Representative bureaucracy and COVID‐19 among local emergency response professionals

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1002/rhc3.12293

Sean Hildebrand, Matthew Malone

{"title":"Representative bureaucracy and COVID‐19 among local emergency response professionals","authors":"Sean Hildebrand, Matthew Malone","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the opinions of local emergency management professionals with regard to the response of the US federal government to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The responses to a survey from May/June 2020 demonstrate that these feelings, ranging from highly successful to extremely poor, are reflective of the culture at large in the nation. The study will examine whether the feelings expressed by local officials are reflective of prevailing political leanings of their constituency, measured as the presidential voting habits from 2000 to 2020 in the respondent's jurisdiction. This will extend Hildebrand's (2020) testing which linked the emergency management field to the theory of “representative bureaucracy.” This theory surmises that government actors will be reflective of their body politic in their behavior and attitudes toward federal initiatives. The findings suggest that those who represent “Strong Republican” jurisdictions have greater odds in rating the federal response as being effective, and that those from “Strong Democrat” locations will have greater odds in rating the federal response as not effective at all. Statistical testing also suggests that as the population of the jurisdiction increases, the less likely the respondent was to consider the federal response to COVID‐19 effective.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":"141 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article considers the opinions of local emergency management professionals with regard to the response of the US federal government to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The responses to a survey from May/June 2020 demonstrate that these feelings, ranging from highly successful to extremely poor, are reflective of the culture at large in the nation. The study will examine whether the feelings expressed by local officials are reflective of prevailing political leanings of their constituency, measured as the presidential voting habits from 2000 to 2020 in the respondent's jurisdiction. This will extend Hildebrand's (2020) testing which linked the emergency management field to the theory of “representative bureaucracy.” This theory surmises that government actors will be reflective of their body politic in their behavior and attitudes toward federal initiatives. The findings suggest that those who represent “Strong Republican” jurisdictions have greater odds in rating the federal response as being effective, and that those from “Strong Democrat” locations will have greater odds in rating the federal response as not effective at all. Statistical testing also suggests that as the population of the jurisdiction increases, the less likely the respondent was to consider the federal response to COVID‐19 effective.

查看原文本刊更多论文

地方应急专业人员中具有代表性的官僚主义和 COVID-19

本文探讨了地方应急管理专业人员对美国联邦政府应对 COVID-19 大流行的看法。对 2020 年 5 月/6 月进行的一项调查的答复表明，这些感受从非常成功到极其糟糕不等，反映了美国的整体文化。本研究将考察地方官员所表达的感受是否反映了其选区的普遍政治倾向（以受访者所在辖区 2000 年至 2020 年的总统投票习惯为衡量标准）。这将扩展希尔德布兰德（2020 年）的测试，该测试将应急管理领域与 "代议制官僚机构 "理论联系起来。该理论推测，政府行为者的行为和对联邦倡议的态度将反映其政治体制。研究结果表明，"共和党强势 "辖区的代表更有可能将联邦应对措施评为有效，而 "民主党强势 "辖区的代表则更有可能将联邦应对措施评为无效。统计测试还表明，随着辖区人口的增加，受访者认为联邦应对 COVID-19 的措施有效的可能性越小。

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

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-

CiteScore

7.50

自引率

8.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.