非营利组织应对灾害和气候变化:谁来应对?谁的计划?

IF 2.2 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Nonprofit Policy Forum Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1515/npf-2023-0017
Beth Gazley, Rachel Cash
{"title":"非营利组织应对灾害和气候变化:谁来应对?谁的计划?","authors":"Beth Gazley, Rachel Cash","doi":"10.1515/npf-2023-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As weather disasters intensify under the impacts of climate change, an important public policy question is whether the kinds of organizations most likely to provide disaster relief are themselves planning for climate change. A statewide Indiana survey of the leaders of a wide variety of community “social safety net” organizations ( N = 467) provides rich descriptive data to understand the realities of local disaster planning as it relates to climate change. Our findings support federal disaster policy in showing first that most of these charities have been or expect to be involved in local disaster relief, either as a primary or secondary mission focus. Charities identifying as primarily disaster responders are much more likely to belong to local emergency planning networks and slightly more likely to plan for emergencies. However, most charity leaders do not acknowledge climate change’s human origins and have not discussed climate change at the board level, with this position strongly related to their understanding of climate change’s potential impact on the communities they serve. And most have not taken some risk mitigation steps. We conclude that the Federal Emergency Management Authority’s national disaster response policy, which relies on the readiness of nonprofits to fill in service roles, does not account for the potential unpreparedness of nonprofits themselves. Policymakers should expand their “whole-community” (three-sector) approach to reinforce local network opportunities as forums for exchanging experience and knowledge, including an explicit linkage between the communication of the science of climate change and emergency planning.","PeriodicalId":44152,"journal":{"name":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","volume":"141 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nonprofit Disaster Response and Climate Change: Who Responds? Who Plans?\",\"authors\":\"Beth Gazley, Rachel Cash\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/npf-2023-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract As weather disasters intensify under the impacts of climate change, an important public policy question is whether the kinds of organizations most likely to provide disaster relief are themselves planning for climate change. A statewide Indiana survey of the leaders of a wide variety of community “social safety net” organizations ( N = 467) provides rich descriptive data to understand the realities of local disaster planning as it relates to climate change. Our findings support federal disaster policy in showing first that most of these charities have been or expect to be involved in local disaster relief, either as a primary or secondary mission focus. Charities identifying as primarily disaster responders are much more likely to belong to local emergency planning networks and slightly more likely to plan for emergencies. However, most charity leaders do not acknowledge climate change’s human origins and have not discussed climate change at the board level, with this position strongly related to their understanding of climate change’s potential impact on the communities they serve. And most have not taken some risk mitigation steps. We conclude that the Federal Emergency Management Authority’s national disaster response policy, which relies on the readiness of nonprofits to fill in service roles, does not account for the potential unpreparedness of nonprofits themselves. Policymakers should expand their “whole-community” (three-sector) approach to reinforce local network opportunities as forums for exchanging experience and knowledge, including an explicit linkage between the communication of the science of climate change and emergency planning.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nonprofit Policy Forum\",\"volume\":\"141 5\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nonprofit Policy Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2023-0017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2023-0017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着气候变化影响下天气灾害的加剧,一个重要的公共政策问题是,最有可能提供救灾的组织本身是否在为气候变化做规划。印第安纳州对各种社区“社会安全网”组织(N = 467)的领导人进行了一项全州范围的调查,提供了丰富的描述性数据,以了解与气候变化有关的当地灾害规划的现实情况。我们的研究结果支持了联邦救灾政策,首先表明这些慈善机构中的大多数已经或期望参与当地救灾,无论是作为主要的还是次要的任务重点。被认定为主要救灾机构的慈善机构更有可能属于当地应急规划网络,并且更有可能为紧急情况制定计划。然而,大多数慈善机构领导人不承认气候变化的人类起源,也没有在董事会层面讨论气候变化,这与他们对气候变化对他们所服务的社区的潜在影响的理解密切相关。而且大多数都没有采取一些降低风险的措施。我们得出的结论是,联邦紧急事务管理局的国家灾难应对政策依赖于非营利组织填补服务角色的准备,并没有考虑到非营利组织本身潜在的准备不足。决策者应该扩大他们的“全社区”(三部门)方法,以加强作为交流经验和知识论坛的地方网络机会,包括在气候变化科学的传播和应急规划之间建立明确的联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Nonprofit Disaster Response and Climate Change: Who Responds? Who Plans?
Abstract As weather disasters intensify under the impacts of climate change, an important public policy question is whether the kinds of organizations most likely to provide disaster relief are themselves planning for climate change. A statewide Indiana survey of the leaders of a wide variety of community “social safety net” organizations ( N = 467) provides rich descriptive data to understand the realities of local disaster planning as it relates to climate change. Our findings support federal disaster policy in showing first that most of these charities have been or expect to be involved in local disaster relief, either as a primary or secondary mission focus. Charities identifying as primarily disaster responders are much more likely to belong to local emergency planning networks and slightly more likely to plan for emergencies. However, most charity leaders do not acknowledge climate change’s human origins and have not discussed climate change at the board level, with this position strongly related to their understanding of climate change’s potential impact on the communities they serve. And most have not taken some risk mitigation steps. We conclude that the Federal Emergency Management Authority’s national disaster response policy, which relies on the readiness of nonprofits to fill in service roles, does not account for the potential unpreparedness of nonprofits themselves. Policymakers should expand their “whole-community” (three-sector) approach to reinforce local network opportunities as forums for exchanging experience and knowledge, including an explicit linkage between the communication of the science of climate change and emergency planning.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nonprofit Policy Forum
Nonprofit Policy Forum PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
23
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Avoiding Burnout with Compassionate Accompaniment: A Novel Approach to Training, Selecting, Managing, and Regulating Frontline Workers Nonprofit Disaster Response and Climate Change: Who Responds? Who Plans? The Rise of Learning Pods: Civil Society’s Expanding Role in K-12 Education in the United States Rereading Salamon: Why Voluntary Failure Theory is Not (Really) About Voluntary Failures Frontmatter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1