Yeah, this one will be a good one’, or Tacit knowledge, prophylaxis and the border
Exploring everyday health security decisionmaking
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12300489 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Adam Ferhani (0000-0002-8111-5410, University of Sheffield, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 53 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 497-514 |
| Publication date | 2022-03-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Security Dialogue (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0967-0106 • E-ISSN: 1460-3640 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/09670106211066750 |
| OpenAlex | W4214862095 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 51 |
Approaching health security from a practice-theoretical perspective, this article advances our understanding of the everyday and locality in health security decisionmaking, and is guided by the following two questions: How is it determined when a health security threat is likely to be present at a point of entry? What knowledge informs everyday health security decisions at borders? Markedly little is known about health security decisionmaking, though conventional wisdom tells us that health security decisions are based on stringent processes and – importantly – anchored in epidemiological knowledge. The assumed primacy of epidemiological knowledge in health security decisionmaking is well illustrated by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: evidence-based responses emerged globally following sophisticated epidemiologic investigation. Are health security decisions always rooted in epidemiology? A 12-month period of non-participant observation of Port Health Officers – who, under the auspices of the 2005 International Health Regulations, are responsible for numerous prophylactic measures at the UK border – gives a unique, privileged entry point for understanding the health security decisionmaking process and tells a story that both questions the centrality of epidemiology and foregrounds the role of tacit knowledge and intuition in health security decisionmaking. This article, which draws on insights from the science and technology studies literature on tacit knowledge, shows how observed health risk taxonomies and corollary decisions in prophylactic border security are predicated almost exclusively on hunches and ‘just knowing’ that something ‘doesn’t feel right’
Biosecurity · Critical security studies · Knowledge management · Political science · Public relations · Sociology · Tacit knowledge · Computer Science · Global Security and Public Health · Law · Medicine · Migration, Health and Trauma · Viral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Securing Borders
Tacit and Explicit Knowledge
Unprepared
Impossible Engineering
Cognition in the Wild
Peripheral Vision
Personal Knowledge
The Site of the Social
The Politics of Insecurity
International practices
Who's Afraid of a Chicken? Securitization and Avian Flu
The International Health Regulations, Covid-19, and bordering practices
Decisions at the data border
What’s in an act? On security speech acts and little security nothings
Securitizing Zika
Catching the flu
The Surveillance Legacies of 9/11
A Brief Introduction of the Puzzle of Discretion
Trust, Privilege, and Discretion in the Governance of the US Borderlands with Mexico
Bioweapons Proliferation
The securitisation of avian influenza
Bright Air, Brilliant Fire
Dreaming of Seamless Borders
Why the Covid-19 response needs International Relations
Pandemic Response as Border Politics
The Policy Tools of Securitization
Should HIV/Aids Be Securitized? The Ethical Dilemmas of Linking HIV/Aids and Security
HIV/Aids and securitization theory
Securitization and the Construction of Security
Bioinformational diplomacy
The Play of International Practice
Security and Immigration
Pathways to practice
Tacit Knowledge, Secrecy, and Intelligence Assessments
Epistemic Cultures
Securitization' revisited
Securitizing infectious disease
The Mangle of Practice
Toward a Theory of Social Practices
Tacit Knowledge, Weapons Design, and the Uninvention of Nuclear Weapons
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |