ABSTRACT
Public security in the face of the current large-scale migration crisis in Central and Eastern Europe, which is the first since World War II, is an issue that should be examined taking into account various criteria (social, economic, political, extreme threat, etc.). The aim of this paper is to answer the research questions: (1) do people in Poland fear migrants? (2) how do they value public safety? To answer the research question, the authors conducted a survey and estimated the value of public safety with the use of the contingent valuation method. Because of the Covid-19 pandemic, the questionnaires were collected online (previously also sent online to academic communities throughout Poland). The research was carried out in Poland in November and December 2021 in an attempt to grasp the migrant crisis at the east- ern EU border. According to the study results, the value of public safety in Poland amounts to PLN 210.8 billion (almost EUR 45 billion). Based on the situation in Central and Eastern Europe in 2022, it was found that most respondents are not afraid of migrants. Such a result should encourage further in-depth analyses of the broadly understood phe- nomena of personal security and social security, taking into account also other empirical variables including.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: This project specifically aims to examine (1) the individual impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on first responders, (2) the organizational impact of COVID-19 on first response agencies and (3) policy and organizational response and support efforts to mitigate potentially harmful effects of the pandemic. Design/methodology/approach: The authors' conducted a mixed-methods analysis, including a review of secondary sources (e.g. government documents, organizational policies and news pieces), state-level policies, encompassing surveys, in-depth semi-structured interviews and PhotoVoice focus groups. Findings: COVID-19 compounded many of the inherent risks facing first responders and added new stressors. First responders assumed added responsibilities during the pandemic which increased workloads, job-related stress, burnout, distance from the community and first responders' feelings of frustration. Even with personal protective equipment (PPE), first responders faced greater exposure to individuals with COVID-19 and were primarily concerned with transmitting the virus to family members, or other members of the first responders' support networks. State-level COVID-19 policies that were geared toward first responders aimed to improve the first responders' personal lives outside of work and mitigate burnout within the profession. First response agencies adapted to the pandemic by implementing a wide range of measures. Practical implications: First responders also identified several weaknesses in the first responders' agencies' approach to the pandemic. To prepare for the next public health emergency, first response agencies should proactively train employees, build up the first responders' supplies of equipment and PPE, implement policies to strengthen their workforce (e.g. increase hiring for understaffed positions, reduce turnover and mitigate role abandonment), allow for greater employee autonomy, improve communication between leaders and employees and prioritize employees' mental health, as well as other factors relating to departments' informal culture. Originality/value: This is one of the largest studies conducted on three types of first responders (police officers, fire firefighters, emergency medical technicians (EMTs) and paramedics) across the United States of America during a public health crisis. © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited.
ABSTRACT
This case study explores Florida's emergency management response during the COVID-19 pandemic. Utilizing the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework and transboundary crisis literature, this article identifies how state attributes, institutions, multi-sector stakeholders, and their interactions may have influenced the state's response to the pandemic. Findings from the content analyses of government policies, documents, and news reports indicate that some aspects of Florida's response were politically motivated, inflexible, and driven by a small circle of advisors, often ignoring expert opinions and the needs of uniquely vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the findings indicate that public health departments had sidelined locally-controlled emergency management departments. This research offers insight into effective decision-making practices during the response phase of a pandemic and contributes knowledge to the literature in emergency management and public administration focusing on transboundary crises.