Civil protection, due to its origin in security, defense and the national guard, has been associated with the army. In this sense, the literature review indicates the unavoidable influence of law, order and security institutions on civil protection. Therefore, the objective of this work was to observe this line of inheritance in a public university under the assumption that the community surveyed would have an expectation oriented towards science and technology. An exploratory, transversal and correlational work was carried out with a sample of 100 students selected for their affiliation to the internship and social service system in national security and law enforcement institutions. The results show that risk perception is oriented to the incommensurability of exposure to internal and external conflicts (35% of the total variance explained). In relation to the reviewed literature, it is recommended to reject the hypothesis related to the significant differences between the dimensions reported and the factors observed in the present work.

Civil protection is a central axis on the agenda of international organizations dedicated to financing developing countries and mitigating internal or international war conflicts (DeRouen, Bercovitch & Pospieszna, 2011). The origin of civil protection lies in territorial and national security, as well as civil defense. Consequently, the institutions and forces of order were responsible for legitimizing the coercive policies that force a war conflict.

The second war reported about 150 million deaths, more than half, around 58%, are civilian deaths (Singer & Small, 1994). In the Nazi regime from 1933 to 1945, 187 million civilians related to Jewish culture were executed; 6 million Jewish communities, 5.7 million Russian Jewish communities, 3 million war prisoners with Jewish ancestry, 1.8 million Polish Jewish communities, 825 thousand Serbian and Roman Jewish communities (Pearn, 2003). It is estimated that there are just over 86 thousand victims in the Syrian civil war and 13 thousand in the war between Ukraine and Russia, 4 thousand of which are civilians (Fazal, 2004).

In these scenarios, civil protection emerges with a pacification option, although its extension in public and citizen security suggests that internal conflicts are more unpredictable than external ones. In fact, the casualties in civil wars exceed any international conflict.

The history of civil protection is the story of how societies have developed systems and measures to protect their citizens and communities in the event of natural disasters, emergencies and crisis situations.

Antiquity: Throughout history, communities have developed rudimentary forms of civil protection (Nsia-Pepra, 2016). For example, ancient civilizations such as the Romans had systems for fighting fires and for medical care in case of disasters. However, these systems were limited and lacked the organization and scope of modern systems.

18th century: In Europe, particularly England, voluntary rescue societies were created to help victims of shipwrecks and other maritime disasters (Collier & Hoeffler, 2007). These organizations marked the beginning of a more organized response to emergencies.

19th century: As cities grew and became more prone to fires and other urban disasters, the first fire departments emerged and more effective fire alarm and suppression systems were developed (Brittain, 1998).

20th century: Following the two world wars and the growing threat of nuclear war during the Cold War, the importance of civil protection was emphasized. Many countries created government agencies dedicated to emergency management and disaster preparedness, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the United States (Stampp, 1965).

1950s: During the Cold War, civilian preparedness for nuclear attacks was widely promoted. Nuclear shelters were built and warning exercises were carried out for the population (Schantz, 2013).

1970s: The focus on civil protection began to expand beyond nuclear war to include a variety of natural and man-made disasters (Nsia-Pepra, 2019). More comprehensive disaster response plans were developed and public education on preparedness was promoted.

2000s: The threat of terrorism became a major focus of civil protection in many parts of the world after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States (Chen, Sheng, & Lai, 2023). More rigorous security measures were established and emergency response capabilities were strengthened.

21st century: Civil protection has continued to evolve with the growing threat of extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, floods, wildfires and earthquakes (Lacina, 2006). They have also focused on cybersecurity and preparedness for pandemics, such as COVID-19.

Today, civil protection is an essential component of emergency management in most countries, and its approach has evolved to address a wide range of threats and challenges, with an emphasis on planning, preparation, response and disaster recovery (Marshall, 2014). Civil protection agencies work closely with other organizations, local governments and the community at large to ensure the safety and resilience of populations in the face of all types of crisis situations.

The evolution of civil protection has been a continuous process that has adapted to changing needs and challenges over time. Below is an overview of the evolution of civil protection:

Historical origins: The first signs of civil protection measures can be traced back to ancient civilizations, which developed rudimentary systems to deal with natural disasters and conflicts (Markevich & Harrison, 2011). For example, the Romans had fire brigades and emergency doctors.

19th century: With the growth of cities and industrialization, the first fire organizations and rescue societies emerged to address fires and emergencies (Oakes, 1995). These organizations were largely voluntary.

World War I: During World War I, there were significant advances in emergency medical care and battlefield casualty evacuation (Saum, 1974). These advances influenced the subsequent development of emergency medical care in civilian situations.

World War II: World War II saw the implementation of mass evacuation strategies for civilians in response to bombing and air raids (Ghobarah, Huth & Russett, 2004). This led to the recognition of the importance of civil protection planning in times of conflict and disasters.

Cold War: During the Cold War, there was a strong emphasis on civilian preparation for a possible nuclear attack (Guha Sapir et al., 2022). Nuclear shelters were built and warning exercises were carried out for the population.

1960s: Over time, civil protection began to expand beyond nuclear war to include a variety of natural and man-made disasters (Durfee, 2009). Specific government agencies were established for emergency management and civil protection.

1970s and 1980s: Public education on disaster preparedness and the importance of emergency planning was promoted. Civil protection became an integral part of emergency management in many countries (Hacker, 2011).

1990s and 2000s: The threat of terrorism gained prominence in civil protection after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States (Curlin, Chen & Hussain, 1976). Security measures were reinforced and response capabilities against terrorist attacks were improved.

21st century: Civil protection has continued to evolve to address a wide range of threats, including extreme weather events, pandemics, cyberattacks and technological disasters (Myers, 1986). Emphasis has been placed on community resilience, inter-agency coordination and preparation for complex and multifaceted scenarios.

Technological advances: The development of communication technologies, geographic information systems and weather forecasting models has significantly improved the ability to predict, monitor and respond to disasters (Cunningham, 2006).

Global focus: International cooperation on civil protection has become more important, with countries and organizations working together to respond to disasters around the world. Examples of this include the Global Fire Information System. Information Management System) and the United Nations Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

In summary, the evolution of civil protection has involved a constant expansion of its scope and adaptation to changing threats and challenges over time (Sambanis, 2002). It has moved from focusing on military conflicts to addressing a variety of emergency situations, including natural disasters, terrorist threats and technological risks, with a focus on preparedness, response and risk mitigation.

Civil protection as an instrument of coercive mediation in conflicts has been promoted by the United Nations. It is estimated that the number of civilian deaths in conflicts is significantly reduced if the number of troops sent increases sharply (Fuftman, Kathman & Shannon, 2013: 875). Furthermore, the intensification of conflicts forced a diversification of peace missions with a considerable increase in troops and a significant reduction in direct and indirect victims in conflicts between groups or nations (Bove & Ruggeri, 2016: 681).

However, civil protection replaced civil defense when it was implemented in disaster risks due to exposure to natural and technological phenomena. The attack on the twin towers reconsidered protection with an orientation towards civil defense, ignoring the rights of those exposed to disaster risks due to authoritarian policies of espionage and data manipulation (Alexander, 2002: 209).

In the context of war conflicts, combat strategies proliferate. Ethnic cleansing is established through strategies of deception, ambush, impersonation or anticipation of the intervention of international peacekeeping organizations. Such military strategies force civilian self-defense. These are simulations of support or neutrality that allow the self-defense groups to preserve their assets and protect their members (Naines & Paddon, 2012: 231).

However, the virtues of civil self-defense groups prevail over questions about forced recruitment, as well as the physical and sexual abuse of those who refuse to collaborate. In this sense, civil protection moves towards civil security channeled by protocols that demonstrate the vulnerability of adverse groups to armed violence (Carpenter, 2017: 377).

Therefore, the objective of this work was to establish the research agenda around civil protection from its military origins to the implementation of technology in relation to the prevention and mitigation of conflicts and risks.

Are there significant differences between the dimensions of civil protection with respect to the observations of this work in a sample of 100 students from a public university regarding the perception, communication and management of internal and external war conflicts?

Hypothesis 1. Given that the investigative agenda is based on the origin of civil protection in territorial and national defense and security, it is feasible to appreciate a review bias that will deepen the recognition of law enforcement forces, mainly military forces, as leaders of the security and pacification through coercion, obedience and compliance of civil society.

Hypothesis 2. If the literature legitimizes the intervention of the army in civil protection through some security and pacification system, then it will justify the use of coercion as a guiding instrument of peace and conflict relations between diverse, antagonistic or allied authors.

Hypothesis 3. While the research agenda legitimizes military coercion as the guiding axis of the security and civil protection agenda, the academic community’s question such an approach and, consequently, significant differences are expected between the structure of dimensions of security and civil protection reported. in the literature regarding the risk perceptions of the sample of students surveyed.

Method

A cross-sectional, exploratory and correlational study was carried out with a sample of 100 students ( M = 21.3 SD = 3.2 years and M = 9'897.00 SD = 324.38 monthly income) selected for their participation in the internship and social service system in institutions of the order like the police and the army.

The Risk Perception Scale was used, which includes statements regarding exposure to conflicts and risks associated with civil or international wars. Each item includes seven response options ranging from 0 = “not at all likely” to 7 = “quite likely.” The reliability of the scale reached values higher than those required with alpha and omega of 0.785 and 0.796 respectively. Adequacy and sphericity [ X 2 = 2539.520 (153 df) p = 0.001; KMO = 0.801] suggests validity that ranged between 0.345 and 0.547

The sample was contacted through their institutional email. They were informed about the objectives and those responsible for the project, emphasizing the non-remuneration for their participation in the study, as well as the written guarantee of confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. The homogenization of the concepts was established with focus groups of 10 people who responded to activating questions such as: In an internal or external conflict, what would you expect from the local, federal police, and the army? Do you consider that civil society should expose itself to civil or external conflict with another nation in order to support, support or collaborate with law enforcement and security forces? Next, using a Delphi technique, the same groups evaluated the scale items, assigning a value of 0 for their degree of total disagreement and 1 for their total agreement in three rounds. In the first session they issued their grade, in the second they compared their criteria with those of their classmates, and in the third session they reconsidered or ratified their grade. In a third session they responded to the items on the risk perception scale.

The data were captured in Excel and processed in JASP version 14. The parameters of reliability, adequacy, sphericity, validity, correlation and regression were estimated. Values close to unity were considered evidence of non-rejection of the hypotheses.

Results

Adequacy and sphericity were established with the Bartlett test and the KMO parameter. The results show that the scale reached the minimum essential values of 0.600 for all items except number 18. This means that more sophisticated analyzes could be carried out. 

The exploratory factor analysis of principal axes with promax rotation showed correlation values between the items and three factors that the literature identifies as incommensurability, unpredictability and uncontrollability of conflicts and war risks. That is, the sample surveyed seems to randomly attribute exposure to conflicts and risks without considering prevention or mitigation. 

The percentages of explained variance achieved by the factors indicate that the incommensurability factor is the prevailing one in the analyzed structure. In this way, 35% of the total variance is explained by the incommensurability dimension, 15% by the unpredictability factor and the same percentage for the uncontrollability component. 

In order to establish the dependency relationships between the factors, the correlations between them were estimated. The results show that incommensurability and unpredictability have negative relationships (0.097), but the first factor with uncontrollability reaches positive values (0.069), as well as the second and third factors have positive associations (0.143). That is, the factor structure seems to be configured around the first factor since the correlations with the second and third factors indicate collinearity.

The adjustment values [ X 2 = 683.221 (102 df ) p = 0.001; RMSEA = 0.232; TLI = 0.621] suggest the rejection of the null hypothesis. It means then that the premise of the influence of national security administered and legitimized by the authority of the forces of law and order is accepted by the sample surveyed. Furthermore, the structure indicates that the first factor related to incommensurability reflects the propaganda of security and pacification based on the increase in troops in a war conflict.

Discussion

The review of the literature concerning civil protection indicates the prevalence of a military approach, since the evidence suggests that an increase in the number of blue helmets in war conflicts corresponds to a pacification of civil or international war scenarios (Garenne, Coninx & Dupuy, 1997). In this sense, the literature highlights that the impact on the civilian population is established with the measurement of risk perception, which is a function of communication and the culture of risk exposure (Eckhardt, 1991). If war conflicts are distinguished by the propaganda of victory directed at the military forces and the counter-propaganda of massacre directed at the international community, it is feasible to consider that the security or pacification propaganda of the blue helmets is directed towards all actors (Cunningham, 2016). In this way, the symbolization and meaning of war is counteracted by the establishment of a conflict-oriented agenda for propagandists and pacification promoted by international organizations such as the United Nations or Doctors Without Borders, but with the exhibition of the military forces in terms of volume, permanence and attention to the affected population (Schabas, 1998).

The limits of the literature review lie in the number of sources consulted, since access to literature limits the generalization of the discussion and criticism to the central themes. Consequently, it is recommended to carry out a review with a lower threshold of years of publication, but with extensive databases in order to establish the axes of the research agenda and anticipate discussion scenarios oriented towards the legitimation of military forces in the civil protection, since science and technology govern pacification decisions as long as the actors submit to verifiable knowledge.

Conclusion

Protection is a central axis in the international cooperation agenda for the development of countries. In the case of pacification, the literature reviewed suggests that law enforcement forces, mainly the military, are at least symbolic leaders of the relations between the parties in conflict. Such propensity to risk contrasts with the literature related to the perception of communities affected by war conflicts. Inside war zones, affected civilians can expect pacification with the intervention of UN blue helmets, but this communication and risk management strategy is susceptible to propaganda which can veer towards massacre and generate terror in the civilian population more than security. Therefore, the literature regarding the impact of propaganda on communities in conflict will have to be questioned until a satisfactory point of consensus is reached where science and technology, through some law enforcement, anticipate conflicts, reduce risks and mitigate the war.