TY - JOUR
T1 - Compliant, complacent or panicked? Investigating the problematisation of the Australian general public in pandemic influenza control
AU - Davis, Mark
AU - Stephenson, Niamh
AU - Flowers, Paul
PY - 2011/3/1
Y1 - 2011/3/1
N2 - This article examines how pandemic influenza control policies interpellate the public. We analyse Australian pandemic control documents and key informant interviews, with reference to the H1N1 virus in 2009. Our analysis suggests that the episodic and uncertain features of pandemic influenza give control measures a pronounced tactical character. The general public is seen as passive and, in some cases, vulnerable to pandemic influenza. Communication focuses on promoting public compliance with prescribed guidelines, but without inspiring complacency, panic or other unruly responses. These assumptions depend, however, on a limited social imaginary of publics responding to pandemics. Drawing on Foucault, we consider how it is that these assumptions regarding the public responses to pandemics have taken their present form. We show that the virological modelling used in planning and health securitisation both separate pandemic control from its publics. Further, these approaches to planning rely on a restricted view of human agency and therefore preclude alternatives to compliance-complacency-panic and, as we suggest, compromise pandemic control. On this basis we argue that effective pandemic control requires a systematic dialogue with the publics it seeks to prepare in anticipation of the event of pandemic influenza.
AB - This article examines how pandemic influenza control policies interpellate the public. We analyse Australian pandemic control documents and key informant interviews, with reference to the H1N1 virus in 2009. Our analysis suggests that the episodic and uncertain features of pandemic influenza give control measures a pronounced tactical character. The general public is seen as passive and, in some cases, vulnerable to pandemic influenza. Communication focuses on promoting public compliance with prescribed guidelines, but without inspiring complacency, panic or other unruly responses. These assumptions depend, however, on a limited social imaginary of publics responding to pandemics. Drawing on Foucault, we consider how it is that these assumptions regarding the public responses to pandemics have taken their present form. We show that the virological modelling used in planning and health securitisation both separate pandemic control from its publics. Further, these approaches to planning rely on a restricted view of human agency and therefore preclude alternatives to compliance-complacency-panic and, as we suggest, compromise pandemic control. On this basis we argue that effective pandemic control requires a systematic dialogue with the publics it seeks to prepare in anticipation of the event of pandemic influenza.
KW - Australia
KW - communication
KW - H1N1
KW - pandemic influenza
KW - panic
KW - policy
KW - public
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953076418&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.016
DO - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.016
M3 - Article
C2 - 21349624
AN - SCOPUS:79953076418
SN - 0277-9536
VL - 72
SP - 912
EP - 918
JO - Social Science and Medicine
JF - Social Science and Medicine
IS - 6
ER -