Introduction to the Theme Section: Rural Sociology and Animal Disease
Introduction to the Theme Section: Rural Sociology and Animal Disease
复制标题
主题部分介绍：农村社会学与动物疾病
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-9523.2009.00498.x
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Enticott G
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Enticott G
在农村社会学的发展中，动物健康一直是一个沉默的角色。尽管战后欧洲农村社会学关注的是农业内部的创新、新技术的采用和农业推广服务的作用（Hofstee 1960），令人惊讶的是，很少有人关注动物疾病治疗和动物健康方面的创新和技术进步，也很少有人关注兽医科学和兽医专业在农村专业知识和农村卫生中的地位。社会这一空白很难用没有任何重大的农业动物健康问题来解释。在农村社会学学科兴起的同时，英国也即将完成（显然）成功根除牛结核病的工作。虽然2001年英国爆发的口蹄疫在Sociologia Ruralis上引发了一系列学术论文（例如，参见唐纳森等人，2002;班尼特和Phillipson，2004），但1967年爆发后的类似反应从未出现过。在大多数情况下，动物健康主要被视为现代农业竞争力的辅助手段，而当代农村社会学则更多地受到农业可持续性方面的影响。因此，其他学科可能被视为研究动物疾病暴发的社会经济后果的传统家园。动物健康的这种学科分类也可以解释为什么兽医期刊中很少有研究涉及农村社会学的方面。Beaudeau等人（1996年）研究了耕作方式对畜群管理的影响，这是一个明显的例外。然而，正如引言开头的引文表明兽医职业如何改变以应对动物疾病问题一样，农村社会学最近也开始解决这些问题。跨学科的转变，以及农民对农业风险的看法是文化塑造的认识，鼓励越来越多的农村社会学家更加认真地对待动物疾病，这也是由理论发展和最近发生的事件相结合所推动的，这些事件已经看到了农村社会学（以及更广泛的社会科学）和动物疾病之间出现的新关系。转向后结构主义，特别是行动者网络理论是一个重要因素。另一个原因是，动物疾病的爆发本身已经成为戏剧性的事件。正如上面引用的话所暗示的，BSE代表了这里的转折点，但是
Animal health has been something of a silent player in the development of rural sociology. Although much Post-War European rural sociology was concerned with innovation within agriculture, the adoption of new technologies and the role of extension services for agriculture (Hofstee 1960), there has been surprisingly little attention paid either to innovation and technological advances in the treatment of animal disease and animal health or to the place of veterinary science and the veterinary profession within rural expertise and rural society. This lacuna can hardly be explained by the absence of any significant agricultural animal health problems. At the same time as the discipline of rural sociology was emerging, so was the United Kingdom nearing completion of an (apparently) successful eradication of bovine tuberculosis from cattle. Whilst the 2001 outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease in the United Kingdom provoked a flurry of academic papers in Sociologia Ruralis (for example see Donaldson et al. 2002; Bennett and Phillipson 2004), a similar response following the 1967 outbreak was never evident. For the most part, animal health has been seen principally as an adjunct to the competitiveness of modern agriculture, whilst contemporary rural sociology has been shaped more by aspects of agricultural sustainability. As a result, other disciplines may have been seen as the traditional home of studies of the socio-economic consequences of animal disease outbreaks. This disciplinary categorisation of animal health may also explain why few studies within veterinary journals have engaged with aspects of rural sociology. Beaudeau et al’s (1996) study the influence of styles of farming upon herd management being one notable exception. However, just as the quote at the beginning of this introduction indicates how the veterinary profession has changed to meet the problems of animal disease, so too has rural sociology recently begun to address these issues. Shifts towards interdisciplinarity, and the recognition that farmers’ perceptions of agricultural risks are culturally shaped, have encouraged a growing number of rural sociologists to take animal disease more seriously, prompted also by a combination of theoretical developments and recent events that have seen the emergence of a new relationship between rural sociology (and the wider social sciences) and animal disease. The turn to poststructuralism and in particular Actor-Network Theory has been a significant factor. Another, is that outbreaks of animal disease have become dramatic events in themselves. As the quote above suggests, BSE represents the turning point here, but