EUROPEAN AND SLOVENIAN PUBLIC OPINION ON PROTECTION AGAINST NATURAL AND OTHER DISASTERS
Abstract
An analysis of public opinion data helps us identify the fundamental views and opinions of the European and Slovenian public on civil protection and protection against natural and other disasters. A descriptive analysis of data on the key challenges and priorities of the European Union (EU) shows that security and related variables occupy a very important place in European public opinion. Among the perceived threats, disasters related to climate change are on average the most prominent; however, there are also significant differences between EU Member States. European public opinion unequivocally supports the coordinating role of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism in responding to disasters. It also supports the fact that the EU offers solidarity assistance in the event of a disaster to all countries around the world that request help. On average, trust in regional or local, national, and European authorities with regard to their preparedness for disasters at the EU level is not satisfactory, and there are very large differences between individual countries, as well. The Slovenian public emphasize the importance of developing disaster protection, have a high level of trust in disaster response actors and in media reporting on disasters, believe in the well- preparedness of the actors, and assess the effectiveness of their response to disasters differently from case to case. The public see the Slovenian Armed Forces as an important entity in providing disaster relief.
References
Almond, G. A., Verba, S., 1965. The Civic Culture. Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. An Analytic Study. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company.
Borger, V., 2020. The concept of Solidarity. V The Currency of Solidarity: Constitutional Transformation during the Euro Crisis, Cambridge Studies in European Law and Policy. Cambridge University Press, 25–52.
Covid-19 sledilnik. Stanje covid-19 v Sloveniji, dostopno na: https://covid-19.sledilnik.org/sl/stats, 5. 6. 2025.
CRED 2023 Disasters in Numbers. UC Louvain, 2024.
Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism 2013.
Dobnik Jeraj, M., Martinič, S., 2019. Spremembe na področju civilne zaščite na ravni Evropske unije (EU), Ujma 33, 258–265.
Doktrina zaščite, reševanja in pomoči. Vlada Republike Slovenije, 30. 5. 2002.
Emergency Response Coordination Centre, https://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/civil-protection/emergency-response-coordination-centre-ercc_en, 28. 8. 2024.
Flash Eurobarometer 550, EU challenges and priorities 2024.
Forst, R., 2021. Solidarity: Concept, Conceptions, and Contexts. Normative Orders 02. Research Centre of Goethe University Frankfurt am Main.
Howard, A., Agllias, K., Bevis, M., Blakemore, T. 2016. They’ll Tell Us When to Evacuate: The Experiences and Expectations of Disaster-Related Communication in Vulnerable Groups, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 139–146.
Inglehart, R., 1990, Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Kervyn, N., Chan, E., Malone, C., Korpusik, A., Ybarra, O., 2014. Not All Disasters Are Equal in the Public’s Eye: The Negativity Effect of Warmth and Brand Perception, Social Cognition, 32, (3), 256–275.
Kirschenbaum, A., Rapaport, C., Canetti, D., 2017. The Impact of Information Sources on Earthquake Preparedness, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 21 (March), 99–109.
Komter, A. E., 2004. Social Solidarity and the Gift. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Malešič, M.,1991. Evropski družbi naproti: Civilna zaščita. Ujma 5, 246–248.
Malešič, M., 2014. Slovenska javnost: spoznavni in zaznavni vidiki varnosti. Ljubljana: Založba FDV.
Malešič, M., Javnomnenjska zaznava okoljske varnosti v Sloveniji. Teorija in praksa: revija za družbena vprašanja, 2023, 60 (4), 729–752.
Malešič, M. 2019. The concept of trust in disasters: the Slovenian experience. Disaster prevention and management, 28 (5), 603–615.
Malešič, M., 2025. The Union Civil Protection Mechanism in the prism of solidarity theory. Journal of comparative politics, 18 (1), 34–50.
Mileti, D., 1999. Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States, Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Mishler, W., Rose, R., 2001. What Are the Origins of Political Trust?: Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-Communist Societies. Comparative Political Studies, 34(1), 30–62.
Newton, K., Norris P., 1999. Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture or Performance? Paper for Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, 1-5 September.
Rosenthal, U., Boin, A. R., Comfort, L. K., 2001. Managing Crises. Threats, Dilemmas, Opportunities. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 342–349.
Sciarra, S., 2018. Solidarity and Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Slovensko javno mnenje 2023/2 in Slovensko javno mnenje 2024/1.
Special Eurobarometer 541, EU Civil Protection 2023.
‘t Hart, P., Sundelius, B., 2013. Crisis Management Revisited: A New Agenda for Research, Training and Capacity Building within Europe, Cooperation and Conflict, 444–461. www.cac.sagepub.com, 15. 10. 2014.
Trust in Professions 2018. The GfK Verein study, From firefighters to politicians. https://www.nim.org/fileadmin/PUBLIC/3_NIM_Publikationen/NIM_Studies/2018_-_Trust_in_Professions_-_Englisch.pdf, 5. 6. 2025.
Ujma 2014–2023, Ljubljana, Uprava RS za zaščito in reševanje.
Union Civil Protection Knowledge Networ. https://civil-protection-knowledge-network.europa.eu/, 24. 8. 2024.
Uprava Republike Slovenije za zaščito in reševanje. http://www.sos112.si/slo/page.php?src=cz1.htm, 13. 12. 2014.
Villani, S., 2017. The EU Civil Protection Mechanism: Instrument of response in the event of a disaster. Revista Universitaria Europea 26, 121–148.
White, J. D., Fu, K. W. Who Do You Trust? Comparing People-Centred Communications in Disaster Situations in the United States and China, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 14, (2), 126–142.
Weng, W. W., Woo, C. K., Cheng, Y. S., Ho, T., Horowitz, I., 2015. Public Trust and Corruption Perception: Disaster Relief, Applied Economics, 47 (6), 4967–4981.
Zakon o obrambi, Uradni list RS, št. 103/04 – uradno prečiščeno besedilo in 95/15.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ujma

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The articles are made available to the public under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).