In this contribution to our “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Margaret Weir explores how social solidarity manifests across differing…
In their contribution to the “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Elisabeth Jean Wood, Douglas Rogers, K. Sivaramakrishnan, and Rene Almeling explain that for the foreseeable future, research in many field sites will face complex ethical and logistical challenges, and argue that immersive ethnographic field research will likely be among the last areas of academic research to resume something resembling its prepandemic rhythms. They reflect on the necessary conditions for the resumption of US-based or international field research and propose a series of principles that academic institutions can follow in order to avoid promulgating unresponsive, blanket policies.
Writing for the “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Monica DeHart reflects on how the mobility restrictions of the pandemic has thrown into question basic assumptions about how we do what we do and how we know what we know—particularly poignant questions for ethnographers used to studying social phenomena through their embodied experience and sustained engagement with their objects of study. She explores analytical and methodological strategies for thinking ethnographically despite the current contingencies of research (im)mobility.
Thomas Pepinsky explores one explanation for why some countries are more successful at managing Covid-19 than others for our “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series. By comparing the accomplishments of social democracies like Germany and “developmental states” like South Korea with the relative failures of democracies like Italy and the United States, he explores which traits among advanced, capitalist democracies entail more effective policy responses. Pepinsky argues that the strong role of the state in the national economy is the common through line among democracies that have fared better. Ultimately, successful democratic responses to dealing with pandemics is a matter of political economy.
Qatar, the Coronavirus, and Cordons Sanitaires: Migrant Workers and the Use of Public Health to Define the Nationby Natasha N. Iskander
In her contribution to our “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Natasha Iskander analyses labor migration in the midst of the pandemic and the ways in which migrants are multiply vulnerable. She reports on her research on labor camps in Qatar and the state’s deployment of a cordon sanitaire in the wake of the coronavirus’ spread, situating this current use of the cordon into a broader historical perspective on its use as a tool for excluding marginalized groups. Iskander connects Qatar’s treatment of foreign workers to a vision of the state’s high-tech future in which laborers are increasingly disposable—a vision that the pandemic may be brutally helping to realize.
Risk for “Us,” or for “Them”? The Comparative Politics of Diversity and Responses to AIDS and Covid-19by Evan Lieberman
In his essay for our “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Evan Lieberman writes about the influence of social diversity on the politics of infectious disease control. How does the articulation of ethnic, racial, and national boundaries impede effective policy responses? Using the AIDS crisis as a comparative case-study, Lieberman asks if data that emphasize ethnic, racial, and national categories—while they may be intended to highlight and mitigate disparities—have the potential to stigmatize vulnerable groups during a pandemic. He calls on social science to investigate how such categories influence risk perceptions, citizen behaviors, and government responses.
In her contribution to the “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” essay series, An Ansoms reflects on how universities and scientific institutions can support researchers working in crisis contexts. Unpicking the toll that such contexts can take on researchers, Ansoms lays out an institutional strategy for providing support through training, coaching, and care. By undertaking a deliberate strategy for developing resilience, institutions can ensure that researchers are able to cope with the emotional challenges posed by carrying out research in times and places of crisis.
Research in Insecure Times and Places: Ethics of Social Research for Emerging Ecologies of Insecurityby Tatiana Carayannis and Annalisa Bolin
As part of the “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” essay series, this theme on “Social Research and Insecurity” brings together scholars from across the social sciences to examine our longstanding research practices and develop new ones in response to the insecurity that Covid-19 has created. In this introductory essay, Tatiana Carayannis and Annalisa Bolin outline the new valences of research in the pandemic era, from security challenges for both researchers and researched to new methodologies for gathering data remotely and the need to reflect on the changing roles of institutions. Throughout this theme, researchers with experience working in contexts of insecurity provide a roadmap for both the pitfalls of and possible solutions for navigating research in the age of the coronavirus.
Writing for the “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Jonathan S. Hack and Cole Edick examine the deference of the judiciary toward other branches of government during crises, such as the ongoing pandemic. How deferential will courts be toward broad government action by executives and legislatures that restrict rights and liberties in the name of ensuring public health and safety? Pointing to historical precedent and recent coronavirus-related cases brought before the judiciary in the United States, they argue that courts are likely to act as legitimating agents that promote and expand state police power in times of crisis.
In this essay for our “Covid-19 and the Social Sciences” series, Miguel Centeno reviews T.H. Marshall’s trilogy of civil, political, and social rights, raising questions about how such rights might be affected during major systemic crises. Can democracies successfully manage systemic challenges under global crisis conditions, with attention to each set of rights? Are some rights easier to defend than others during crises? And, when is the collective good allowed to supersede individual freedoms? He calls for democratic theory to answer these questions, arguing that systemic crises represent a similar challenge to democracy as natural disaster or war.