The comparative ‘court politics’ of Covid-19
Explaining Government Responses to the Pandemic
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7315134 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John Boswell (0000-0002-3018-8791, University of Southampton, corresponding author), Jack Corbett (0000-0003-2005-7162, University of Southampton), Roderick A W Rhodes (0000-0002-1886-2392, University of Southampton), Heidi Houlberg Salomonsen (0000-0002-2002-6801, Aarhus University) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Pages | 1258-1277 |
| Publication date | 2021-06-30 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of European Public Policy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1350-1763 • E-ISSN: 1466-4429 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/13501763.2021.1942159 |
| OpenAlex | W3173748497 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 15 |
| References cited | 8 |
What has shaped the different responses to COVID-19? The orthodoxy in the crisis management literature holds that the response to events like COVID-19 is primarily shaped by a decentralized group of actors on the ground. In this paper, we argue that a top-down explanation, focused on the actions and intentions of the core executive, is an essential complement to this bottom-up emphasis on a distributed network. Specifically, we advance a ‘court politics’ understanding of how governing elites have taken advice and made decisions, and sketch out the impact this has had in framing and constraining crisis response efforts. The argument uses an interpretive framework centred on the dilemmas that governing elites face in managing crisis. We illustrate the underlying ‘court politics’ which has driven responses to COVID-19 in England and Denmark. We show that pathologies and dysfunctions in Johnson’s court have filtered through into inertia and indecisiveness, while the centralization of authority in Frederiksen’s court has enabled swift and decisive intervention. Our analysis shows that a top-down emphasis on executive government–and the ‘court politics’ therein–offers a fruitful agenda for understanding and comparing COVID-19 crisis response
Crisis management · Framing (construction · Law and economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Schism · Sociology · Disaster Management and Resilience · Disaster Response and Management · Law · Public Administration
Hybrid Crisis Governance
Reclaiming the Authority to Plan
Elite sense-making in the core executive
Is it all about the government's early response? A configurational analysis of 27 cases in governing Covid ‐19 in China
Rethinking situated agency
Learning to govern
A Data-Political Spectacle
The Nordic governments' responses to the Covid‐19 pandemic
Representation in times of crisis
Next slide please
Understanding policy changes
How does government feel? Toward a theory of institutional pathos in public administration
The state of British policymaking
Organizing Expertise During a Crisis. France and Sweden in the Fight Against Covid-19
Fighting against Covid-19
| Unique citing works | 15 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3,75 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 15 |