Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the empirical literature on the resilience of firefighters related to potentially traumatic events (PTE). This paper identifies how resilience is defined in this particular research field, reveals trends in applied research methods and examines the main topics addressed in previous research.Design/methodology/approachWeb of Science, PsycARTICLES and Google Scholar databases were searched, as well as a secondary manual screening of the reference lists of all the selected studies and Dutch academic journals. Based on this review, 54 empirical articles were included in the current paper.FindingsFirstly, this paper revealed that there is no consensus in how to define the concept of resilience in this specific research area. A second observation was that most of the selected studies used a quantitative, cross-sectional research design. Finally, the 54 empirical studies provided insights on six topics: the role of the organization, demographic factors, personal characteristics, coping strategies, social support and the reactions of firefighters in the aftermath of PTE. Comparing the empirical results was challenged by the different interpretations and denominations of the concept of resilience and the myriad of measurement techniques applied across the selected articles.Originality/valueThis literature review discovered some promising avenues for future research regarding resilience of firefighters. Moreover, it demonstrated that studying resilience is particularly interesting as the identification of supporting factors leads to a better understanding of how to enhance the well-being, job satisfaction and job performance of firefighters.

Policy advisory systems, which provide evidence-informed policy advice to governments, are put under great pressure in times of crisis. Crisis situations may engender conflicting interpretations by stakeholders about how to respond. These conflicts are compounded by inevitable gaps in knowledge and uncertainties about how the crisis might develop. All governments face challenges beyond their control which can take many forms, ranging from financial and political disruptions through to health pandemics, natural disasters, and threats to national security. Such decision-making pressures were especially evident during the COVID-19 crisis and followed different trajectories in different countries. This introductory article frames a group of research studies that brings new insights into various aspects of how governmental policy advisory systems responded to this crisis. Policy advice was formulated against a backdrop of controversies about how to prioritise health outcomes, economic livelihoods and social interaction. These studies analyse policy advisory systems with particular attention to the quality of the available knowledge base, the disciplinary mix of expertise within advisory bodies, the roles of experts as either trusted insiders or as external commentators, as providers or 'shapers' of knowledge, and the degree of (in)formality in their relationships with politicians. These issues are also investigated in the context of creeping crises, such as climate change. Taken together, the special issue provides new insights into how knowledge provided through policy advisory systems informs crisis governance. In this way, it advances our knowledge of the relationship between experts in policy advisory systems and political decision-makers in times of crisis.

Expert advice played a pivotal role in shaping the COVID-19 policy responses of different countries. Such measures had wide ranging impacts beyond health, including education, economy, law, and other societal aspects. Thus, analysis of how expertise was utilised and adjusted to adapt to changes during the crisis can draw valuable insights into how to better prepare policy advisory systems to respond to future crises. Here we examine the dynamics of COVID-19 policy advisory systems in Belgium and Australia through interviews with 34 experts directly involved during the first two years of the crisis. We examine the temporal changes in how expert advice was sought, provided, and utilised for crisis decision-making, and the various expert groupings and their relationships over time. In both countries, there was policy learning and adjustment, signalled primarily by an expansion in the breadth of perceived relevant expertise as the scope was re-framed from a 'health' crisis to an all-encompassing socio-economic crisis. In Australia, policy responses were shaped by a relatively cohesive inter-governmental group of senior health bureaucrats who became gatekeepers of the evidence presented to state and federal government leaders in the National Cabinet. In Belgium, the more fragmented and changing array of advisory groups reflected tensions within crisis management arrangements, resulting in divergent expert opinions both within the formal advisory groups and in the public realm throughout the crisis. Our findings build on the policy advisory systems and policy learning literature and suggest that more adaptive frameworks and principles be developed for specific contexts.

The use of force by the police and other law enforcement officers has long been a significant topic of concern, especially when it results in death. This issue and the controversies around it have recently been highlighted by a series of high-profile deaths in 2020. Police Lethal Force and Accountability assesses the frequency of deaths, and the availability and reliability of information regarding deaths, associated with the application of force by law enforcement agencies in four jurisdictions: Belgium, England & Wales, France and the Netherlands. By adopting a common set of considerations for assessing the policies and practices within these individual jurisdictions, this report enables comparisons to be made across them. In doing so, we look to provide those in policing agencies, campaigning groups, government ministries and others, with sound information with which they can identify priorities to ensure uses of force are being accurately recorded and investigated. By enabling those concerned to understand how uses of force are recorded and addressed in comparison with other jurisdictions, we hope this report will help them to build a stronger case when holding public institutions accountable and identifying points for improvement. As documented, while deaths from the use of force appear relatively rare across these four jurisdictions when compared to countries such as the US the procedures and policies for recording, investigating and disclosing details associated with deaths are wanting. The availability of official information on the number of deaths associated with the use of force, its reliability, and the extent of details collected on those that die at the hands of the state vary from country to country. While there are elements of good practice, the procedures and policies are often lacking in critical respects. As a result of such deficiencies, it is difficult to assess many important dimensions of policing, including whether some communities are disproportionality subjected to the lethal use of force. Ultimately, reducing the extent of police force requires addressing underlying societal conditions associated with employment, health, housing and education. However, more can be done by law enforcement agencies, as well as by their oversight bodies and government ministers. Assembling data and evidence that is accessible, relevant and useful to those concerned with lethal force is a necessary step to enhance accountability for, and possibly prevent, deaths. In the context of democratic societies, the police and police-related bodies not only need to act on what they know in order to learn lessons, but also to demonstrate they are doing so to the populations they are meant to serve. Every death associated with the use of force by law enforcement officials should be recorded, recognised and investigated. No one's death should go unacknowledged and unexamined.