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

Abstract

Both crisis research and crisis management policy suggest that crisis management experiences a “participatory turn” and it seems to be a renewed interest in the topic of crisis volunteerism. However, the voice of volunteer organizations, paradoxically, appears to be missing in research. This article builds on an interview study (26 interviews) with different types of voluntary organizations in Sweden. It explores two aspects of crisis volunteerism (i) the diversity of crisis volunteerism and (ii) the changing landscape of crisis volunteerism. The Disaster Research Center (DRC) typology is used to understand different types of volunteering and how different organizational types relate to each other. The empirical material shows that a significant amount of voluntary engagement with relevance to crisis management takes place outside the realm of core crisis management actors. An important finding is that the number of avenues where voluntary engagement is needed has expanded, and as a result, we need to engage new volunteer groups in society. Hence, the study suggests a more adaptive and inclusive understanding of the phenomenon of crisis volunteerism.

“A shovel or a shopping cart”: lessons from ten years of disaster response by a student-led volunteer group

“…Most notably, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015) urges states to encourage “civil society, volunteers, organised voluntary work organisations and community-based organisations” to participate and collaborate in disaster response, including giving “space and modalities” to children and youth as “agents of change” (p. 23). However, despite rising expectations for volunteer participation, efforts to systematically analyse crisis volunteerism have been surprisingly limited, particularly in its more informal forms (Strandh and Eklund 2018 ) and among children and young people (Peek 2008 ; Fothergill 2017 ), prompting calls for more situated and diverse understandings of its expression (Whittaker et al 2015 ; Strandh 2019 ). In particular, if volunteer action is to be effectively encouraged and sustained in disaster response there is a practical need to explore the learnings of successful local groups over time (Betten et al, 2021 ), specifically how crisis volunteer groups understand their capabilities and limitations, as well as conditions for effective operation (McLennan et al 2016 ), and how approaches to crisis volunteerism might develop over time and across different disasters (Simsa et al 2019 ).…”

Full issue

“…Traditionally, volunteer participation in ORs has largely been mediated through organizations such as the Home Guard and the Red Cross. Membership of voluntary organizations is a source of legitimacy, and professional responders generally prefer involvement by affiliated volunteers (Johansson et al, 2018;Strandh, 2019) owing to their greater co-ordination and similarity to professional responders (e.g., in terms of screening, training and equipment). Nevertheless, there are challenges involved in collaboration with 6 organized volunteers, such as the balance between autonomy and co-ordination, which even organized volunteers may lack (Phillips, 2016).…”

Editorial: The Contingency Perspective to Crisis Management

“…Meanwhile, in the Swedish case study of Strandh, the need for their inclusion increases when membership of traditional organizations is ageing and declining, and the social impact of crises is more likely to stem from future conflict situations and social unrest than only from forest fires and floods. A diversification of volunteer involvement in preparedness and response should therefore no longer be a peripheral concern (Strandh, ).…”

“…作者Veronica Strandh也全面研究了危机和灾害，她在《危机志愿服务再现？》一文中聚焦于危机管理中志愿参与的多样性。与Kenis等人（2019）所研究的应急措施一致的是，作者认为能识别不同类型的志愿参与（因此也能识别不同响应），同时志愿参与类型发挥不同作用，应对不同危机。与红十字会的参与相比，服务于基于信仰的机构志愿者在应对恐怖袭击，或森林火灾这类所谓的“社会”危机一事上发挥的作用完全不同。传统志愿者机构 (灾害研究中心之扩增机构的类型学，参见Dynes, : 151) 在这方面发挥的作用已被熟知，但Strandh 强调，扩增的新兴机构（Dynes类型学中的第三类和第四类）数量正在增多，以应对危机和灾害，这类机构具备显著异质性，但被误解。同时，Strandh在这篇以瑞士为例的案例研究中指出，当传统机构成员变老逝去时，上述新兴机构的需求便会增加，并且危机造成的社会影响也更有可能源于未来冲突情况和社会动荡，而不仅是源自森林火灾或水灾。灾害预备响应过程中的多样化志愿参与因此不应只是一个边缘事件(Strandh, )。…”

“…El papel de las organizaciones de voluntarios tradicionales (las organizaciones en expansión en la tipología del Centro de Investigación de Desastres, véase Dynes, , 151) es bien conocido a este respecto, pero Strandh enfatiza que las organizaciones en expansión y emergentes (tipo III y IV en la tipología de Dynes) están en aumento en respuesta a crisis y desastres, que son altamente heterogéneos y mal comprendidos. Mientras tanto, en el estudio de caso sueco de Strandh, la necesidad de su inclusión aumenta cuando la membresía de organizaciones tradicionales está envejeciendo y disminuyendo, y el impacto social de las crisis es más probable que surja de futuras situaciones de conflicto y malestar social que solo de incendios forestales y inundaciones Por lo tanto, una diversificación de la participación de los voluntarios en la preparación y la respuesta ya no debería ser una preocupación periférica (Strandh, ).…”