Advertisement

Assessing the Effectiveness of Civil Protection at National and EU Levels

  • Sten WidmalmEmail author
  • Charles F. Parker
  • Thomas Persson
Chapter
Part of the European Administrative Governance book series (EAGOV)

Abstract

In this chapter, the authors investigate the extent to which social capital and the structure and culture of public administration correlate with perceptions of the effectiveness of civil protection at both national and EU levels. They address this issue with the aid of survey data to shed light on how practitioners and officials working with civil protection think about the performance and effectiveness of agencies in this area. The main finding is that both trust-related and organizational factors matter for perceived effectiveness. The results show that, if civil protection is to work well and to be perceived as effective by those working in the area, then social capital in the form of trust is vital: trust levels must be high, loyalty prized, and professionalism valued. Organizational factors are clearly crucial too: in particular, the importance of hierarchy and rule-governance stands out.

Bibliography

  1. Anderson, C. (1998). When in Doubt, Use Proxies: Attitudes Toward Domestic Politics and Support for European Integration. Comparative Political Studies, 31(5), 569–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ansell, C., Boin, A., & Keller, A. (2010). Managing Transboundary Crises: Identifying the Building Blocks of an Effective Response System. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 18(4), 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armingeon, K., & Ceka, B. (2013). The Loss of Trust in the European Union During the Great Recession Since 2007: The Role of Heuristics from the National Political System. European Union Politics, 15(1), 82–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Backman, S., & Rhinard, M. (2018). The European Union’s Capacities for Managing Crises. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(2), 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boin, A., & ‘t Hart, P. (2010). Organising for Effective Emergency Management: Lessons from Research. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69(4), 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boin, A., Ekengren, M., & Rhinard, M. (2013). The European Union as Crisis Manager: Patterns and Prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boin, A., Rhinard, M., & Ekengren, M. (2014a). Managing Transboundary Crises: The Emergence of European Union Capacity. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 22(3), 131–142.Google Scholar
  8. Boin, A., Busuioc, M., & Groenleer, M. (2014b). Building European Union Capacity to Manage Transboundary Crises: Network or Lead-Agency Model? Regulation & Governance, 8(4), 418–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bossong, R., & Hegemann, H. (Eds.). (2015). European Civil Security Governance: Diversity and Cooperation in Crisis and Disaster Management. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. H. (2016a). Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy. Public Administration Review, 76(6), 887–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Christensen, T., Danielsen, O. A., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. (2016b). Comparing Coordination Structures for Crisis Management in Six Countries. Public Administration, 94(2), 316–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Commission of the European Communities. (2012, June). Civil Protection, Special Eurobarometer 383. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Communication.Google Scholar
  13. Commission of the European Communities. (2015, May). Civil Protection, Special Eurobarometer 433. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Communication.Google Scholar
  14. Commission of the European Communities. (2017, May). Civil Protection, Special Eurobarometer 454. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Communication.Google Scholar
  15. Easton, D. (1965). A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  16. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Gruening, G. (2001). Origin and Theoretical Basis of New Public Management. International Public Management Journal, 4(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harteveld, E., van der Meer, T., & De Vries, C. E. (2013). In Europe We Trust? Exploring Three Logics of Trust in the European Union. European Union Politics, 14(4), 542–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hayek, F. A. (1960). The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kapucu, N. (2006). Interagency Communication Networks During Emergencies: Boundary Spanners in Multiagency Coordination. American Review of Public Administration, 36(2), 207–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kapucu, N., & Ustun, Y. (2017). Collaborative Crisis Management and Leadership in the Public Sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(7), 329–341.Google Scholar
  22. Kramer, R. (1999). Trust and Distrust in Organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kramer, R. (2004). Collective Paranoia: Distrust between Social Groups. In R. Hardin (Ed.), Distrust (pp. 136–166). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  24. Kuipers, S., Boin, A., Bossong, R., & Hegemann, H. (2015). Building Joint Crisis Management Capacity? Comparing Civil Security Systems in 22 European Countries. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 6(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McGuire, M., Brudney, J., & Gazley, B. (2010). The “New Emergency Management”: Applying the Lessons from Collaborative Governance to Twenty-First-Century Emergency Planning. In R. O’Leary, D. Van Slyke, & S. Kim (Eds.), The Future of Public Administration Around the World (pp. 117–128). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Missiroli, A. (2006). Disasters Past and Present: New Challenges for the EU. Journal of European Integration, 28(5), 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Muños, J. (2017). Political Trust and Multilevel Government. In S. Zmerli & T. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on Political Trust (pp. 69–88). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Newton, K., & Norris, P. (2000). Confidence in Public Institutions. Faith, Culture, or Performance? In S. J. Pharr & R. D. Putnam (Eds.), Disaffected Democracies: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Countries? (pp. 52–73). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Newton, K., & Zmerli, S. (2011). Three Forms of Trust and Their Association. European Political Science Review, 3(2), 169–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Norris, P. (2017). The Conceptual Framework of Political Support. In S. Zmerli & T. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on Political Trust (pp. 19–32). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nowak, A. (Ed.). (2006). Civilian Crisis Management: The EU Way. Chaillot Paper No 90. Paris: Institute for Security Studies.Google Scholar
  32. Ostrom, V., & Ostrom, E. (1971). Public Choice: A Different Approach to the Study of Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 31(2), 203–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Parker, C. F., & Stern, E. K. (2002). Blindsided? September 11 and the Origins of Strategic Surprise. Political Psychology, 23(3), 601–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Parker, C. F., Persson, T., & Widmalm, S. (2018). The Effectiveness of National and EU-Level Civil Protection Systems: Evidence from 17 Member States. Journal of European Public Policy.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1523219.
  35. Parker, C. F., Stern, E., Paglia, E., & Brown, C. (2009). Preventable Catastrophe? The Hurricane Katrina Disaster Revisited. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 17(4), 206–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Patton, A. (2007). Collaborative Emergency Management. In W. Waugh & K. Tierney (Eds.), Emergency Management: Principles and Practice for Local Government (pp. 71–84). Washington, DC: ICMA.Google Scholar
  37. Persson, T., Parker, C., & Widmalm, S. (2017). Social Trust, Impartial Administration and Public Confidence in EU Crisis Management Institutions. Public Administration, 95(1), 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rondinelli, D. A. (1981). Government Decentralization in Comparative Perspective—Theory and Practice. International Review of Administrative Science, 47(2), 133–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rykkja, L. H., & Lægreid, P. (2014). Coordinating for Crisis Management in Norway after the Terrorist Attack in 2011. In P. Lægreid, K. Sarapuu, L. H. Rykkja, & T. Randma-Liiv (Eds.), Organizing for Coordination in the Public Sector: Practices and Lessons from 12 European Countries (pp. 66–77). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van der Meer, T., & Zmerli, S. (2017). The Deeply Rooted Concern with Political Trust. In S. Zmerli & T. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on Political Trust (pp. 1–18). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Waugh, W. L., & Streib, G. (2006). Collaboration and Leadership for Effective Emergency Management. Public Administration Review, 66(SI), 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Widmalm, S. (2008). Decentralisation, Corruption and Social Capita: From India to the West. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, and Singapore: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Young, O. R. (1994). International Governance. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Young, O. R. (2001). Inferences and Indices: Evaluating the Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes. Global Environmental Politics, 1(1), 99–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Závecz, G. (2017). Post-Communist Societies of Central and Eastern Europe. In S. Zmerli & T. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on Political Trust (pp. 440–460). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sten Widmalm
    • 1
    Email author
  • Charles F. Parker
    • 2
  • Thomas Persson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GovernmentUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Government Centre of Natural Hazards and Disaster Science (CNDS)Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations