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.

Points for practitioners

COVID-19 has shown that national political and administrative standard operating procedures in preparation for crises are, at best, partially helpful. Notwithstanding the fact that dealing with the unpredictable is a necessary part of crisis management, a need to further improve the institutional preparedness for pandemic crises in all three countries examined here has also become clear. This should be done particularly by way of shifting resources to the health and care sectors, strengthening the decentralized management of health emergencies, stocking and/or self-producing protection material, assessing the effects of crisis measures, and opening the scientific discourse to broader arenas of experts.

中文翻译：

---

追踪危机治理中的分歧：比较法国，德国和瑞典对COVID-19大流行的反应

在法国，德国和瑞典进行的针对COVID-19大流行的行政回应的跨国比较旨在探讨大流行期间制度背景和行政文化如何塑造解决问题和治理模式的策略，以及危机的程度已用于机会管理。文章显示，在法国，中央政府采取坚决的遏制措施，果断，分层地作出反应。相比之下，德国的应对措施以最初的自下而上的方法为特征，该方法在危机的进一步过程中让联邦显着地团结起来，然后又回到了地区差异和地方自由裁量权。在瑞典，“正常治理”的延续和很大程度上依靠建议的自愿遵守政策的策略，而德国和法国则更少，而是实施具有法律约束力的法规的策略。比较分析还显示，这三个国家的相关利益攸关方都将危机作为改变机构设置和行政程序的机会。

从业人员要点

COVID-19表明，为应对危机而制定的国家政治和行政标准操作程序充其量只是部分有用。尽管应对不可预测的事件是危机管理的必要部分，但在这里所研究的所有三个国家中，进一步改善大流行危机的制度准备的需求也已变得显而易见。尤其应通过以下方式做到这一点：将资源转移到卫生和保健部门，加强对突发卫生事件的权力下放管理，库存和/或自产保护材料，评估危机措施的效果，并向更广阔的领域开放科学讨论专家。