TY - JOUR A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Hellström, Mikael A1 - Ramberg, Ulf A1 - Reiter, Renate T1 - Tracing divergence in crisis governance BT - responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden compared JF - International review of administrative sciences N2 - 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. KW - administrative culture KW - containment KW - crisis KW - governance KW - multi-level system KW - policy advice KW - public health KW - window of opportunity Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320979359 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 87 IS - 3 SP - 556 EP - 575 PB - Sage CY - Los Angeles, California ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Bouckaert, Geert A1 - Galli, Davide A1 - Reiter, Renate A1 - van Hecke, Steven T1 - Opportunity management of the COVID-19 pandemic BT - testing the crisis from a global perspective JF - International review of administrative sciences N2 - This article provides a conceptual framework for the analysis of COVID-19 crisis governance in the first half of 2020 from a cross-country comparative perspective. It focuses on the issue of opportunity management, that is, how the crisis was used by relevant actors of distinctly different administrative cultures as a window of opportunity. We started from an overall interest in the factors that have influenced the national politics of crisis management to answer the question of whether and how political and administrative actors in various countries have used the crisis as an opportunity to facilitate, accelerate or prevent changes in institutional settings. The objective is to study the institutional settings and governance structures, (alleged) solutions and remedies, and constellations of actors and preferences that have influenced the mode of crisis and opportunity management. Finally, the article summarizes some major comparative findings drawn from the country studies of this Special Issue, focusing on similarities and differences in crisis responses and patterns of opportunity management. KW - administrative culture KW - comparison KW - COVID-19 KW - crisis management KW - governance KW - opportunity management KW - pandemic KW - window of opportunity Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852321992102 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 87 IS - 3 SP - 497 EP - 517 PB - Sage CY - Los Angeles, California ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Eichhorn, Sebastian A1 - Rusche, Karsten A1 - Weith, Thomas T1 - Integrative governance processes towards sustainable spatial development BT - solving conflicts between urban infill development and climate change adaptation JF - Journal of environmental planning and management N2 - Due to the high concentration of people and infrastructures in European cities, the possible impacts of climate change are particularly high (cities' social, economic and technical vulnerabilities). Adaptation measures to reduce the sensitivity of a city to climate risks are therefore of particular importance. Nevertheless, it is also common to develop compact and dense urban areas to reduce urban sprawl. Urban infill development and sustainable spatial climate policies are thus in apparent conflict with each other. This article examines how German cities deal with the tensions between these two policy fields. Using six case studies, a new heuristic analysis method is applied. This study identifies three key governance aspects that are essential for promoting the joint implementation: instruments, organisation and interaction. Based on our case studies, we conclude that successful implementation can only be achieved through integrative governance including all three domains. KW - urban infill development KW - climate change adaptation KW - governance KW - social KW - innovation KW - heuristic analysis Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1866509 SN - 0964-0568 SN - 1360-0559 VL - 64 IS - 12 SP - 2233 EP - 2256 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Streck, Charlotte T1 - Strengthening the Paris Agreement by holding non-state actors accountable BT - establishing normative links between transnational partnerships and treaty implementation JF - Transnational environmental law N2 - While the intergovernmental climate regime increasingly recognizes the role of non-state actors in achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement (PA), the normative linkages between the intergovernmental climate regime and the non-state dominated 'transnational partnership governance' remain vague and tentative. A formalized engagement of the intergovernmental climate regime with transnational partnerships can increase the effectiveness of partnerships in delivering on climate mitigation and adaptation, thereby complementing rather than replacing government action. The proposed active engagement with partnerships would include (i) collecting and analyzing information to develop and prioritize areas for transnational and partnership engagement; (ii) defining minimum criteria and procedural requirements to be listed on an enhanced Non-state Actor Zone for Climate Action platform; (iii) actively supporting strategic initiatives; (iv) facilitating market or non-market finance as part of Article 6 PA; and (v) evaluating the effectiveness of partnerships in the context of the enhanced transparency framework (Article 13 PA) and the global stocktake (Article 14 PA). The UNFCCC Secretariat could facilitate engagement and problem solving by actively orchestrating transnational partnerships. Constructing effective implementation partnerships, recording their mitigation and adaptation goals, and holding them accountable may help to move climate talks from rhetoric to action. KW - transnational partnerships KW - non-state actors KW - Paris Agreement KW - climate KW - governance KW - transnational governance Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102521000091 SN - 2047-1025 SN - 2047-1033 VL - 10 IS - 3 SP - 493 EP - 515 PB - Cambridge Univ. Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Heinzel, Mirko Noa A1 - Liese, Andrea T1 - Expert authority and support for COVID-19 measures in Germany and the UK BT - a survey experiment JF - West European politics N2 - During COVID-19, various public institutions tried to shape citizens’ behaviour to slow the spread of the pandemic. How did their authority affect citizens’ support of public measures taken to combat the spread of COVID-19? The article makes two contributions. First, it presents a novel conceptualisation of authority as a source heuristic. Second, it analyses the authority of four types of public institutions (health ministries, universities, public health agencies, the WHO) in two countries (Germany and the UK), drawing on novel data from a survey experiment conducted in May 2020. On average, institutional endorsements seem to have mattered little. However, there is an observable polarisation effect where citizens who ascribe much expertise to public institutions support COVID-19 measures more than the control group. Furthermore, those who ascribe little expertise support them less than the control group. Finally, neither perception of biases nor exposure to institutions in public debates seems consistently to affect their authority. KW - COVID-19 KW - expertise KW - authority KW - survey experiment KW - institutions KW - crises KW - governance Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1873630 SN - 0140-2382 SN - 1743-9655 SP - 1258 EP - 1282 PB - Taylor & Francis CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Daviter, Falk T1 - Coping, taming or solving BT - alternative approaches to the governance of wicked problems JF - Policy studies N2 - One of the truisms of policy analysis is that policy problems are rarely solved. As an ever-increasing number of policy issues are identified as an inherently ill-structured and intractable type of wicked problem, the question of what policy analysis sets out to accomplish has emerged as more central than ever. If solving wicked problems is beyond reach, research on wicked problems needs to provide a clearer understanding of the alternatives. The article identifies and explicates three distinguishable strategies of problem governance: coping, taming and solving. It shows that their intellectual premises and practical implications clearly contrast in core respects. The article argues that none of the identified strategies of problem governance is invariably more suitable for dealing with wicked problems. Rather than advocate for some universally applicable approach to the governance of wicked problems, the article asks under what conditions different ways of governing wicked problems are analytically reasonable and normatively justified. It concludes that a more systematic assessment of alternative approaches of problem governance requires a reorientation of the debate away from the conception of wicked problems as a singular type toward the more focused analysis of different dimensions of problem wickedness. KW - Wicked problems KW - complex problems KW - governance KW - problem-solving KW - policy analysis Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2017.1384543 SN - 0144-2872 SN - 1470-1006 VL - 38 IS - 6 SP - 571 EP - 588 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Surminski, Swenja A1 - Thieken, Annegret T1 - Promoting flood risk reduction BT - the role of insurance in Germany and England JF - Earth's Future N2 - Improving society's ability to prepare for, respond to and recover from flooding requires integrated, anticipatory flood risk management (FRM). However, most countries still focus their efforts on responding to flooding events if and when they occur rather than addressing their current and future vulnerability to flooding. Flood insurance is one mechanism that could promote a more ex ante approach to risk by supporting risk reduction activities. This paper uses an adapted version of Easton's System Theory to investigate the role of insurance for FRM in Germany and England. We introduce an anticipatory FRM framework, which allows flood insurance to be considered as part of a broader policy field. We analyze if and how flood insurance can catalyze a change toward a more anticipatory approach to FRM. In particular we consider insurance's role in influencing five key components of anticipatory FRM: risk knowledge, prevention through better planning, property‐level protection measures, structural protection and preparedness (for response). We find that in both countries FRM is still a reactive, event‐driven process, while anticipatory FRM remains underdeveloped. Collaboration between insurers and FRM decision‐makers has already been successful, for example in improving risk knowledge and awareness, while in other areas insurance acts as a disincentive for more risk reduction action. In both countries there is evidence that insurance can play a significant role in encouraging anticipatory FRM, but this remains underutilized. Effective collaboration between insurers and government should not be seen as a cost, but as an investment to secure future insurability through flood resilience. KW - flooding KW - insurance KW - governance KW - risk reduction Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000587 SN - 2328-4277 VL - 5 SP - 979 EP - 1001 PB - Wiley CY - Hoboken ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Chan, Sander A1 - Boran, Idil A1 - van Asselt, Harro A1 - Iacobuta, Gabriela A1 - Niles, Navam A1 - Rietig, Katharine A1 - Scobie, Michelle A1 - Bansard, Jennifer S. A1 - Delgado Pugley, Deborah A1 - Delina, Laurence L. A1 - Eichhorn, Friederike A1 - Ellinger, Paula A1 - Enechi, Okechukwu A1 - Hale, Thomas A1 - Hermwille, Lukas A1 - Hickmann, Thomas A1 - Honegger, Matthias A1 - Hurtado Epstein, Andrea A1 - Theuer, Stephanie La Hoz A1 - Mizo, Robert A1 - Sun, Yixian A1 - Toussaint, Patrick A1 - Wambugu, Geoffrey T1 - Promises and risks of nonstate action in climate and sustainability governance JF - Wiley interdisciplinary reviews : Climate change KW - climate change KW - governance KW - nonstate actions KW - SDGs KW - sustainable development Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.572 SN - 1757-7780 SN - 1757-7799 VL - 10 IS - 3 PB - Wiley CY - Hoboken ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schmeiss, Jessica A1 - Hölzle, Katharina A1 - Tech, Robin P. G. T1 - Designing Governance Mechanisms in Platform Ecosystems: Addressing the Paradox of Openness through Blockchain Technology JF - California Management Review N2 - The paradox of openness is inherent to all platform ecosystems-the tension in enabling maximum openness to create joint innovation while guaranteeing value capturing for all actors. Governance mechanisms to solve this paradox are embedded into the technical architecture of the platform, addressing the dimensions of access, control, and incentives. Blockchain technology offers unique ways to design novel governance mechanisms through the standardization of interactions. However, the design of such an architecture requires careful consideration of the cost associated with it. KW - ecosystems KW - governance KW - value creation KW - platforms KW - technology management Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619883618 SN - 0008-1256 SN - 2162-8564 VL - 62 IS - 1 SP - 121 EP - 143 PB - Sage Publ. CY - Thousand Oaks ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Seyfried, Markus A1 - Reith, Florian T1 - The seven deadly sins of quality management: trade-offs and implications for further research JF - Quality in higher education N2 - Quality management in higher education is generally discussed with reference to commendable outcomes such as success, best practice, improvement or control. This paper, though, focuses on the problems of organising quality management. It follows the narrative of the seven deadly sins, with each ‘sin’ illustrating an inherent trade-off or paradox in the implementation of internal quality management in teaching and learning in higher education institutions. Identifying the trade-offs behind these sins is essential for a better understanding of quality management as an organisational problem. KW - Quality management KW - higher education KW - governance KW - trade-offs KW - teaching KW - research Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2019.1683943 SN - 1353-8322 SN - 1470-1081 VL - 25 IS - 3 SP - 289 EP - 303 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER -