@article{KuhlmannHellstroemRambergetal.2021,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Hellstr{\"o}m, Mikael and Ramberg, Ulf and Reiter, Renate},
  title     = {Tracing divergence in crisis governance},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences},
  volume    = {87},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {Los Angeles, California},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852320979359},
  pages     = {556 -- 575},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {This cross-country comparison of administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden is aimed at exploring how institutional contexts and administrative cultures have shaped strategies of problem-solving and governance modes during the pandemic, and to what extent the crisis has been used for opportunity management. The article shows that in France, the central government reacted determinedly and hierarchically, with tough containment measures. By contrast, the response in Germany was characterized by an initial bottom-up approach that gave way to remarkable federal unity in the further course of the crisis, followed again by a return to regional variance and local discretion. In Sweden, there was a continuation of 'normal governance' and a strategy of relying on voluntary compliance largely based on recommendations and less - as in Germany and France - on a strategy of imposing legally binding regulations. The comparative analysis also reveals that relevant stakeholders in all three countries have used the crisis as an opportunity for changes in the institutional settings and administrative procedures.},
  language  = {en}
}