Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19

This article discusses the Bulgarian response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Bulgarian case is characterized by an ineffective constitution of the individuals as subjects of responsibility for the health of the population, which resulted in a vaccine coverage considerably lower than the European aver...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Todor Hristov
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: CBS Open Journals 2023-12-01
Series:Foucault Studies
Subjects:
Online Access:https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/article/view/7086
_version_ 1797225548288622592
author Todor Hristov
author_facet Todor Hristov
author_sort Todor Hristov
collection DOAJ
description This article discusses the Bulgarian response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Bulgarian case is characterized by an ineffective constitution of the individuals as subjects of responsibility for the health of the population, which resulted in a vaccine coverage considerably lower than the European average. The article argues that the fragile responsibilization is an effect of the response to the pandemic that, building on older post-socialist regulations of the access to healthcare, instead of restricting the circulation of bodies in general, tried to differentiate between economically productive and unproductive circulation and to limit only the latter by progressively increasing its differential costs (both in terms of time and efforts and in terms of risks). An analysis of the legal actions against quarantine violators, however, suggests that such a strategy stimulated the public to respond to the pandemic by calculating risks, and if the social actors nevertheless behaved irresponsibly, it was often because they took into account not only the risks posed by the virus but also smaller-scale risks affecting their social support networks. The authorities, however, tried to repair the unreliable responsibilization by articulating an ad hoc right to health defined at the level of the population. That biopolitical right to health was crucial to the implementation of certificate requirements. It was harmonized with individual rights by opening up fields of choice such as the choice between vaccination and daily testing. However, since the differential costs of the higher-risk options seemed irrational, the constellation of individual rights and right to health left a growing residue of irresponsible conducts justifying a further intensification of control.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T21:21:49Z
format Article
id doaj.art-47e65516fdac4b2b912150d278745e44
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1832-5203
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-24T14:10:46Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher CBS Open Journals
record_format Article
series Foucault Studies
spelling doaj.art-47e65516fdac4b2b912150d278745e442024-04-03T09:21:03ZengCBS Open JournalsFoucault Studies1832-52032023-12-013510.22439/fs.i35.7086Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19Todor Hristov0University of SofiaThis article discusses the Bulgarian response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Bulgarian case is characterized by an ineffective constitution of the individuals as subjects of responsibility for the health of the population, which resulted in a vaccine coverage considerably lower than the European average. The article argues that the fragile responsibilization is an effect of the response to the pandemic that, building on older post-socialist regulations of the access to healthcare, instead of restricting the circulation of bodies in general, tried to differentiate between economically productive and unproductive circulation and to limit only the latter by progressively increasing its differential costs (both in terms of time and efforts and in terms of risks). An analysis of the legal actions against quarantine violators, however, suggests that such a strategy stimulated the public to respond to the pandemic by calculating risks, and if the social actors nevertheless behaved irresponsibly, it was often because they took into account not only the risks posed by the virus but also smaller-scale risks affecting their social support networks. The authorities, however, tried to repair the unreliable responsibilization by articulating an ad hoc right to health defined at the level of the population. That biopolitical right to health was crucial to the implementation of certificate requirements. It was harmonized with individual rights by opening up fields of choice such as the choice between vaccination and daily testing. However, since the differential costs of the higher-risk options seemed irrational, the constellation of individual rights and right to health left a growing residue of irresponsible conducts justifying a further intensification of control.https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/article/view/7086BiopoliticsResponsibilizationControlRiskRight to healthCovid-19
spellingShingle Todor Hristov
Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19
Foucault Studies
Biopolitics
Responsibilization
Control
Risk
Right to health
Covid-19
title Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19
title_full Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19
title_fullStr Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19
title_full_unstemmed Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19
title_short Fragile Responsibilization: Rights and Risks in the Bulgarian Response to Covid-19
title_sort fragile responsibilization rights and risks in the bulgarian response to covid 19
topic Biopolitics
Responsibilization
Control
Risk
Right to health
Covid-19
url https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/article/view/7086
work_keys_str_mv AT todorhristov fragileresponsibilizationrightsandrisksinthebulgarianresponsetocovid19