评估COVID-19大流行的危机管理:对挪威和瑞典调查委员会报告的研究

IF 5.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Tom Christensen, Per Lægreid
{"title":"评估COVID-19大流行的危机管理:对挪威和瑞典调查委员会报告的研究","authors":"Tom Christensen, Per Lægreid","doi":"10.1093/polsoc/puad020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines the inquiry reports from the commissions charged with investigating government crisis management of the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway and Sweden. Such postcrises commissions have been a common feature in many countries as they seek to systematize their experiences and learn from the crisis. In this article, we used various dimensions of governance capacity and governance legitimacy as assessment criteria. It reveals that the commissions’ assessment criteria were not very specific in their reports, but a reanalysis of their findings shows that governance capacity and governance legitimacy dimensions are useful to assess the reports themselves. The two reports reveal a lack of preparedness in both countries, but they differ in their conclusions about governance regulation and output legitimacy.","PeriodicalId":47383,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Society","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the crisis management of the COVID-19 pandemic: a study of inquiry commission reports in Norway and Sweden\",\"authors\":\"Tom Christensen, Per Lægreid\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/polsoc/puad020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article examines the inquiry reports from the commissions charged with investigating government crisis management of the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway and Sweden. Such postcrises commissions have been a common feature in many countries as they seek to systematize their experiences and learn from the crisis. In this article, we used various dimensions of governance capacity and governance legitimacy as assessment criteria. It reveals that the commissions’ assessment criteria were not very specific in their reports, but a reanalysis of their findings shows that governance capacity and governance legitimacy dimensions are useful to assess the reports themselves. The two reports reveal a lack of preparedness in both countries, but they differ in their conclusions about governance regulation and output legitimacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47383,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy and Society\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad020\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad020","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文审查了负责调查挪威和瑞典政府COVID-19大流行危机管理的委员会的调查报告。这种危机后委员会在许多国家都是一个共同的特点,因为它们试图将自己的经验系统化,并从危机中吸取教训。在本文中,我们使用治理能力和治理合法性的各个维度作为评估标准。它揭示了委员会的评估标准在其报告中不是非常具体,但对其调查结果的重新分析表明,治理能力和治理合法性维度对于评估报告本身是有用的。这两份报告显示,两国都缺乏准备,但它们在治理监管和产出合法性方面的结论不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the crisis management of the COVID-19 pandemic: a study of inquiry commission reports in Norway and Sweden
This article examines the inquiry reports from the commissions charged with investigating government crisis management of the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway and Sweden. Such postcrises commissions have been a common feature in many countries as they seek to systematize their experiences and learn from the crisis. In this article, we used various dimensions of governance capacity and governance legitimacy as assessment criteria. It reveals that the commissions’ assessment criteria were not very specific in their reports, but a reanalysis of their findings shows that governance capacity and governance legitimacy dimensions are useful to assess the reports themselves. The two reports reveal a lack of preparedness in both countries, but they differ in their conclusions about governance regulation and output legitimacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Policy and Society
Policy and Society Multiple-
CiteScore
18.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
43
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: Policy and Society is a prominent international open-access journal publishing peer-reviewed research on critical issues in policy theory and practice across local, national, and international levels. The journal seeks to comprehend the origin, functioning, and implications of policies within broader political, social, and economic contexts. It publishes themed issues regularly and, starting in 2023, will also feature non-themed individual submissions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信