Crisis Coordination in First Responder Organizations

Helge Renå
{"title":"Crisis Coordination in First Responder Organizations","authors":"Helge Renå","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Crisis coordination as process can be understood as the adjustment of actions and decisions among interdependent actors to achieve specified goals. Coordination during crises typically involves a broad variety of first responder organizations, from professionals, such as emergency agencies and nongovernmental organizations like the Red Cross, to nonprofessional organizations and individuals, who often play a decisive role in crisis response. Traditionally, research on crisis coordination in first responder organizations seemed to be, broadly speaking, divided into two camps. One strand of literature focused on the formal structures of the government and the established first responder organizations and how they are interdependent via hierarchical relations and unity of command. The other strand of literature, with a long history in the field of disaster sociology, has taken a primary interest in the actual coordination that occurs “on the scene” in the immediate aftermath of crises and disasters. From this perspective, the actors involved in crisis coordination are conceptualized as a network of actors that are interrelated via novel structures and relations that emerge and develop as the crisis response unfolds. In the broader literature on coordination, there has been a shift in focus from explaining why coordination mechanisms work to a growing interest in how coordination happens by focusing on the emergent nature of the process of coordination. Following this shift and the scholarly work on organizational improvisation, there seems to be a growing consensus that crisis coordination is enabled by a combination of routinized practices and improvised action. More generally, recent scholarly work builds on the extant perspectives and literatures by seeing them in combination rather than as opposites. Instead of focusing primarily on the formal hierarchical relations in the established first responder organizations or the collaborative networks that emerge at the incident scene, current research tries to theorize how they are intertwined, and when, how, and why they sometimes reinforce each other and sometimes not.","PeriodicalId":203278,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1627","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Crisis coordination as process can be understood as the adjustment of actions and decisions among interdependent actors to achieve specified goals. Coordination during crises typically involves a broad variety of first responder organizations, from professionals, such as emergency agencies and nongovernmental organizations like the Red Cross, to nonprofessional organizations and individuals, who often play a decisive role in crisis response. Traditionally, research on crisis coordination in first responder organizations seemed to be, broadly speaking, divided into two camps. One strand of literature focused on the formal structures of the government and the established first responder organizations and how they are interdependent via hierarchical relations and unity of command. The other strand of literature, with a long history in the field of disaster sociology, has taken a primary interest in the actual coordination that occurs “on the scene” in the immediate aftermath of crises and disasters. From this perspective, the actors involved in crisis coordination are conceptualized as a network of actors that are interrelated via novel structures and relations that emerge and develop as the crisis response unfolds. In the broader literature on coordination, there has been a shift in focus from explaining why coordination mechanisms work to a growing interest in how coordination happens by focusing on the emergent nature of the process of coordination. Following this shift and the scholarly work on organizational improvisation, there seems to be a growing consensus that crisis coordination is enabled by a combination of routinized practices and improvised action. More generally, recent scholarly work builds on the extant perspectives and literatures by seeing them in combination rather than as opposites. Instead of focusing primarily on the formal hierarchical relations in the established first responder organizations or the collaborative networks that emerge at the incident scene, current research tries to theorize how they are intertwined, and when, how, and why they sometimes reinforce each other and sometimes not.
第一反应组织的危机协调
作为过程的危机协调可以理解为相互依赖的行动者之间的行动和决策的调整,以实现特定的目标。危机期间的协调通常涉及各种各样的第一反应组织,从专业人员,如紧急机构和非政府组织,如红十字会,到非专业组织和个人,他们往往在危机应对中发挥决定性作用。传统上,对第一反应组织危机协调的研究大体上分为两大阵营。一种文献集中于政府的正式结构和已建立的第一反应组织,以及它们如何通过等级关系和统一指挥而相互依存。另一派文学在灾难社会学领域有着悠久的历史,主要关注危机和灾难发生后“现场”的实际协调。从这个角度来看,参与危机协调的行为者被概念化为一个行为者网络,这些行为者通过随着危机反应的展开而出现和发展的新结构和关系而相互关联。在关于协调的更广泛的文献中,焦点已经从解释协调机制为何起作用转变为关注协调过程的突发性,从而对协调如何发生越来越感兴趣。随着这种转变和对组织即兴的学术研究,似乎越来越多的人认为,危机协调是通过常规做法和即兴行动的结合来实现的。更一般地说,最近的学术工作是建立在现有观点和文献的基础上,把它们结合起来,而不是对立起来。目前的研究不是主要关注已建立的第一反应组织或事故现场出现的协作网络中的正式等级关系,而是试图理论化它们是如何交织在一起的,以及何时、如何以及为什么它们有时相互加强,有时不相互加强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信