{"title":"Heuristics and protective behavior for floods","authors":"Marvin Starominski-Uehara","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12221","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12221","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12221","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47574588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"To appeal and amend: Changes to recently updated Flood Insurance Rate Maps","authors":"D. Lea, Sarah B. Pralle","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12222","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12222","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12222","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46800311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
K. Boersma, J. Ferguson, P. Groenewegen, J. Wolbers
Funding information Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Grant/Award Number: 409‐14‐003 Abstract A major challenge for disaster scholars and policymakers is to understand the power dimension in response networks, particularly relating to collaboration and coordination. We propose a conceptual framework to study interests and negotiations in and between various civic and professional, response networks drawing on the concepts of “programming” and “switching” proposed by Manuel Castells in his work on the network society. Programming in disaster response refers to the ability to constitute response networks and to program/reprogram them in terms of the goals assigned to the network. Switching is the ability to connect different networks by sharing common goals and combining resources. We employ these concepts to understand how the US Federal Emergency Management Agency organized its response in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy. Our conceptual framework can be used both by disaster scholars and policymakers to understand how networked power is constructed and utilized.
资助信息Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek，赠款/奖项编号：409‐14‐003摘要灾害学者和决策者面临的一个主要挑战是了解应对网络中的权力层面，特别是与合作和协调有关的权力层面。我们根据Manuel Castells在其关于网络社会的工作中提出的“编程”和“切换”的概念，提出了一个概念框架来研究各种公民和专业响应网络中的利益和谈判。灾害应对中的规划是指建立应对网络并根据分配给网络的目标对其进行规划/重新规划的能力。交换是通过共享共同目标和组合资源来连接不同网络的能力。我们利用这些概念来了解美国联邦紧急事务管理局是如何在卡特里娜飓风和桑迪飓风之后组织应对的。我们的概念框架可供灾害学者和决策者使用，以了解网络化电力是如何构建和利用的。
{"title":"The dynamics of power in disaster response networks","authors":"K. Boersma, J. Ferguson, P. Groenewegen, J. Wolbers","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12218","url":null,"abstract":"Funding information Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Grant/Award Number: 409‐14‐003 Abstract A major challenge for disaster scholars and policymakers is to understand the power dimension in response networks, particularly relating to collaboration and coordination. We propose a conceptual framework to study interests and negotiations in and between various civic and professional, response networks drawing on the concepts of “programming” and “switching” proposed by Manuel Castells in his work on the network society. Programming in disaster response refers to the ability to constitute response networks and to program/reprogram them in terms of the goals assigned to the network. Switching is the ability to connect different networks by sharing common goals and combining resources. We employ these concepts to understand how the US Federal Emergency Management Agency organized its response in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy. Our conceptual framework can be used both by disaster scholars and policymakers to understand how networked power is constructed and utilized.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12218","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42003174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Markku Lehtonen, M. Kojo, Mika Kari, Tapio Litmanen
Funding information Finnish Research Programme on Nuclear Waste Management (KYT2022), Grant/Award Number: Dnro KYT 13/2019; Strategic Research Council at the Academy of Finland “Collaborative remedies for fragmented societies – facilitating the collaborative turn in environmental decision‐making” (CORE), Grant/Award Number: Research project no. 313015; European Commission Marie Skłodowska‐Curie Individual Fellowships Abstract Trust and confidence have been identified as crucial for efforts at solving the conundrum of high‐level radioactive waste management (RWM). However, mistrust has its virtues, especially in the form of “civic vigilance”—healthy suspicion towards the powers that be. This article examines civic vigilance in the form of “watchdog journalism,” as practiced by the leading Finnish and French newspapers— Helsingin Sanomat (HS) and Le Monde (LM)—in their RWM reporting. Although both countries are forerunners in RWM, Finland constitutes a Nordic “high‐trust society” while France has been characterized as a “society of mistrust.” Employing the methods of frame analysis, key RWM‐related news frames were identified, consisting of varying combinations of confidence, skepticism, trust, and mistrust. LM's mistrust‐skepticism‐oriented framings reflect the classical watchdog role, in sharp contrast with the confidence oriented framings of HS, which tends to reproduce government and industry framings. Explanations for the observed differences can be sought in historically constituted political and media cultures, as well as national nuclear “regimes”. For further research, we suggest two alternative hypotheses concerning the
{"title":"Healthy mistrust or complacent confidence? Civic vigilance in the reporting by leading newspapers on nuclear waste disposal in Finland and France","authors":"Markku Lehtonen, M. Kojo, Mika Kari, Tapio Litmanen","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12210","url":null,"abstract":"Funding information Finnish Research Programme on Nuclear Waste Management (KYT2022), Grant/Award Number: Dnro KYT 13/2019; Strategic Research Council at the Academy of Finland “Collaborative remedies for fragmented societies – facilitating the collaborative turn in environmental decision‐making” (CORE), Grant/Award Number: Research project no. 313015; European Commission Marie Skłodowska‐Curie Individual Fellowships Abstract Trust and confidence have been identified as crucial for efforts at solving the conundrum of high‐level radioactive waste management (RWM). However, mistrust has its virtues, especially in the form of “civic vigilance”—healthy suspicion towards the powers that be. This article examines civic vigilance in the form of “watchdog journalism,” as practiced by the leading Finnish and French newspapers— Helsingin Sanomat (HS) and Le Monde (LM)—in their RWM reporting. Although both countries are forerunners in RWM, Finland constitutes a Nordic “high‐trust society” while France has been characterized as a “society of mistrust.” Employing the methods of frame analysis, key RWM‐related news frames were identified, consisting of varying combinations of confidence, skepticism, trust, and mistrust. LM's mistrust‐skepticism‐oriented framings reflect the classical watchdog role, in sharp contrast with the confidence oriented framings of HS, which tends to reproduce government and industry framings. Explanations for the observed differences can be sought in historically constituted political and media cultures, as well as national nuclear “regimes”. For further research, we suggest two alternative hypotheses concerning the","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12210","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47181332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What is the impact of a crisis on the belief systems of leaders? We know from a substantial body of research that the beliefs of leaders impact their decision making processes. These beliefs are generally assumed to be stable, which makes them a reliable tool for explaining decision making behavior. There is, however, some limited evidence that suggests that when crises are experienced by leaders as a traumatic event, their beliefs can be affected. This article studies the potential impact of crisis ‐ induced trauma on leaders' belief systems by measuring the operational codes of Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte before and after the shooting down of fl ight MH17 in 2014 in Ukraine. We use quantitative content analysis of written texts such as the speeches by Rutte. Our aim is to contribute to the crisis management literature that focuses on individual leadership and crises by fi nding out whether Rutte's operational code changed signi fi cantly after the downing of fl ight MH17. We conclude that there were two signi fi cant changes in Rutte's belief system, but these cannot be attributed to the effects of the traumatic event only. Therefore we offer an alternative explanation that combines the traumatic event hypothesis with the crisis ‐ learning hypothesis.
{"title":"Trauma and belief systems; an operational code analysis of Dutch Prime Minister Rutte and the downing of flight MH17","authors":"Niels Willigen, F. Bakker","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12209","url":null,"abstract":"What is the impact of a crisis on the belief systems of leaders? We know from a substantial body of research that the beliefs of leaders impact their decision making processes. These beliefs are generally assumed to be stable, which makes them a reliable tool for explaining decision making behavior. There is, however, some limited evidence that suggests that when crises are experienced by leaders as a traumatic event, their beliefs can be affected. This article studies the potential impact of crisis ‐ induced trauma on leaders' belief systems by measuring the operational codes of Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte before and after the shooting down of fl ight MH17 in 2014 in Ukraine. We use quantitative content analysis of written texts such as the speeches by Rutte. Our aim is to contribute to the crisis management literature that focuses on individual leadership and crises by fi nding out whether Rutte's operational code changed signi fi cantly after the downing of fl ight MH17. We conclude that there were two signi fi cant changes in Rutte's belief system, but these cannot be attributed to the effects of the traumatic event only. Therefore we offer an alternative explanation that combines the traumatic event hypothesis with the crisis ‐ learning hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12209","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46230627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01Epub Date: 2020-12-03DOI: 10.1002/rhc3.12207
Kevin Pollock, Riana Steen
The total defence (TD) concept aims to provide an effective crisis response structure by increasing society resilience. However, the complexity of its structure regarding resource mobilization and management process highlights the need for a complexity-oriented approach in the operationalising of TD. We study the application of TD during the COVID-19 crisis and explore what makes the TD a viable system with resilience capabilities in the face the crisis. We apply the Viable Systems Model as a methodology to compare the viability of the United Kingdom and Norwegian TD systems, both of which use systems networks to achieve resilience, and contrast the different outcomes of each country. Our analysis highlights that: Managing the complexity of the TDS requires that all of the involved agencies proactively adopt a transparent approach to a joint decision making. This demands a wide range of sources of innovative solutions at different levels. Joint exercises, developed by the responsible agencies, enhance mutual understating of roles and responsibilities and crisis response structure. This calls for institutionalized support to dedicate resources. To avoid communications challenges, involved agencies in the TDS need to adopt an open messaging strategy, highlighting how to deal with uncertainties in communicating of decisions and action.
{"title":"Total Defence Resilience: Viable or Not During COVID-19? A Comparative Study of Norway and the UK.","authors":"Kevin Pollock, Riana Steen","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12207","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The total defence (TD) concept aims to provide an effective crisis response structure by increasing society resilience. However, the complexity of its structure regarding resource mobilization and management process highlights the need for a complexity-oriented approach in the operationalising of TD. We study the application of TD during the COVID-19 crisis and explore what makes the TD a viable system with resilience capabilities in the face the crisis. We apply the Viable Systems Model as a methodology to compare the viability of the United Kingdom and Norwegian TD systems, both of which use systems networks to achieve resilience, and contrast the different outcomes of each country. Our analysis highlights that: Managing the complexity of the TDS requires that all of the involved agencies proactively adopt a transparent approach to a joint decision making. This demands a wide range of sources of innovative solutions at different levels. Joint exercises, developed by the responsible agencies, enhance mutual understating of roles and responsibilities and crisis response structure. This calls for institutionalized support to dedicate resources. To avoid communications challenges, involved agencies in the TDS need to adopt an open messaging strategy, highlighting how to deal with uncertainties in communicating of decisions and action.</p>","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/rhc3.12207","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38750886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In every disaster scenario, emergency responders face tremendous uncertainty and risk that would influence their willingness to respond (WTR). Hence, it is important to gain better understanding of psychological root causes for emergency responders to abandon their roles and, in turn, to develop better disaster response strategies. Our recent study has shown that the overall WTR of Louisiana EMS and LEO personnel is 69.9%. In addition, emergency responders’ WTR decreased as perceived threat increased. The statistically significant influences on WTR were fear of working an unfamiliar role, concern for family, self-safety, feeling well-prepared to respond, duty to colleagues, and increasing the frequency of training.
{"title":"A study of emergency medical service personnel and law enforcement official willingness to respond to disasters","authors":"Erick B. Knezek, V. T. Vu, Jim Lee","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12212","url":null,"abstract":"In every disaster scenario, emergency responders face tremendous uncertainty and risk that would influence their willingness to respond (WTR). Hence, it is important to gain better understanding of psychological root causes for emergency responders to abandon their roles and, in turn, to develop better disaster response strategies. Our recent study has shown that the overall WTR of Louisiana EMS and LEO personnel is 69.9%. In addition, emergency responders’ WTR decreased as perceived threat increased. The statistically significant influences on WTR were fear of working an unfamiliar role, concern for family, self-safety, feeling well-prepared to respond, duty to colleagues, and increasing the frequency of training.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12212","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48479836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Emergent learning during crisis: A case study of the arctic circle border crossing at Storskog in Norway","authors":"R. Steen, Bernt Rønningsbakk","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12211","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12211","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12211","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41967225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Hindsight is so 2020","authors":"S. Kuipers","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12217","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12217","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45790805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：