Download full text
(external source)
Citation Suggestion
Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz022
Exports for your reference manager
China vs the WHO: a behavioural norm conflict in the SARS crisis
[journal article]
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 heal... view more
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.... view less
Keywords
WHO; China; health policy; contagious disease; prophylaxis; public health
Classification
International Relations, International Politics, Foreign Affairs, Development Policy
Document language
English
Publication Year
2019
Page/Pages
p. 535-552
Journal
International Affairs, 95 (2019) 3
Issue topic
The dynamics of dissent
Handle
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/216883
ISSN
1468-2346
Status
Postprint; peer reviewed
Licence
Deposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modifications