How Did Colectiv Disaster Affected The Risk Perception Of Youths In Romania
=== c79a268cd08cc92bcd29be067941dc230389e28c_488366_1 ===
University of……………..
Faculty – Business…..
Specialization: International Events Management
MASTER THESIS
Research Supervisor:
Prof. univ.dr.
NAME:
Surname:
Master Student:
NAME:
Surname:
, 2017
University of……………..
Faculty – Business……
Specialization: International Events Management
MASTER THESIS
Title: How did "Colectiv" disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania ?
Research Supervisor:
Prof. univ. dr.
NAME:
Surname:
Master Student:
NAME:
Surname:
………………., 2017
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Abreviation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
§Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………..
§Chapter I. Introduction ………………………….…………………..
Risk management………………………………………………………….
Risk-perception…………………………………………………………….
The “Colectiv” disaster……………………………………………………
The study…………………………………………………………………..
§Chapter II. Literature review
2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………
Experiencing Fire………………………………………………………..
Fire Risk-Perception Findings……………………………………………
Indirect Experience (media, groups)……………………………………..
Decision-making process………………………………………………..
Key points……………………………………………………………….
§Chapter III. Research methodology…………………..…………….…….
3.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………..
3.2 Philosophical Position…………………………………………………..
3.3 Research Design…………………………………………………………
3.4 Methodological choice…………………………………………………..
3.5 Research Approach for Theory Development…………………………..
3.6 Time-Horizon……………………………………………………………
3.7 Data collection…………………………………………………………..
3.8 Sampling strategy……………………………………………………….
3.9 Research strategy and data analysis…………………………………….
3.10 Ethical Issues………………………………………………………….
3.11 Limitations………………………………………………………………
3.12 Validity, Reliability and Generalizability………………………………
§Chapter IV Findings and discutions…………………………………
§Conlusions and recommendations ………………….………………..…
Apendix………………………………………………………………………
References…………………………………………………………..………
How did "Colectiv" disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania ?
Abstract:
§INTRODUCTION
1.1.RISK MANAGEMENT
1.2.RISK-PERCEPTION
A generic definition of event risks according to Bowdin is “any future incident that will negatively influence the event” or it could be described simply as “possible problem” (Bowdin et al., 2012). With a great increase in events sector worldwide, the authorities and governments are acknowledging the importance of risk management procedures in order to avoid major disasters and threats to health and safety. The incidents at events are too often a result of incompetence in management (Bowdin et al., 2012) and also of noncompliance with the law or corruption, as the author adds. These beliefs are drawn directly from the incident which this study focuses on and other similar catastrophes. Risk management includes all activities that enable the probability of risk occurring or its effect to be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level (Pálinkás 2011). Besides the risks that affect the health and safety of people involved with the organisation or attendance; it also concerns with a vast area of risks such as financial, promotional, marketing risks or even misrepresentation of event by marketing (Bowdin et al., 2012).Many authors researched the topic and came up with different categories of risks in events. According to Berlonghi (1990) a generalised division can be: administration, marketing and public relations, health and safety, crowd management, security and transport. Other areas of concern usually arise from the unique characteristics of each event for example: ticket sales, communication, alcohol, noise etc. (Bowdin et al., 2012).The nature of this study involves health and safety risks and more specifically, it is focused on the risk of fire and the impacts it has upon the risk-perception of attendees.
1.3.THE “COLECTIV” DISASTER
On the night of 30th October 2015 at “Colectiv” Club in Bucharest the rock band Goodbye to Gravity were launching their newest album. The concert was attended by more than 300 people, most of them young and some minors. Around 22:30 local time, sparks from pyrotechnics around stage ignite one of the pillars covered in low quality soundproofing foam. The first and probably the only action against the fire, as reported by attendants, was made by one of the band members which threw some beer at it trying to take it out (ziare.ro, 2015). Obviously nobody realised the danger they were facing, the fire extends quickly to the ceiling and in a matter of seconds the whole club was caught on fire. People rushed towards the only exit, which couldn’t fit more than two persons at a time, and just a few managed to get out without any injuries. The rock concert which was supposed to bring joy to people turned out to be the deadliest event that happened in Romania since the 1989 Revolution (Stirile ProTV, 2015).The information emphasised by the author from media sources available, brings to light the way events are organised in Romania, by people with lack of knowledge and experience in the field of events management. In this case, the result of noncompliance with the law, as the club had the legal right of hosting only 80 persons, and of corruption, as it turned out that the club owners used to bribe the law enforcement officers in charge with periodical inspections at the club for health and safety preparedness. The owners of the club and the state institutions responsible with the periodical inspections of businesses following the rules, were declared guilty for the death of 64 people and the injury of another 184.This terrifying incident stimulated enragement among the population and represented the main motive for over 30.000 people to stand together in the streets against a corrupt government and ask both the Prime Minister and the Mayor of sector 4 in which the club was situated to abandon their positions. After they had resigned, the government was changed to a technocratic one to please the crowds in the street.
1.4.THE STUDY
This study aims to evaluate the impacts of the disaster on 30th October 2015 at “Colectiv” Club in Bucharest, upon the risk-perception of attendees, and to find out how it affected their decision-making process. Any new requirements of the public to feel safe are also explored. This research investigates the perception of risk for planned events after the nightclub fire. Male and females aged between 19 to 25 that attend events and/or clubs at least three times a month are the focused population of the study.
The research question can be formulated as “How did ‘Colectiv’ disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania?”. Further, authors in events studies suggest that a key research question for social event studies theme is “What are the personal and social consequences of negative event experiences?” and approve as an adequate research method in-depth interviews and focus groups (Getz, 2016).
Donald Getz (2016) also suggests that negative experience linked with an organised event can lead to loss of interest in attending events with no intent to repeat visitations and negative word-of-mouth communication.
The objectives of the study can be illustrated as:
Collecting qualitative data on perception of risk as a result of “Colectiv” disaster from young people that usually attend events and nightclubs.
To investigate if there is a major impact on the risk-perception of attending events, and how it is characterised.
To build theory of risk-perception of attendees based on the analysis of data collected.
A qualitative approach is undertaken to shed light on the perception that people have towards risk in attending events with emphasis on the description of impacts as a result of the fire.
Information is gathered through unstructured interviews which offers a more flexible and an open methodology. The analysis of data aims to establish the variation of experiences and perceptions in relationship with the situation in our case the “Colectiv” disaster.The author suggest that a correlational study is the most appropriate to evaluate the impact of the event upon the selected population and to establish the existence of a relationship between the disaster and changes in their risk-perception.
§CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW
to do: -identify and describe various theories relevant to your field, and specify gaps in existing knowledge in the area.
-recent advances in the area of study, current trends and so on.
-provide a theoretical background to your study.
-list main themes converting them into subheadings based on your theoretical framework.
-under each subheading record the main findings with respect to the theme in question highlighting the reasons for and against an argument if they exist, and identifying gaps and issues.
-integrate the results from your study with specific and relevant findings from the existing literature by comparing the two for confirmation or contradiction.
ADD TABLES OF THEORY Mentioned in text.
INTRODUCTION
Considering the small amount of studies undertaken in the area of risk-perception the author struggles to collect and examine specific literature to better understand the area of risk and, specifically, how fire affects the decision-making process of young people to attend events and nightclubs. This chapter focuses on providing a theoretical background to the study while establishing links between what is proposed to be examined and what has been already studied. The aim of the literature review is to identify and briefly describe the main theories relevant to the field of risk-perception and address specific gaps in the existing knowledge. It is desired to analyse findings of other authors to understand the domain of research.The literature review analyses the risk-perception of fire in organised events context, identifying specific gaps and acknowledging appropriate methodologies to be used in this study. In the following chapter a brief research of the literature review uncovers that most studies concerning risk-perception of communities are focused on hazards such as natural disasters and in general large-scale events with great impacts. While researching fire related risk-perception of general public a limited amount of literature could be found based on the author’s resources and obvious limitation, as the available time and capacity of a single person to research. When a more specific research of literature is undertaken regarding fire at organised events and/or nightclub fires, the author acknowledges the lack of studies focused on risk-perception of attendees and notes that most of the studies are made from the management or government point of view with the objective of creating risk management procedures for future organisation of events. Authors that studied fire-related risk behaviour regarding domestic fires acknowledged that little research has focused on this area and reviewed social-science based literature on fire noting that useful insights can be found, but there is a need for much more in order to establish a satisfactory body of knowledge. Compared to most studies in the area that are focused on wild-fire incidents and natural disasters the authors highlights that, despite the fact that domestic fires usually have smaller impacts, are much more frequent and take place worldwide regardless of geographic location or climate which have significant importance for natural disasters (Clark, Smith and Conroy, 2014). The same arguments can be brought into our study that focuses on fire-related incidents in the context of organised events and nightclubs. It can be agreed, by common sense, that such events that can take place anywhere, at anytime, with less circumstances needed for it to happen; can be considered unexpected, more dangerous as its surprising for most people, which in the end affects the efficiency of response in the case of emergencies and have less existing mitigating actions against it.
2.2.EXPERIENCING FIRE
Experiencing a fire can be very traumatic with potentially devastating long-term effects not only physical like injuries and death but also psychological impacts that can haunt individuals for the rest of their life. Risk is not always understood in rational ways and not experienced the same by all people. Authors agree that risk is subjective and evaluated differently depending on a variety of factors (Beck 1992; Douglas and Wildavsky 1982; Lupton 1999; in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014). Findings suggest that individual’s perception of risk is affected by several factors such as social group in which they belong to, employment type, age and gender (Gustafson 1998).These facts have powerful implications in developing policies and practices that offer a better understanding, accommodation and reduced impact of risk. By considering key issues from literature dealing with perception of risk it can be reflected upon how such approaches might contribute to a better understanding of fire in organised events and/or nightclubs and for future research in this area.It is clear that different groups of people experience different outcomes with different consequences at an emotional level and this emphasises the gaps in general understanding of risk in the context of events.Studies have provided valuable findings for understanding risk from a rational and objective point of view developing models of risk and risk taking that may be applied in an economic and managerial environment ( Henwood et al.2008 in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014).Clearly human beings will not consider risk in a rational and objective way that includes logic, reason and mathematically calculable facts that influence the decision-making process of taking a risk. Authors argue that feelings and emotions are the main drivers in the individual assessment of risk based upon intuition, instincts and previous experiences rather than rational analysis (Slovic and Peters, 2006).
2.3.FIRE RISK-PERCEPTION FINDINGS
Different approaches suggest that it is not important to research individual perception of risk but rather the perception of cultural groups with consideration to biographical background and their subjective perception. While researching the literature of risk, the author discovers that these studies are not specific enough and have emphasis on general risk while fire context remains under examined. Given the number of studies focusing on crime, terrorism, natural disasters and work-place risks it is surprising that there is absence of fire or fire-risk considering the high frequency of such events. The author highlights the necessity of specific research in risk-perception related to fire incidents in nightclubs and organised events.
Authors suggest that there is a great opportunity in evaluating the attitudes people have regarding the experience of a fire not only to understand the impacts on behaviour but also how risk is constructed and understood. Existing studies of people experiencing crimes and terrorism are numerous compared to literature of how perception of risk has changed after fire (Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014).Results of different studies in the area of risk perception found that characteristics such as gender and previous emergency experience, have great impact upon the accuracy of risk perception. These results suggest that women and people that have previously experienced an emergency situation are more accurate in estimating risks. Also people with lower income are found to have a higher risk perception value as well as married people over non-married people. These findings suggest that personal circumstances play an important role in the way risk is perceived by each individual (Knuth et al., 2014).
2.4.INDIRECT EXPERIENCE (MEDIA,GROUPS)
In the context of destination’s recovery process after a disaster which includes rebuilding infrastructure, facilities and communities it is really important to re-establish the image and visitors’ perception of a destination through the communication of correct and consistent information to the public. In this matter, the media plays a major role in restoring confidence of the public after a disaster and it can be argued that the way that media reports affects the image and perceptions of visitors directly. In general, it is considered that the media reporting represents a primary influence to negative destination image, and it is known to influence risk perception which is a major consideration fact in destination choice (Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016).Tourist destination image can be defined as “the sum of all those emotional and aesthetic qualities such as experiences, beliefs, ideas, recollections and impressions, that a person has of a destination” (Crompton,1979 quoted in Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016). Authors found that mass media tries to generate awareness but at the same time it shapes the image of a disasters and of the destination where a disaster takes place. Other studies add that there is a high difficulty in controlling these matters and suggest a direct collaboration with the media for keeping under control the images broadcasted (Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016). Media frequently uses sensationalist and dramatic terms to draw public attention in a way which sometimes can create a sense of fear among its readers or over-exaggerate the impacts of an event or disaster. “Social representation theory” (Pearce et al.1996 quoted in Getz, 2016) states that communities and societies build the general image of events based on experiences, social interaction, available information and the media. These factors influence attitudes towards future events and play a major role in local communities’ perception of how helpful events really are. It is important to acknowledge the role of media in the overall understanding of what happened at the “Colectiv” club and how it contributed to a possible change in risk-perception of general public. Did the way that the media reported the disaster increased the fear of attending clubs? Did it have a negative influence on the destination’s image? Are the impacts over-estimated because of the media? Did the media play a major role in the following protests? These considerations have a great importance in the understanding of factors that influence the decision-making process and the evaluation of impacts upon the risk-perception of people attending organised events.
2.5.DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
When speaking about attending events, and factors that influence the decision-making processes of people, one of the main considerations suggested by events literature are antecedents, that represent the sum of factors that are shaping the needs and demands for events and the way choices and decisions are made (Getz, 2016). Knowledge from disciplines like marketing and psychology can be adapted to consumer behaviour in leisure and tourism studies to generate useful information. Getz (2016) creates a framework for investigating the impacts that shape the demand for events. Needs are closely linked with theory of psychology and economics which are mixed with consumer research that explores decision-making, to create a theoretical framework that includes the main factors that are shaping participation and attendance at planned events. The suggested framework contains the factors and suggest interconnections between them, but it is highlighted that a particular set of antecedents can not foresee certain decisions or that certain experiences are creating a predictable future behaviour (Getz, 2016). The framework of applied psychological theory to event participation by Benckendorff and Pearce (2012) suggests that personality, motivation and involvement are important when looking at antecedents. Further the framework interconnects barriers and constraints, decision-making, event experience and meaning, evaluation, feedback and involvement. Decision-making in events is a mix of factors such as antecedents background with decision-making processes. A key role is represented by people’s behaviour and how they search for information, among with economic considerations such as attractiveness, substitute experiences, attendant’s loyalty to different types of events (Getz, 2016). Getz (2016) categorised the decision as either routine or unique, exemplifying fans that attend a specific event year after year and for whom it is becoming a routine. In this case, the decision-making process of a routine person requires less information and time for taking a decision given their predisposition of attending the event. On the other hand, most events are perceived to be a unique decision, which usually tends to be characterised by consumers that require lots of information, which is time consuming to be found, and adds up to a longer decision to purchase. Further, the author mentions the importance of risk factor in the decision-making process saying that “every new decision to attend or participate in an event poses risks such as wasted time and money, bad experience, and health and safety concerns.” (Getz, 2016). Speaking of post-experience evaluation, creating a memorable experience is the goal of most events and if people feel great they tend to return or choose experiences alike (Gibson 2005, in Getz, 2016). In fact, post-experience evaluation plays a major role in people’s perception of events and it represents important criteria for economic and safety considerations and subsequently in the final decision to attend a new event.
The literature investigates closely the relationship between satisfaction at events and creation of loyalty for a specific event and desire to live comparable experiences. But, less thought has been given to the other possibility of disappointing event experiences and how it affects the perception of consumers. It is known that a negative experience makes consumers less likely to become loyal (Getz,2016) , but as in the case of satisfaction, does it affect the perception of events alike? Does it create a fear of comparable experiences and finally affects the demand of similar events?
2.6.KEY POINTS
In conclusion, one of the main issue that has been acknowledged after undertaking the literature review is the lack of studies concerning fire risk-perception of attendees at organised events and it is highlighted the need of studies in this specific area. The impacts of natural disasters and other significant tragedies, upon communities and the economy are usually studied. From this it is argued that fires at organised events and/or nightclubs are under examined and it represents a gap in the available body of knowledge. Further it is observed that domestic-fire and other smaller fire incidents usually have less notable impacts, but are more frequent and take place anywhere regardless of geographical and environmental considerations, facts that make those kind of disasters unexpected and very dangerous for communities (Clark, Smith and Conroy, 2014). Experiencing a fire can be traumatic with long-term implications, not only physical but also psychological and these usually vary depending on factors such as social group, employment type, age and gender (Gustafson 1998). All these factors matter because risk is not always understood in rational ways and is not experienced the same by all people, leading to the conclusion that risk is subjective and evaluated differently depending on a variety of factors (Beck 1992; Douglas and Wildavsky 1982; Lupton 1999; in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014). There are authors that provide a multitude of objective frameworks and risk-taking models that may be applied for economic and managerial purposes (Henwood et al.2008 in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014). But there is not enough knowledge of how general public subjectively understands risk and how such disasters affect their future behaviour related to attending events. Other commonly found facts that affect the most people’s perception of risk are represented by gender and previous experiences, authors agreeing that females and people that have previously experienced an emergency situation are more precise in estimating future risks. Moreover, people with lower income and married couples are found to have a higher risk-perception value compared to individuals that are not part of these groups (Knuth et al., 2014). In conclusion, personal circumstances play an important role in the way risk is perceived by each individual. Secondly, it has been found that indirect experience and the role of a destination image plays an important part in the way general public perceives risk. As the media represents the main source of information and the primary influence to negative destination image, the communication of correct and consistent information by the media is absolutely necessary for reconstructing the image of a destination after a disaster and for a good general understanding of public related to the real impacts of such an event (Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016).
(Pearce et al.1996 quoted in Getz, 2016) states that communities and societies build the general image of events based on experiences, social interaction, available information and the media. These factors influence attitudes towards future events and play a major role in local communities’ perception of the advantages of hosting events. While considering the importance of decision-making process of attending events and purchasing these types of experiences, the concepts of antecedent background, post-experience evaluation and people’s behaviour regarding information research among with economic considerations are illustrated. Further according to Getz (2016) the decision-making process is categorised by either a routine decision or a unique decision and these categories are presented with their specific characteristics. In contrast with the literature regarding theories that link the satisfaction with creation of loyalty and desire to attend comparable events (Getz, 2016), several questions arouse regarding the possibility of existing relationships between disappointing event experiences and desire to avoid experiences alike and similar events.
Does it create fear of similar events? Does it affect the perception of risk in people’s decision-making process?
§CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
to do: – An account of the research question/hypothesis and resulting objectives to be investigated.
An account of the chosen research philosophy and/or approach, and choice justification as it relates to the research question/hypothesis.
Clear description of the methods to be used to conduct the investigation.
Justification as to why the selected methods are considered to be the most appropriate for responding to the research question.
Discussion of the sample, instruments (design, pre-testing, administration), and data collection process to be undertaken.
Explanation of the methods/models/concepts to be used to analyse the collected data.
Description of any anticipated difficulties associated with gathering and analysis of data and how they can be overcome. (optional)
Description of ethical issues and how these are proposed to be dealt with. (optional), Interpretivist, Exploratory research, Qualitative, grounded theory, induction??
INTRODUCTION
Emerging from the literature review, the proposed research question is: “How did ‘Colectiv’ disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania?”. In order to answer the research question, it is needed to investigate the impacts of negative experiences, highlighting personal and social consequences through in-depth interviews. The qualitative approach sheds light upon possible relationship between negative experience and a diminished interest in attending events alike; while creating avoidance of repeated attendance and negative word-of-mouth communication. The issue of risk-perception and risk management has received a significant amount of interest from a variety of authors over the years (Getz,2016; Gustafo,1998; Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016) and many theories have aroused from their studies. However, risk-perception of attendees and direct impacts on risk perception caused by a fire has not been previously studied in the context of organised events, and this represents the gap addressed by this study.Based on the following methodology, the study investigates young attendee’s attitudes towards risk at organised events, and any changes that were produced by the “Colectiv” disaster in the way they perceive it.
PHILOSOPHICAL POSITION
Given the subjective nature of the study, the interpretative approach allows the researcher to analyse social actors within their own cultural settings and seeks to understand phenomena rather than explaining it, involving qualitative observation that are subjective in nature (Wilson,2010). “The carrying out of this research is usually based on an inductive approach, moving from observation to theory.” (Wilson,2010).The interpretative view of the world provides interesting views and new insights into a particular area, but it is mostly criticised for its reliability and measurement issues. And also by difficulties for future research regarding accuracy and repeatability for carrying out the same work.Unlike positivists, interpretivist often avoid generalization but rather engage in social interaction and participation trying to look at one particular subject in-depth and agree that the world is open to interpretation(Wilson,2010). As mentioned in the literature review, people tend to perceive risk subjectively rather than applying a rational process for risk understanding. In harmony with the previous statement the interpretivist believes that research methods based on natural sciences phenomena and positivist philosophy are inappropriate in the study of social and organizational phenomena, because of human way of subjective understanding (Myers, 2011).Acknowledging the risks of interpretivism and the challenge of collecting good quality data and creation of valuable knowledge to fill the literature gap, the interpretative philosophy remains the most suitable choice for this particular study as it is usually linked to qualitative methods and helps answering the research question.
RESEARCH DESIGN
According to Wilson (2010), a research design “is a detailed framework or plan that helps to guide you through the research process, allowing a greater likelihood of achieving your research objectives.”The research design is based on the previously set objectives and aims to select the most appropriate methodological procedures to best answer the research question. Saunders et al.(2012) defined exploratory research as “ research that aims to seek new insights, ask new questions and to assess topics in a new light.”Exploratory research usually investigates areas where there is currently little knowledge and work that can be referred to (Wilson, 2010). The goal of this kind of research is to develop insights into a particular area that leads to development of hypotheses (Wilson,2010).Compared to descriptive research or explanatory research that focus on describing characteristics; exploratory research focuses on gathering data for development of hypotheses (Myers, 2011).The nature of the research objectives, that aim to investigate attendees’ opinions and develop theory in risk-perception where little work has been done, fits perfectly with the unstructured approach of exploratory research.
METHODOLOGICAL CHOICE
Unlike quantitative research methods that were developed in the natural sciences study and focus on interpretation of numbers to analyse values and levels of theoretical concepts that represent strong scientific evidence towards explaining how phenomenon work (Myers, 2011). Qualitative research methods are usually used in social sciences to study social and cultural phenomena through observation, interviews and questionnaires (Myers, 2011). Some of the qualitative research methods are action research, case study research and grounded theory (Myers, 2011).Compared to quantitative research that focuses on a particular topic across many people to determine trends or patterns, qualitative research aims to study a particular issue in depth and goes along with exploratory research in areas that are rather new and less examined (Myers, 2011).Because this study aims to evaluate people’s perception regarding a particular issue, and uses an interpretative approach that is subjective in nature, the qualitative research represents the most appropriate method to provide specific and detailed data rather than numerical or statistical data.
RESEARCH APPROACH FOR THEORY DEVELOPMENT
According to Saunders et al. (2012), induction represents a “research approach which involves the development of theory as a result of analysing data already collected.”Inductive reasoning begins with observation and measures, identifies patterns and repeated occurrences of phenomena with the aim of creating hypotheses to be tested and finally creation of conclusions and theories (Saunders and Lewis, 2012).On the other hand, deduction is characterised by “testing a theoretical proposition using a research strategy specifically designed for the purpose of testing.” (Saunders and Lewis, 2012).
An inductive approach has been chosen, as this study aims to collect data to address the literature gap previously mentioned. The interpretative approach which allows analysis of social actors and provides interesting new insights in the events industry, goes along with induction and qualitative research which then helps for creation of theory.
TIME-HORIZON
Considering the limited time-frame for conducting this study, the author considered the most appropriate time dimension as being the cross-sectional study. According to Saunders et al.(2012), the cross-sectional research is defined as “the study of a particular topic at a particular time” also know as “snapshot”. Cross-sectional study is characterised by one collection of data which analysed represents the current thinking of participants towards an issue. In qualitative research, the cross-sectional research can be done through interviews conducted over a short time period. One of the advantages of conducting a cross-sectional study, is that it provides a minimum amount of data which is more in-depth, detailed and representative for that period of time
DATA COLLECTION
According to Myers (2011) “primary data add richness and credibility to qualitative manuscripts.” Further, interviews allow the author to arrive at unique results and also to evaluate a specific issue in-depth (Myers, 2011). As stated by Wilson (2010), other advantages of conducting face-to-face interviews are “the ability to engage in verbal and non-verbal communication”, “the respondent’s feedback can often be recorded, thereby providing accurate information” and also “completion is immediate and straightforward.”. Authors agree that more richly primary data is collected by personal interviews over non-personal data collection methods, because the respondent is allowed to elaborate the answer and provide information that through surveys or questionnaires would not have been provided (Myers, 2011; Wilson, 2010; Saunders and Lewis, 2012).
In accordance with the interpretative, exploratory and inductive approach of the study; the author decides to conduct semi-structured interviews that provide a more flexible way of collecting data based on a set of predetermined themes and questions, which allows variation of question asked and addition of questions if useful for a higher quality of data collected (Saunders and Lewis, 2012; Myers, 2011; Wilson, 2010).
The study is based on six semi-structured interviews of an average duration of one hour.
SAMPLING STRATEGY
When conducting a research, authors usually select a representative sample of the population aimed by the study, basically because it is not realistic or achievable to collect data from the whole population especially in undergraduate research like this one. (Myers, 2011; Wilson, 2010; Saunders and Lewis, 2012). According to Saunders and Lewis (2012), non-probability sampling is defined as “a variety of sampling techniques for selecting a sample when you do not have a complete list of the population.” One of the non-probability sampling strategies it is purposive sampling, which is based on the researcher’s judgment, reasons and limitations to select the sample members most appropriate for the study (Saunders and Lewis, 2012). Purposive sampling is usually applied on qualitative research and subjects are chosen with respect to the objectives of the study and with the aim of best answering the research question (Saunders and Lewis, 2012).Given the aim of the study to investigate youth’s perception of risk and more exactly members of this particular group which periodically attend events or/and nightclubs (at least 3 times a month); The author decided that the Homogeneous type of purposive sampling is the most appropriate way of collecting data considering the research question. According to Saunders and Lewis (2012), one of the reasons to adopt a homogeneous purposive sampling is that “one particular subgroup will provide minimum variation in possible data collected.” However, this particular sampling method “will allow characteristics to be explored in greater depth and minor differences to be more apparent.”In order to compare final results with facts determined by previous studies in risk-perception previously mentioned in the literature review, such as the role of gender, previous experience or marriage in perception of risk. HETEROGENEOUS or HOMOGENEOUS?CAN IT BE MIXED?AGE GROUP IS IT CONSIDERED AS HOMOGENEOUS TYPE?DIFFERENT AGE,GENDER, INCOME, SOCIAL STATUS, MARRIAGE HETEROGENEOUS ????
RESEARCH STRATEGY AND DATA ANALYSIS
According to Glaser (1992), grounded theory is defined as “the systematic generating of theory from data, that itself is systematically obtained from social research”. Saunders and Lewis (2012) characterised grounded theory as “a research strategy in which theory is developed from data generated by a series of observations or interviews principally involving an inductive approach”. The author subjectively chose grounded theory as the strategy for data analysis, finding it the most suitable for this inductive and exploratory study which aims to develop new knowledge for events industry literature.
Conducted interviews are presented in the form of written transcripts which are coded for creation of main themes that are later analysed.
As suggested by Pace (2004), grounded theory can be developed in four steps:
-generating categories and their properties (coding)
-integrating categories and their properties
-delimiting the theory
-writing the theory
Further, proposed by Wilson (2010) the stages of grounded theory can be:
1.Data collection-observational research
2.Open coding and analysis
3.Axial coding and selective coding
4.A proposed theory
5.Evaluation and comparison with existing theories.Authors also suggest that grounded theory does not have a definitive process and is more likely an inductive approach which is based on constant comparison. Finally, it is important that researchers that decide to adopt grounded theory begin the study with no preconceived theory and as close to no theory as possible. Moreover, it is advised that data collection and data analysis should happen at the same time to allow an open mind-set to new ideas and patterns which may rise during its process.
3.10 ETHICAL ISSUES
3.11 LIMITATIONS
3.12 VALIDITY, RELIABILITY AND GENERALIZABILITY
§CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSION
§CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
APENDIX
REFERENCES
1.Bowdin, G. (2012). Events Management 3rd Edition. 3rd ed. Abingdon: Routledge [Imprint].
2. Ziare.com. (2015). incendiu club Colectiv | Actualitate | Ziare.com. [online] Available at: http://www.ziare.com/stiri/incendiu-club-colectiv/ [Accessed 24 Mar. 2017].
3. stirileprotv.ro. (2016). UN AN DE LA TRAGEDIA DIN COLECTIV. Portretele celor 64 de tineri care si-au pierdut viata in urma incendiului. [online] Available at: http://stirileprotv.ro/stiri/incendiu-in-colectiv/jurnalisti-muzicieni-arhitecti-si-fotografi-cine-sunt-cei-48-de-tineri-care-si-au-pierdut-viata-in-colectiv.html [Accessed 24 Mar. 2017].
4. Stirileprotv.ro. (2015). INCENDIU IN COLECTIV. [online] Available at: http://stirileprotv.ro/stiri/incendiu-in-colectiv [Accessed 24 Mar. 2017].
5. Hopkin, P. (2015). Fundamentals of risk management. 3rd ed. London: Kogan Page, pp.147-171.
6. Clark, A., Smith, J. and Conroy, C. (2014). Domestic fire risk: a narrative review of social science literature and implications for further research. Journal of Risk Research, 18(9), pp.1113-1129.
7. Slovic, P., and E. Peters. 2006. “Risk Perception and Affect.” Current Directions in Psychological Science. 15 (6): 322-325.
8. Knuth, D., Kehl, D., Hulse L., Spangenberg L., Brähler, E. and Schmidt, S. (2014). Risk perception and emergency experience: comparing a representative German sample with German emergency survivors. Journal of Risk Research, 18(5), pp.581-601.
9. Walters, G., Mair, J. and Lim, J. (2016). Sensationalist media reporting of disastrous events: Implications for tourism. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 28, pp.3-10.
10. GETZ, D. (2016). EVENT STUDIES: THEORY, RESEARCH AND POLICY FOR PLANNED EVENTS. 3rd ed. LONDON: ROUTLEDGE.
11. Wilson, J. (2010). Essentials of business research. 1st ed. London: Sage.
12. Myers, M. (2011). Qualitative research in business & management. 1st ed. London: Sage.
13. Saunders, M. and Lewis, P. (2012). Doing research in business and management. 1st ed. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
=== c79a268cd08cc92bcd29be067941dc230389e28c_488366_2 ===
University of……………..
Faculty – Business…..
Specialization: International Events Management
MASTER THESIS
Research Supervisor:
Prof. univ.dr.
NAME:
Surname:
Master Student:
NAME:
Surname:
, 2017
University of……………..
Faculty – Business……
Specialization: International Events Management
MASTER THESIS
Title: How did "Colectiv" disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania ?
Research Supervisor:
Prof. univ. dr.
NAME:
Surname:
Master Student:
NAME:
Surname:
………………., 2017
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Abreviation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
§Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………..
§Chapter I. Introduction ………………………….…………………..
Risk management………………………………………………………….
Risk-perception…………………………………………………………….
The “Colectiv” disaster……………………………………………………
The study…………………………………………………………………..
§Chapter II. Literature review
2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………
Experiencing Fire………………………………………………………..
Fire Risk-Perception Findings……………………………………………
Indirect Experience (media, groups)……………………………………..
Decision-making process………………………………………………..
Key points……………………………………………………………….
§Chapter III. Research methodology…………………..…………….…….
3.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………..
3.2 Philosophical Position…………………………………………………..
3.3 Research Design…………………………………………………………
3.4 Methodological choice…………………………………………………..
3.5 Research Approach for Theory Development…………………………..
3.6 Time-Horizon……………………………………………………………
3.7 Data collection…………………………………………………………..
3.8 Sampling strategy……………………………………………………….
3.9 Research strategy and data analysis…………………………………….
3.10 Ethical Issues………………………………………………………….
3.11 Limitations………………………………………………………………
3.12 Validity, Reliability and Generalizability………………………………
§Chapter IV Findings and discutions…………………………………
§Conlusions and recommendations ………………….………………..…
Apendix………………………………………………………………………
References…………………………………………………………..………
How did "Colectiv" disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania ?
Abstract:
§INTRODUCTION
1.1.RISK MANAGEMENT
The risk of human infection resulting from burning cattle cull wastes in power stations would be negligible. A detailed risk assessment, carried out by the Agency, based on test rig trial burning of meat and bonemeal (MBM) and tallow from cattle slaughtered under the Goverment’s Over Thirty Month Scheme (OTMS) shows that the risk of an individual contracting CJD (Creutzfeldt Jacob Disease) would be as low as 1 in 30 000 million. This is 3000 times less than the risk of death by lightning’.,,The press release went on to confirm that, though the studies showed that the risk to both the public and the workers would be negligible, the Agency would not be giving blanket approval to applications for cattle incineration.´´ (Ferdorak, Rogers, 1991)The potential impact of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) has proved to be one of the most controversial risk management issues of the decade. Whilst interspersed with numerous other risk controversies, BSE has outperformed many of its contemporaries in terms of length, scientific uncertainty, economic impact and public outrage. One of the most pressing decision problems was how best to deal with the carcasses such that the public would be confident that the threat of BSE contamination was negligible. In June 1997 the Environment Agency in the UK issued a press release explaining the results of trial burns it had conducted at two coal-fired power stations. Approval would only be granted if all statutory requirements were met: ‘Every application will be rigorously assessed on its own merits and there will also be widespread public consultation before a decision is taken’. Risk management encompasses disciplines from the natural, engineering, political, economic and social sciences. One of the key issues highlighted by the multidisciplinarity of risk management is whether risk assessment as a scientific process can and should be separated from risk management. The basis of the arguments for and against separation are rooted in fundamental views of the role of science and society. Over the 20-30 year period of risk management research much has been learned, though many of the important lessons (not least stakeholder involvement) relate as much to the challenges of working in a multidisciplinary setting as to the development of the single disciplines involved. It is indicative of current risk debates that a regulatory agency chooses to announce the result of its quantitative risk assessment in the same breath as its assurance that, despite the extremely low risk, widespread public consultation will occur in advance of any decision. This example could be interpreted in different ways. Some may question why widespread consultation is necessary if the risk is so low. Others may ask what is so wrong with the risk assessment that widespread consultation is still necessary?Whilst we recognize that risk assessment is clearly a part of the process of managing risks, we also note that there are many different risk assessment approaches in different decision-making contexts. It is beyond the scope of this article to discuss ail of the variabilities. Instead, we focus on example applications of risk assessment at different tiers of decision making: project/site-specific, strategic regulation and policy making. ,,This includes two distinct types of risk assessment.´´(Lisk,1991) Quantitative risk assessment relates to an activity or substance and attempts to quantify the probability of adverse effects due to exposure. In contrast, comparative risk assessment is a procedure used for ranking risk issues by their severity in order to prioritize and justify resource allocation. The examples of these two types discussed here provide a means of illustrating : how risk assessment is being used in decision making, the issues which this use raises in relation to ,,robustness, efficiency and fairness, and whether and how risk assessment can be more effectively integrated into risk management. However, it is important to provide some historical background to the isolation versus integration debate and to expand upon our definitions.´´(Pastor, 1993)
1.2.RISK-PERCEPTION
A generic definition of event risks according to Bowdin is “any future incident that will negatively influence the event” or it could be described simply as “possible problem” (Bowdin et al., 2012). With a great increase in events sector worldwide, the authorities and governments are acknowledging the importance of risk management procedures in order to avoid major disasters and threats to health and safety. The incidents at events are too often a result of incompetence in management (Bowdin et al., 2012) and also of noncompliance with the law or corruption, as the author adds. These beliefs are drawn directly from the incident which this study focuses on and other similar catastrophes. Risk management includes all activities that enable the probability of risk occurring or its effect to be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level (Pálinkás 2011). Besides the risks that affect the health and safety of people involved with the organisation or attendance; it also concerns with a vast area of risks such as financial, promotional, marketing risks or even misrepresentation of event by marketing (Bowdin et al., 2012).Many authors researched the topic and came up with different categories of risks in events. According to Berlonghi (1990) a generalised division can be: administration, marketing and public relations, health and safety, crowd management, security and transport. Other areas of concern usually arise from the unique characteristics of each event for example: ticket sales, communication, alcohol, noise etc. (Bowdin et al., 2012).The nature of this study involves health and safety risks and more specifically, it is focused on the risk of fire and the impacts it has upon the risk-perception of attendees.
We observed several similarities and differences between the expert and public perceptions.The differences in risk perception were both quantitative and qualitative, the relevant results can be summarized as follows: Compared with the public, the experts significantly and systematically perceived less risk for all of the seven biotech applications. Some groups judged the risk from food-related applications higher than the risk from medical applications, in line with previous literature. Compared with the public, the experts perceived food applications as less harmful and more useful, compared with the public, the experts perceived medical applications as less harmful, more useful, belter known to science, and less new. When estimating the risk of biotechnology applied to Lbe medical domain, the public was concerned with how useful and how harmful the application could be, whereas experts also considered factors such as the number and type of people potentially affected by a mass introduction of the application and how much science knew about the technology. When estimating the risk of biotechnology applied to food, the public was concerned not only with potential harm and potential benefits, but also with how much science knows about it and how new they perceived the product to be, while experts were only concerned with how harmful and useful it is. Experts and the public dilfer in their perception of risk. However, experts and non-experts differences may be affected by the nature of the hazard, New and technological hazards, such as biotechnology, might be especially sensitive to the expertise factor because of the specialized knowledge surrounding this type of risk. When we tested if the observed differences in perceived risk levels among groups could be explained by variations in the quality of perceived risk, the results indicated that the dimensions we used in the present study did not fully explain the difference between experts and the public, although they did make a difference. Other factors not covered in this study (e.g. ethical factors) might have significantly contributed as well. With respect to the communication of information related to biotech applications, these results suggest that public perceptions of risk from biotech applications could be reduced by providing information about benefits. On the other hand, experts’ perception of risk from biotech applications could be increased by providing information on harmful effects and negative consequences. In both cases, however, the perception of risk should be conveyed by the general affective meaning that the experts and the public attribute to biotechnology. Over the past decade, much has changed in the sociopolitical realm as well as in the science and technology of drug manufacture and delivery.The present survey examined public views in light of these changes. The mean ratings of trust in information source were as we expected. Information provided by research institutes and environmental groups was trusted the most (especially for the public), followed by political organizations, while information provided by industries was trusted the least. However, we were surprised to find a low correlation between trust in information source and risk perception.This low correlation might be explained by the way we measured trust (as information reliability provided by a source rather than trust in risk management, as has been used in previous studies). Perceptions regarding many other activities (e g. driving, smoking) and technologies (e.g. air travel, pesticides), including other medical technologies (c.g. X-rays, surgery),provide baseline data that will allow the impact of new drug problems and ,,controversies to be monitored and allow trends in relevant attitudes and perceptions to be followed over time, provide data that will enhance understanding of how to inform patients more ef fectively about the risks and benefits of medicines.´´( Slovic, 2010)
1.3.THE “COLECTIV” DISASTER
On the night of 30th October 2015 at “Colectiv” Club in Bucharest the rock band Goodbye to Gravity were launching their newest album. The concert was attended by more than 300 people, most of them young and some minors. Around 22:30 local time, sparks from pyrotechnics around stage ignite one of the pillars covered in low quality soundproofing foam. The first and probably the only action against the fire, as reported by attendants, was made by one of the band members which threw some beer at it trying to take it out (ziare.ro, 2015). Obviously nobody realised the danger they were facing, the fire extends quickly to the ceiling and in a matter of seconds the whole club was caught on fire. People rushed towards the only exit, which couldn’t fit more than two persons at a time, and just a few managed to get out without any injuries. The rock concert which was supposed to bring joy to people turned out to be the deadliest event that happened in Romania since the 1989 Revolution (Stirile ProTV, 2015).The information emphasised by the author from media sources available, brings to light the way events are organised in Romania, by people with lack of knowledge and experience in the field of events management. In this case, the result of noncompliance with the law, as the club had the legal right of hosting only 80 persons, and of corruption, as it turned out that the club owners used to bribe the law enforcement officers in charge with periodical inspections at the club for health and safety preparedness. The owners of the club and the state institutions responsible with the periodical inspections of businesses following the rules, were declared guilty for the death of 64 people and the injury of another 184.This terrifying incident stimulated enragement among the population and represented the main motive for over 30.000 people to stand together in the streets against a corrupt government and ask both the Prime Minister and the Mayor of sector 4 in which the club was situated to abandon their positions. After they had resigned, the government was changed to a technocratic one to please the crowds in the street.
The club’s setup and especially the fact that there were no emergency exits made it difficult for the people to get out in time and save themselves. As a result, 26 people lost their lives that night and 38 others died in the following months at the hospital, making this the biggest tragedy in Romania in the last 20 years. The fireworks used during the rock concert held by local band Goodbye to Gravity burned for 15 seconds, after which a spark reached a pillar that was covered in soundproofing foam, which caught fire. The band’s singer asked for a fire extinguisher, but the fire spread incredibly fast. It took just a few seconds for the fire to go up to the ceiling and then spread to the whole ceiling, fueled by the flammable materials and the air conditioning. Specialists from the Institute of Mining Security and Explosion Protection in Petrosani have recently completed the report on the Colectiv club tragedy in Bucharest. The document remakes the incident by the second, according to Digi 24.After about 35 seconds, hot drops of melted foam started to fall on the people that were still in the club, burning their skin. Only 51 seconds, flammable toxic gas starts coming down .Only after a minute the club’s second door, which was blocked, is forced open. Too late, given that 72 seconds after the fire started the whole club was full of black and yellow smoke resulted from the polyurethane foam that burned. Thus, even some of those who had no external burns later succumbed because their airways were burned by the hot toxic smoke. The deadly fire that killed 64 people of the 400 who were in Bucharest’s Colectiv club on October 30 last year only burned for about 2.5 minutes, according to the experts’ report. The fire took only seconds to spread to the whole club, giving the people inside very little time to react and get out.The fire burned for 153 seconds after which is started to extinguish naturally, according to the report. The experts’ reconstitution is a key piece of evidence in the criminal case against Colectiv club’s owners and the firm that installed the fireworks in the club.
1.4.THE STUDY
This study aims to evaluate the impacts of the disaster on 30th October 2015 at “Colectiv” Club in Bucharest, upon the risk-perception of attendees, and to find out how it affected their decision-making process. Any new requirements of the public to feel safe are also explored. This research investigates the perception of risk for planned events after the nightclub fire. Male and females aged between 19 to 25 that attend events and/or clubs at least three times a month are the focused population of the study.
The research question can be formulated as “How did ‘Colectiv’ disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania?”. Further, authors in events studies suggest that a key research question for social event studies theme is “What are the personal and social consequences of negative event experiences?” and approve as an adequate research method in-depth interviews and focus groups (Getz, 2016).
Donald Getz (2016) also suggests that negative experience linked with an organised event can lead to loss of interest in attending events with no intent to repeat visitations and negative word-of-mouth communication.
The objectives of the study can be illustrated as:
Collecting qualitative data on perception of risk as a result of “Colectiv” disaster from young people that usually attend events and nightclubs.
To investigate if there is a major impact on the risk-perception of attending events, and how it is characterised.
To build theory of risk-perception of attendees based on the analysis of data collected.
A qualitative approach is undertaken to shed light on the perception that people have towards risk in attending events with emphasis on the description of impacts as a result of the fire.
Information is gathered through unstructured interviews which offers a more flexible and an open methodology. The analysis of data aims to establish the variation of experiences and perceptions in relationship with the situation in our case the “Colectiv” disaster.The author suggest that a correlational study is the most appropriate to evaluate the impact of the event upon the selected population and to establish the existence of a relationship between the disaster and changes in their risk-perception.
All journalistic genres are covered on the adevarul.ro site, although the most frequently occurring is news text (news spot, broad news articles, updates). As in all Romanian media, there is a growing trend towards opinio n-fla- vored discourse, as well as a growing preference for subjective approaches, a direct consequence of the interlocking between social media and media. In the week following the tragedy, manifestations of sympathy gradually turned into street protests, clamors, organized marches, collective demands, etc., culminating in the resignation of Prime Minister Victor Ponta on 4 November 2015. From a topical point of view, content (with text, photo and video) referring to protests was predominant, especially between the second and the eighth day post-tragedy. After the tenth day, the Cunent Events section featured associated articles regarding the street manifestations and theft political consequences. After this period, the subjects of incoming materials related to subsequent deaths, the condition of the victims, an inquiry to establish accountability, the closure of many unlicensed chibs, charitable actions, medical or psychological views concerning the events, etc. Opinion articles continued to be published, but to a lesser degree, a sign that the emotional climax had passed. From a topical perspective, the scope of approaches to the event and connected developments is wide and conelative. On the first day after the tragedy, most materials refer directly to the persons invoked (deceased, injured, unidentified persons, relatives, friends, participants, witnesses, club owners, members of ihe band), as well as 10 donating blood, on-site aspects of the club, messages from officials, etc. In the following days, as events unfolded, the scope widens considerably, with instructive articles concerning donating blood or skin, first aid for bums, national mourning postponed or cancelled concerts and other events, clubs being closed down or under scrutiny, similar tragedies, sales of fire extinguishers, etc As of the second day after the event, the first news concerning street demonstrations began to appear. Initially, these demonstrations were intended to express sympathy for the victims and their families. The subjects of the latter articles focused on victims’ profiles/stories, messages from celebrities, personalities and public figures, taken from their blogs or Facebook accounts.After the tragedy, social media operated as a tool of maximum utility, with users reacting spontaneously and with great solidarity in a very shon time. The first lists with names of the injured weie picked up by Adevarul fiom media, where they had begun to circulate shortly after the fire broke out . By using a slogan voiced by protesters on the second day of street action, she publicized the idea that Romania had invested more in building churches than in the construction or renovation of hospitals, thus forcing many bum victims to be hospitalized abroad due to the lack of resources to be treated in theft own country. In the following days, social media messages regarding the involvement or lack of involvement of the Church m the Colectiv tragedy exploded furiously, aggressively and with a high emotional charge, polarizing entire communities of onliners to extremes. The situation on adevarul.ro is, to a large extent, emblematic of the approach of the classical and digital media in Romania. The professional press paid special attention to the chain of events generated by the fire at the CdectivClub, permanently monitoring social media and picking up from here a significant amount of information and, in particular, opinions. The rapid conversion of manifestations of solidarity into anti-system protests and their evolution became predominant themes in the Romanian media. From a quantitative point of view, days 4 and 6 marked the climax. Most materials over the ten days after the tragedy were related to the street protests. Many adevarul.ro conespondents across the country reported that the people, especially young people, were mobilizing via Faoebook, switching from simple mobilizing messages and spontaneous civil impulses to creating events and groups dedicated to solidarity movements and anti-system protests, as the manifestations were genetically dubbed. New themes to emerge in the debates included the association of rock music with satanism or the tarnished image of the Patriarch, not to mention several unflattering figures of priests, etc. It is interesting to note the two most important articles concerning the #Colectiv tragedy published on social media between 30 October and 11 November. In first place, with 33,912 re-postings and 460 comments, having gone viral in the days following the fire, was an article penned on I November 2015 by a journalist from Gandul-info, Cristina Andrei (2015), entitled: “With 18,000 Churches and 425 Hospitals, We Are Watching Our Brothers Die on Pavements". Like the majority of Romanian media the adevarul.ro site functioned during this period as an intermediate vector for the consolidation and enhancement of the transmission of messages from social media. These two functions conferred a twin role on classical media, namely, as a transmitter and at the same time guarantee of the information circulating on social media.As a professional media entity, adevarul.ro played a filtering role, taking authentic information and attributed opinions from social media indicating the sources in nearly all cases. This aspect is important in terms of the interweaving of media and social media, given that rumors, false information, highly aggressive personal attacks, and moves towards ihe political appropriation and exploitation of evenis were insidious traps for professional journalists.(Sălcudean, Mureșan, 2017)
§CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW
to do: -identify and describe various theories relevant to your field, and specify gaps in existing knowledge in the area.
-recent advances in the area of study, current trends and so on.
-provide a theoretical background to your study.
-list main themes converting them into subheadings based on your theoretical framework.
-under each subheading record the main findings with respect to the theme in question highlighting the reasons for and against an argument if they exist, and identifying gaps and issues.
-integrate the results from your study with specific and relevant findings from the existing literature by comparing the two for confirmation or contradiction.
ADD TABLES OF THEORY Mentioned in text.
The CESARE-Risk model is a risk assessment model developed by the Center for Environmental and Risk Engineering in Australia to quantify the performance of a building fire safety system .The development of this model is closely associated with the launching of the performance-based Building Code of Australia (BCA, 1996), which was the first set of performance-based regulations to be adopted gradually by each state and territory in Australia. The BCA96 is based on a four level hierarchy; namely, objectives, functional statements, performance requirements, and deemed-to-satisfy provisions and verification methods. These verification methods can be used to prove that an alternative solution complies with the performance requirements. The CESARE-Risk model uses the NRCC fire growth model, based on its merits of simplicity, efficiency and robustness. Predictions from the NRCC fire growth model; have been compared with experimental results obtained for various fire conditions; namely, smoldering, flaming and flashover. Modifications to the NRCC model have been undertaken to achieve closer agreement between the predicted and the measured results. The center developed a model of smoke spread in large residential buildings called CESARE-SMOKE model using the zone concept and network approach. The CESARE-SMOKE model is coupled with the NRCC fire growth model to predict smoke movement to each enclosure in a building. The aim of the CESARE-Human Behavior Model is to estimate the number of persons in different locations in an apartment building at different times during a fire incident. The model consists of the response submodel that deals with behavior up to the time when evacuation begins by occupants leaving an apartment and the evacuation submodel that deals with the movement of people in a building. The Human Behavior Model, in conjunction with the Fire Growth and Smoke Spread Models, is used to estimate the cumulative time-dependent exposure of occupants to toxic and thermal effects. The evacuation submodel is a dynamic network model that is used to estimate the spatial distribution of the expected number of occupants as a function of time. It is assumed that, once occupants leave an apartment, they seek to exit the building. However, this movement strategy can be altered by smoke conditions, which can force occupants to seek alternative exit routes. If these exits are not available, then occupants are assumed to attempt to return to their apartment. Since occupants can have different response parameters such as probabilities, response durations and movement speeds, several occupant group categories were defined using demographic data of the Australian population. Also in recognition of the importance of the effect of age, drugs and alcohol use, and mobility-related handicaps on fire fatalities, further occupant groups were defined. The conditions of occupants are defined to be stationary, ambulatory, incapacitation or fatality. The calculation of occupant incapacitation and fatality is based on the temporal accumulation of toxic and thermal effects associated with each occupant. For simplicity, it is assumed that the effects of toxic gases and heat are mutually exclusive; i.e., death can be caused by either toxic gases or heat, but not both. The definition of risk is one that varies from area to area and even between members in the same area. Watts and Hall use the following definition of risk, which is based on the definition of the Society for Risk Analysis : risk is the potential for realization of unwanted, adverse consequences to human life, health, property, or the environment. Estimation of risk (for an event) is usually based on the expected value of the conditional probability of the event occurring times the consequence of the event, given that it has occurred. It follows that risk for a building, a process, or some other entity would be the probability distribution of events and associated consequences relevant to that building, process, or entity. A comprehensive definition of fire risk is given as follows: fire risk can be viewed as the possibility of an unwanted fire hazard in an uncertain situation, where loss or harm may be induced to the valued, typically life, property, business continuity, heritage, and/or environment. The key factors include unwanted outcomes or consequences, uncertainty, valuation, and likelihood of occurrence. Building fire risk analysis can be considered as the process of understanding and characterizing fire hazard in a building, unwanted outcomes that may result from a fire, and the likelihood of fire and unwanted outcomes occurring . (G.V. Hadjisophocleous and Z. Fu, 2002).
Communicating about public health often means communicating risk, which in turn involves particular challenges due to its complex and multi-dimensional nature. Elucidating rhe difficulties associated with risk communication starts with understanding the word risk. To us, risk is the perceived probability of negative consequences of a hazard occurring and the perceived magnitude of those consequences. It is possible for one, but not the other to be high enough to warrant attention from any particular individual or group of individuals. By contrast, many people fiel susceptible to the common cold during the flu season, but do not perceive the common cold to be very severe. Thus, we will be assuming that risk incorporates both the susceptibility and the severity dimensions of any given threat, as is consistent with contemporary understanding of this term. Scholars of risk perception understand that it is, in large part, due to the perceptions of knowledge and dread with regard to the risk. Their data showed that nuclear power was rated the highest in terms of severity of consequences; it was viewed as having high risks and low benefits. Skiing, though, was viewed as having many benefits and few risks, and, skiing was raced below the mid-point of the scale for severity of consequences. (Thomson T. , Parrott R.Nussbaum J., 2011)
For example, consuming alcoholic beverages can cause risks such as reaction time or have a negative effect on decision-making quality. But, alcohol consumption (in moderation) can decrease risks such as diabetes (for beer) or heart disease (red wine). Alhakami and Slovic (1994) found that the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit of an activity (e.g., using pesticides) was related to the strength of affect (positive or negative) linked with that activity.The RISP Model. One information seeking model applied to risk issues is the Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) model developed by Griffin and colleagues. They have applied this model, using cross-sectional surveys, to citizens’ information seeking and processing on such topics as Great Lakes fish contamination, floods, climate change, and a parasite in drinking water.The primary application of RISP has been to issues on which people might seek and process information from various sources, as measured through self-reported information seeking (though one study from outside the Griffin et al. team has applied the RISP model to hypothetical emissions from a factory using a sample of industry neighbors.The same numerical information can be presented in a range of formats, including frequencies, probabilities, percentages, population size required for one expected event, decimal proportion, odds, and verbal expressions. How numerical information is presente does not make a mathematical difference (that is, 5% is mathematically equivalent to 5 out of 100), but it does make a perceptual difference for message receivers. The choice numerical format can influence the understanding and decisions of a message . (Thomson T. , Parrott R.Nussbaum J., 2011)
(Source of Table: Thomson T. , Parrott R.Nussbaum J., 2011)
INTRODUCTION
Considering the small amount of studies undertaken in the area of risk-perception the author struggles to collect and examine specific literature to better understand the area of risk and, specifically, how fire affects the decision-making process of young people to attend events and nightclubs. This chapter focuses on providing a theoretical background to the study while establishing links between what is proposed to be examined and what has been already studied. The aim of the literature review is to identify and briefly describe the main theories relevant to the field of risk-perception and address specific gaps in the existing knowledge. It is desired to analyse findings of other authors to understand the domain of research.The literature review analyses the risk-perception of fire in organised events context, identifying specific gaps and acknowledging appropriate methodologies to be used in this study. In the following chapter a brief research of the literature review uncovers that most studies concerning risk-perception of communities are focused on hazards such as natural disasters and in general large-scale events with great impacts. While researching fire related risk-perception of general public a limited amount of literature could be found based on the author’s resources and obvious limitation, as the available time and capacity of a single person to research. When a more specific research of literature is undertaken regarding fire at organised events and/or nightclub fires, the author acknowledges the lack of studies focused on risk-perception of attendees and notes that most of the studies are made from the management or government point of view with the objective of creating risk management procedures for future organisation of events. Authors that studied fire-related risk behaviour regarding domestic fires acknowledged that little research has focused on this area and reviewed social-science based literature on fire noting that useful insights can be found, but there is a need for much more in order to establish a satisfactory body of knowledge. Compared to most studies in the area that are focused on wild-fire incidents and natural disasters the authors highlights that, despite the fact that domestic fires usually have smaller impacts, are much more frequent and take place worldwide regardless of geographic location or climate which have significant importance for natural disasters (Clark, Smith and Conroy, 2014). The same arguments can be brought into our study that focuses on fire-related incidents in the context of organised events and nightclubs. It can be agreed, by common sense, that such events that can take place anywhere, at anytime, with less circumstances needed for it to happen; can be considered unexpected, more dangerous as its surprising for most people, which in the end affects the efficiency of response in the case of emergencies and have less existing mitigating actions against it.
2.2.EXPERIENCING FIRE
Experiencing a fire can be very traumatic with potentially devastating long-term effects not only physical like injuries and death but also psychological impacts that can haunt individuals for the rest of their life. Risk is not always understood in rational ways and not experienced the same by all people. Authors agree that risk is subjective and evaluated differently depending on a variety of factors (Beck 1992; Douglas and Wildavsky 1982; Lupton 1999; in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014). Findings suggest that individual’s perception of risk is affected by several factors such as social group in which they belong to, employment type, age and gender (Gustafson 1998).These facts have powerful implications in developing policies and practices that offer a better understanding, accommodation and reduced impact of risk. By considering key issues from literature dealing with perception of risk it can be reflected upon how such approaches might contribute to a better understanding of fire in organised events and/or nightclubs and for future research in this area.It is clear that different groups of people experience different outcomes with different consequences at an emotional level and this emphasises the gaps in general understanding of risk in the context of events.Studies have provided valuable findings for understanding risk from a rational and objective point of view developing models of risk and risk taking that may be applied in an economic and managerial environment ( Henwood et al.2008 in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014).Clearly human beings will not consider risk in a rational and objective way that includes logic, reason and mathematically calculable facts that influence the decision-making process of taking a risk. Authors argue that feelings and emotions are the main drivers in the individual assessment of risk based upon intuition, instincts and previous experiences rather than rational analysis (Slovic and Peters, 2006)
2.3.FIRE RISK-PERCEPTION FINDINGS
Different approaches suggest that it is not important to research individual perception of risk but rather the perception of cultural groups with consideration to biographical background and their subjective perception. While researching the literature of risk, the author discovers that these studies are not specific enough and have emphasis on general risk while fire context remains under examined. Given the number of studies focusing on crime, terrorism, natural disasters and work-place risks it is surprising that there is absence of fire or fire-risk considering the high frequency of such events. The author highlights the necessity of specific research in risk-perception related to fire incidents in nightclubs and organised events.
Authors suggest that there is a great opportunity in evaluating the attitudes people have regarding the experience of a fire not only to understand the impacts on behaviour but also how risk is constructed and understood. Existing studies of people experiencing crimes and terrorism are numerous compared to literature of how perception of risk has changed after fire (Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014).Results of different studies in the area of risk perception found that characteristics such as gender and previous emergency experience, have great impact upon the accuracy of risk perception. These results suggest that women and people that have previously experienced an emergency situation are more accurate in estimating risks. Also people with lower income are found to have a higher risk perception value as well as married people over non-married people. These findings suggest that personal circumstances play an important role in the way risk is perceived by each individual (Knuth et al., 2014).
The FIA-P also evaluated details and characteristics of the firesetting incident (e.g,, how materials were obtained, site of fire, type of property damage), levels of behavioral and emotional correlates just prior to the fire (e.g., aggression and defiance, depression and withdrawal, rule violations), and consequences following the fire, such as family and disciplinary (e.g., family discipline, child was talked to or counseled by someone outside the family), financial (e,g„ value of damages), medical (i.e., injury, death), legal (eg,, criminal record, removal from home), and social and peer effects (e g., peer acceptance, peer rejection or avoidance). The study provides descriptive details of the fires set by the children. Interestingly, in this study heightened (vs. low) curiosity was associated with greater fire involvement out of the house and less costly fire damages, whereas heightened (vs. low) anger was associated with greater aggression and defiance just prior to the fire and peer rejection following the fire. A parallel study of 95 firesetters described the Fire Incident Analysis for Children based on this work . The FIA-C consists of 21 questions that identified details and characteristics (e.g-, how materials were obtained, site, severity of damages, forethought, planning), primary motives (curiosity or experimentation; anger, revenge, manipulation), and consequences as mediated by family members and friends (e.g., discipline, attention), reactions to the incident, and tire impact of the incident on future firesetting. The FIA-C provides a structured approach to understanding the child's reports to questions regarding the incident. Among the study's findings, access to incendiaries, lack of child remorse and parental consequences, and motives of curiosity and fun were commonly reported characteristics. Four of the fire characteristics predicted children's overall severity of involvement in fire at follow-up (he,, fire Out of home, acknowledgment of being likely to set another fire, a neutral or positive reaction to the fire, no parental response to the tire). Such instruments may facilitate a quantitative evaluation of the details of an individual incident. Other characteristics to be evaluated reflect factors that may increase the child's risk for subsequent firesetting and clarify the need or targets for intervention. An extension of some of the information in the FEMA (1979,1933) interviews provides an operationalization of several risk factors that are evaluated in separate interview measures with parents (the Firesetting Risk Inventory or FRl; Kolko & Kazdin, 1989a) and children (the Children's Firesetting Inventory or CFI; Kolko & Kazdin, 1989b). The FRI examines several factors specific to fire (e.g,, curiosity about fire, involvement in fire-reiated activities, early experiences with fire, exposure to peer Or family models, knowledge of fire safety, fire skill Or competence), and more general factors (e.g., positive and negative behavior, frequency and efficacy of harsh punishment). Compared with nonfiresetters, parents of firesetters acknowledged significantly higher scores on measures of firesetting contact (e.g,, curiosity about fire, involvement in fire-related acts, exposure to peers or family fire models), general child and parent behavior (e.g., negative behavior), and family environment (e.g., use of harsh punishment, less effective mild punishment).
The CFI includes a smaller set of risk factors believed to be easiest for children to answer. The six factors included curiosity about fire (e.g., How much do you want to play with fire? How special or magical is fire to you?), involvement in fire-related activities (e g., How many times did you pull a fire alarm?), knowledge about things that bum (e,g.( Will clothes, like a shirt or pair of pants, bum?), fire competence (e.g,. What steps would you follow to light a fire in a fireplace?), exposure to models and materials (eg., How many of your friends have you seen playing with matches or lighting fire?), and supervision and discipline [e.g.,. How often are you disciplined at home?). Relative to nonfinesetters, firesetters acknowledged more attraction to fire, past fireplay, family interest in fire, exposure to friends or family who smoke, and, somewhat surprisingly, knowledge of things that bum, hut tended to show less fine competence (skill) on role-plays than nonfiresetters.(Hasselt, Hersen, 1999).
Fire risk assessments can be performed based on past fire experience, Such tire risk assessments, however, are valid Only if the situation in the past and that could be assessed at the present are the same. This requires that rhe controlmg parameters that govern the fire scenarios in both situations are the same. Often, they are not the same because of changes over time such as the introduction of new furnishing materials Or new fire protection systems. Controlling parameters include fire protection systems, such as sprinklers that control the development of a fire or alarm systems that expedite the evacuation of the occupants. Controlling parameters also include physical parameters, such as the type and amount of combustibles that govern the development of a fire or the number and length of the egress routes that govern the required evacuation time. If these controlling parameters are not the same, then a fire risk assessment based On the past experience Can be quite wrong. The following two examples illustrate the importance of examining the controlling parameters to ensure that the fire scenarios that happened in the past and those that could happen in the present are similar before the fire experience from the past can be applied to the present. The first example is a deadly night club fire. A deadly fire often leads to an obligatory investigation of fire safety issues and the imposition of new safety regulations. As a result, the controlling parameters in the past and those at present arc not the same, Past experience, therefore, may not apply. The second example is a house fire. House fires occur regularly with often tragic consequences. However, the number of deaths in a typical house fire, although tragic, is not at a level that would cause immediately major changes in regulations. As a result, the controlling parameters in the recent past and those at present may be the same. Recent past experience, therefore, may still apply. Long-time past experience, however, may not apply because of the changes over time such as the introduction of new furnishing materials or new fire protection systems.(Yung, 2008)
2.4.INDIRECT EXPERIENCE (MEDIA,GROUPS)
In the context of destination’s recovery process after a disaster which includes rebuilding infrastructure, facilities and communities it is really important to re-establish the image and visitors’ perception of a destination through the communication of correct and consistent information to the public. In this matter, the media plays a major role in restoring confidence of the public after a disaster and it can be argued that the way that media reports affects the image and perceptions of visitors directly. In general, it is considered that the media reporting represents a primary influence to negative destination image, and it is known to influence risk perception which is a major consideration fact in destination choice (Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016).Tourist destination image can be defined as “the sum of all those emotional and aesthetic qualities such as experiences, beliefs, ideas, recollections and impressions, that a person has of a destination” (Crompton,1979 quoted in Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016). Authors found that mass media tries to generate awareness but at the same time it shapes the image of a disasters and of the destination where a disaster takes place. Other studies add that there is a high difficulty in controlling these matters and suggest a direct collaboration with the media for keeping under control the images broadcasted (Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016). Media frequently uses sensationalist and dramatic terms to draw public attention in a way which sometimes can create a sense of fear among its readers or over-exaggerate the impacts of an event or disaster. “Social representation theory” (Pearce et al.1996 quoted in Getz, 2016) states that communities and societies build the general image of events based on experiences, social interaction, available information and the media. These factors influence attitudes towards future events and play a major role in local communities’ perception of how helpful events really are. It is important to acknowledge the role of media in the overall understanding of what happened at the “Colectiv” club and how it contributed to a possible change in risk-perception of general public. Did the way that the media reported the disaster increased the fear of attending clubs? Did it have a negative influence on the destination’s image? Are the impacts over-estimated because of the media? Did the media play a major role in the following protests? These considerations have a great importance in the understanding of factors that influence the decision-making process and the evaluation of impacts upon the risk-perception of people attending organised events.
We will look at a night club fire to examine whether fire experience from the past can be applied to a similar night club fire in the present. For this exercise, we will look at a night club fire with a simple and well-defined fire scenario. We will look at the February 2003 Station Club fire in Rhode Island, United States which killed around one hundred people. This fire started at the back of the stage while the band was playing. The fire was recorded by video because the show was being video recorded at the time (CNN News, 2003). The fire was also analysed by the National Institute of Science and Technology using both experimental and computer simulations (Madrzykowski, Bryncr and Kerber, 2006).
Over the years, there have been many deadly night club fires in the world, but not many have simple and well-defined fire scenarios. For example, one of the deadliest night club fires in the United States is the 1942 Cocoanut (irovc fire in Boston that killed 492 people. The location of the fire origin and the cause of that fast fire spread is still being analysed today after so many years (Beller and Sapochctri, 2000).
The Station Club was a small wooden building with a capacity for 300 people. There were four exits, including the main entrance, but no sprinklers. Fire started when fireworks used by the rock band to start the show ignited the combustible material on stage and the fire spread quickly. Most people died while trying to leave through the front entrance.
We will examine the controlling parameters of that Station Club fire and see whether those controlling parameters are common in other similar night clubs. If these controlling parameters remain the same, then the experience from the Station Club fire can be applied to the other night clubs. If they arc not the same, then that experience cannot be applied to the other night clubs. We will first go through the five fire- barriers which were discussed in Chapter 2.
Barrier 1 is a barrier to prevent a fire from starting. The rock band used fireworks on stage with plenty of easily combustible material around. The chance of starting a fire was very high. Barrier 1, therefore, was not there.
Barrier 2 is a barrier to contain the fire from spreading. The small night club was basically a large dance hall with no compartmenta- tion to isolate the fire. The club also had no sprinklers to suppress the fire. Barrier 2, therefore, was not there.
Barrier 3 is a barrier to control the smoke from spreading. Since the small night club was just a large open dance hall, with no smoke control systems to either extract the smoke or to contain the smoke, smoke spread readily to the whole hall. Barrier 3, therefore, was not there.
Barrier 4 is a barrier to provide early warnings to the occupants and to safeguard the egress routes for evacuation. The rock band was playing at the time when the fire started, and was using fireworks for special effects, it would have been difficult for the patrons to notice a fire, or hear any instructions from anyone on how to evacuate. The patrons would not have been able to evacuate early, nor would they have been aware of all the exits that were available to them. Most left by the way they came in, therefore, using only one exit. Barrier 4, therefore, was not there.
Barrier 5 is to notify the fire department early so they can respond early. With nothing to control the fire, the fast fire would have engulfed the whole place quickly, probably in just minutes. It would have been difficult for the fire department to respond fast enough to control the fire and rescue the people. Barrier 5, therefore, was not thcrc.
The Station Club, basically, had no fire barriers between the fire and the occupants. Fire barriers reduce the probabilities of fire scenarios that would lead to harm. When there were no barriers, the probabilities of fire scenarios that would lead to harm were 100%. That explains why there were so many fatalities.
While fire barriers reduce the probabilities of fire scenarios that would lead to harm, the level of harm is governed by the physical parameters. We will look at the physical parameters in the Station Club fire that governed the two important time-dependent events: the speed of the fire development and the speed of occupant evacuation. The explanations below show that the physical parameters would make the speed of the fire development very fast and the speed of occupant evacuation very slow. That would explain why there were so many casualties.
I. Fire development was fast because the combustible on stage was the type of material that would burn quickly, such as foam and plastic. The dance hall was not large and a fast fire would fill up the space with smoke in just minutes.
2. Occupant evacuation was not fast because the patrons would not have noticed the fire early and would have been affected by the dense smoke. Also, most patrons apparently tried to leave via the main entrance door rather than using all the exits.
Let's examine the question whether we can apply the Station Club fire experience to other night clubs. The answer, as discussed before, is yes if the controlling parameters are the same; and no if the controlling parameters are not the same. To have the same controlling parameters in other night clubs requires that the bands in the other clubs would still be using fireworks on stage, that there would be similar fast burning material on stage, that there would be no fire protection systems in place, and that the people would still be using only one exit to leave. If these controlling parameters are not the same, then the risk is different. Often, as a result of a major fire incident, new fire safety regulations are imposed and night clubs with these new fire safety measures would have lower fire risks. For example, if fireworks arc banned on stage, or the use of any pyrotechnics must follow a strict safety guideline, or sprinklers are required, or exits are required to be clearly marked and that the people are given prior instructions to use them before the show starts, the risk would be a lot lower.(Yung, 2009)
2.5.DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
When speaking about attending events, and factors that influence the decision-making processes of people, one of the main considerations suggested by events literature are antecedents, that represent the sum of factors that are shaping the needs and demands for events and the way choices and decisions are made (Getz, 2016). Knowledge from disciplines like marketing and psychology can be adapted to consumer behaviour in leisure and tourism studies to generate useful information. Getz (2016) creates a framework for investigating the impacts that shape the demand for events. Needs are closely linked with theory of psychology and economics which are mixed with consumer research that explores decision-making, to create a theoretical framework that includes the main factors that are shaping participation and attendance at planned events. The suggested framework contains the factors and suggest interconnections between them, but it is highlighted that a particular set of antecedents can not foresee certain decisions or that certain experiences are creating a predictable future behaviour (Getz, 2016). The framework of applied psychological theory to event participation by Benckendorff and Pearce (2012) suggests that personality, motivation and involvement are important when looking at antecedents. Further the framework interconnects barriers and constraints, decision-making, event experience and meaning, evaluation, feedback and involvement. Decision-making in events is a mix of factors such as antecedents background with decision-making processes. A key role is represented by people’s behaviour and how they search for information, among with economic considerations such as attractiveness, substitute experiences, attendant’s loyalty to different types of events (Getz, 2016). Getz (2016) categorised the decision as either routine or unique, exemplifying fans that attend a specific event year after year and for whom it is becoming a routine. In this case, the decision-making process of a routine person requires less information and time for taking a decision given their predisposition of attending the event. On the other hand, most events are perceived to be a unique decision, which usually tends to be characterised by consumers that require lots of information, which is time consuming to be found, and adds up to a longer decision to purchase. Further, the author mentions the importance of risk factor in the decision-making process saying that “every new decision to attend or participate in an event poses risks such as wasted time and money, bad experience, and health and safety concerns.” (Getz, 2016). Speaking of post-experience evaluation, creating a memorable experience is the goal of most events and if people feel great they tend to return or choose experiences alike (Gibson 2005, in Getz, 2016). In fact, post-experience evaluation plays a major role in people’s perception of events and it represents important criteria for economic and safety considerations and subsequently in the final decision to attend a new event.
The literature investigates closely the relationship between satisfaction at events and creation of loyalty for a specific event and desire to live comparable experiences. But, less thought has been given to the other possibility of disappointing event experiences and how it affects the perception of consumers. It is known that a negative experience makes consumers less likely to become loyal (Getz,2016) , but as in the case of satisfaction, does it affect the perception of events alike? Does it create a fear of comparable experiences and finally affects the demand of similar events?
Problem identification is the first step in the decision-making process. Problems occur when an expectation or standard is not being met. Additionally, problems are created when a discrepancy exists between the desired expectation and the current situation. As an example, when a fire department is addressing multiple complaints regarding response times from two separate comers of the community, problem identification may lead to several internal factors, from dispatch issues to response issues. After addressing those issues, problem identification may lead to an inadequate number of fire stations, poor distribution of existing fire stations, or a combination of the two caused by annexations.
Evaluating the problem by the planning consideration questions is a way to determine the credibility of the identified problem. Are extended response times within the scope of the vision and mission? Are extended response times a part of long-term goals?
Are extended response times in accordance with organizational strategies, goals, and objectives? Are extended response times an organizational priority? Obviously, the answer to these questions is a resounding no. Unfortunately, identifying the problem does not solve the problem.
Step 2: Decision Criteria
Once the fire chief has identified the problem, the next essential component in the process is determining the decision criteria. Identifying decision criteria may be done alone or with a group of stakeholders. Using the station location scenario, the best results will be achieved in a group setting and by consulting with stakeholders.
Having the fire chief be the sole identifier of decision criteria limits the generation of ideas; however, utilizing only fire personnel also has disadvantages. Biases may occur when fire fighters focus primarily on the internal benefits of adding a fire station. Similarly, consulting only with elected officials may reveal primarily political implications. Including only citizens in the underserved areas will produce highly emotional considerations. An all-inclusive approach will lead to decision criteria such as the following:
Risks to life and property
Support of elected officials
Support from community
Funding a fire station
Funding a new engine
Funding additional personnel
When several criteria are identified, using a variety of stakeholders with diverse interests and motives, the criteria must be assigned values so that priorities can be considered. A numeric value is assigned for each criterion using the nominal group scoring process, or by brainstorming and assigning the most valued criterion 10 or 100, depending on the number of criteria (see Table 1.1.).
The fourth consideration in decision making is generating reasonable alternatives. In some instances, doing nothing deserves consideration. It causes stakeholders to face the reality of identifying a credible problem and the consequences of taking no ac
tion. However, because the outcomes are unthinkable and unacceptable in the fire station scenario, doing nothing is not an option. To that end, there are the following three viable options:
Relocate two fire stations from neighborhoods experiencing good response times from two or more existing fire stations.
Add two new fire stations.
Relocate one existing station and add one new fire station.
Step 6: Selecting Alternatives
Alternatives should be based on community and governmental decision-making priorities, so meeting the needs of citizens should be a high priority when selecting the best alternative. Choosing the alternative that is best for the leader(s) is considered of least importance. The best solution for the fire station scenario should be the one that solves the problem for both neighborhoods, enhances the community’s social climate, strengthens labor/management relationships, builds the credibility of the city and fire administration, and is the most cost effective for taxpayers.
Step 7: Implementation
Implementing the alternative includes communicating the alternative and the associated action plan to all stakeholders; developing effective project teams to carry out the action plan, and monitoring the process through to completion. Communicating the plan can be as simple as a few community meetings or as complex as marketing a bond or tax proposal to fund capital improvements or pay increases. The action plan objectives should be assigned to committed, competent personnel who are capable of getting the job done.(Buckman, 2006).
2.6.KEY POINTS
In conclusion, one of the main issue that has been acknowledged after undertaking the literature review is the lack of studies concerning fire risk-perception of attendees at organised events and it is highlighted the need of studies in this specific area. The impacts of natural disasters and other significant tragedies, upon communities and the economy are usually studied. From this it is argued that fires at organised events and/or nightclubs are under examined and it represents a gap in the available body of knowledge. Further it is observed that domestic-fire and other smaller fire incidents usually have less notable impacts, but are more frequent and take place anywhere regardless of geographical and environmental considerations, facts that make those kind of disasters unexpected and very dangerous for communities (Clark, Smith and Conroy, 2014). Experiencing a fire can be traumatic with long-term implications, not only physical but also psychological and these usually vary depending on factors such as social group, employment type, age and gender (Gustafson 1998). All these factors matter because risk is not always understood in rational ways and is not experienced the same by all people, leading to the conclusion that risk is subjective and evaluated differently depending on a variety of factors (Beck 1992; Douglas and Wildavsky 1982; Lupton 1999; in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014). There are authors that provide a multitude of objective frameworks and risk-taking models that may be applied for economic and managerial purposes (Henwood et al.2008 in Clark, Smith and Conroy,2014). But there is not enough knowledge of how general public subjectively understands risk and how such disasters affect their future behaviour related to attending events. Other commonly found facts that affect the most people’s perception of risk are represented by gender and previous experiences, authors agreeing that females and people that have previously experienced an emergency situation are more precise in estimating future risks. Moreover, people with lower income and married couples are found to have a higher risk-perception value compared to individuals that are not part of these groups (Knuth et al., 2014). In conclusion, personal circumstances play an important role in the way risk is perceived by each individual. Secondly, it has been found that indirect experience and the role of a destination image plays an important part in the way general public perceives risk. As the media represents the main source of information and the primary influence to negative destination image, the communication of correct and consistent information by the media is absolutely necessary for reconstructing the image of a destination after a disaster and for a good general understanding of public related to the real impacts of such an event (Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016).
(Pearce et al.1996 quoted in Getz, 2016) states that communities and societies build the general image of events based on experiences, social interaction, available information and the media. These factors influence attitudes towards future events and play a major role in local communities’ perception of the advantages of hosting events. While considering the importance of decision-making process of attending events and purchasing these types of experiences, the concepts of antecedent background, post-experience evaluation and people’s behaviour regarding information research among with economic considerations are illustrated. Further according to Getz (2016) the decision-making process is categorised by either a routine decision or a unique decision and these categories are presented with their specific characteristics. In contrast with the literature regarding theories that link the satisfaction with creation of loyalty and desire to attend comparable events (Getz, 2016), several questions arouse regarding the possibility of existing relationships between disappointing event experiences and desire to avoid experiences alike and similar events.
Does it create fear of similar events? Does it affect the perception of risk in people’s decision-making process?
§CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
to do: – An account of the research question/hypothesis and resulting objectives to be investigated.
An account of the chosen research philosophy and/or approach, and choice justification as it relates to the research question/hypothesis.
Clear description of the methods to be used to conduct the investigation.
Justification as to why the selected methods are considered to be the most appropriate for responding to the research question.
Discussion of the sample, instruments (design, pre-testing, administration), and data collection process to be undertaken.
Explanation of the methods/models/concepts to be used to analyse the collected data.
Description of any anticipated difficulties associated with gathering and analysis of data and how they can be overcome. (optional)
Description of ethical issues and how these are proposed to be dealt with. (optional), Interpretivist, Exploratory research, Qualitative, grounded theory, induction??
Case study is the most appropriate method when we want a thorough and in-depth investigation of a topic, but also the context in which it unfolds. The other methods discussed above are not always able to discover all aspects of reality, as case studies aim to discover just such hidden issues. Flyvbjerg (2011) identifies four characteristics that are specific to the case study. The most important is the emphasis on choosing the unit of study and its delimitation to the detriment
Considerations related to the research method. Second, account
That the case study is intensive, being more complete, richer and more detailed. Third, the time course of the case is included in his study. Finally, the case study does not neglect the relationship of the case with the outside, therefore the delimitation of the boundaries of the case is important in order to see what is in the case and what remains in its context.
Depending on the purpose for which we want to use, there are several types of case studies (Yin, 2002). We chose a combination of the following categories to make research more efficient:
1.Explorators, in which field research and data collection can be made before defining hypotheses. This type of study can be considered as a preliminary one for some research;
2. Descriptive, where the cases are related to a theory. We describe how each aspect of the advanced theory relates, trying to see how cause-effect relationships work;
3.Explicative, in which we seek to find causal relationships explaining the phenomenon studied. In relation to public administration, we can retain many uses:
1.To explain complex causal links that occur in real life actions;
2.To describe the context in which actions have been taken;
3. To describe the actions;
4.To explore those situations where the evaluated action does not have a clear set of results. Case studies can focus on one or more cases. The single case study is used to generate, confirm, or rule out a theory in a single or extreme situation, often using longitudinal data. The case is selected before you start collecting the data.
Multiple case studies give us more convincing conclusions using
Comparison of cases. We allow both the study of each case and the study of each characteristic in several cases. Selected cases are not single or extreme cases.(Șandor, 2010)
INTRODUCTION
Emerging from the literature review, the proposed research question is: “How did ‘Colectiv’ disaster affected the risk-perception of youths in Romania?”. In order to answer the research question, it is needed to investigate the impacts of negative experiences, highlighting personal and social consequences through in-depth interviews. The qualitative approach sheds light upon possible relationship between negative experience and a diminished interest in attending events alike; while creating avoidance of repeated attendance and negative word-of-mouth communication. The issue of risk-perception and risk management has received a significant amount of interest from a variety of authors over the years (Getz,2016; Gustafo,1998; Walters, Mair and Lim, 2016) and many theories have aroused from their studies. However, risk-perception of attendees and direct impacts on risk perception caused by a fire has not been previously studied in the context of organised events, and this represents the gap addressed by this study.Based on the following methodology, the study investigates young attendee’s attitudes towards risk at organised events, and any changes that were produced by the “Colectiv” disaster in the way they perceive it.
PHILOSOPHICAL POSITION
Given the subjective nature of the study, the interpretative approach allows the researcher to analyse social actors within their own cultural settings and seeks to understand phenomena rather than explaining it, involving qualitative observation that are subjective in nature (Wilson,2010). “The carrying out of this research is usually based on an inductive approach, moving from observation to theory.” (Wilson,2010).The interpretative view of the world provides interesting views and new insights into a particular area, but it is mostly criticised for its reliability and measurement issues. And also by difficulties for future research regarding accuracy and repeatability for carrying out the same work.Unlike positivists, interpretivist often avoid generalization but rather engage in social interaction and participation trying to look at one particular subject in-depth and agree that the world is open to interpretation(Wilson,2010). As mentioned in the literature review, people tend to perceive risk subjectively rather than applying a rational process for risk understanding. In harmony with the previous statement the interpretivist believes that research methods based on natural sciences phenomena and positivist philosophy are inappropriate in the study of social and organizational phenomena, because of human way of subjective understanding (Myers, 2011).Acknowledging the risks of interpretivism and the challenge of collecting good quality data and creation of valuable knowledge to fill the literature gap, the interpretative philosophy remains the most suitable choice for this particular study as it is usually linked to qualitative methods and helps answering the research question.
RESEARCH DESIGN
According to Wilson (2010), a research design “is a detailed framework or plan that helps to guide you through the research process, allowing a greater likelihood of achieving your research objectives.”The research design is based on the previously set objectives and aims to select the most appropriate methodological procedures to best answer the research question. Saunders et al.(2012) defined exploratory research as “ research that aims to seek new insights, ask new questions and to assess topics in a new light.”Exploratory research usually investigates areas where there is currently little knowledge and work that can be referred to (Wilson, 2010). The goal of this kind of research is to develop insights into a particular area that leads to development of hypotheses (Wilson,2010).Compared to descriptive research or explanatory research that focus on describing characteristics; exploratory research focuses on gathering data for development of hypotheses (Myers, 2011).The nature of the research objectives, that aim to investigate attendees’ opinions and develop theory in risk-perception where little work has been done, fits perfectly with the unstructured approach of exploratory research.
METHODOLOGICAL CHOICE
Unlike quantitative research methods that were developed in the natural sciences study and focus on interpretation of numbers to analyse values and levels of theoretical concepts that represent strong scientific evidence towards explaining how phenomenon work (Myers, 2011). Qualitative research methods are usually used in social sciences to study social and cultural phenomena through observation, interviews and questionnaires (Myers, 2011). Some of the qualitative research methods are action research, case study research and grounded theory (Myers, 2011).Compared to quantitative research that focuses on a particular topic across many people to determine trends or patterns, qualitative research aims to study a particular issue in depth and goes along with exploratory research in areas that are rather new and less examined (Myers, 2011).Because this study aims to evaluate people’s perception regarding a particular issue, and uses an interpretative approach that is subjective in nature, the qualitative research represents the most appropriate method to provide specific and detailed data rather than numerical or statistical data.
RESEARCH APPROACH FOR THEORY DEVELOPMENT
According to Saunders et al. (2012), induction represents a “research approach which involves the development of theory as a result of analysing data already collected.”Inductive reasoning begins with observation and measures, identifies patterns and repeated occurrences of phenomena with the aim of creating hypotheses to be tested and finally creation of conclusions and theories (Saunders and Lewis, 2012).On the other hand, deduction is characterised by “testing a theoretical proposition using a research strategy specifically designed for the purpose of testing.” (Saunders and Lewis, 2012).
An inductive approach has been chosen, as this study aims to collect data to address the literature gap previously mentioned. The interpretative approach which allows analysis of social actors and provides interesting new insights in the events industry, goes along with induction and qualitative research which then helps for creation of theory.
TIME-HORIZON
Considering the limited time-frame for conducting this study, the author considered the most appropriate time dimension as being the cross-sectional study. According to Saunders et al.(2012), the cross-sectional research is defined as “the study of a particular topic at a particular time” also know as “snapshot”. Cross-sectional study is characterised by one collection of data which analysed represents the current thinking of participants towards an issue. In qualitative research, the cross-sectional research can be done through interviews conducted over a short time period. One of the advantages of conducting a cross-sectional study, is that it provides a minimum amount of data which is more in-depth, detailed and representative for that period of time
DATA COLLECTION
According to Myers (2011) “primary data add richness and credibility to qualitative manuscripts.” Further, interviews allow the author to arrive at unique results and also to evaluate a specific issue in-depth (Myers, 2011). As stated by Wilson (2010), other advantages of conducting face-to-face interviews are “the ability to engage in verbal and non-verbal communication”, “the respondent’s feedback can often be recorded, thereby providing accurate information” and also “completion is immediate and straightforward.”. Authors agree that more richly primary data is collected by personal interviews over non-personal data collection methods, because the respondent is allowed to elaborate the answer and provide information that through surveys or questionnaires would not have been provided (Myers, 2011; Wilson, 2010; Saunders and Lewis, 2012).
In accordance with the interpretative, exploratory and inductive approach of the study; the author decides to conduct semi-structured interviews that provide a more flexible way of collecting data based on a set of predetermined themes and questions, which allows variation of question asked and addition of questions if useful for a higher quality of data collected (Saunders and Lewis, 2012; Myers, 2011; Wilson, 2010).
The study is based on six semi-structured interviews of an average duration of one hour.
SAMPLING STRATEGY
When conducting a research, authors usually select a representative sample of the population aimed by the study, basically because it is not realistic or achievable to collect data from the whole population especially in undergraduate research like this one. (Myers, 2011; Wilson, 2010; Saunders and Lewis, 2012). According to Saunders and Lewis (2012), non-probability sampling is defined as “a variety of sampling techniques for selecting a sample when you do not have a complete list of the population.” One of the non-probability sampling strategies it is purposive sampling, which is based on the researcher’s judgment, reasons and limitations to select the sample members most appropriate for the study (Saunders and Lewis, 2012). Purposive sampling is usually applied on qualitative research and subjects are chosen with respect to the objectives of the study and with the aim of best answering the research question (Saunders and Lewis, 2012).Given the aim of the study to investigate youth’s perception of risk and more exactly members of this particular group which periodically attend events or/and nightclubs (at least 3 times a month); The author decided that the Homogeneous type of purposive sampling is the most appropriate way of collecting data considering the research question. According to Saunders and Lewis (2012), one of the reasons to adopt a homogeneous purposive sampling is that “one particular subgroup will provide minimum variation in possible data collected.” However, this particular sampling method “will allow characteristics to be explored in greater depth and minor differences to be more apparent.”In order to compare final results with facts determined by previous studies in risk-perception previously mentioned in the literature review, such as the role of gender, previous experience or marriage in perception of risk. HETEROGENEOUS or HOMOGENEOUS?CAN IT BE MIXED?AGE GROUP IS IT CONSIDERED AS HOMOGENEOUS TYPE?DIFFERENT AGE,GENDER, INCOME, SOCIAL STATUS, MARRIAGE HETEROGENEOUS ???
RESEARCH STRATEGY AND DATA ANALYSIS
According to Glaser (1992), grounded theory is defined as “the systematic generating of theory from data, that itself is systematically obtained from social research”. Saunders and Lewis (2012) characterised grounded theory as “a research strategy in which theory is developed from data generated by a series of observations or interviews principally involving an inductive approach”. The author subjectively chose grounded theory as the strategy for data analysis, finding it the most suitable for this inductive and exploratory study which aims to develop new knowledge for events industry literature.
Conducted interviews are presented in the form of written transcripts which are coded for creation of main themes that are later analysed.
As suggested by Pace (2004), grounded theory can be developed in four steps:
-generating categories and their properties (coding)
-integrating categories and their properties
-delimiting the theory
-writing the theory
Further, proposed by Wilson (2010) the stages of grounded theory can be:
1.Data collection-observational research
2.Open coding and analysis
3.Axial coding and selective coding
4.A proposed theory
5.Evaluation and comparison with existing theories.Authors also suggest that grounded theory does not have a definitive process and is more likely an inductive approach which is based on constant comparison. Finally, it is important that researchers that decide to adopt grounded theory begin the study with no preconceived theory and as close to no theory as possible. Moreover, it is advised that data collection and data analysis should happen at the same time to allow an open mind-set to new ideas and patterns which may rise during its process.
A year after the tragedy, some victims of the Colectiv club fire gave an interview:
Alex Plingu, 27, Architecture Student
"I suffered second and third degree burns and was in hospital for two months. I was lucky enough to meet some really lovely staff members—the nurses would kiss me on the forehead when they took me into surgery and told me it would be OK. They slept about an hour every night.
Colectiv was one of the coolest places in downtown Bucharest. But in Romania, we're money hungry. In Colectiv, there wasn't room to properly flick a cigarette butt to the floor, because the owners wanted to sell drinks at a large bar. When you build a club, how hard is it to install a sprinkler installation on the ceiling? How expensive could that be? Especially when you think about how much they're asking for an overpriced beer and the entrance fee.
I made a video about my experience from the fire, and I got comments like, "You stepped over dead bodies just to get yourself out." Actually, I was at the bottom of the pile of people. When I got out, I tried pull an 18-year old boy out. We were both crying and burned raw. But I couldn't do it. I couldn't get him out. He died. Don't tell me I stepped over dead bodies."
Oprea Mariana (Tedy), 29, Architect
"I have second and third degree burns on 45 percent of my body. They transferred me to Vienna, where I woke up from my coma a month and a half later. Only people dressed from head to toe in slippers, masks, and smocks were allowed in my hospital room.
I had sepsis, lung issues, and my blood had to be drained. At some point, my kidneys gave in, but luckily I responded well to the cocktail of antibiotics they gave me. I can't tell you where I got the infections from. I could have gotten them in hospital in Romania, or they could've come from the floor of the club—I crawled around on the floor with my burnt arms. In Vienna, they told me I couldn't leave my room because my infections could've killed patients with a weakened immune system.
Before the fire, I wasted a lot of time worrying over things. This thing made me stand on my own two feet; it helped me move forward. When I enter a club now, I immediately check how many people are in there, where the emergency exits are, the stairs, the fire extinguishers. I was aware of those things before, but I never imagined something of this scale could happen.
I'm mostly pissed off by the hypocrisy of certain influential people, who believe that what happened was a sign from God—that we deserved it. I'd like people to understand that we're all guilty—the people who owned the venue and risked our lives, but also the people going to these venues and supporting them."
Alex Teodorescu, 23, Engineer and Musician
"Whenever I see photos from Colectiv, I feel sick. When you see someone who's burned, it's tough to know you were in there, next to them, but that you came out unscathed. We pushed and shoved one another to get out—it's a burden to know that some people got burned because of you.
When it was over, I felt totally empty. I didn't have the energy to do much. I could've died and have let someone else live instead. Perhaps they could have done more with their life. I felt I didn't want to be self-indulgent and have therapy—I pretended I was just fine. I didn't go out for about a month after the fire but that feeling slowly faded. I went back to the same kind of life I had before Colectiv. I go to the same clubs I went to before, because that's where they play the music I like. They have fire extinguishers now, and they don't let as many people in as they used to. The problem isn't the clubs—it's Romania itself. Everyone knows you can't make it here by opening a legal business."
Corina Gabriela Ioniță, 31, Civil Servant
"I have second and third degree burns on 40 percent of my body—my hands, arms, back, and left calf. In hospital in Bucharest, they changed my bed sheets and cleaned my wounds and bandages, but their care was lacking in some respects. My hair was blackened from the smoke, but they only washed it after a week. By that time, bits of my hair had broke off and stuck to the wounds on my back.
After more than a week in Elias hospital in Bucharest, I was transferred to a hospital in the UK. My lungs collapsed about a month after the fire, and I was put in a coma for a while. When they sent me home, they gave me a letter for the doctors at Elias to keep me under observation and start rehabilitation treatment. But the doctors at Elias told me there was no recovery department at their hospital—even though there is one—and that I had to look for a recovery clinic myself. They wished me luck, took a look at the wounds, and told me I was fine. The government said there was a plan to support the victims, but none of the hospitals knew what to do. I didn't even get medical leave from work for the time I was abroad.
I spent months going from one institution to the next trying to get what I deserved. I went to the National Health Insurance Agency countless times to file all sorts of requests. To get there, I'd ride on cabs with open wounds on my back."
Ionut Constantin, 21, Economics Student
"That night, while I was lying in a pile of people near the exit, I thought to myself, Wait, I'm 20, what's happening? I'm going to die, and I haven't really done anything with my life yet. I had a fractured rib and lesions in my back. But I was given a second chance. So in the months since I recovered, I've started to hit the gym properly—I used to weigh about 235 pounds—now I'm at like 190.
I don't think the club owners are to blame and the hospitals did all they could do in the circumstances. After the fire, everyone was careful for a while, but now we're back to acting just like before. Last month, I was banned from the Facebook page of a student club because I sent them some pictures proving that people were smoking in their venue—which is illegal.
People told me I should try to get some of the money the NGOs have raised. I haven't asked for or taken any compensation, and I don't want to, either. Other people have told me that I shouldn't speak up because I didn't actually get burned. I've tried to ignore them."
Cătălina Marin, 35, Finance Inspector
"I had third degree burns and grafts on my shoulder, back, and on my left hand. At the hospital, I wasn't admitted to the intensive care unit, but they covered me in a wool blanket. The cleaning lady there wiped the dust from our heads, and she used the same mop in the hallways as in our rooms. I was washed by my mother and the mother of the girl I shared the room with.
If one of my wounds would fester on a Saturday or Sunday, they couldn't do anything about it because the storage room was locked on those days. They had no supplies—no bandages, no creams. The response from people in Romania was wonderful, though. They gave us so much stuff during those first few days that we didn't know where to put it. They also brought us food, warm lunches for everyone. When I left the hospital near the end of November, I didn't know what to do—the wound on my back was still open, it was raw flesh. It closed in January.
Since the fire, I feel uncomfortable in crowded places, which is unfortunate since I work with 20 people in one room, in a building that looks like it could collapse at any point."
Also, another romanian youngster were interviewed about thei perception about risk in post Colectiv context:
Hubert: Country after one year of Collective did not change as I would have liked. All agitation after the event was extinguished very quickly. I expect consistent laws on spaces and clubs; I quickly closed some places and that's what we knew to do. Unfortunately, we can count on underground safe clubs and here is the fault of corruption in our country. Unsafe locations in Bucharest we have now, do not give names.
How did he change me Collectively? I became more careful both on the organizing side and as a spectator. There was a fear, when the space I find is overcrowded. The first 3-4 months after the Collective, each event limits strict access to a number of x people .. has returned to the habit of overcrowding in the hunt for profit.
I understand and know how big are rents and lack of space, but whenever a tragedy can be repeated. Underground culture must be helped because we have a lot of talented people. I hope we can understand what underground culture means and how valuable it is.
Viorela:
After the collective tragedy, smoking in the clubs was banned. Following the tragedy in the Collective, he found out the infections in hospitals and diluted disinfectants. Change? I think it's going to be many more years until something really changes …
It affected me directly what happened in the Collective because I had to be there that night … I can not even realize this thing now and it seems to me to be unreal. It's a very sensitive subject, and I could not talk to anyone about it. I did not burn, but others did!
It took me a few months before I could take the courage to go back to a concert. Soccer has not passed. I'm definitely still afraid.
Irina:
First of all, I still can not believe it happened what happened. I continue to watch reportages, documentaries, read and still seem unreal. Unfortunately, reality is different.
1. In the country: maybe tougher controls, perhaps more frightened patrons, some more cautious. There was a little scare at first, but then forgetting came in and great change really did not happen. And another change: the tragedy gave the world the stories of remarkable people that we might not have known soon enough. Unfortunately, we've come to find cool people from Ro in this way.
2. I: I do not think I have changed in any way. Just a little sadder, more disappointed, with the slightest disappointment that some things are doomed to failure. And then I think that this collective, this common pain of the country, must mean something. And I'm pulling a loso hoping there's going to be a change. So I have changed in the ratio of skepticism-naivety in which the balance is still inclined to one, to the other.
Roxana B .:
A government has fallen, some resignations have been made, politics has worn other clothes, and so on. We are still looking guilty, but we do not change anything at all, we do not take any further attitudes from some nervous comments shared in our circle of friends. We continue to complain, but we allow all kinds of injustice to come around us.
From the thought that I will leave the country as soon as possible, I have come to refuse to do so soon. I started to signal any injustice and stop allowing my rights to be violated. I do not do justice, but I'm just trying to be a fully responsible citizen of this country.
Andreea C .:
I'm not sure that something changed in Romania after the Collective. I think there is a beginning of civic consciousness, at least at the level of young people, but we still have a long way to go to live in a country as we want it to. I hope we can catch that moment.
As for me, I think I'm just more alert to what's going on around me, maybe a little more socially active and more and more revolted when I think about our political class.
I do not know how to get rid of this corruption and the major disability that we have as a society, but I hope at some point we will all get up and realize that Romania needs a RESET both at Political level, and at administrative and social levels.
Stefan:
A little consciousness and civic spirit has been activated, but without constant support it goes out.
Capri:
I think he's already looked. Whoever was not involved in any way in this disaster and saw everything just on TV, forgot. He remembers when Pro TV reports, saddenes, feels powerless, somehow enjoys being healthy yet. Concerning the safety of confusion, I do not think it has been solved.
In the club go once a week, with the metro going every day. I, personally, still do not realize what the "disaster" has been in me. Then it was a pretty strong shock, especially as somebody I met. I think there are a few directions – stay in the country and assume what you "offer", stay in the country and try to change, or go.
Alex:
I do not think there has been any substantial change at the administrative level, but I think it was a thrust in how people perceive the dangers and impor- tance of prevention measures.
Related to me. Same old, I'm not changed or, in fact, the Collective incident did not cause any change in my perception and behavior.
Aliciu:
It was more obvious than ever that people who do not do their jobs can lead to the death of other people. There were no characters with a name and a girl, but institutions all over the place. In other cases, it was a nurse or a doctor or a vames or a politician. It's easy to look with your finger to them and say, "Oh, you are snuff." But now it was a whole tumult of pain in which Institutions were involved.
It was the first time I realized that we are, in fact, and rightfully helpless. Like neither the police, nor the Salvation and no one else besides good people and … luck … I can not help you. And unfortunately I do not always want to do it.
I have become more careful to vote. More aware that it is important to intervene. More eager to get involved. I did not do it 100%, but I realized how important it was.
R:
In the country, I think people's expectations for normality have changed. I think, or I like to believe, that people have become less tolerant with "las' that goes and it" and they are increasingly beginning to ask for natural things. I support how good things can be.
Roxana:
I will look at the full side of the glass and, instead of judging what has changed, I will be glad that something has changed. People have taken courage. They got out of their bubble and together they changed the government. The press caught courage and gave one and the other out of their perfect bubbles. He brought them to trial before the people.
More importantly, it seems to me to understand how much we have to change and that it is only in our power to do it. I taught myself to take more care of me, to be more careful about what bars and discos I am in, to get my cigarette butts before I throw them in the garbage and go to the vote in time.
Jah:
My opinion is that after the collective tragedy in the country, nothing real has changed and that has a result. Neither at administrative, nor legislative, nor social level. Everything is left and everything is done the same, maybe a little more careful or hidden, as the case may be. Some people have changed. Whether they are among the victims, whether they are close or known to them, or that they are simply people who still hope that something can be done by a small change. There have been a few changes, but at such a small level that I do not think there are actually changes that make a difference. At least not now. Unfortunately…
And I have probably changed the way most people have been affected (directly or indirectly) by the tragic event last year. More specifically, for me it has greatly increased the ability to become aware of what is happening around me. I think now that just because something seems to be what I know it is, it does not mean that everything can not be changed in a fraction of a second.
I changed because I understood that things could take a completely unexpected turn and that it does not just happen in movies or others, but it can happen anytime to anyone. I changed because I saw what a mistake or a cumulative error, apparently small, but with effects and consequences of the proportions and permanent. The list may continue, but probably not. I have changed because I understand that nothing is permanent and any change can affect your reality for good or for bad. I did not want to change at all, I would not change anything on 30/10/2015, but the choice was not mine or ours …
At the bottom I also changed because our reality has changed, for some, altogether, for others, maybe in part, but it has changed. The fact is that, unfortunately, what happened there that night can not change as much as I would. So, I think we should be able to change something from now on, what is possible, for the sake of things that can not be changed, if not for another purpose …
Adriana:
There has been little change in people's perceptions of what they have been doing daily: problems in the medical and administration system. They are more willing to believe that everything is purulent. But, beyond the awareness, I do not think that more than 2-3 months people have maintained their willingness to help.
Tweets have been made to donate blood for the first 2 weeks, and then the wind whistles again in the donation centers. Until I fail to see newsfeed disappear as my friend's questions go to donate for x or y case, I will not think anything has changed fundamentally.
Ah, and probably fell a few heads then, which made the above to better cover the traces and be a little more fearsome. I do not think I changed very hard. I can invest a little more nerves in trying to convince my friends to vote. Be aware that we are the change
Robert:
I think the impact was felt mainly in the political class, with the fire in the Collective being the first of the protests that ended with the establishment of a government of technocrats.
Otherwise, I did not notice any noticeable changes, and as far as I am concerned, it did not affect my lifestyle (if this is the case).
Andra:
Maybe too few. It's true that some clubs are closed, they're some lawsuits, but this country is essentially sick. Change should come from each of us and develop our sense of responsibility. Regardless of metaphorically speaking, I think we all need some kind of fire.
I have changed in the sense that I am more aware that life hangs on a thread. Maybe I'm glad more about what I have about people, about happenings. I think I smile more, I propose more. I think it's a change of attitude. Every time something bad happens to me, I remember the event and suddenly it does not affect me so much. Maybe I'm stronger.
Oana Bratila:
In the country I do not feel that much has changed … And I mean first of all at the individual level. You know, the brain has the extraordinary ability to make us, after passing through an event with a positive or negative impact on us, to come back in record time to our basic state. And how our basic condition is a fairly comfortable one in which either we leave our head or we cry and we bump on the edge, mostly to that we have come back …
Maybe people started to react more quickly to what is not going well, but they are still in the "reactive" position and waiting for something to go wrong to open their mouth or act in some way or another. The idea of a corporation looking for "dynamic and proactive" people is a cliché, but Romania needs this kind of people.
Collectively, it made me stop postponing a project I had in my mind for a long time. #HaiCuMine is a social engagement project based on the power of personal example and motivation from belonging to a group. I plan to call people to go together to clean up forests, donate blood, plant trees, observe elections, participate in protests, and generally any action where you feel that our involvement matters.
There are many people who would like to get involved, but because they do not have friends or colleagues who take part in such actions around them, they get demoted. However, the good news is that there are not a few of these people and that after Colectiv it is even possible to have multiplied. We just do not know each other yet.
Robi:
After the Collective, there was a clear wave of change that still feels today. Besides the change of government, which seemed to me to be beneficial and a sort of shy responsibility in the consciousness of people, there are not quite obvious things. I think the effects will be seen over many years, in a positive sense if the trend evolves.
I can not put a point on a particular feature that I gained after that event, of course I had no friends or close to the Collective.
I think it made me more accountable to the society I live in, I want more to give an example, not to the fact that tomorrow I will fight in the streets to stop trees with a handgun, not a To try to give an example of common sense in daily behavior, I think it's the first step. We lack the common sense.
Andreea P .:
The collective tragedy was the loss of innocence for me and for my generation. We thought we were indestructible and lived in a beautiful bubble. What happened on the evening of October 30 showed not only the risks to which we were exposed from the unconscious, but also the serious systemic problems our country faces and which eventually allowed this tragedy to happen.
Delasing was no longer an option. We were supposed to do something for us and those who had perished absurdly and terribly at the Collective.
I think the country wanted – in shock and sadness – to do the only thing it could do for the memory of those missing people, to make sure they did not die in the van. And he came out. And he chanted. And she was ultraglimed. And so the Ponta Government fell and that's how the Cholos Government came, whom I personally am proud of.
Then, we should also mention the community that gathered around the #Rezistam Movement, which started by ensuring that those left alive but physically and mentally injured are not allowed to fight alone, and here I want to mention the name of Cristina Hurdubaia who Made it all possible.
#TogetherReizstam is actually a community that still changes something in this country, the person with the person, the individual with the individual.
I only hope that the impact not only on me as an individual, but also on my country, will be with long beating. To push us to vote, to lead us to fairness, to a change of attitude and to more involvement. MA pushing for the vote, pushing it to fairness and a change of attitude.
G .:
Personally, I do not think I changed. They may come out rarer through clubs and, when they do, I am involuntarily attentive to safety issues.
Probably a feeling of paranoia remained in my bones, after all the collective tragedy. On the evening of the misfortune I was in another city in Romania and, from a distance, seemed unbelievable.
In the months immediately following the Collective, I think there was a feeling of rebellion that spread through all the people of the country, regardless of political affiliation or sympathy, especially since there were all kinds of inquiries that clarified the way in which Something like that: employers who want to make an immediate profit with a minimal investment, authorities that are just waiting to be helped to facilitate this, other authorities that do their job of saving, only on paper, a medical system that seems to be broken off The country that just went through a war, etc.
There has been an attempt to "do something, it can not be done" and which has materialized through protests, the demolition of a government and its replacement with people who are not part of the corrupt political family.
There has also emerged an alternative political class, far from being perfect, but at least good to pause the corrupted system we have bathed so far.
In the long run, in the country I do not think much has changed. We see that we are still letting down in a detrimental retardation of all kinds of diversions such as the Family Coalition, which today struggles to ban same-sex marriages, as if this were the problem of Romania, and more so in – a near future will propose a ban on abortion.
As long as we do not remove this way of corrupting and manipulating people's minds, we will not even get rid of corruption in institutions, politics, etc.
Cristian Neagoe:
1. The Government. It has been almost a year of technocrat governance, the most honest and best-intentioned of all the governments that I remember. That, of course, from the perspective of the "least evil", since politics does not exist without compromise. This post-college government has done good things, but some stumbling blocks have been constantly obstructed by Parliament and the press, but also by lack of political or influence experience. Overall, the organized pack against this government has been able to hamper fundamental changes, but it's the first time I know when I felt I was governed by a few skilled people who really care about what the citizen wants.
2. The medical system. I do not know if there's really been a change here, but it's sure he's been shaken from the ground. At least we've all found out that chances are you're dying in a hospital when your cabbage immunity is higher than if you stay at home or even in a certain ditch. I learned how rotten is a system that has allowed for many years to get infections and mortality grow through the ceiling just because some unconscious boys make money carts from our lives. The realization of this fact was so brutal that the trust in the Romanian state as a "protector of public interest" became a sinister joke.
3. Perception of the earthquake. Until the Collective, the fatal earthquake had been perceived by many as a recurrent bau-bau kept on TV by some criminal prophets. People still prefer not to think about it, although it is much clearer now that they live in a city that will dust and dust in an earthquake over 7 degrees. Bucharest is in the top 10 of the worst capitals of a major seism.
If now – or in the next few years – there would be an earthquake of the magnitude of '77, 10,000 people would die, plus many other days in the infected hospitals of Romania, and over 450,000 people would be affected in Bucharest, say studies the most recent. We have reconfirmed 10,000 buildings, trained 3 million people to shoot a deafening alarm signal. They need immense resources that are not anymore, they've gotten on the vanghelions and blew through various pockets. They could have been allocated over the last 15 years, but no government has considered this a priority.
Press status. The press is said to be the "guard dog of democracy". At us, the mainstream press is rather a puppy that makes a lot of laughing, but only on order. Where were the investigative departments of the major Romanian news trusts behind the Collective? If they were not diluted in septicemia, then they were making blackmail on political orders. It took a handful of sports journalists (!) – Catalin Tolontan and his team from Gazeta Sporturilor – to reveal one of the great killer secrets of the corner of the world in which we live (and especially die).
5. Smoking. I find it hard to smoke in public places and the world seems to be used to it. It was not as difficult as many people thought. I'm smoker, but I do not mind going out. On the contrary, the cigarette becomes a special occasion, it's not just a miserable automatism. I'm glad I smoke less, I do not hurt others with my smoke, I'm talking to the strangers that brings the vagina together, my clothes do not smell of ash. And I have not heard that for this reason a traditional fumeliness has gone bankrupt (with all the ISU authorizations taken for granted).
6. Exit in town. From college, it's not the same way out there. Not before the cultural and commercial offer would have been a sensation. But after that horrible fire, almost everything was closed: cinemas, theaters, clubs, pubs, restaurants, art galleries, handicraft workshops. This meant for many bankruptcy, for others, as traditional craftsmen (watchmakers, shoemakers, glassworks, ceaprazari, furniture restorers, radio-TV troubleshooters, etc.), an end of an era, and sometimes even Personal life. They are collateral victims of a system that has done nothing to protect them and now leaves them on the road.
7. Society. I think she's got a little more solid. From the sacrifice of that Collective, it has reborn a collectivity that seemed to be lost among us here.
Gabriela:
I do not think much has changed as a direct effect of the Collective incident. The most significant change is the absence (permanent) of those who did not survive the fire. The victims I personally knew were the kind of people who had a positive contribution to society (and who knows what we could have done with them?).
After 31 October 2015, I stopped going to musical events indoors in private places (bars, clubs, halls, etc.) in Bucharest. Not because I'm afraid, but as a personal form of boycott because there is no way to know with certainty which places are safe and not.
Dragos:
It's been a year and I did not do anything. Nothing has really changed.
Collective is about people and the system. It's hard for me to talk about the Collective without thinking about politics and administration. Political octopus is so well-infiltrated in social structures that almost every discussion goes to politics. People in the system who had to shut up or disappear have entered a gray area and are now starting to come out again. Why? Because we allow this, because they have the impression of watching. Well, we who do not fool us with buckets, do not forget. And no, we will not even forget you, as I have not forgotten anyone from '89 until now.
I think people who until now have not been looking around at all around them as things happen have begun to become a little more careful, have begun to ask and ask questions, but that's all.
Collectively affection has affected us very emotionally and I think I have become a bit more emotionally sensitive. The open wound begins to close and it is natural to happen like this, but we need to take care of it and do it so that it scars properly.
I personally find it very hard to think about what happened without my crying. I plang and injure myself because I do not understand why this mess had to happen. Yes, I lost a very good friend there. Yeah, I'm gonna get my hands on the bad guy and go over them because now, a year after, they all will show up on TV or Facebook and they're gonna make their point of sorrow and compassion.
I would love to shut up all. Quiet.
ETHICAL ISSUES
3.11 LIMITATIONS
3.12 VALIDITY, RELIABILITY AND GENERALIZABILITY
§CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSION
§CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
There is a proverb in English that says something like 'there is no limit how bad things can get', and these days, unfortunately, the collective club tragedy Has proven not to be just a proverb, but a real word. There are many lessons to learn and draw conclusions, but it is especially important to take the necessary steps in the future to avoid such events.We often hear the phrase 'risk transfer by insurance' … It is a wrong formulation because the risk can not be transferred, but only the financial consequences of the risk. Practically, in the case of the 'Collective' club, no insurer could have 'stopped' the fire but only, in the case of an insurance policy (property or civil liability), to pay compensation if a risk had occurred secure.Responsibility for risk control is strictly an economic agent, and authorities, by means of rules and legislation, encourage it by specific means to manage their fire risk for example (by issuing fire authorizations, fire risk recommendations, punitive actions In the event of non-compliance with the rules, ie fines, etc.). It should be noted that fire protection rules in Romania are very close, if not identical to many of the international standards.
Any risk occurs as a result of an uninterrupted chain of events that need not necessarily be related to each other. The role of risk management is to 'break' such a chain, thereby reducing the frequency and severity of potential damage. Risk control measures to protect property and civil liability (which should be lacking in any economic agent working with the public) are largely common (with the difference as for exposures do not use separation and diversification) and keep on Construction (building materials, observance of the norms in force, etc.), the activity carried out by the insured (training and procedures in case of a risk, evacuation in case of emergency, etc.), protection (against fires for example) and not in Last resort to protect against external risks (eg, neighbors). When the risk is too high, risk management helps the businessman avoid those activities where the production of risk is not a hazard but almost a certainty – both in terms of damage to property or liability and to use a Metaphor, prevent economic agents from welding a full gas tank.
APENDIX
http://www.discovery.ro/emisiuni/colectiv/
REFERENCES
1.Bowdin, G. (2012). Events Management 3rd Edition. 3rd ed. Abingdon: Routledge [Imprint].
2. Ziare.com. (2015). incendiu club Colectiv | Actualitate | Ziare.com. [online] Available at: http://www.ziare.com/stiri/incendiu-club-colectiv/ [Accessed 24 Mar. 2017].
3. stirileprotv.ro. (2016). UN AN DE LA TRAGEDIA DIN COLECTIV. Portretele celor 64 de tineri care si-au pierdut viata in urma incendiului. [online] Available at: http://stirileprotv.ro/stiri/incendiu-in-colectiv/jurnalisti-muzicieni-arhitecti-si-fotografi-cine-sunt-cei-48-de-tineri-care-si-au-pierdut-viata-in-colectiv.html [Accessed 24 Mar. 2017].
4. Stirileprotv.ro. (2015). INCENDIU IN COLECTIV. [online] Available at: http://stirileprotv.ro/stiri/incendiu-in-colectiv [Accessed 24 Mar. 2017].
5. Hopkin, P. (2015). Fundamentals of risk management. 3rd ed. London: Kogan Page, pp.147-171.
6. Clark, A., Smith, J. and Conroy, C. (2014). Domestic fire risk: a narrative review of social science literature and implications for further research. Journal of Risk Research, 18(9), pp.1113-1129.
7. Slovic, P., and E. Peters. 2006. “Risk Perception and Affect.” Current Directions in Psychological Science. 15 (6): 322-325.
8. Knuth, D., Kehl, D., Hulse L., Spangenberg L., Brähler, E. and Schmidt, S. (2014). Risk perception and emergency experience: comparing a representative German sample with German emergency survivors. Journal of Risk Research, 18(5), pp.581-601.
9. Walters, G., Mair, J. and Lim, J. (2016). Sensationalist media reporting of disastrous events: Implications for tourism. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 28, pp.3-10.
10. GETZ, D. (2016). EVENT STUDIES: THEORY, RESEARCH AND POLICY FOR PLANNED EVENTS. 3rd ed. LONDON: ROUTLEDGE.
11. Wilson, J. (2010). Essentials of business research. 1st ed. London: Sage.
12. Myers, M. (2011). Qualitative research in business & management. 1st ed. London: Sage.
13. Saunders, M. and Lewis, P. (2012). Doing research in business and management. 1st ed. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
14. Hester R.E., Harrison R.M., (1998), Risk Assesement and Risk management, Royal Society of Chemerstry, Manchester, pp.124.
15. J. Pastor, M. Alia. A. J. Hernandez, M.J. Adarve, A. Urcclay and F. A. Anton,(1993), Sei. Total Environ., suppl. 127.
D.J. Lisk, Sei. Total Environ.. (1991), 100. 415.
P. M. Fedorak and R.E. Rogers. Waste Manage. Res., ,9, 537.
Paul Slovic, 2010, The feeling of risk, Earthscan, London, pp.220.
https://www.romania-insider.com/tragedy-in-romania-people-had-153-seconds-to-get-out-of-the-deadly-club/
Sălcudean M., Mureșan R., The emotional impact of traditional and new media in social events,in Comunicar magasine, no.50/2017.
G.V. Hadjisophocleous and Z. Fu , Literature review of fire risk assessment methodologies , International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, Volume 6, Number 1, p.28-45, 2004
Thomson T. , Parrott R.Nussbaum J., (2011), The Routledge handbook of health comunication, second edition, Routledge, London, pp.220, 221.
Hasselt V., Hernsen M.(1999), Handbook of psichological approaches with violent offenders, Springer, New York, p.217.
David Yung,(2008) Principles of fire risk assessement in building, Wiley, West Sussex, pp.69.
John Buckman, (2006), Chief fire officers, desk reference, Jhones and Bertlet, Boston, p.114.
Șandor Sorin, 2010, Metode și tehnici de cercetare în științele sociale, București, Polirom, p.45.
www.vice.com.
Metropolitan.ro
http://www.1asig.ro/Nicio-asigurare-nu-inlocuieste-managementul-riscurilor-articol-52530.htm
http://www.discovery.ro/emisiuni/colectiv/
Copyright Notice
© Licențiada.org respectă drepturile de proprietate intelectuală și așteaptă ca toți utilizatorii să facă același lucru. Dacă consideri că un conținut de pe site încalcă drepturile tale de autor, te rugăm să trimiți o notificare DMCA.
Acest articol: How Did Colectiv Disaster Affected The Risk Perception Of Youths In Romania (ID: 116057)
Dacă considerați că acest conținut vă încalcă drepturile de autor, vă rugăm să depuneți o cerere pe pagina noastră Copyright Takedown.