Search

BackgroundThe online discussion around the COVID-19 pandemic is multifaceted, and it is important to examine the different ways by which online users express themselves. Since emojis are used as effective vehicles to convey ideas and sentiments, they can offer important insight into the public’s gendered discourses about the pandemic. ObjectiveThis study aims at exploring how people of different genders (eg, men, women, and sex and gender minorities) are discussed in relation to COVID-19 through the study of Twitter emojis. MethodsWe collected over 50 million tweets referencing the hashtags #Covid-19 and #Covid19 for a period of more than 2 months in early 2020. Using a mixed method, we extracted three data sets containing tweets that reference men, women, and sexual and gender minorities, and we then analyzed emoji use along each gender category. We identified five major themes in our analysis including morbidity fears, health concerns, employment and financial issues, praise for frontline workers, and unique gendered emoji use. The top 600 emojis were manually classified based on their sentiment, indicating how positive, negative, or neutral each emoji is and studying their use frequencies. ResultsThe findings indicate that the majority of emojis are overwhelmingly positive in nature along the different genders, but sexual and gender minorities, and to a lesser extent women, are discussed more negatively than men. There were also many differences alongside discourses of men, women, and gender minorities when certain topics were discussed, such as death, financial and employment matters, gratitude, and health care, and several unique gendered emojis were used to express specific issues like community support. ConclusionsEmoji research can shed light on the gendered impacts of COVID-19, offering researchers an important source of information on health crises as they happen in real time.

Global health security is an increasingly complex regime. The failures of global governance and norms of cooperation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the re-entrenchment to nationalist policy-making have created impetus for new governance arrangements, institutions and policy development. These changes include amendments to the International health regulations (IHR), development of a pandemic convention or accord, convening of the High- Level Meeting on Pandemic Preparedness and Response, establishment of the Pandemic Fund, and development of the medical countermeasures platform, among others. These various developments claim to be in synergy with each other, but understanding of regime complexes and forum shifting from international relations reveal the power dyna mics which underlie these processes. I use these concepts to demonstrate how states are transferring negotiations from one institutional location to another in search of more favourable outcomes, or are creating strategic uncertainty within negotiations to avoid future accountability. I further highlight three risks posed by these developments: (i) an increasingly complex landscape for global health security; (ii) erosion of the World Health Organization's authority in global health security; and (iii) dominance of high-income state positions within these negotiations. La securite sanitaire mondiale est un systeme de plus en plus complexe. Les echecs essuyes par la gouvernance mondiale et les normes en matiere de cooperation durant la pandemie de maladie a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), ainsi que le retour a une elaboration nationaliste des politiques, ont entraine la creation de mecanismes de gouvernance, destitutions et de programmes politiques inedits. Ces transformations se traduisent notamment par des amendements au Reglement sanitaire international (RSI), la mise au point d'une convention ou d'un accord face aux pandemies, l'organisation de la Reunion de haut niveau inedite sur la prevention, la preparation et la riposte face aux pandemies, l'etablissement du Fonds de lutte contre les pandemies, mais aussi l'instauration de la plateforme de contre-mesures medicales. Ces differents changements affirment reuvrer en synergie, mais la comprehension des complexites du systeme et revolution des debats, qui se detachent des relations internationales, revelent les dynamiques de pouvoir qui sous-tendent ces processus. J'utilise ces concepts pour montrer comment les Etats transferent les negociations d'un siege institutionnel a l'autre en quete de resultats plus favorables, ou creent une incertitude strategique dans le cadre des negociations pour se soustraire a de futures responsabilites. Je souligne egalement trois risques que comportent ces changements: (i) un paysage sans cesse plus complexe pour la securite sanitaire mondiale; (ii) l'erosion de l'autorite exercee par l'Organisation mondiale de la Sante en la matiere; et enfin, (iii) la position dominante des Etats a revenu eleve dans les negociations. La seguridad sanitaria mundial es un sistema cada vez mas complejo. Los fracasos de la gobernanza mundial y de las normas de cooperacion durante la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus de 2019 (COVID-19) y el repliegue hacia la formulacion de politicas nacionalistas han impulsado nuevos acuerdos de gobernanza, instituciones y desarrollo de politicas. Estos cambios incluyen enmiendas al Reglamento Sanitario Internacional (RSI), el desarrollo de una convencion o acuerdo sobre pandemias, la convocatoria de la Reunion de Alto Nivel sobre Preparacion y Respuesta ante Pandemias, el establecimiento del Fondo para Pandemias y el desarrollo de la plataforma de contramedidas medicas, entre otros. Estos diversos desarrollos pretenden funcionar en sinergia, pero la comprension de las complejidades del sistema y la evolucion de los debates, al margen de las relaciones internacionales, revelan la dinamica de poder que subyace a estos procesos. Utilizo estos conceptos para demostrar como los Estados trasladan las negociaciones de un lugar institucional a otro en busca de resultados mas favorables o crean incertidumbre estrategica dentro de las negociaciones para evadir futuras responsabilidades. Ademas, destaco tres riesgos que plantean estos acontecimientos: (i) un panorama cada vez mas complejo para la seguridad sanitaria mundial; (ii) la perdida de autoridad de la Organizacion Mundial de la Salud en materia de seguridad sanitaria mundial; y (iii) el predominio de las posiciones de los Estados de ingresos altos en estas negociaciones., Introduction Global health security, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as 'the activities required, both proactive and reactive, to minimize the danger and impact of acute public health events [...]

There has been increasing recognition of gender-based inequity as a barrier to successful policy implementation. This consensus, coupled with an increasing frequency of emergencies in human and animal populations, including infectious disease events, has prompted policy makers to re-evaluate gender-sensitivity in emergency management planning. Seeking to identify key publications relating to gendered impacts and considerations across diverse stakeholders in different types of animal health emergencies, we conducted a non-exhaustive, targeted scoping review. We developed a matrix for both academic and policy literature that separated animal health emergencies into two major categories: humanitarian crises and infectious disease events. We then conducted semistructured interviews with key animal health experts. We found minimal evidence of explicit gender responsive planning in animal health emergencies, whether humanitarian or infectious disease events. This was particularly salient in Global North literature and policy planning documents. Although there are some references to gender in policy documents pertaining to endemic outbreaks of African swine fever (ASF) in Uganda, most research remains gender blind. Despite this, implicit gendered themes emerged from the literature review and interviews as being direct or indirect considerations of some research, policy, and implementation efforts: representation; gendered exposure risks; economic impact; and unpaid care. Absent from both the literature and our conversations with experts were considerations of mental health, gender-based violence, and intersectional impacts. To remedy the gaps in gender-based considerations, we argue that the intentional inclusion of a gender transformative lens in animal health emergency planning is essential. This can be done in the following ways: (1) collection of disaggregated data (race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.); (2) inclusion of gender experts; and (3) inclusion of primary gendered impacts (minimal representation of women in policy positions, gender roles, economic and nutrition impacts) and secondary gendered impacts (gender-based violence, mental health, additional unpaid care responsibilities) in future planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]