China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis
Identifieur interne : 003958 ( Ncbi/Merge ); précédent : 003957; suivant : 003959China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis
Auteurs : Christian Kreuder-SonnenSource :
- International Affairs [ 0020-5850 ] ; 2019.
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
Url:
DOI: 10.1093/ia/iiz022
PubMed: 32287368
PubMed Central: 7108605
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Pmc, to step Corpus: 001061
- to stream Pmc, to step Curation: 001061
- to stream Pmc, to step Checkpoint: 000479
Links to Exploration step
PMC:7108605Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis</title>
<author><name sortKey="Kreuder Sonnen, Christian" sort="Kreuder Sonnen, Christian" uniqKey="Kreuder Sonnen C" first="Christian" last="Kreuder-Sonnen">Christian Kreuder-Sonnen</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno>
<idno type="pmid">32287368</idno>
<idno type="pmc">7108605</idno>
<idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7108605</idno>
<idno type="RBID">PMC:7108605</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.1093/ia/iiz022</idno>
<date when="2019">2019</date>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">001061</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">001061</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Curation">001061</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Curation">001061</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Checkpoint">000479</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Checkpoint">000479</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Merge">003958</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis</title>
<author><name sortKey="Kreuder Sonnen, Christian" sort="Kreuder Sonnen, Christian" uniqKey="Kreuder Sonnen C" first="Christian" last="Kreuder-Sonnen">Christian Kreuder-Sonnen</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j">International Affairs</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0020-5850</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1468-2346</idno>
<imprint><date when="2019">2019</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass></textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><title>Abstract</title>
<p>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 <italic>International Affairs</italic>
on ‘The dynamics of dissent’, guest-edited by Anette Stimmer and Lea Wisken.</p>
</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-dir>properties open_access</pmc-dir>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Int Aff</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">Int Aff</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ia</journal-id>
<journal-title-group><journal-title>International Affairs</journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="ppub">0020-5850</issn>
<issn pub-type="epub">1468-2346</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">32287368</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="pmc">7108605</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/ia/iiz022</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">iiz022</article-id>
<article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group><article-title>China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kreuder-Sonnen</surname>
<given-names>Christian</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>5</month>
<year>2019</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub" iso-8601-date="2019-05-01"><day>01</day>
<month>5</month>
<year>2019</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>95</volume>
<issue>3</issue>
<fpage>535</fpage>
<lpage>552</lpage>
<history><date date-type="accepted"><day>22</day>
<month>11</month>
<year>2018</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions><copyright-statement>© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Royal Institute of International Affairs. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: <email>journals.permissions@oup.com</email>
.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2019</copyright-year>
<license license-type="publisher-standard" xlink:href="https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model"><license-p>This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model">https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model</ext-link>
)</license-p>
</license>
<license><license-p>This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections.</license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<self-uri xlink:href="iiz022.pdf"></self-uri>
<abstract><title>Abstract</title>
<p>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 <italic>International Affairs</italic>
on ‘The dynamics of dissent’, guest-edited by Anette Stimmer and Lea Wisken.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group><kwd>international law</kwd>
<kwd>global health</kwd>
<kwd>China</kwd>
<kwd>international organization</kwd>
<kwd>World Health Organization</kwd>
<kwd>norms</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts><page-count count="18"></page-count>
</counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
</pmc>
<affiliations><list></list>
<tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Kreuder Sonnen, Christian" sort="Kreuder Sonnen, Christian" uniqKey="Kreuder Sonnen C" first="Christian" last="Kreuder-Sonnen">Christian Kreuder-Sonnen</name>
</noCountry>
</tree>
</affiliations>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Sante/explor/SrasV1/Data/Ncbi/Merge
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 003958 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Ncbi/Merge/biblio.hfd -nk 003958 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Sante |area= SrasV1 |flux= Ncbi |étape= Merge |type= RBID |clé= PMC:7108605 |texte= China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis }}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Ncbi/Merge/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:32287368" \ | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Ncbi/Merge/biblio.hfd \ | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a SrasV1
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. | ![]() |