Reimagining Disease Modelling and Outbreak Analysis: A Report on the "Critical Social Science Approaches to Epidemic Intelligence" Workshop
Rachel Yang
01/20/2025 | Report-Backs
On March 21st and 22nd of 2024, the University of Sydney hosted a workshop titled "Critical Social Science Approaches to Epidemic Intelligence." While this workshop was delayed several times due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the delays afforded unexpected space and more time for reflection and refinement, enriching our conversations on epidemic intelligence and modeling–that is, the methods used to detect, analyse, and manage infectious disease outbreaks. The recent pandemic became a critical point of reference, allowing participants to not only interrogate how real-time modeling, public health interventions, and public responses intersected in unprecedented ways but also challenge the assumptions that overlook the social dimensions of epidemics.
Organized by Professors Warwick Anderson (Sydney/Melbourne), Kari Lancaster (UNSW/University of Bath), and Sonja van Wichelen (Sydney), this highly interdisciplinary event brought together 37 scholars from universities in Australia, the United States, Europe, and Asia and disciplines such as medical anthropology, sociology of medicine, the history and philosophy of science, and science and technology studies. Participants included senior scholars, mid- and early-career researchers, and PhD students, fostering a rich exchange of ideas. Held over two days, the workshop was generously supported by grants from the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia, the University of New South Wales, and both the Charles Perkins Centre and the Sydney Centre for Southeast Asian Studies, both of which are at the University of Sydney.
The workshop had three objectives: 1) investigating the historical development of epidemic intelligence and modeling, especially in relation to disease ecology and social medicine, 2) examining the modeling practices used during the COVID-19 and other epidemics, and 3) assessing how sociological perspectives can be integrated with contemporary disease models.
The workshop featured six engaging sessions with presentations, panel discussions, and Q&A. Participants wrote short “thought pieces” in advance of the workshop that everyone read beforehand. In each session, brief presentations from three authors were followed by discussant comments, and all sessions included group discussion.
A day before the workshop, Stephen Corbett, former Director of the Centre for Population Health at Western Sydney Local Health District (WSLHD), led a walking tour around Circular Quay, an area of Sydney’s Central Business District where the bubonic plague severely hit in 1900. Stephen shared historical anecdotes about the outbreak such as its connection to Sydney’s outdated sewer system and public hygiene. These stories showed how disease outbreaks both shape and are shaped by societal and infrastructural responses, offering insights that aligned closely with some themes of the workshop.
The first day consisted of introductory remarks from the organisers and four sessions. The first session discussed the boundary work of disease models, focusing on how measurement practices and metrics shape what is considered legitimate knowledge in epidemic management. Presentations explored the role of case reporting in defining the scope of epidemic management, the biopolitical dimensions of surveillance that distinguish between endemic and epidemic conditions, and an empirical analysis of HIV prevention. Following a short break, the focus shifted to the inclusivity of models. Presentations in this panel discussed issues of diversity and functional differences within digital platforms and the social etiology of diseases, probing how epidemics exploit and exacerbate the existing inequalities of race, class, and disability. Additionally, an examination of risk mapping in Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever in Europe was undertaken, with reflections on its limitations, such as its uneven usage.
After lunch, we discussed the perspectives of social contagion, which refers to the spread of disease, as well as behaviors, ideas, and social conditions. This interdisciplinary panel commenced with technical insights drawn from Complex Systems scholarship, offering an understanding of the interactions and collective behaviors within societies that shape and are shaped by crises. Another paper in this panel explored social contagion through the lens of misinformation, tracing the dissemination of (pseudo)scientific knowledge within communities. The final panel of the day examined modeling differences, probing into the disparities of race in COVID-19 molecular research and modeling, questioning the assumptions underlying HIV testing models, and discussing the cascade of care to better understand global health data infrastructures and their limitations.
The second day of the workshop featured two more sessions. The fifth session explored ecological dimensions of epidemic modeling and intelligence. Presentations focused on the interplay between live poultry markets and influenza viruses in China, drawing from social network theory. Insights were also presented on situating epidemic intelligence within the broader context of the multispecies world, as well as the challenges and collaborative efforts involved in epidemic response across borders. The final session focused on the urgency and unique challenges faced in epidemic intelligence. Discussions revolved around the potential pitfalls of mathematical modeling in epidemic response, particularly how it might inadvertently amplify the abstraction of urgency and hinder accountability within epidemic intelligence efforts. Moreover, the panel examined the role of ‘crisis’ in shaping data practices—what we called ‘crisis technologies’—and delved into the colonial legacies inherent in modeling strategies and assumptions. The final paper examined the pursuit of hepatitis C elimination and proposed a new future of the "crisis sublime," suggesting that practices of elimination creates a different kind of crisis: a future modeled without disease.
The workshop concluded with a recap of key insights and discussions. Participants gained valuable knowledge from the exploration of epidemic intelligence through critical social science lenses. The workshop challenged the prevailing assumptions that epidemic intelligence is a purely technical practice and stressed the importance of addressing the social, cultural, and political dimensions of epidemics. It was suggested that future epidemic preparedness should shift from infrastructure vulnerabilities and security gaps to sustaining collective well-being, with a stronger emphasis on global health equity. To this end, it might be necessary to step away from a rigid biosecurity framework and explore other kinds of vulnerability, along with more sensitive approaches to addressing them. Several avenues for publishing the findings of the workshop have been planned, and the workshop ended with a deep commitment to future collaborations that bring together social scientists and historians alongside traditional experts in data, public health, and policymaking.
Author Bio
Rachel Yang is a PhD candidate in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at the University of Sydney. Her interests lie at the intersection of STS, environmental humanities, and medical humanities. Centering on Hong Kong as a case study, her doctoral thesis aims to complicate the understanding of infectious disease transmission by examining the interplay of human and non-human agents, including objects, architecture, animals, institutions, and political-historical forces.
Editor's Comment
Richard Fadok edited this post.
Published: 01/20/2025
