期刊文献+

公共卫生突发事件的沟通策略与影响——2015年北京某大厦麻疹事件与美国迪士尼麻疹事件对比分析 被引量:4

“Building X Measles Outbreak” and “Disneyland Measles Outbreak”——A comparative analysis of public health emergency response strategies in China and US
下载PDF
导出
摘要 政府不同的危机沟通策略会影响公共卫生突发事件的发展和社会效果。本文使用公开数据,对比同样发生在2015年1月的美国“迪士尼麻疹事件”与北京“某大厦麻疹事件”,分析两国在应对公共卫生危机时的危机沟通策略及其社会影响的差异性。两起麻疹暴发事件发生时间接近,发生场所类似,发生原因相同,并造成了相似规模的感染病例。但是两国的危机应对策略显著不同,美国是大力宣传“小题大做”,中国则通过强调“可防可控”尽力大事化小,迅速平息疫情。在短期效果上,两种策略都可以成功平息具体的疫情暴发;但在长期效果上,“小题大做”策略更能够引导公众的认知、推进政策法律的完善、深化学术研究,因而能更有效预防公共卫生突发事件的再次发生。建议:危机应对策略在处理短期危机时,也应该重视长远效果。 Different government crisis response strategies will affect the development and social impact of public health emergency events.Using public data,this article compares the“Disneyland measles outbreak”in California in the US,with the“Building X measles outbreak”in Beijing,and analyzes the effectiveness and impact of different public health crisis response strategies in the two countries.The two measles outbreaks occurred in the same month,January 2015,in similar public spaces,by similar causes,and resulted in similar scale of measles outbreaks.But the two countries strategies were markedly different.In essence,the US strategy was to“make small things big”by using the public reaction as a source of publicity,and leverage to introduce measures that will help prevent future occurrences.The Chinese strategy was to avoid social panic by reassuring the public that the outbreak was“contained and under control”,and acting very fast to control it.Comparing the aftermath of the two incidents,the evidence shows that while the Chinese strategy was more effective in the short term,the US strategy was more effective in the long term,as the public debate surrounding the incident did change the attitude of the public,promoted the passing of new policies and laws,and served as a fruitful case study for academic research.The paper suggests that crisis response strategies should consider using the best of both styles,by acting decisively to control outbreaks,while letting public debate on the issue serve as a catalyst for long-term change.
作者 Miguel A.Salazar 张颖 胡晓江 李远香 彭向东 韩自强 Miguel A.Salazar;Zhang Ying;Hu Xiaojiang;Li Yuanxiang;Peng Xiangdong;Han Ziqiang
出处 《风险灾害危机研究》 2019年第1期239-256,共18页 Journal of Risk, Disaster & Crisis Research
基金 国家自然科学基金“预防接种异常反应:风险的社会扩大和社会管理”(项目编号:71373027) 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助
关键词 公共卫生危机 麻疹疫情 危机沟通 社会影响 Public Health Crisis Measles Outbreak Risk Communication Social Impact
  • 相关文献

参考文献11

二级参考文献56

  • 1叶国文.预警和救治:从“9·11”事件看政府危机管理[J].国际论坛,2002,4(3):22-27. 被引量:61
  • 2郭俊.试析我国政府信息传播在当代的变革及存在的问题[J].长江大学学报(社会科学版),2005,28(6):64-66. 被引量:4
  • 3《中央人民政府新闻总署给各地新闻机关关于救灾应即转入成绩与经验方面报道的指示》,《中国共产党新闻工作文件汇编(中)》,新华出版社1980年版,第62-63页. 被引量:2
  • 4夏鼎铭.《“客观主义报道”辨析》[J].新闻大学,1988,. 被引量:2
  • 5United States Department of Agriculture. Production & inspection risk analysis [ EB ]. http://www, isis. usda. gov/Fact_Sheets/Risk_ Analysis/index. asp ,2009 -09 - 09. 被引量:1
  • 6Chu C. Sustainable development and crisis management: multi-sectoral partnership & risk communication [ R ]. Brisbane Centre for Environment and Population Health (CEPH) of Gfiffith University, 2007. 被引量:1
  • 7WHO. Best practices for communicating with the public during an outbreak[ EB ]. http ://www. who. int/csr/resources/publications/ WHO_CDS_2005_32/en/,2007 - 08 - 10. 被引量:1
  • 8Bennett P, Caiman K. Risk communication and public health[ M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.1. 被引量:1
  • 9Leiss W. Effective risk communication practice [ J ]. Journal of Toxicology Letters, 2004,149:399 - 404. 被引量:1
  • 10Wadia R. Public health and risk communication : a brief overview in Olympics[ R]. Beijing: Public Health Safety Workshop documents, 2006. 被引量:1

共引文献255

同被引文献44

引证文献4

二级引证文献79

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部