IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v15y2022i4p187-d796223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To Trust or Not to Trust? COVID-19 Facemasks in China–Europe Relations: Lessons from France and the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Emilie Tran

    (Department of Government and International Relations, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong)

  • Yu-chin Tseng

    (CCKF-European Research Center on Contemporary Taiwan, University of Tübingen, 72074 Tübingen, Germany)

Abstract

At the crossroads of sociology and international relations, this interdisciplinary and comparative research article explores how the COVID-19 outbreak has impacted China–Europe relations. Unfolding the critical moments of the COVID-19 outbreak, this article characterizes the evolution of China–Europe relations with regard to the facemask. This simple object of self-protection against the coronavirus strikingly became a source of contention between peoples and states. In the face of this situation, we argue that the facemask is the prism through which to illustrate (1) the transnational links between China and its overseas population, (2) the changing social perceptions of China and Chinese-looking people in European societies, and (3) the advent of China’s health diplomacy and its reception in Europe. Comparing two European settings—France and the United Kingdom (UK)—the common denominator appears to be the reduced trust, if not outright distrust, between individuals and communities in the French and British contexts, and in Sino–French and Sino–British relations at the transnational level. Combining critical juncture theory and (dis)trust in international relations as our analytical framework, this article examines how the facemask became a politicized object, both between states and between Mainland China and its overseas population, as the epidemic unfolded throughout Europe. Adopting a qualitative approach, our dataset comprises the analysis of official speeches and statements; press releases; traditional and social media content (especially through hashtags such as #JeNeSuisPasUnVirus, #IAmNotAVirus, #CoronaRacism, etc.); and interviews with Chinese, French, and British community members.

Suggested Citation

  • Emilie Tran & Yu-chin Tseng, 2022. "To Trust or Not to Trust? COVID-19 Facemasks in China–Europe Relations: Lessons from France and the United Kingdom," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:4:p:187-:d:796223
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/4/187/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/4/187/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leach, William D. & Sabatier, Paul A., 2005. "To Trust an Adversary: Integrating Rational and Psychological Models of Collaborative Policymaking," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(4), pages 491-503, November.
    2. McGillivray, Fiona & Smith, Alastair, 2000. "Trust and Cooperation Through Agent-specific Punishments," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(4), pages 809-824, October.
    3. Alistair Cole & Julien S. Baker & Dionysios Stivas, 2021. "Trust, Transparency and Transnational Lessons from COVID-19," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cali Mortenson Ellis & Michael C. Horowitz & Allan C. Stam, 2015. "Introducing the LEAD Data Set," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 718-741, August.
    2. Eduardo Borensztein & Ugo Panizza, 2009. "The Costs of Sovereign Default," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 56(4), pages 683-741, November.
    3. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    4. Jens Nilsson & Annica Sandström & Daniel Nohrstedt, 2020. "Beliefs, social identity, and the view of opponents in Swedish carnivore management policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 453-472, September.
    5. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    6. Bevaola Kusumasari & MD Enjat Munajat & Fadhli Zul Fauzi, 2023. "Measuring global pandemic governance: how countries respond to COVID-19," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(2), pages 603-629, June.
    7. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.
    8. Gabriel Leonardo & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2016. "Politicians, bureaucrats, and tax morale: What shapes tax compliance attitudes?," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1608, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    9. Andrew F Smith, 2014. "Political deliberation and the challenge of bounded rationality," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(3), pages 269-291, August.
    10. George Maramba & Hanlie Smuts & Funmi Adebesin & Marie Hattingh & Tendani Mawela, 2023. "KMS as a Sustainability Strategy during a Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-13, June.
    11. Alastair Smith, 2009. "Political Groups, Leader Change, and the Pattern of International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(6), pages 853-877, December.
    12. Patricia A. McKay & Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Christine A. Vogt, 2020. "Assessing improvements in socio-ecological system governance using mixed methods and the quality governance framework and its diagnostic capacity tool," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 41-66, March.
    13. Russell W. Mills & Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, 2014. "Secondary learning and the unintended benefits of collaborative mechanisms: The Federal Aviation Administration's voluntary disclosure programs," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 437-454, December.
    14. Fiona McGillivray & Alastair Smith, 2005. "The Impact of Leadership Turnover and Domestic Institutions on International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 639-660, October.
    15. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 690-713, October.
    16. Alexandra Guisinger & Alastair Smith, 2002. "Honest Threats," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(2), pages 175-200, April.
    17. Andrew Pattison & William Cipolli & Jose Marichal, 2022. "The devil we know and the angel that did not fly: An examination of devil/angel shift in twitter fracking “debates” in NY 2008–2018," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 51-72, January.
    18. Antje Witting, 2017. "Insights from ‘policy learning’ on how to enhance the use of evidence by policymakers," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Gary Uzonyi & Matthew Wells, 2016. "Domestic institutions, leader tenure and the duration of civil war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(3), pages 294-310, July.
    20. Shawna K. Metzger, 2017. "Time is on my side? The impact of timing and dispute type on militarized conflict duration," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(3), pages 308-329, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:4:p:187-:d:796223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.