Ubiquity Presstech@ubiquitypress.com20260517102842Generated by RUA metadata exporter

sup-82-e-15-978-91-7635-247-20301Ubiquity Press15978-91-7635-247-20610.16993/bco01internal-reference82BCB20201RUA Series ID6022002-07241001Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bco1B01Christophe Emmanuel PrematChristophe EmmanuelPrematDepartment of Romance Studies and Classics Stockholm UnversityAssociate Professor in French with a major specialisation in Cultural Studies at Stockholm University. Member of the editorial board of Sens Public, an international web journal of social sciences. Co-editor in chief of the Nordic Journal of Francophone Studies. Current research focuses on memory debates in France, discourse analysis, and political periodicals in France. Part of the research project analyzing political discourses in Romance-speaking countries (ROMPOL, Stockholm University) and the research project “Language and Power” (Språk och Makt, Stockholm University).2B01Jean-Michel De WaeleJean-MichelDe WaeleDepartment of Political Science Université Libre de BruxellesFull Professor of Political Science at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Director of the Department of Political Science, Director of the Centre for the Study of Political Life (CEVIPOL), Dean of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, and Vice-Rector for Student Affairs and Relations with Society. Research focuses on political and social actors in Central and Eastern Europe, and the relationship between sport and politics. Comparative politics is central to his thinking. Visiting professor in various universities (France, Tunisia, China, Romania, Bulgaria, etc.).3B01Michel PerottinoMichelPerottinoInstitute of Political Science Charles UniversityAssociate Professor and researcher at the Institute of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University. Head of the Department of Political Science. Specialised in Czech politics, political parties (theory and sociology), and political systems (especially France and Czech Republic). Member of the National Institute for Research on Socioeconomic Impacts of Diseases and Systemic Risks (SYRI).01eng01fre55223User DefinedPolitical Science23User DefinedDiscourse analysis23User DefinedCommunication studies23User DefinedCultural and media studies23User DefinedSocial psychology23User DefinedInternational Relations12Discourse analysis12Political Science12Public policies12Bureaucracy12Sociology of health12Sociology of experts12Social representations12Social psychology12Media studies12Communication studies12Public administration10POL07300010LAN00400010PSY03100093JPQB93KCVJ93GTC93JMH01010302<p>The health crisis the world is going through is arguably the first contemporary “global crisis” that threatens the world with generalized anomy and its new economic option, globalization. It has struck China, settles in Europe, strikes heavily in the United States and Latin America, and is spreading rapidly in other continents. The same problem has to be faced by different States and it addresses fascinating questions to social and political sciences. To understand, we must compare said political scientist Giovanni Sartori. Comparing the way in which States are managing this crisis can allow us to understand the global crisis and the national specificities. The first reaction of the States is a considerable predilection for sanitary methods of quarantine and containment. The aim is to understand the effects of this crisis on every political system and every legal system. How were the actions taken, received, approved or challenged? How do different national political cultures adapt to new situations? What does this tell us about each of the societies, about each of the political regimes and, ultimately, about the place of the State in contemporary societies? Are the legal instruments one of the means to manage the crisis? Is the organization of the State reinforced or weakened in the context of the health emergency? What do these levers tell us about the metamorphoses of the contemporary State in a period of unprecedented health crisis?</p> <p>Since April 2020, a new research network in political science, discourse analysis and law has been established on the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the States (Posoc19, <i>Pouvoirs et Sociétés Face à la Crise du COVID-19</i>). The objective of the current project is to focus on the axis of expertise in order to empower the network and be able to compare the ways in which political systems are based on scientific expertise. To what extent is political power based on scientific expertise? Is the expertise autonomous?</p> <p>What is the effect of expertise on public opinion? How does it help to fight against the spread of fake news? A research group inside the network Posoc19 has been established in May 2020 and focuses on the comparison of experts' profiles and discourses. During the spring of 2020 and during the COVID-19 pandemic, new expert figures emerged in connection with public health issues. In some countries, official expert figures have even imposed themselves in order to be able to legitimize the decisions taken by the political authorities, while in other countries, there has been more visibility of conflicts of expertise involving experts appointed by political power (sacralization of the expert who in this case assumes a political function, with or without political responsibility to bear) versus university experts and researchers. In addition, the media have sometimes selected certain experts for other reasons (proximity to lobbies, in particular pharmaceuticals, political and / or partisan positions, relations with a cabinet or a company, etc.), which made the situation even more complex. In some cases "super experts" have emerged, in others more collegial formats have been chosen.</p> <p>Some countries opted for mixed strategies with a combination of superexperts and committees. In addition to the fundamental question of the choice of experts (on a political, scientific, media, etc. basis) there has also been the question of political responsibility for the choices made, both in the short and in the long term. The gradual shift to a slower time frame (after the first few weeks in an emergency) makes it possible to ask questions and offer an analysis of different national cases, especially when economic imperatives seem to be taking over. It is also important to know if the experts influenced incumbent politicians on the choice of a strategy or if it was the strategy that made politicians choose the experts. The analysis of public policies is relevant here in order to compare the actors (experts / committees / government / administration /politicians), the agenda and the nature of the decision. The final aim of the research is to produce an accurate typology of systems of expertise due to the comparative approach.</p>0202<p>This book is aimed at researchers, students, and practitioners interested in how the voices of experts have been conveyed in the public sphere during the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Beyond controversies over the selection of these experts by governments or the media, the book draws on methodologies from discourse analysis, media studies, political science, sociology, and social psychology to compare the role that experts played in justifying unpopular political decisions. Several configurations have emerged, including politically contested systems with medical heroes, bureaucratized systems with a super-reference expert, or more collegiate forms of committees tasked with providing political leaders with the necessary reports to justify political decisions.</p>04Introduction: The legitimacy of experts in the public space during the pandemic La crise de la COVID-19 et les ambiguïtés de la construction de la figure de « l’expert médical » dans la grammaire politique populiste: le bon, la brute et le truand Représentations sociales de la COVID-19 dans dix pays du monde : le discours public à plusieurs voix des experts, des leaders politiques et des institutions à travers différents médias The United Arab Emirates, an Early Adopter of Global Best Practices Le rôle des experts dans les politiques de lutte contre la COVID-19 au Japon Gestion de la COVID-19 en Suisse : expertise scientifique et démocratie de consensus en temps de crise No hero outside the hospital lane. Governmental Committees, Pop Star Experts and Conflicts of Expertise in COVID-19-ridden Italy Spain, between its waves and experts – Navigating through a complex network of advisory committees in a context of political confrontation Expert, experts et expertise pendant la crise de la COVID-19 – le cas tchèque Le rôle de l’expertise dans la construction du consensus suédois face à la pandémie Experts et politiques dans la gestion de la crise de la COVID-19 en Belgique : conflit de territoires et récit médiatique The construction of the COVID-19 pandemic as a social problem: expert discourse and representational naturalisation in the mass media during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada46http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/47Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)040901https://storage.googleapis.com/rua-sup/files/media/cover_images/6a036697-4915-40be-9d22-99420520d1f6.pngStockholm University Press01Stockholm University Press01Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bcoStockholm0420240905025.5in031.12in081.3889122506lb018.5in1315978-91-7635-248-91315978-91-7635-249-61315978-91-7635-250-2sup-82-e-15-978-91-7635-248-90301Ubiquity Press15978-91-7635-248-90610.16993/bco01internal-reference82DGE20100201RUA Series ID6022002-07241001Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bco1B01Christophe Emmanuel PrematChristophe EmmanuelPrematDepartment of Romance Studies and Classics Stockholm UnversityAssociate Professor in French with a major specialisation in Cultural Studies at Stockholm University. Member of the editorial board of Sens Public, an international web journal of social sciences. Co-editor in chief of the Nordic Journal of Francophone Studies. Current research focuses on memory debates in France, discourse analysis, and political periodicals in France. Part of the research project analyzing political discourses in Romance-speaking countries (ROMPOL, Stockholm University) and the research project “Language and Power” (Språk och Makt, Stockholm University).2B01Jean-Michel De WaeleJean-MichelDe WaeleDepartment of Political Science Université Libre de BruxellesFull Professor of Political Science at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Director of the Department of Political Science, Director of the Centre for the Study of Political Life (CEVIPOL), Dean of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, and Vice-Rector for Student Affairs and Relations with Society. Research focuses on political and social actors in Central and Eastern Europe, and the relationship between sport and politics. Comparative politics is central to his thinking. Visiting professor in various universities (France, Tunisia, China, Romania, Bulgaria, etc.).3B01Michel PerottinoMichelPerottinoInstitute of Political Science Charles UniversityAssociate Professor and researcher at the Institute of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University. Head of the Department of Political Science. Specialised in Czech politics, political parties (theory and sociology), and political systems (especially France and Czech Republic). Member of the National Institute for Research on Socioeconomic Impacts of Diseases and Systemic Risks (SYRI).01eng01fre55223User DefinedPolitical Science23User DefinedDiscourse analysis23User DefinedCommunication studies23User DefinedCultural and media studies23User DefinedSocial psychology23User DefinedInternational Relations12Discourse analysis12Political Science12Public policies12Bureaucracy12Sociology of health12Sociology of experts12Social representations12Social psychology12Media studies12Communication studies12Public administration10POL07300010LAN00400010PSY03100093JPQB93KCVJ93GTC93JMH01010302<p>The health crisis the world is going through is arguably the first contemporary “global crisis” that threatens the world with generalized anomy and its new economic option, globalization. It has struck China, settles in Europe, strikes heavily in the United States and Latin America, and is spreading rapidly in other continents. The same problem has to be faced by different States and it addresses fascinating questions to social and political sciences. To understand, we must compare said political scientist Giovanni Sartori. Comparing the way in which States are managing this crisis can allow us to understand the global crisis and the national specificities. The first reaction of the States is a considerable predilection for sanitary methods of quarantine and containment. The aim is to understand the effects of this crisis on every political system and every legal system. How were the actions taken, received, approved or challenged? How do different national political cultures adapt to new situations? What does this tell us about each of the societies, about each of the political regimes and, ultimately, about the place of the State in contemporary societies? Are the legal instruments one of the means to manage the crisis? Is the organization of the State reinforced or weakened in the context of the health emergency? What do these levers tell us about the metamorphoses of the contemporary State in a period of unprecedented health crisis?</p> <p>Since April 2020, a new research network in political science, discourse analysis and law has been established on the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the States (Posoc19, <i>Pouvoirs et Sociétés Face à la Crise du COVID-19</i>). The objective of the current project is to focus on the axis of expertise in order to empower the network and be able to compare the ways in which political systems are based on scientific expertise. To what extent is political power based on scientific expertise? Is the expertise autonomous?</p> <p>What is the effect of expertise on public opinion? How does it help to fight against the spread of fake news? A research group inside the network Posoc19 has been established in May 2020 and focuses on the comparison of experts' profiles and discourses. During the spring of 2020 and during the COVID-19 pandemic, new expert figures emerged in connection with public health issues. In some countries, official expert figures have even imposed themselves in order to be able to legitimize the decisions taken by the political authorities, while in other countries, there has been more visibility of conflicts of expertise involving experts appointed by political power (sacralization of the expert who in this case assumes a political function, with or without political responsibility to bear) versus university experts and researchers. In addition, the media have sometimes selected certain experts for other reasons (proximity to lobbies, in particular pharmaceuticals, political and / or partisan positions, relations with a cabinet or a company, etc.), which made the situation even more complex. In some cases "super experts" have emerged, in others more collegial formats have been chosen.</p> <p>Some countries opted for mixed strategies with a combination of superexperts and committees. In addition to the fundamental question of the choice of experts (on a political, scientific, media, etc. basis) there has also been the question of political responsibility for the choices made, both in the short and in the long term. The gradual shift to a slower time frame (after the first few weeks in an emergency) makes it possible to ask questions and offer an analysis of different national cases, especially when economic imperatives seem to be taking over. It is also important to know if the experts influenced incumbent politicians on the choice of a strategy or if it was the strategy that made politicians choose the experts. The analysis of public policies is relevant here in order to compare the actors (experts / committees / government / administration /politicians), the agenda and the nature of the decision. The final aim of the research is to produce an accurate typology of systems of expertise due to the comparative approach.</p>0202<p>This book is aimed at researchers, students, and practitioners interested in how the voices of experts have been conveyed in the public sphere during the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Beyond controversies over the selection of these experts by governments or the media, the book draws on methodologies from discourse analysis, media studies, political science, sociology, and social psychology to compare the role that experts played in justifying unpopular political decisions. Several configurations have emerged, including politically contested systems with medical heroes, bureaucratized systems with a super-reference expert, or more collegiate forms of committees tasked with providing political leaders with the necessary reports to justify political decisions.</p>04Introduction: The legitimacy of experts in the public space during the pandemic La crise de la COVID-19 et les ambiguïtés de la construction de la figure de « l’expert médical » dans la grammaire politique populiste: le bon, la brute et le truand Représentations sociales de la COVID-19 dans dix pays du monde : le discours public à plusieurs voix des experts, des leaders politiques et des institutions à travers différents médias The United Arab Emirates, an Early Adopter of Global Best Practices Le rôle des experts dans les politiques de lutte contre la COVID-19 au Japon Gestion de la COVID-19 en Suisse : expertise scientifique et démocratie de consensus en temps de crise No hero outside the hospital lane. Governmental Committees, Pop Star Experts and Conflicts of Expertise in COVID-19-ridden Italy Spain, between its waves and experts – Navigating through a complex network of advisory committees in a context of political confrontation Expert, experts et expertise pendant la crise de la COVID-19 – le cas tchèque Le rôle de l’expertise dans la construction du consensus suédois face à la pandémie Experts et politiques dans la gestion de la crise de la COVID-19 en Belgique : conflit de territoires et récit médiatique The construction of the COVID-19 pandemic as a social problem: expert discourse and representational naturalisation in the mass media during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada46http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/47Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)040901https://storage.googleapis.com/rua-sup/files/media/cover_images/6a036697-4915-40be-9d22-99420520d1f6.pngStockholm University Press01Stockholm University Press01Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bcoStockholm04202409050615978-91-7635-247-21315978-91-7635-249-61315978-91-7635-250-2sup-82-e-15-978-91-7635-249-60301Ubiquity Press15978-91-7635-249-60610.16993/bco01internal-reference82DGE20102901RUA Series ID6022002-07241001Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bco1B01Christophe Emmanuel PrematChristophe EmmanuelPrematDepartment of Romance Studies and Classics Stockholm UnversityAssociate Professor in French with a major specialisation in Cultural Studies at Stockholm University. Member of the editorial board of Sens Public, an international web journal of social sciences. Co-editor in chief of the Nordic Journal of Francophone Studies. Current research focuses on memory debates in France, discourse analysis, and political periodicals in France. Part of the research project analyzing political discourses in Romance-speaking countries (ROMPOL, Stockholm University) and the research project “Language and Power” (Språk och Makt, Stockholm University).2B01Jean-Michel De WaeleJean-MichelDe WaeleDepartment of Political Science Université Libre de BruxellesFull Professor of Political Science at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Director of the Department of Political Science, Director of the Centre for the Study of Political Life (CEVIPOL), Dean of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, and Vice-Rector for Student Affairs and Relations with Society. Research focuses on political and social actors in Central and Eastern Europe, and the relationship between sport and politics. Comparative politics is central to his thinking. Visiting professor in various universities (France, Tunisia, China, Romania, Bulgaria, etc.).3B01Michel PerottinoMichelPerottinoInstitute of Political Science Charles UniversityAssociate Professor and researcher at the Institute of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University. Head of the Department of Political Science. Specialised in Czech politics, political parties (theory and sociology), and political systems (especially France and Czech Republic). Member of the National Institute for Research on Socioeconomic Impacts of Diseases and Systemic Risks (SYRI).01eng01fre55223User DefinedPolitical Science23User DefinedDiscourse analysis23User DefinedCommunication studies23User DefinedCultural and media studies23User DefinedSocial psychology23User DefinedInternational Relations12Discourse analysis12Political Science12Public policies12Bureaucracy12Sociology of health12Sociology of experts12Social representations12Social psychology12Media studies12Communication studies12Public administration10POL07300010LAN00400010PSY03100093JPQB93KCVJ93GTC93JMH01010302<p>The health crisis the world is going through is arguably the first contemporary “global crisis” that threatens the world with generalized anomy and its new economic option, globalization. It has struck China, settles in Europe, strikes heavily in the United States and Latin America, and is spreading rapidly in other continents. The same problem has to be faced by different States and it addresses fascinating questions to social and political sciences. To understand, we must compare said political scientist Giovanni Sartori. Comparing the way in which States are managing this crisis can allow us to understand the global crisis and the national specificities. The first reaction of the States is a considerable predilection for sanitary methods of quarantine and containment. The aim is to understand the effects of this crisis on every political system and every legal system. How were the actions taken, received, approved or challenged? How do different national political cultures adapt to new situations? What does this tell us about each of the societies, about each of the political regimes and, ultimately, about the place of the State in contemporary societies? Are the legal instruments one of the means to manage the crisis? Is the organization of the State reinforced or weakened in the context of the health emergency? What do these levers tell us about the metamorphoses of the contemporary State in a period of unprecedented health crisis?</p> <p>Since April 2020, a new research network in political science, discourse analysis and law has been established on the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the States (Posoc19, <i>Pouvoirs et Sociétés Face à la Crise du COVID-19</i>). The objective of the current project is to focus on the axis of expertise in order to empower the network and be able to compare the ways in which political systems are based on scientific expertise. To what extent is political power based on scientific expertise? Is the expertise autonomous?</p> <p>What is the effect of expertise on public opinion? How does it help to fight against the spread of fake news? A research group inside the network Posoc19 has been established in May 2020 and focuses on the comparison of experts' profiles and discourses. During the spring of 2020 and during the COVID-19 pandemic, new expert figures emerged in connection with public health issues. In some countries, official expert figures have even imposed themselves in order to be able to legitimize the decisions taken by the political authorities, while in other countries, there has been more visibility of conflicts of expertise involving experts appointed by political power (sacralization of the expert who in this case assumes a political function, with or without political responsibility to bear) versus university experts and researchers. In addition, the media have sometimes selected certain experts for other reasons (proximity to lobbies, in particular pharmaceuticals, political and / or partisan positions, relations with a cabinet or a company, etc.), which made the situation even more complex. In some cases "super experts" have emerged, in others more collegial formats have been chosen.</p> <p>Some countries opted for mixed strategies with a combination of superexperts and committees. In addition to the fundamental question of the choice of experts (on a political, scientific, media, etc. basis) there has also been the question of political responsibility for the choices made, both in the short and in the long term. The gradual shift to a slower time frame (after the first few weeks in an emergency) makes it possible to ask questions and offer an analysis of different national cases, especially when economic imperatives seem to be taking over. It is also important to know if the experts influenced incumbent politicians on the choice of a strategy or if it was the strategy that made politicians choose the experts. The analysis of public policies is relevant here in order to compare the actors (experts / committees / government / administration /politicians), the agenda and the nature of the decision. The final aim of the research is to produce an accurate typology of systems of expertise due to the comparative approach.</p>0202<p>This book is aimed at researchers, students, and practitioners interested in how the voices of experts have been conveyed in the public sphere during the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Beyond controversies over the selection of these experts by governments or the media, the book draws on methodologies from discourse analysis, media studies, political science, sociology, and social psychology to compare the role that experts played in justifying unpopular political decisions. Several configurations have emerged, including politically contested systems with medical heroes, bureaucratized systems with a super-reference expert, or more collegiate forms of committees tasked with providing political leaders with the necessary reports to justify political decisions.</p>04Introduction: The legitimacy of experts in the public space during the pandemic La crise de la COVID-19 et les ambiguïtés de la construction de la figure de « l’expert médical » dans la grammaire politique populiste: le bon, la brute et le truand Représentations sociales de la COVID-19 dans dix pays du monde : le discours public à plusieurs voix des experts, des leaders politiques et des institutions à travers différents médias The United Arab Emirates, an Early Adopter of Global Best Practices Le rôle des experts dans les politiques de lutte contre la COVID-19 au Japon Gestion de la COVID-19 en Suisse : expertise scientifique et démocratie de consensus en temps de crise No hero outside the hospital lane. Governmental Committees, Pop Star Experts and Conflicts of Expertise in COVID-19-ridden Italy Spain, between its waves and experts – Navigating through a complex network of advisory committees in a context of political confrontation Expert, experts et expertise pendant la crise de la COVID-19 – le cas tchèque Le rôle de l’expertise dans la construction du consensus suédois face à la pandémie Experts et politiques dans la gestion de la crise de la COVID-19 en Belgique : conflit de territoires et récit médiatique The construction of the COVID-19 pandemic as a social problem: expert discourse and representational naturalisation in the mass media during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada46http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/47Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)040901https://storage.googleapis.com/rua-sup/files/media/cover_images/6a036697-4915-40be-9d22-99420520d1f6.pngStockholm University Press01Stockholm University Press01Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bcoStockholm04202409050615978-91-7635-247-21315978-91-7635-248-91315978-91-7635-250-2sup-82-e-15-978-91-7635-250-20301Ubiquity Press15978-91-7635-250-20610.16993/bco01internal-reference82DGE20102201RUA Series ID6022002-07241001Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bco1B01Christophe Emmanuel PrematChristophe EmmanuelPrematDepartment of Romance Studies and Classics Stockholm UnversityAssociate Professor in French with a major specialisation in Cultural Studies at Stockholm University. Member of the editorial board of Sens Public, an international web journal of social sciences. Co-editor in chief of the Nordic Journal of Francophone Studies. Current research focuses on memory debates in France, discourse analysis, and political periodicals in France. Part of the research project analyzing political discourses in Romance-speaking countries (ROMPOL, Stockholm University) and the research project “Language and Power” (Språk och Makt, Stockholm University).2B01Jean-Michel De WaeleJean-MichelDe WaeleDepartment of Political Science Université Libre de BruxellesFull Professor of Political Science at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Director of the Department of Political Science, Director of the Centre for the Study of Political Life (CEVIPOL), Dean of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, and Vice-Rector for Student Affairs and Relations with Society. Research focuses on political and social actors in Central and Eastern Europe, and the relationship between sport and politics. Comparative politics is central to his thinking. Visiting professor in various universities (France, Tunisia, China, Romania, Bulgaria, etc.).3B01Michel PerottinoMichelPerottinoInstitute of Political Science Charles UniversityAssociate Professor and researcher at the Institute of Political Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University. Head of the Department of Political Science. Specialised in Czech politics, political parties (theory and sociology), and political systems (especially France and Czech Republic). Member of the National Institute for Research on Socioeconomic Impacts of Diseases and Systemic Risks (SYRI).01eng01fre55223User DefinedPolitical Science23User DefinedDiscourse analysis23User DefinedCommunication studies23User DefinedCultural and media studies23User DefinedSocial psychology23User DefinedInternational Relations12Discourse analysis12Political Science12Public policies12Bureaucracy12Sociology of health12Sociology of experts12Social representations12Social psychology12Media studies12Communication studies12Public administration10POL07300010LAN00400010PSY03100093JPQB93KCVJ93GTC93JMH01010302<p>The health crisis the world is going through is arguably the first contemporary “global crisis” that threatens the world with generalized anomy and its new economic option, globalization. It has struck China, settles in Europe, strikes heavily in the United States and Latin America, and is spreading rapidly in other continents. The same problem has to be faced by different States and it addresses fascinating questions to social and political sciences. To understand, we must compare said political scientist Giovanni Sartori. Comparing the way in which States are managing this crisis can allow us to understand the global crisis and the national specificities. The first reaction of the States is a considerable predilection for sanitary methods of quarantine and containment. The aim is to understand the effects of this crisis on every political system and every legal system. How were the actions taken, received, approved or challenged? How do different national political cultures adapt to new situations? What does this tell us about each of the societies, about each of the political regimes and, ultimately, about the place of the State in contemporary societies? Are the legal instruments one of the means to manage the crisis? Is the organization of the State reinforced or weakened in the context of the health emergency? What do these levers tell us about the metamorphoses of the contemporary State in a period of unprecedented health crisis?</p> <p>Since April 2020, a new research network in political science, discourse analysis and law has been established on the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the States (Posoc19, <i>Pouvoirs et Sociétés Face à la Crise du COVID-19</i>). The objective of the current project is to focus on the axis of expertise in order to empower the network and be able to compare the ways in which political systems are based on scientific expertise. To what extent is political power based on scientific expertise? Is the expertise autonomous?</p> <p>What is the effect of expertise on public opinion? How does it help to fight against the spread of fake news? A research group inside the network Posoc19 has been established in May 2020 and focuses on the comparison of experts' profiles and discourses. During the spring of 2020 and during the COVID-19 pandemic, new expert figures emerged in connection with public health issues. In some countries, official expert figures have even imposed themselves in order to be able to legitimize the decisions taken by the political authorities, while in other countries, there has been more visibility of conflicts of expertise involving experts appointed by political power (sacralization of the expert who in this case assumes a political function, with or without political responsibility to bear) versus university experts and researchers. In addition, the media have sometimes selected certain experts for other reasons (proximity to lobbies, in particular pharmaceuticals, political and / or partisan positions, relations with a cabinet or a company, etc.), which made the situation even more complex. In some cases "super experts" have emerged, in others more collegial formats have been chosen.</p> <p>Some countries opted for mixed strategies with a combination of superexperts and committees. In addition to the fundamental question of the choice of experts (on a political, scientific, media, etc. basis) there has also been the question of political responsibility for the choices made, both in the short and in the long term. The gradual shift to a slower time frame (after the first few weeks in an emergency) makes it possible to ask questions and offer an analysis of different national cases, especially when economic imperatives seem to be taking over. It is also important to know if the experts influenced incumbent politicians on the choice of a strategy or if it was the strategy that made politicians choose the experts. The analysis of public policies is relevant here in order to compare the actors (experts / committees / government / administration /politicians), the agenda and the nature of the decision. The final aim of the research is to produce an accurate typology of systems of expertise due to the comparative approach.</p>0202<p>This book is aimed at researchers, students, and practitioners interested in how the voices of experts have been conveyed in the public sphere during the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Beyond controversies over the selection of these experts by governments or the media, the book draws on methodologies from discourse analysis, media studies, political science, sociology, and social psychology to compare the role that experts played in justifying unpopular political decisions. Several configurations have emerged, including politically contested systems with medical heroes, bureaucratized systems with a super-reference expert, or more collegiate forms of committees tasked with providing political leaders with the necessary reports to justify political decisions.</p>04Introduction: The legitimacy of experts in the public space during the pandemic La crise de la COVID-19 et les ambiguïtés de la construction de la figure de « l’expert médical » dans la grammaire politique populiste: le bon, la brute et le truand Représentations sociales de la COVID-19 dans dix pays du monde : le discours public à plusieurs voix des experts, des leaders politiques et des institutions à travers différents médias The United Arab Emirates, an Early Adopter of Global Best Practices Le rôle des experts dans les politiques de lutte contre la COVID-19 au Japon Gestion de la COVID-19 en Suisse : expertise scientifique et démocratie de consensus en temps de crise No hero outside the hospital lane. Governmental Committees, Pop Star Experts and Conflicts of Expertise in COVID-19-ridden Italy Spain, between its waves and experts – Navigating through a complex network of advisory committees in a context of political confrontation Expert, experts et expertise pendant la crise de la COVID-19 – le cas tchèque Le rôle de l’expertise dans la construction du consensus suédois face à la pandémie Experts et politiques dans la gestion de la crise de la COVID-19 en Belgique : conflit de territoires et récit médiatique The construction of the COVID-19 pandemic as a social problem: expert discourse and representational naturalisation in the mass media during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada46http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/47Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)040901https://storage.googleapis.com/rua-sup/files/media/cover_images/6a036697-4915-40be-9d22-99420520d1f6.pngStockholm University Press01Stockholm University Press01Publisher’s corporate websitehttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se02Publisher’s website for a specified workhttps://www.stockholmuniversitypress.se/books/e/10.16993/bcoStockholm04202409050615978-91-7635-247-21315978-91-7635-248-91315978-91-7635-249-6