政策工具视角下我国突发公共卫生事件应急管理政策文本量化分析  

Quantitative analysis of policy texts on emergency management of public health emergencies in China from the perspective of policy tools

作　　者：高一冉 王燕萍 王鹏[2] 于甜 魏敏 王可欣 孟楠 诸葛瑞倩 吴群红[1] GAO Yiran;WANG Yanping;WANG Peng;YU Tian;WEI Min;WANG Kexin;MENG Nan;ZHUGE Ruiqian;WU Qunhong(School for health Management,Harbin Medical University,Harbin,Heilongjiang 150081,China;不详)

机构地区：[1]哈尔滨医科大学卫生管理学院,黑龙江哈尔滨150081 [2]哈尔滨医科大学公共卫生学院

出　　处：《中国公共卫生管理》2024年第4期480-486,共7页Chinese Journal of Public Health Management

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目(72361137562)。

摘　　要：目的剖析我国突发公共卫生事件应急管理相关政策文本,揭示防控治理的内在逻辑,探讨政策工具的特点与不足,为未来政策调整与优化提供有效参考。方法基于内容分析法,建立“政策工具-应急管理生命周期”二维分析框架,对我国367份突发公共卫生事件应急管理政策文本进行量化分析。结果政策工具比重失衡:能力建设型、权威型、激励型政策工具使用较多,分别占32.5%、29.11%、21.19%;象征与劝诫型、系统变革型政策工具使用相对较少,仅占8.67%、8.53%。应急管理各阶段覆盖不均:反应阶段政策工具使用频率最高,占41.38%;恢复、预防阶段使用次之,分别占30.03%、20.96%;准备阶段政策工具使用最少,仅占7.63%。结论建议增加象征与劝诫型、系统变革型工具的使用,重视预防、准备阶段,调整内部结构,确保政策工具与应急管理阶段相协调,实现政策工具的多元化和均衡化,提升政策执行效果。Objective To analyse the policy texts related to emergency management of public health emergencies in China,reveal the internal logic of prevention,control and governance,explore the characteristics and deficiencies of policy tools,so as to provide effective reference for future policy adjustment and optimization.Methods Based on the content analysis method,a two-dimensional analysis framework of“policy tools-emergency management life cycle”was established to quantitatively analyse 367 emergency management policy texts on public health emergencies in China.Results The weight of policy tools was unbalanced:capacity building,authority and incentive policy tools were used more often,accounting for 32.5%,29.11%and 21.19%,respectively;symbols and exhortations and systemic change policy tools were used less often,accounting for only 8.67%and 8.53%.The phases of emergency management were unevenly covered:the response phase had the highest frequency of use of policy tools,at 41.38%;the recovery and prevention phases had the second highest use,at 30.03%and 20.96%,respectively;and the preparedness phase had the lowest use of policy tools,at only 7.63%.Conclusion It is recommended to increase the use of symbolic and exhortation-type and systemic change-type tools,pay attention to the prevention and preparedness phases,adjust the internal structure to ensure that the policy tools are coordinated with the emergency management phase,and achieve the diversification and balancing of policy tools to enhance the effectiveness of policy implementation.

关 键 词：突发公共卫生事件 卫生政策 政策工具 量化分析 

分 类 号：R197[医药卫生—卫生事业管理]