Search results

This report provides a synthesis of the results of three CARISMAND Stakeholder Assemblies held in A) Bucharest,Romania on April 14-15, 2016; B) Rome,Italy on February 27-28, 2017; and C) Lisbon,Portugal on February 27-28, 2018. These Stakeholder Assemblies, together with six Citizen Summits (see Deliverables D5.3 – D5.9) were part of the CARISMAND cycle of events (see Figure 1 below). This cycle of events was the key concept at the core of the CARISMAND project which aimed to ensure a comprehensive feedback loop betweendisaster practitioners and citizens. It also allowed for the progression of ideas co-created by disaster practitioners and citizens. The locations of the three Stakeholder Assemblies were chosen due to their rather different "backgrounds". The three countries had been struck at the time of the respective event by different types of disasters. In addition, the three countries have very different "cultures", or cultural impacts, at a societal level. Romania has a comparatively strong authoritative systems due to its political history; Italy has experienced a strong direct in-flow of migrants in the last years due to its geological location; and Portugal has long been a traditional "melting pot" where, over more than a millennium, people from different cultural backgrounds and ethnic origins (in particular North Africa, South America, and Europe) have lived together. Accordingly, these differences were expected to allow a wide range of practitioners' attitudes and perceptions related to cultural factors in disaster management to emerge. In order to not only gather a variety of attitudes and perceptions but also promote cross-sectional knowledge transfer, the audience in all three events consisted of a wide range of practitioners who are typically involved in disaster management, e.g., civil protection agencies , the emergency services, paramedics, nurses, environmental protection agencies, the Red Cross, firefighters, the military, and the police. Further, these practitioners were from several regions in the respective country; in Portugal, the Stakeholder Assembly also included practitioners from the island of Madeira. The 40-60 participants per event were recruited via invitations sent to various organisations and institutions that play a role in disaster management, and via direct contacts of local partners in the CARISMAND consortium. Each assembly consisted of a mix of presentations and discussion groups to combine dissemination with information gathering (for detailed schedules see Appendices A1-A3). In an initial general assembly, the event started with presentations of the CARISMAND project and its main goals and concepts. Then, participants were split into small working groups in separate breakout rooms, where they discussed and provided feedback on a specific topic. After each working group session, panel discussions allowed the participants to present the results of their working group to the rest of the audience. After each panel discussion, keynote speakers gave presentations related to the topic that had been discussed during the working groups. This schedule was designed to ensure that participants are provided with detailed information about recent developments in disaster management, but without influencing the attitudes and perceptions expressed in the working groups. In the third Stakeholder Assembly, different sets of recommendations for practitioners (related to the use of cultural factors in disaster management) were presented to the general audience, followed by small discussion group sessions as described above. ; The project was co-funded by the European Commission within the Horizon2020 Programme (2014–2020). ; peer-reviewed

This report provides a summary of the topics discussed and the results of the third CARISMAND Stakeholder Assembly conducted in Lisbon, Portugal on 27-28 February 2018. In order to promote cross-sectional knowledge transfer and gather a variety of attitudes and perceptions, as in the first and second CARISMAND Stakeholder Assemblies held in Romania and Italy in the previous years, the audience consisted of a wide range of practitioners who are typically involved in disaster management, e.g., civil protection, the emergency services, paramedics, nurses, environmental protection, Red Cross, firefighters, military, and the police. Further, these practitioners were from several regions in Portugal, including the island of Madeira. The 40 participants were recruited via invitations sent to various Portuguese organisations and institutions, and via direct contacts of the Civil Protection Department in Lisbon which is one of the partners in the CARISMAND consortium. The event consisted of a mix of presentations and discussion groups to combine dissemination with information gathering (for the detailed schedule/programme see Appendix 1). Furthermore, this third Stakeholder Assembly was organised and specifically designed to discuss and collect feedback on a comprehensive set of recommendations for disaster practitioners, which will form one of the core elements of the CARISMAND Work Package 9 'Toolkit'. These recommendations, which have all been formulated on the basis of Work Packages 2-10 results, were structured in four, main "sets": 1. Approaches to ethnicity in disaster management; 2. Culturally aware disaster-related training activities; 3. Cultural factors in disaster communication, with the sub-sets: a. Cultural values and emotions; (cross-)cultural symbols; "physical" aides and methods; b. Involvement of cultural leaders; involvement of specific groups; usage of social media and mobile phone apps; and 4. Improving trust, improving disaster management. In an initial general assembly, the event started with presentations of the CARISMAND project and its main goals and concepts, including the concept of culture adopted by CARISMAND, and the planned CARISMAND Toolkit architecture and functionalities. These were followed by a detailed presentation of the first of the above mentioned sets of recommendations for practitioners. Then, participants of the Stakeholder Assembly were split into small groups in separate breakout rooms, where they discussed and provided feedback to the presented recommendations. Over the course of the 2-day event, this procedure was followed for all four sets of recommendations. To follow the cyclical design of CARISMAND events, and wherever meaningful and possible, the respective Toolkit recommendations for practitioners provided also the basis for a respective "shadow" recommendation for citizens which will be discussed accordingly in the last round of CARISMAND Citizen Summits (Citizen Summit 5 in Lisbon, and Citizen Summit 6 in Utrecht) in 2018. The location of the Third Stakeholder Assembly was selected to make use of the extensive local professional network of the Civil Protection Department in Lisbon, but also due to Portugal being a traditional "melting pot" where, over more than a millennium, people from different cultural backgrounds and local/ethnical origins (in particular Africa, South America, and Europe) have lived both alongside and together. All documents related to the Working Groups, i.e. discussion guidelines and consent forms, were translated into Portuguese. Accordingly, all presentations, as well as the group discussions were held in Portuguese, aiming to avoid any language/education-related access restrictions, and allowing participating practitioners to respond intuitively and discuss freely in their native language. For this purpose, simultaneous interpreters and professional local moderators were contracted via a local market research agency (EquaçãoLógica), which also provided the basic data analysis of all Working Group discussions and an independent qualitative evaluation of all recommendations presented in the event. The results of this analysis and evaluation will demonstrate that most recommendations were seen by the participating practitioners to be relevant and useful. In particular, those recommendations related to the use of cultural symbols and the potential of mobile phone apps and/or social media were perceived as stimulating and thought-provoking. Some recommendations were felt to be less relevant in the specific Portuguese context, but accepted as useful in other locations; a very small number was perceived to be better addressed to policy makers rather than practitioners. These and all other suggestions for improvement of the presented CARISMAND Toolkit recommendations for practitioners have been taken up and will be outlined in the final chapter of this report. ; The project was co-funded by the European Commission within the Horizon2020 Programme (2014-2020). ; peer-reviewed

This report provides a summary of the topics discussed and the results of the CARISMAND Second Stakeholder Assembly conducted in Rome, Italy on 27-28 February 2017. In order to promote cross-sectional knowledge transfer, as in the CARISMAND First Stakeholder Assembly held in Romania in the previous year, the audience consisted of a wide range of practitioners that are typically involved in disaster management, e.g., civil protection, the emergency services, paramedics, nurses, environmental protection, Red Cross, fire-fighters, military, the police, and other non-governmental organisations. Further, these practitioners were from several regions in Italy, e.g., Rome and Lazio, Toscana, Emilia-Romagna, and Valle D'Aosta. The participants, who varied between 40 and 60, were recruited via invitations sent to various Italian organisations and institutions (at the national, regional and local levels), and via direct contacts of the Protezione Civile Comune di Firenze who are one of the Italian partners in the CARISMAND Consortium. The event consisted of a mix of presentations, working groups, and panel discussions for these participating practitioners, in order to combine dissemination with information gathering (for the detailed schedule/programme please see Appendix 1). After an initial general assembly where the CARISMAND project and its main goals were presented, the participants of the Stakeholder Assembly were split into small groups in separate breakout rooms, where over the course of the two days they discussed the following topics: 1) Working Group 1. "Culture & Risk": Practical Experience of Cultural Aspects Disaster Communication between Practitioners and Citizens; 2) Working Group 2. "Media Culture & Disasters": The Use of Social Media and Mobile Phone Applications in Disasters; 3) Working Groups 3. "Social Cohesion & Social Corrosion": Cultures, Communities, and Trust. After each working group session, panel discussions allowed the participants to present the results of their working group to the rest of the audience. After each panel discussion, keynote speakers gave presentations related to the respective working group's topic. This time schedule was designed to ensure that participants are provided with detailed information about recent developments in disaster management, e.g. related to the use of mobile phone apps and social media, but without influencing their attitudes and perceptions expressed in the working groups. The main focus of the working groups was the relationships between culture and risk/disaster communication, the role of social media and smartphone apps, and trust between citizens and disaster managers and/or authorities. These topics, and the questions discussed within each working group, were chosen:  following the findings of the CARISMAND First Stakeholder Assembly held in Bucharest, in particular regarding the disconnection between citizens' risk perception and cultural factors in disasters; 1) the results of the CARISMAND First and Second Citizen Summits held in Bucharest and Malta respectively, specifically taking up the participants' suggestions regarding vulnerable groups and groups that are seen to be potentially helpful in disaster situations; 2) the results of Work Package 3 'Cultural Factors and Technologies', in particular regarding the increasing interest in mobile phone apps compared to social media usage; 3) the literature review provided in Work Package 4 'Risk Perception and Risk Cultures', particularly regarding the ambivalent of role of trust in disaster preparedness, response and recovery; 4) the preliminary findings of Work Package 7 'Citizens Empowerment', in respect to community cohesion and specific opportunities for citizen empowerment; and 5) topics highlighted in Work Package 8 'Risk Communication and the Role of the Media in Risk Communication' regarding disaster communication practices (particularly in connection with social media/apps usage as identified in Work Package 3 'Cultural Factors and Technologies'). These topics were also chosen in order to provide a sound basis for the next round of CARISMAND events (Third and Fourth CARISMAND Citizen Summits held, later, in Rome and Frankfurt in June 2017), i.e. exploring issues of risk perception and culture in the context of disasters at the very point, where practitioners and citizens interact. The location of the Second Stakeholder Assembly was selected to make use of the extensive local professional network of the Protezione Civile, but also due to Italy being a location where various "types" of hazards are prevalent, and disasters were occurred in the very recent past. All documents related to the Working Groups, i.e. discussion guidelines and consent forms, were translated into Italian. Accordingly, all presentations as well as the group discussions were held in Italian, aiming to avoid any language/education-related access restrictions, and allowing participating practitioners to respond intuitively and discuss freely in their native language. For this purpose, researchers from the Laboratory of Sciences Citizenship in Rome, one of the CARISMAND Consortium members, were used as Working Group moderators, alongside simultaneous interpreters and professional local moderators contracted via a local market research agency (RFR International), who also provided the transcripts and translations into English for all Working Group discussions. It is important to note that the discussions within these working groups reflect the participants' perceptions and may or may not reflect the realities of how communication actually occurs in disaster situations. ; The project was co-funded by the European Commission within the Horizon2020 Programme (2014-2020). ; peer-reviewed

The analyses and results in this document are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviour of European citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime. This study was undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Data were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil quotas and reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The survey consisted of 50 questions and sub-questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union. Overall, 5,361 respondents from 28 countries completed the questionnaire. Results reveal that more citizens feel insecure in the presence of surveillance than feel secure. At the same time, only a minority of citizens feel that they are well informed about laws and regulations regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance, and only a small minority feel that these laws and regulations are effective. Amongst those who feel they are not informed about laws and regulations two thirds think that the laws are not effective and only a small minority think they are effective. Whereas, of those who feel informed, only one third think laws are not effective, and another third think they are effective, i.e., increasing the perceived knowledge about law appears to increase citizens' perceived effectiveness of these laws. Although the majority of citizens feel insecure rather than secure in the presence of surveillance, the majority of those who perceive laws and regulations regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance as effective feel secure in the presence of surveillance. Therefore, increasing the perceived effectiveness of data protection laws related to surveillance is likely to substantially increase citizens' feelings of security in the presence of surveillance. The study also revealed that the link between citizens' feeling of security/insecurity and perceived effectiveness of laws and regulations is stronger than the link between feelings of security/insecurity and perceived effectiveness of surveillance measures themselves. Overall, a majority of citizens feel happy with CCTV but generally unhappy with the other types of surveillance investigated. The relationship between feeling insecure in the presence of surveillance and feeling happy or unhappy with surveillance appears to be stronger than the link between feelings of security in the presence of surveillance and feeling happy or unhappy with surveillance. More research is needed to disentangle these relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' feelings about the general quality of life. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for Malta within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in Malta for age and gender). Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between February and March 2014. The sample is based on the responses from 260 individuals who indicated Malta as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Maltese respondents indicated overall a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. Further, the majority of respondents feel more unhappy than happy with the different types of surveillance (except CCTV), and they feel also unhappy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it. Additionally, there is a link between feeling happy, or unhappy, about surveillance and feeling secure or insecure through the presence of surveillance. A large number of Maltese respondents appear to have two distinct, and very different, reactions to surveillance. Some people feel secure in the presence of surveillance, but in others surveillance produces feelings of insecurity. However, analyses also indicate that increasing the effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance, more than increasing the effectiveness of surveillance measures itself, may make citizens feel more secure. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for Slovakia within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in Slovakia for age and gender. Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014, face to face interviews were carried out during the same period. The Slovakian quota sample is based on the responses from 200 individuals (total sample: 352 respondents) who indicated Slovakia as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face., the Slovakian respondents indicated a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. Further, the majority of respondents feel more unhappy than happy with the different types of surveillance, and they feel most unhappy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it. At the same time, the majority of Slovakian respondents feel insecure in the presence of surveillance whilst only in a small minority surveillance produces feelings of security, but there is only a weak link between feeling happy, or unhappy, about surveillance and feeling secure or insecure through the presence of surveillance. However, analyses also indicate that increasing citizens' belief in the effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance may make reduce citizens' feelings of insecurity more than only increasing the effectiveness of surveillance measures. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for Slovenia within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in Slovenia for age and gender. Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between December 2013 and February 2014. The Slovenian sample is based on the responses from 200 individuals who indicated Slovenia as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Slovenian respondents felt more insecure than secure in the presence of surveillance, and they indicated a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. Further, the majority of respondents also feel more unhappy than happy with the different types of surveillance investigated, and they feel most unhappy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it. Analyses also indicate that whilst feeling happy or unhappy with surveillance is only weakly related to feeling more secure or insecure in the presence of surveillance, an increased belief in the effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance may make citizens feel more secure. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for Austria within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in Austria for age and gender. Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between January and March 2014. The sample is based on the responses from 135 individuals who indicated Austria as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Austrian respondents overall felt more insecure than secure in the presence of surveillance, and they indicated a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. Further, the majority of respondents also feel more unhappy than happy with the different types of surveillance investigated, and they feel also unhappy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it. Additionally, there is a link between feeling happy, or unhappy, about surveillance and feeling secure or insecure through the presence of surveillance. However, analyses also indicate that increasing the perceived effectiveness of surveillance measures and, in particular, increasing the perceived effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance may make citizens feel more secure. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for the Czech Republic within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in the Czech Republic for age and gender (based on Eurostat data of 12/2012). Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between January and March 2014. The Czech sample is based on the responses from 200 individuals who indicated the Czech Republic as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Czech respondents indicated a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. At the same time, it depends on the specific type of surveillance measure whether respondents feel more unhappy or happy with it. But despite the respondents' general perception of surveillance measures being useful, surveillance measures currently reduce feelings of insecurity in less than 1 in 5 people, whereas in 1 out of 3 respondents the presence of surveillance produces feelings of insecurity. Analyses also indicate that the Czech respondents' feeling happy or unhappy with surveillance is only weakly to moderately related to feeling more secure or insecure in the presence of surveillance, and that neither an increased belief in the general effectiveness of surveillance nor in the effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance may make citizens feel more secure. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for Bulgaria within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in Bulgaria for age and gender. Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between December 2013 and January 2014. The sample is based on the responses from 200 individuals who indicated Bulgaria as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Bulgarian respondents indicated overall a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. The majority of respondents feel more unhappy than happy with the different types of surveillance (except CCTV), and they feel also unhappy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it, but there is only a weak link between feeling happy, or unhappy, about surveillance and feeling secure or insecure through the presence of surveillance. At the same time, and despite the respondents' general perception of surveillance measures being useful, surveillance measures currently appear not to reduce their feelings of insecurity. Although analyses also indicate that increasing the perceived effectiveness of CCTV may increase citizens' feelings of security in the presence of surveillance to a certain extent, increasing the perceived effectiveness of the other measures of surveillance may not have the same effect. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

This document presents the results for Romania within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in Romania for age and gender. Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between December 2013 and March 2014. The sample is based on the responses from 200 individuals who indicated Romania as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Romanian respondents indicated a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. Further, the majority of respondents feel more happy than unhappy with the different types of surveillance (except surveillance using databases containing personal information), but they feel more unhappy than happy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it. Additionally, there is no link between feeling happy, or unhappy, about surveillance and feeling secure or insecure through the presence of surveillance. Romanian respondents appear to have two distinct, and very different, reactions to surveillance. Some people feel secure in the presence of surveillance, but in others surveillance produces feelings of insecurity. However, analyses also indicate that increasing citizens' belief in the effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance may make reduce citizens' feelings of insecurity more than only increasing the effectiveness of surveillance measures. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed

AbstractThis study investigates how citizens perceive the role of mobile phone apps specifically designed for disaster communication, and how these perceptions may differ from perceived roles and functions of social media in disaster‐related tasks/situations. Focusing on trust in authorities and technology use, results suggest that social media use not only fosters trust via shared narratives and collective sense‐making but may also improve trust relationships through local authorities assuming the function of a trustworthy information provider. In disaster apps usage, trust between citizens and authorities is generated through perceptions of shared responsibility rather than shared narratives. Apps were seen as mechanisms that reveal authorities' general willingness to share control, which may help overcome citizens' perceptions that they are distrusted by authorities.

This document presents the results for the Netherlands within the framework of a larger study undertaken as part of the RESPECT project – "Rules, Expectations and Security through Privacy-enhanced Convenient Technologies" (RESPECT; G.A. 285582) – which was co-financed by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme (2007-2013). Analyses are based on a survey regarding the perceptions, feelings, attitudes and behaviours of citizens towards surveillance for the purpose of fighting crime, carried out amongst a quota sample that is representative of the population in the Netherlands for age and gender. Responses were gathered, predominantly, through an online survey supplemented by a number of questionnaires administered in face to face interviews, in order to fulfil the quota and also reach those citizens who do not use the internet. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions and was available online in all languages of the European Union between November 2013 and March 2014. The face to face interviews were carried out between November 2013 and January 2014. The Dutch sample is based on the responses from 350 individuals who indicated the Netherlands as their country of residence in the online survey or were administered the questionnaire face to face. As a result, the Dutch respondents indicated a strongly felt lack of trust in the protection of, and control over, personal information gathered via surveillance. Further, the majority of respondents feel more unhappy than happy with the different types of surveillance (except CCTV), and they feel also unhappy about surveillance taking place without them knowing about it. Additionally, there is a link between feeling happy, or unhappy, about surveillance and feeling secure or insecure through the presence of surveillance. A large number of Dutch respondents appear to have two distinct, and very different, reactions to surveillance. Some people feel secure in the presence of surveillance, but in others surveillance produces feelings of insecurity. However, analyses also indicate that increasing the perceived effectiveness of surveillance measures and increasing the perceived effectiveness of laws regarding the protection of personal data gathered via surveillance may make citizens feel more secure. More research is needed to disentangle the relationships and effects between surveillance measures, feelings of security or insecurity, and citizens' general quality of life feelings. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 285582. ; peer-reviewed