Balancing Governance Capacity and Legitimacy: How the Norwegian Government Handled the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 Crisis as a High Performer

2020/05/23 by Tom Christensen, Per Lægreid · 7 citations
Social Sciences · #Disaster Management and Resilience #Global Security and Public Health #Public Relations and Crisis Communication

paper · pdf · doi:10.1111/puar.13241

Abstract

This essay addresses how the Norwegian government has handled the coronavirus pandemic. Compared with many other countries, Norway has performed well in handling the crisis. This must be understood in the context of competent politicians, a high-trust society with a reliable and professional bureaucracy, a strong state, a good economic situation, a big welfare state, and low population density. The Norwegian government managed to control the pandemic rather quickly by adopting a suppression strategy, followed by a control strategy, based on a collaborative and pragmatic decision-making style, successful communication with the public, a lot of resources, and a high level of citizen trust in government. The alleged success of the Norwegian case is about the relationship between crisis management capacity and legitimacy. Crisis management is most successful when it is able to combine democratic legitimacy with government capacity.

Citations

• Distinguishing Different Types of Coproduction: A Conceptual Analysis Based on the Classical Definitions
• Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy

Cited by

• Governments’ Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic
• Where you are matters: Network position, designed network, and central government agency termination
• Time tactics in public administration: evidence from a survey experiment
• Bureaucratic redundancy and administrative burden: Evidence from public‐private partnerships (<scp>PPPs</scp>) in <scp>China</scp>
• Understanding the Co‐Provision of Disaster‐Related Services in the United States: Universities and Colleges as Community Stakeholders
• Performing Authority in Times of Crisis: Six Frames of Contested Authority During the Pandemic Era in Finland
• Why did China persist with a zero-COVID policy? A cultural interpretation of Confucianism

Related

• Coping with the unforeseen: bounded rationality and bureaucratic responses to the COVID-19 crisis
• Tracing divergence in crisis governance: responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden compared
• High-stakes crisis management in the Low Countries: Comparing government responses to COVID-19
• Trust, Crisis, and Delegation: A Comparative Analysis of Public Health Authorities During the <scp>COVID</scp> ‐19 Pandemic
• Crisis Preparedness and Systemic Risk: The Role of Municipal Leaders in Disaster Risk Governance in Norway