学来加强其对产生此类知识的贡献,这种研究正在逐渐普及。就像Ooms指出的那样,更为重要的是,全球卫生学者更好地了解自己在政治进程中的作用。现在该承认基于专家的技术官僚主义方法同样具有政治性。我们将需要更大程度地反思和分析专家在全球卫生治理中的作用,并在此背景下探索政治,专业知识与民主之间的联系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号