At the external boundary of a disaster response operation: The dynamics of volunteer inclusion

Abstract

In the present article, practices of inclusion of different types of volunteers in the response to a large‐scale forest fire in Sweden are studied. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with three types of voluntary actors. The volunteers were organized to different degrees, from members of organizations and participants in emergent groups to organizationally unaffiliated individuals. Organized volunteers were the most easily included, particularly if they were members of voluntary emergency organizations. It was difficult for volunteers lacking relevant organizational affiliation to be included. Disaster response operations are dynamic, conditions change over time, and tensions between different modes, degrees, and levels of inclusion may arise. However, irrespective of changing conditions, practices of inclusion of highly organized volunteers work best.

Crisis Volunteerism is the New Black?—Exploring the Diversity of Voluntary Engagement in Crisis Management

“…It aims to enable rapid registration and match people's skills with established and expanding organizations' needs. The interview material leaves one, however, to ponder whether this tool is about the distribution of volunteers or if it also relates to what the organization literature refers to as gate-keeping, or if it also is a question of symbolic inclusion of volunteers (Johansson, Danielsson, Kvarnl€ of, & Eriksson, 2018). Thus, words such as scanning, management and control (in relation to volunteers) are frequently used by the major expanding organizations interviewed in this study.…”

Boundary Work to Conduct Business as Usual: Interaction at the Boundary Between the Affected Organization and Emergency Responders

“…Other researchers examining boundary work during emergencies and crises have studied the establishment of boundaries around one workplace established in public places, namely, the incident site (Johansson et al, 2018;Kvarnl€ of, 2015;Kvarnl€ of & Johansson, 2014). Those studies emphasized the interaction between the core actors and the actors in the absolute vicinity of an emergency (e.g., different types of volunteers), often concluding that it is not a matter of mutuality between the parties, but rather a matter of how the core actors control the presence of others by their legitimacy and occupational jurisdiction.…”

“…A review of crisis management literature indicates that the majority of the studies were concerned with the “core” actors, that is, different types of professional preparedness and emergency services (Andersson, Carlstrom, Ahgren, & Berlin, ; Berlin & Carlström, ; Jerzy, ) and organizations working in high‐reliability environments (Hales & Chakravorty, ; Mousavi et al, ; Roberts & Bea, ). Another stream of research examines more “peripheral” emergency actors, particularly different types of organized (Benson, Twigg, & Myers, ; Kapucu, Arslan, & Demiroz, ; Robinson, Murphy, & Bies, ) and unorganized volunteers (Barsky et al, ; Harris et al, ) and their relationship to the core actors (Egan & Tischler, ; Johansson, Danielsson, Eriksson, Kvarnlöf, & Karlsson, ; Kvarnlöf & Johansson, ; Rivera, ; Scanlon, Helsloot, & Groenendaal, ). Peripheral actors such as volunteers are often described as a “mixed blessing” (Barsky et al, ).…”

Reducing Wooden Structure and Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Disaster Risk through Dynamic Risk Assessment and Management

“…Understanding this initiative and supporting their personal safety to prevent the loss of control and skin burns accidents is important [52][53][54]. Their field experience may be advantageous when developing fire characteristics models [55] and their organizational structure may be valuable for handling crisis situations [56][57][58]. Moreover, understanding their initiative may provide a model that can be transferred to other districts for the benefit of fire disaster risk reduction.…”