Safety Bubble versus Risk Awareness

• DOI: 10.1177/0095327X12465814
• Date: 01 April 2014
• Author: Janja Vuga
• Published date: 01 April 2014
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article
Armed Forces & Society
2014, Vol. 40(2) 357-381
Safety Bubble versus
ª The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Risk Awareness:
DOI: 10.1177/0095327X12465814
afs.sagepub.com
Casualty Aversion
among the Slovenian
Public
Janja Vuga1
Abstract
The acceptance of risk in a certain society is tested when de facto or merely
potential military death casualties are raised. Several dimensions influencing the
acceptability of risk have already been analyzed, although only three are examined in
this article—namely, the historicopolitical, sociodemographic, and cultural. The
Slovenian public opinion survey persistently shows strong risk aversion among
Slovenians and the article’s purpose is therefore to (1) establish how can the strong
risk aversion be explained by the selected dimensions; and (2) identify what part of
the population is most risk-aversive. To that end, over twenty years of Slovenian
public poll data are analyzed using a triangulation of statistical methods, revealing
a cultural pattern of safety bubble versus risk awareness. As the risk aversion model
reveals, Slovenian society represents a safety bubble, with strong risk aversion and a
very narrow selection of activities worth making sacrifices for. Death casualties are
rarely accepted, even if incurred in support of ideals society strongly appreciates, like
humanitarian causes.
Keywords
risk aversion, safety bubble, risk awareness, peace operations, Slovenian armed
forces
1 Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Corresponding Author:
Janja Vuga, Faculty of Social Sciences, Kardeljeva ploscad 5, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Email: janja.vuga@fdv.uni-lj.si

---

358
Armed Forces & Society 40(2)
Introduction
Security has been redefined in the context of globalization, which ultimately put an
end to the illusion that security issues stop at national borders; it has become
internationalized and based on interdependency.1 Hence, the question arises of
whether all nations are willing to participate in the endeavor to assure international
peace and security and, further, if they agree upon the means to be used in order to
achieve that. Data show that the European public is inclined to support ‘‘safer’’
activities that involve minimal use of force. The same holds true for the Slovenian
public, which is generally willing to contribute to collective security; however, only
up to the point where lives are not endangered. In other words, the willingness to
bear the burden of assuring international peace and security is reduced to low-risk
peace operations (POs), for instance humanitarian assistance and postconflict
reconstruction or peace building. One reason for this attitude is the lack of under-
standing of the average citizen about the need for military interventions around the
globe. In the case of Slovenia, the country’s distant and relatively short war
experience, the current perception of low (or no) military threats, past ideas of
demilitarization, and the reappearance of the so-called peace syndrome (related to
the personal rejection of using weapons) have contributed to the formation of the
so-called safety bubble that Slovenian society is living inside.
Researchers have identified several dimensions that influence public attitudes to
death casualties; Luttwak,2 for example, talks about demography, history, politics,
and so on, while Smith3 defines the military context, national interest, strategic
calculus, national policy, and social change as being the most influential in the
context of death casualty aversion among people. Burk,4 on the other hand, empha-
sizes the ability of a government to present the situation as worth dying for and the
resulting death casualties as ‘‘good deaths.’’ However, even in situations where the
public is overwhelmingly in favor of certain POs and even willing to accept death
casualties, like the Dutch public opinion during the war in former Yugoslavia,5
politicians will not necessarily decide on participation if the ‘‘strategic calculus’’
is not in their favor.6 In that context, Meulen and Soeters talk about acceptable risk
as a responsible kind of risk given the military means and political goals.7
Obviously, different authors have identified various dimensions as being
important in shaping the public attitudes to risk. The following article focuses on
three key dimensions that shape public opinion: the first is national culture in the
context of security related uncertainty avoidance; the second is the historicopolitical
dimension in the context of the peace syndrome and the position of a small country
in international relations; while the third is the sociodemographic dimension in the
context of gender- and age-based differences as well as the perception of societal
well-being. The Slovenian public opinion (SPO) survey shows persistently strong
risk aversion among the Slovenian public and therefore the purpose of the article
is to establish if this strong level of risk aversion can be explained by the selected
dimensions and to identify what part of the population is most risk-aversive.

---

Vuga
359
Prevailing Values and Slovenian Culture
Culture is certainly not static and is instead fluid and changeable; it therefore cannot
be framed, let alone expected to remain resistant to various internal and external
changes. Even though there is no uniform definition of culture, values are
elementary for a culture’s existence. Values reflect the core of humanity and human
culture; consequently, there are no societies or social systems without a system of
values which directs and gives sense to the preservation, reproduction and advance-
ment of the society or culture.8 Values are a basic component of every culture and
represent a life guide;9 a manifestation of desirable behavior which affects people’s
decisions, their own actions and evaluations of the actions of others;10 a system of
goals of an individual which expresses the individual’s interests and motivates him
or her;11 and higher principles and higher goals to which individuals aspire, while
society accepts them and balances its activities according to them.12 McCauley notes
that values exist because morals are more convincing and cheaper than coercion.13
According to Hofstede’s14 model of cultural dimensions, Slovenians are inclined to
avoid uncertainty and accept high power distance relations, and are also inclined
to feminine and collectivistic cultural patterns. Cultures avoiding uncertainty try to
minimize the possibility of vague situations by strict laws, rules, security measures,
and so on. Given the strong tendency toward certainty and consequently safety, it is
clear that any kind of risk is undesirable. The high-risk situations that Slovenian
servicemen and servicewomen often face are therefore also disapproved by the public.
According to the masculinity index, Slovenia is one of the more feminine countries,
meaning that forgiveness, helping others, caring for people, and so on, are highly
desired values. Both genders in feminine countries are expected to have common val-
ues, as opposed to more masculine countries where there is a significant gap between
the values expected of men and women. Slovenian culture is very high on power dis-
tribution, meaning that the society accepts an unequal distribution of social power. In
addition, Slovenia has been identified as a collectivistic society. The latter cultural
pattern dates back over 1,400 years when the Slovenian population largely consisted
of farmers forming part of a small and closely connected society.15 The integration of
individuals already at birth into a closely knit social environment has thus in fact
presented a survival strategy for Slovenian people.16 On the other hand, some Slove-
nian sociological theorists (Nastran-Ule, Musek, Bernik)17 have identified a shift in
the past two decades toward individualism and personal values, such as personal
development, interpersonal relations, creativity, education, and so on.
The principles of self-determination and own pleasure are being reinforced and a turn
toward personal or egocentric values can be observed; young people, for example, are no
longer satisfied with earnings, but wish to achieve self-fulfillment and face challenges.
Average assessments of value categories show that among Slovenians social values
predominate, followed by security-related, democratic, and traditional values.18
Despite the low public trust in the majority of state institutions, the Slovenian
Armed Forces (SAF) has remained a highly trusted institution over the years.

---

360
Armed Forces & Society 40(2)
Possible reasons for the high level of trust gained by the SAF can be interpreted
using Garb’s idea of the military converging with the civil environment in terms
of values.19 The armed forces are getting closer to broader society in their concept
and value system, which in turn makes them more accepted. More individualized
values among SAF members are manifested through the modern type of motivation
for participation in POs, followed very closely by the postmodern type, which
corresponds with the value shift in Slovenian society.20 It seems that institutional
loyalty no longer suffices for SAF members since they require additional motivation,
such as career improvement, gaining new skills, the chance of an adventure and
ultimately to earn extra money.21 The perception of POs as a tool to guarantee global
or at least regional stability has not been identified among members of the SAF. It
could be said that the SAF, as well as the whole of...