首页> 外文期刊>Social Studies of Science >Epidemiology and 'developing countries': Writing pesticides, poverty and political engagement in Latin America
【24h】

Epidemiology and 'developing countries': Writing pesticides, poverty and political engagement in Latin America

机译:流行病学和“发展中国家”:在拉丁美洲撰写农药,贫穷和政治参与

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The growth of the field of global health has prompted renewed interest in discursive aspects of North-South biomedical encounters, but analysis of the role of disciplinary identities and writing conventions remains scarce. In this article, I examine ways of framing pesticide problems in 88 peer-reviewed epidemiology papers produced by Northerners and their collaborators studying pesticide-related health impacts in Latin America. I identify prominent geographic frames in which truncated and selective histories of Latin America are used to justify research projects in specific research sites, which nevertheless function rhetorically as generic 'developing country' settings. These frames legitimize health sector interventions as solutions to pesticide-related health problems, largely avoiding more politically charged possibilities. In contrast, some epidemiologists appear to be actively pushing the bounds of epidemiology's traditional journal article genre by engaging with considerations of political power, especially that of the international pesticide industry. I therefore employ a finer-grained analysis to a subsample of 20 papers to explore how the writing conventions of epidemiology interact with portrayals of poverty and pesticides in Latin America. Through analysis of a minor scientific controversy, authorial presence in epidemiology articles, and variance of framing strategies across genres, I show how the tension between 'objectivity' and 'advocacy' observed in Northern epidemiology and public health is expressed in North-South interaction. I end by discussing implications for postcolonial and socially engaged approaches to science and technology studies, as well as their relevance to the actual practice of global health research. In particular, the complicated interaction of the conflicted traditions of Northern epidemiology with Latin American settings on paper hints at a far more complex interaction in the form of public health programming involving researchers and research participants who differ by nationality, ethnicity, gender, profession, and class.
机译:全球卫生领域的发展促使人们对南北生物医学交流的话题性重新产生了兴趣,但对学科特征和书写惯例的作用的分析仍然很少。在本文中,我研究了北方人及其合作者在研究拉丁美洲与农药有关的健康影响的88篇同行评审的流行病学论文中,如何解决农药问题。我确定了突出的地理框架,在这些地理框架中,拉丁美洲的截断历史和选择性历史被用来证明特定研究地点的研究项目的合理性,尽管如此,它们在语言上却具有通用的“发展中国家”环境。这些框架使卫生部门的干预措施合法化,以解决与农药有关的健康问题,从而在很大程度上避免了更多带有政治色彩的可能性。相比之下,一些流行病学家似乎正在通过考虑政治权力,特别是国际农药行业的政治权力,来积极推动流行病学传统期刊文章类型的发展。因此,我对20篇论文的子样本进行了更细致的分析,以探讨流行病学的写作惯例如何与拉丁美洲的贫困和杀虫剂刻画相互影响。通过对一个较小的科学争议,流行病学论文中的作者存在以及各种流派的框架策略进行分析,我展示了在北流行病学和公共卫生中观察到的“客观性”和“倡导性”之间的张力是如何在南北互动中表达的。最后,我将讨论对后殖民和社会参与的科学技术研究方法的意义,以及它们与全球卫生研究的实际实践的相关性。特别是,在纸上,北美流行病学传统与拉丁美洲环境之间相互影响的复杂相互作用表明,以公共卫生计划的形式存在更为复杂的相互作用,涉及不同国籍,种族,性别,专业和类。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

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