Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/313733 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Citation: 
[Journal:] Public Administration [ISSN:] 1467-9299 [Volume:] 102 [Issue:] 4 [Publisher:] Blackwell Publishing Ltd [Place:] Oxford, UK [Year:] 2024 [Pages:] 1397-1417
Publisher: 
Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK
Abstract: 
In the midst of ongoing crises, understanding how citizens perceive administrative crisis management is more relevant than ever. Combining organizational literature with insights from legitimacy research, this article scrutinizes how the public evaluates governance decisions concerning prominent crisis management dilemmas: flexibility versus stability, inclusion versus exclusion, and equity‐based versus needs‐based resource distribution. The paper argues that flexible, inclusive, and equity‐based governance decisions are generally perceived as more legitimate. However, governance decisions are also associated with adverse effects that can mitigate any initially positive effect on legitimacy. The argument is tested in a large‐scale randomized survey experiment in the context of a migration crisis, where governance decisions were manipulated. The findings support the expectations for inclusive crisis management and equity‐based resource distribution, which are perceived as the most legitimate governance alternatives. Internal adaptations of administrative practices toward more flexible and adaptive solutions, however, are perceived less legitimate than stable governmental action.
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.