본문 바로가기
  • Home

A Comparative Study on the Perception for Crisis Management Policy in Local Government

  • Crisisonomy
  • Abbr : KRCEM
  • 2010, 6(3), pp.1-29
  • Publisher : Crisis and Emergency Management: Theory and Praxis
  • Research Area : Social Science > Public Policy > Public Policy in general

이정균 1

1청주대학교

Candidate

ABSTRACT

This study focused on "A Comparative Study on the Perception for Crisis Management Policy in Local Government" by selecting implementation process approach for improve effectiveness of Crisis Management Policy in Local Government. The ways of investigation are documentary research and Empirical Analysis. Using documentary research, we find policy according to each stage in crisis and research approach. And we choose Saundra K. Schneider's study that analyzed crisis norms and bureaucratic norms by using the crisis management policy implementation processes as the preliminary study. When cites Schneider's expression, crisis norms mean residencies' expectation on government implementations during the emergency and bureaucratic norms imply voluntary activities of government in crisis. In dimension of implementation processes, to succeed in crisis management policy means there is little cognitive gap between crisis norms and bureaucratic norms. In other words, as disparity within both groups is large, crisis management policy tends to fail according to proportionate gap. To accomplish the purpose of this study, storm Rusa occurred in 2002, caused great damage in Chungbuk area and storm Maemi happened in 2002 are chosen as the example cases. Based on two cases, we tested degree of gap between residencies' crisis norms who suffered damage and officers' bureaucratic norms in pertinent autonomy using the surveys. At the result of analysis, there are perceptional gaps between residential groups and official groups by showing difference in most measured index. It can be interpreted to have similar gaps at crisis norms and bureaucratic norms of each stage such as mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. This proves crisis management policy in local government is going down the tubes. However, the hypothesis that in the process of crisis management policy implementation processes, crisis norms may be regard mitigation and preparedness as important, yet bureaucratic norms may be consider response and recovery as more significant are not selected. When it comes to learning effect since storm Rusa and Maemi, both residential groups and official groups show perception that they can efficiently cope with sudden crisis than present disposal. In concluding, we know that there are similar gaps among each stage in crisis management policy implementation processes in local government such as mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. These limit toward achievement of goal in the process of the crisis management policy implementation processes in local government.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2022 are currently being built.