Lenz, Alexa
A icle — Published Ve sion
Managing c ises as i no one is wa ching? Go e nance
dilemmas om a public pe spec i e
Public Adminis a ion
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
John Wiley & Sons
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Lenz, Alexa (2024) : Managing c ises as i no one is wa ching? Go e nance
dilemmas om a public pe spec i e, Public Adminis a ion, ISSN 1467-9299, Blackwell Publishing
L d, Ox o d, UK, Vol. 102, Iss. 4, pp. 1397-1417,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/padm.12980
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/313733
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Managing c ises as i no one is wa ching?
Go e nance dilemmas om a public pe spec i e
Alexa Lenz
1,2
1
Geschwis e Scholl Ins i u e o Poli ical
Science, LMU Munich, Munich, Ge many
2
Depa men o Poli ical & Social Sciences,
Zeppelin Uni e si y, F ied ichsha en,
Ge many
Co espondence
Alexa Lenz, Geschwis e Scholl Ins i u e o
Poli ical Science, LMU Munich,
Oe ingens aße 67, 80538 München,
Ge many.
Email: [email p o ec ed]nchen.de
Funding in o ma ion
Bundesminis e ium ü Bildung und
Fo schung, G an /Awa d Numbe :
01UG1826BX
Abs ac
In he mids o ongoing c ises, unde s anding how ci izens
pe cei e adminis a i e c isis managemen is mo e ele an
han e e . Combining o ganiza ional li e a u e wi h insigh s
om legi imacy esea ch, his a icle sc u inizes how he
public e alua es go e nance decisions conce ning p omi-
nen c isis managemen dilemmas: lexibili y e sus s abili y,
inclusion e sus exclusion, and equi y-based e sus needs-
based esou ce dis ibu ion. The pape a gues ha lexible,
inclusi e, and equi y-based go e nance decisions a e gene ally
pe cei ed as mo e legi ima e. Howe e , go e nance decisions
a e also associa ed wi h ad e se e ec s ha can mi iga e any
ini ially posi i e e ec on legi imacy. The a gumen is es ed in
a la ge-scale andomized su ey expe imen in he con ex o
a mig a ion c isis, whe e go e nance decisions we e manipu-
la ed. The indings suppo he expec a ions o inclusi e c isis
managemen and equi y-based esou ce dis ibu ion, which
a e pe cei ed as he mos legi ima e go e nance al e na i es.
In e nal adap a ions o adminis a i e p ac ices owa d mo e
lexible and adap i e solu ions, howe e , a e pe cei ed less
legi ima e han s able go e nmen al ac ion.
1|INTRODUCTION
C isis si ua ions pose ex eme go e nance challenges o go e nmen s and public adminis a ions. To espond o he
u gency and unce ain y o c ises, go e nmen s and public adminis a ions mus mo e away om ou ine ac ions
Recei ed: 28 Ma ch 2023 Re ised: 5 Decembe 2023 Accep ed: 16 Decembe 2023
DOI: 10.1111/padm.12980
This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License, which pe mi s use, dis ibu ion and
ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
© 2024 The Au ho s. Public Adminis a ion published by John Wiley & Sons L d.
Public Admin. 2024;102:1397–1417. wileyonlinelib a y.com/jou nal/padm 1397
and ins ead ind al e na i e coping s a egies o deal wi h he si ua ion and ul ill hei sys em-main aining ole.
The e o e, adminis a ions mix o eplace es ablished bu eauc a ic ou ines wi h new p ocedu es o become adap-
i e, lexible, and inclusi e (Ansell & Boin, 2019; Eckha d e al., 2021; Jung e al., 2018; Moon, 2020). Howe e , his
p ocess o de ia ing om ou ine beha io is pa icula ly suscep ible o he eme gence o go e nance dilemmas,
namely si ua ions in which each compe ing go e nance al e na i e is associa ed wi h clea ad an ages and disad an-
ages, whe e an inhe en con adic ion be ween wo al e na i es exis s and o ganiza ions need o p io i ize one o e
he o he (Ca lson e al., 2017; Olsen e al., 2007; Seo & C eed, 2002; Smi h & Lewis, 2011). A ecen and p ominen
example a e he mask p ocu emen scandals ha occu ed h oughou he Co id-19 Pandemic, when many coun ies
loosened p ocu emen egula ions o p o ide oom o maneu e ing bu simul aneously pa ed he way o abuse
and pe sonal en ichmen (Fü e e -Akili, 2022). The ques ion o how o success ully decide on go e nmen al e na-
i es o e o he s, is he e o e a cen al componen o o ganiza ional and c isis esea ch.
Con e sely, i is wo h no ing ha en enched bu eauc a ic ou ines, while po en ially cons aining in e nal c isis
managemen capabili ies, se e as i al pilla s o poli ical legi imacy by ensu ing legali y, anspa ency, and accoun abili y
(S a k, 2010). As such, public adminis a ions play a suppo ing ole o democ acy, os e ing poli ical and ins i u ional
us and legi imacy (Bogumil & Kuhlmann, 2015; Deephouse e al., 2017; He ian e al., 2012). Conside ing he ele ance
o bu eauc a ic p ocedu es o legi imacy, i is c ucial o unde s and how go e nance decisions, and hence he go e n-
men p ocess, a ec public pe cep ions o legi imacy. So a , he exis ing esea ch on he opic mos ly ocuses on c isis
managemen pe o mance and ou comes, and hence ou pu legi imacy (Ch is ensen e al., 2011;Miz ahie al.,2021b). In
con as , his a icle aims a unde s anding he e ec s o he go e nance p ocess, and in pa icula speci ic go e nance
al e na i es, on public legi imacy. The cen al esea ch ques ion o his a icle hus asks wha e ec he adminis a ion's
decisions on esol ing go e nance dilemmas ha e on he public legi imacy o c isis managemen .
To in es iga e o which ex en he a ious mani es a ions o c isis managemen impac he deg ee o c isis man-
agemen legi imacy, he pape looks a h ee p ominen go e nance dilemmas in c isis managemen wi h opposing
al e na i e go e nance op ions: (1) lexibili y e sus s abili y in he o ganiza ional eac ion (Webb & Che eau, 2006),
(2) inclusion e sus exclusion ega ding ex e nal ac o s (Moynihan, 2009;Whi ake e al.,2015), and (3) equali y e sus
needs-based esou ce edis ibu ion among di e en ecipien s (Hens a, 2010;Su e &Smi h,2017). Public adminis-
a ions a e ine i ably exposed o he ensions be ween compe ing al e na i es when esponding o c ises. Depending
on how adminis a ions choose o sol e exis ing go e nance dilemmas, a ious mani es a ions o c isis managemen
can eme ge. P io esea ch gi es some indica ion ha ce ain go e nance al e na i es a e assessed mo e posi i ely han
o he s (Lakoma, 2024). Fo example, he esul s o Lenz (2022) show ha ci izens who olun ee ed du ing he
2015/16 mig a ion c isis eco ded an inc ease in us in he adminis a ion i hey pe cei ed he adminis a ion as a
lexible and inclusi e ac o . Pa icipa ion is also a d i e o legi imacy and is posi i ely associa ed wi h ci izen sa is ac-
ion (e.g., Laeg eid & Rykkja, 2015; Wu & Jung, 2016).
The e ec s o go e nance al e na i es on public legi imacy a e es ed in a p e egis e ed su ey-expe imen conduc ed
among 2.630 pa icipan s o a p obabili y popula ion in Ge many. A se o igne es ha desc ibe hypo he ical c isis
managemen scena ios a e used o manipula e he go e nance al e na i es. The di e en manipula ions encompass
desc ip ions o ei he he ou ine app oach, bu eauc a ic adap a ion, o a ampan scena io cha ac e ized by ad e se
mani es a ions o adap a ion. The indings show ha ci izens pe cei e c isis managemen as mo e legi ima e when adminis-
a ions eac s able ins ead o lexible and inclusi e ins ead o exclusi e. The di e ences be ween needs-based and
equali y-based esou ce edis ibu ion we e small bu lean owa d he equali y-based edis ibu ion. Pa icula ly, he inding
ha lexible c isis managemen , while inc easing in e nal e ec i eness, dec eases pe cei ed legi imacy le els, emphasizes
he need o pu public pe cep ions mo e in o ocus in c isis managemen and public adminis a ion heo y.
The pape makes se e al con ibu ions: Fi s , i con ibu es o exis en li e a u e by combining c isis manage-
men and o ganiza ional esea ch wi h app oaches om legi imacy esea ch. Mo eo e , by ea u ing c isis
managemen dilemmas, he pape adds a pe spec i e on he c isis managemen p ocess a he han i s ou come. I
aims a unde s anding how speci ic ways o dealing wi h dilemmas ela e o public e alua ions. Second, he pape
con ibu es expe imen al e idence and o iginal da a on how he public e alua es go e nmen esponses o c ises.
1398 LENZ
Finally, emphasizing he legi imacy o c isis managemen holds essen ial insigh s o c isis managemen p ac i ione s:
I can encou age c isis manage s o engage no only wi h an o ganiza ional pe spec i e on c isis managemen success
bu also conside he public legi imacy o he p ocess. This way, he indings hold implica ions o dealing wi h c isis
managemen dilemmas by emphasizing legi imacy conside a ions.
The a icle is s uc u ed as ollows: The nex sec ion de ines c isis managemen legi imacy and heo izes on he
ela ionship be ween legi imacy pe cep ions and c isis managemen dilemmas. Nex , he case o he Ge man mig a ion
c isis 2015/2016 is in oduced and he unde lying da a and design o he su ey expe imen a e laid ou . The p esen a-
ion o he esul s o he analysis is ollowed by a discussion o he limi a ions o he s udy and concluding ema ks.
2|THE EXTERNAL LEGITIMACY OF CRISIS MANAGEMENT
Go e nance legi imacy is a well-explo ed phenomenon in poli ical and o ganiza ional science. Legi imacy is com-
monly de ined as “a gene alized pe cep ion o assump ion ha he ac ions o an en i y a e desi able, p ope , o
app op ia e”(Suchman, 1995, p. 574). This concep hinges on he pe cep ions, sen imen s, and isibili y o a ious
go e nmen and adminis a i e beha io s. I encompasses no jus wha he go e nmen does bu also how ci izens
expec i o beha e and how hey assess i s ac ions (Ch is ensen e al., 2016; Scha p , 1999; V. Schmid , 2013;
Suchman, 1995). In essence, legi imacy embodies he ela ionship be ween a go e nmen and i s ci izens, including
hei assessmen s o adminis a i e o go e nance p ocesses. These assessmen s co e ac o s such as esponsi e-
ness, inclusi eness, anspa ency, ai ness, accoun abili y, and impa iali y (Bo ens, 2007; He ian e al., 2012). Wi hin
he con ex o legi imacy esea ch, li e a u e di e en ia es be ween inpu , h oughpu , and ou pu legi imacy. Inpu
legi imacy pe ains o poli ics and he quali y o poli ical ep esen a ion and esponsi eness. Ou pu legi imacy
ela es o he e ec i eness, decisions, and policies esul ing om he poli ical p ocess. Meanwhile, h oughpu legi i-
macy ela es o he go e nance p ocess as such and ocuses on he deg ee o accoun abili y and anspa ency o
ac o s and hei p ac ices, as well as hei openness o ci il socie y g oups (Eas on, 1967; Scha p , 1999;
V. Schmid , 2013; V. Schmid & Wood, 2019).
Addi ionally, in o ganiza ional ins i u ionalism, he e is he no ion o esponding o challenges o legi imacy
(Deephouse e al., 2017). When aced wi h inconsis en c i e ia, o ganiza ions g apple wi h managing hei legi imacy.
To ei he gain o main ain legi imacy, o ganiza ions can ex end hei exis ing legi imacy o encompass new ac i i ies.
Howe e , in some cases, hey may need o engage in enego ia ion, decoupling, o adap ion o new si ua ions and
unce ain ies (Deephouse e al., 2017; Smi h & Besha o , 2019). I is, howe e , c ucial o no e ha di e en sou ces o
legi imacy may ha e con lic ing c i e ia a imes. Public adminis a ions, in pa icula , ace di icul ies in his ype o
o ganiza ional adap a ion. These en i ies a e p ima ily designed o unc ion wi hin es ablished ou ines, p io i izing he
main enance o legali y, anspa ency, and accoun abili y, and he eby upholding essen ial componen s o p ocess legi -
imacy (Pe e s, 2001;Webe ,2002). This unde mines he complex in e play be ween o ganiza ions, hei b oade socio-
cul u al milieu, and he unique challenges o legi imacy posed by c ises (S a k, 2010,2014).
Thus a , ou unde s anding o he ela ionship be ween c isis go e nance and public pe cep ions o legi imacy
emains somewha limi ed. Only ew s udies ha e in es iga ed ci izens' pe cep ions o go e nmen pe o mance and
e ec i eness in his con ex (Ch is ensen e al., 2011; Miz ahi e al., 2021b). Thei indings unde sco e he impo -
ance o immedia e esul s, like eadiness and p epa edness, as well as ai s such as esponsi eness and anspa -
ency, in shaping how ci izens pe cei e c isis managemen o e all. O he s udies sugges ha ce ain aspec s o c isis
managemen , like he dis ibu ion o help o blame a ibu ion, can a ec elec o al suppo and ou comes
(e.g., Bech el & Hainmuelle , 2011; Malho a & Kuo, 2008). Mazepus and an Leeuwen (2019) explo ed he ela ion-
ship be ween c isis managemen and legi imacy in he con ex o na u al disas e s. Thei esea ch showed ha equi-
able esou ce alloca ion and ai p ocedu al p ac ices play a signi ican ole in in luencing ci izen pe cep ions and
p e e ences. These indings p o ide impo an indica ions o how ci izens e alua e he legi imacy o go e nmen
ac ions du ing c isis managemen . Conside ing ha he p ocess i sel seems o be as impo an as he ou comes in
LENZ 1399
ga ne ing public suppo o adminis a i e ac ions (Van Ryzin, 2011; Vigoda-Gado & Miz ahi, 2016), i is impo an
o u he sc u inize he de e minan s o public legi imacy du ing he c isis managemen p ocess. By in es iga ing
how o ganiza ional dilemmas a e e alua ed om he pe spec i e o public legi imacy, his a icle aims a u he
add essing his esea ch gap.
3|CRISIS GOVERNANCE AND DILEMMAS
C isis managemen esea ch p ima ily ocuses on o ganiza ional, echnical, o manage ial pe spec i es, as well as p o-
cedu al ea u es and he use o esou ces. Wi hin c isis esea ch, he cen al ques ions e ol e a ound s uc u es,
ou ines, coo dina ion mechanisms, and he o e all e ec i eness o c isis managemen s a egies (Ansell e al., 2010;
Noh s ed e al., 2018). Howe e , he e is no ideal ope a ing mode o c isis managemen due o go e nance
dilemmas and ade-o s ha e ol e unde he unce ain y o c ises (Moynihan, 2009; Rosen hal e al., 2001;
A. Schmid , 2019; Webb & Che eau, 2006). Go e nance dilemmas, because o hei pa adoxical na u e, canno be
eadily esol ed h ough cle e o ganiza ion and good managemen alone (Lewis & Smi h, 2014; Ri e a &
Knox, 2023; A. Schmid , 2019). Ins ead, hese dilemmas en ail si ua ions cha ac e ized by a challenging choice among
op ions, each ca ying bo h ad an ages and disad an ages, and lacking an ideal o ully sa is ying solu ion. Conse-
quen ly, decision-making in c isis con ex s necessi a es conside a ion o ade-o s, whe e decision-make s con-
sciously op o ce ain bene i s while eluc an ly sac i icing o he s (Ca lson e al., 2017; Olsen e al., 2007; Seo &
C eed, 2002; Smi h & Lewis, 2011)—a nuanced p ocess made mo e complex by he p essu es o c isis-induced
unce ain y and u gency. This dynamic is pa icula ly salien in ansbounda y c ises, whe e a mul iplici y o ac o s,
sec o s, ins i u ions, and di e gen opinions, gi e ise o go e nance dilemmas. Mo eo e , wi hin highly poli icized
con ex s, such as hose su ounding issues like mig a ion o ecen pandemics, he p ominence o go e nance
dilemmas po en ially inc eases (Ca lson e al., 2017; Ch is ensen e al., 2016; Lewis & Smi h, 2014; Mazepus & an
Leeuwen, 2019; Smi h & Lewis, 2011).
The h ee dilemmas discussed in his a icle a e selec ed conside ing hei omnip esence in c isis managemen
esea ch
1
bu also because o hei connec ion o legi imacy, as he go e nance al e na i es hey encompass ha e a
di ec bea ing on he legi imacy o he c isis managemen p ocess. Fi s , he in e nal lexibili y e sus s abili y dilemma
add esses he ques ion o anspa ency and legali y ele an o h oughpu legi imacy (Com o , 2007;
De e ell, 2010; Webb & Che eau, 2006). Second, he ex e nal inclusion e sus exclusion dilemma speaks o he
aspec o openness and inclusion in he go e nance p ocess (Iusmen & Boswell, 2017; McLennan e al., 2021;
Moynihan, 2009; Whi ake e al., 2015); and inally, ai ness is add essed by he esou ce dilemma, ha is conce ned
wi h he esou ce ealloca ion based on equi y o need be ween ecipien s (Rosen hal e al., 2001; Su e &
Smi h, 2017). All h ee dilemmas a e cen al o in e nal c isis managemen pe o mance. They ha e been s udied
ex ensi ely in o ganiza ion heo y and public adminis a ion esea ch, bu no om a legi imacy pe spec i e.
Conside ing his con ex , i is easonable o expec ha he go e nance choices made by c isis manage s in
add essing hese dilemmas will lead o di e en e ec s on he pe cei ed deg ee o public legi imacy. When c isis
managemen leans owa d one al e na i e o ano he , he nega i e aspec s o he al e na i e may no immedia ely
su ace o be seen as equally ele an . P io esea ch o e s some insigh s, indica ing ha ce ain go e nance al e na-
i es end o ecei e mo e a o able assessmen s han o he s: Flexibili y and inclusion ha e been ound o be posi-
i ely associa ed wi h ci izen us (e.g., Lenz, 2022; Miz ahi e al., 2021a; Wu & Jung, 2016). Simila obse a ions
can be made o he esou ce dilemma, whe e p io indings highligh he ele ance o ai dis ibu ion
(e.g., Mazepus & an Leeuwen, 2019). Howe e , i is impo an o no e ha hese cou ses o ac ion can also ha e
nega i e implica ions, pa icula ly when hey exhibi ampan ai s. Rampan lexibili y o ampan inclusion e e s o
ac ions whe e he ad e se mani es a ions o adap a ion ou weigh he posi i e e ec s on legi imacy compa ed o
hei associa ed al e na i es. Conside ing he isk o ampan mani es a ions, p io i izing al e na i es could esul in
ewe ad e se e ec s on legi imacy a e all.
1400 LENZ
3.1 |In e nal dilemma: Flexibili y e sus s abili y
Du ing c isis managemen , go e nmen s and adminis a i e o ganiza ions ace an in e nal o ganiza ional
dilemma be ween s abili y ( ollowing long-es ablished laws, legal s anda ds, and p ocedu es) on he one hand
and eac ing mo e lexibly o new and un o eseen c ises on he o he hand (Com o , 2007; De e ell, 2010;
Lenz & Eckha d, 2023; Webb & Che eau, 2006). Flexibili y challenges he basic o ganiza ional logic o public
adminis a ions, which is based on accoun abili y, legali y, and anspa ency (S a k, 2014). The e o e, he ques-
ion a ises as o whe he o ganiza ions adhe e o hei ou ines and emain ela i ely s able o whe he hey
espond lexibly o he c isis.
On he one hand, he s abili y is a ge ed a anspa ency and aceabili y o bu eauc a ic p ocesses. Go e n-
men al ac o s mus be pe cei ed as s able ac o s, who espond wi h in eg i y, and wi hou bias o enhance hei
legi imacy (V. Schmid & Wood, 2019). Hence, adminis a i e s uc u es and bu eauc acy a e designed o gua an ee
hose no ms h ough ou ines and ules. S abili y and s uc u e lowe he possibili y o abuse and misconduc , hey
p o ide anspa ency, accoun abili y, and las bu no leas , hey educe unce ain y (Bogumil & Kuhlmann, 2015;
S a k, 2014). De ia ing om ou ine ope a ing p ocedu es comp omises hese aspec s, causing a po en ial h ea o
how legi ima e he c isis managemen p ocess is publicly pe cei ed.
On he o he hand, ules can cons ain ou comes wi hin he o ganiza ional goals o public in e es , pa icu-
la ly du ing c isis si ua ions—which a e cha ac e ized by unce ain ies and a heigh ened sense o u gency.
Ins ead, p agma ic solu ions, lexibili y, and c ea i i y a e necessa y o uphold o ganiza ional pe o mance,
e iciency, o s akeholde p o ec ion (Ansell & Boin, 2019). C isis managemen li e a u e has so a emphasized
he impo ance o lexibili y as a acili a o o e ec i e c isis go e nance, as i enables c ea i e coping
s a egies and he decen aliza ion o decision s uc u es, among o he s (De e ell, 2010; Eckha d e al., 2021;
Lenz & Eckha d, 2023). This posi i e e ec o lexibili y should no only ma e om an o ganiza ional pe spec-
i e bu also a pe spec i e o public legi imacy. As men ioned abo e, mee ing public expec a ions is signi ican
o legi ima e go e nance. Flexible public adminis a ions inc ease he abili y o ac and eac o a c isis as well
as he speed o he c isis esponse (Webb & Che eau, 2006). This ad an age in e iciency hen di ec ly ela es
o he ci izen's expec a ions o hei go e nmen o ake con ol o he c isis (Ch is ensen e al., 2019). P io
esea ch indings sugges inc eases in ci izens' us le els i he adminis a ion was pe cei ed as lexible
and as in c isis managemen (Lenz, 2022;Miz ahie al.,2021a). Addi ionally, i he public obse es how
adminis a ions eac lexibly o c ises ins ead o con o ming o he nega i e s e eo ype o o e ly bu eauc a ic
and indolen adminis a ions, his adap a ion can p oduce posi i e e ec s (e.g., H idman & Ande sen, 2016;
Willems, 2020).
Ne e heless, and despi e he gene ally posi i e impac o lexibili y, i is essen ial o conside i s po en ial
ad e se e ec s, pa icula ly a he expense o adminis a i e accoun abili y (Bo ens & Schillemans, 2011;
S a k, 2014). I lexibili y adop s ampan cha ac e is ics, i can lead o he misuse o he newly gained leeway and
he abuse o disc e iona y powe s ules. In such scena ios, lexibili y migh s ill se e o ganiza ional goals aimed a
enhancing adap able and agile esponses o c ises, bu i addi ionally may esul in ad e se ou comes such as a o i -
ism, o e spending, pe sonal en ichmen , and co up ion. Consequen ly, while lexibili y is ini ially expec ed o ha e a
mo e posi i e e ec on he legi imacy o c isis managemen compa ed o s able adminis a i e ac ion, ampan lexi-
bili y is expec ed o ul ima ely mi iga e o e en unde mine legi imacy.
Hypo hesis H1a. Compa ed o s abili y, lexibili y in c isis managemen inc eases he pe cei ed public
legi imacy o he c isis managemen p ocess.
Hypo hesis H1b. When lexibili y akes ampan ai s, he legi imacy o he c isis managemen p o-
cess dec eases compa ed o s abili y.
LENZ 1401
3.2 |Ex e nal dilemma: Inclusion e sus exclusion
The second dilemma c isis manage s a e con on ed wi h is be ween exclusion and inclusion in he con ex o
pa icipa o y p ocesses (Ha is e al., 2017; McLennan e al., 2021; Moynihan, 2009). This dilemma add esses o gani-
za ional adap a ions o public adminis a ions a he ex e nal dimension, as i conce ns he inclusion o ci ic engage-
men and pa icipa ion in elie ac i i ies, which a e omnip esen du ing disas e s and c ises. Hence, i pe ains o he
ques ion o whe he o ganiza ional bounda ies become pe meable, o i o ganiza ional bounda ies emain igid,
he eby a o ing exclusiona y p ac ices in he o ganiza ion (D abek & McEn i e, 2003; Eckha d e al., 2021; Twigg &
Mosel, 2017; Whi ake e al., 2015).
On he one hand, he inclusion o ci izen olun ee s plays an essen ial ole in c isis managemen o ganiza ions.
The mobiliza ion and u iliza ion o ci izen olun ee s in c isis managemen is a popula no ion in esea ch and among
p ac i ione s alike (Ba sky e al., 2007; Kapucu, 2006; Whi ake e al., 2015). E ec i e c oss-sec o collabo a ion
holds po en ial o public sec o -ci izen in e ac ion in gene al and c isis managemen in pa icula (Kapucu, 2006;
Ma in & Nol e, 2020). Adminis a ions ha display good-quali y ne wo ks usually pe o m be e in c isis manage-
men (Eckha d e al., 2021), and inclusion is also a success ul way o mobilize addi ional su ge capaci y (Whi ake
e al., 2015). Howe e , inclusion does no only ma e om an o ganiza ional pe o mance pe spec i e; ci il socie y
in ol emen is also ega ded as an exp ession o communi y esilience and a popula al e na i e o op-down solu-
ions. Resea ch on ins i u ional us and alue li e a u e emphasizes he posi i e e ec s o ci izen pa icipa ion on
us and legi imacy and add esses he openness and inclusi eness o he c isis go e nance p ocess (Denha d &
Denha d , 2000; Moo e, 1995). P o iding oppo uni ies o indi iduals and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o become
in ol ed in he c isis go e nance p ocess is hus expec ed o inc ease he h oughpu legi imacy o he c isis
managemen p ocess (He ian e al., 2012; Johansson e al., 2018; Vigoda-Gado & Miz ahi, 2016).
One he o he hand, while inclusion is a p o en means o inc easing public legi imacy and add essing he open-
ness and inclusi eness o he c isis go e nance p ocess, i is essen ial o acknowledge ha pa icipa o y app oaches
come wi h ad e se e ec s (He ian e al., 2012; Iusmen & Boswell, 2017). The in ol emen o a g owing numbe o
s akeholde s can lead o ine iciencies and a educ ion in accoun abili y. Fu he mo e, a lack o unde s anding
o in e connec ions and a holis ic o e iew can u he dec ease e ec i eness (Alb is & Lau a, 2021; Bo ens &
Schillemans, 2011). These p oblems become e en mo e p onounced in he con ex o c isis. C isis si ua ions a e
high- isk and high-insecu i y en i onmen s in ol ing a a ie y o ac o s wi h a ying esou ces, skill le els, and access
o in o ma ion o communica ion channels, making c oss-sec o collabo a ion pa icula ly challenging (Twigg &
Mosel, 2017; Whi ake e al., 2015). Fi s , in con as o exclusion, inclusion can esul in educed e iciency and
slowe decision-making, po en ially slowing down c isis esponses (Iusmen & Boswell, 2017; Moynihan, 2009;
S a k, 2014). Second, he inclusion o olun ee s in he c isis esponse can lead o a dilu ion o esponsibili ies and
accoun abili y (Ba sky e al., 2007; D abek & McEn i e, 2003; Ha is e al., 2017; A. Schmid , 2019). Addi ionally,
mul i-ac o c isis managemen ne wo ks can pose challenges ega ding liabili ies. Ex e nal ac o s o en lack au ho i y
wi hin he o mal au ho izing en i onmen o he eme gency managemen sec o ; hey a e o en no bound by con-
ac ual o s a u o y obliga ion bu a he ac olun a ily. Meanwhile, any mis akes o w ong decisions can po en ially
jeopa dize he sa e y and well-being o communi ies o i s esponde s (Alb is & Lau a, 2021; McLennan
e al., 2021). The e o e, success ully in eg a ing olun ee s in o c isis managemen can be challenging, and olun ee s
a e o en pe cei ed as obs acles o e icien disas e esponse.
Consequen ly, despi e he p edominan ly posi i e e ec s o inclusion and openness on he deg ee o public
pe cep ions o legi imacy, ad e se aspec s o inclusion can po en ially ou weigh i s bene i s compa ed o hei
associa ed al e na i es. Rampan inclusion can hus mi iga e he posi i e e ec s o inclusi i y due o a lack o
accoun abili y and o ganiza ional con ol esul ing om inc eased coo dina ion and ne wo king expenses, an
inc eased numbe o in ol ed ac o s, and inc eased esponse complexi y (Van Slyke & Roch, 2004). This is exempli-
ied when liabili ies e ol e in o mino scandals o au ho i ies use ex e nal s akeholde s as scapegoa s o shi blame
on case o any mishaps (Alb is & Lau a, 2021).
1402 LENZ
Hypo hesis H2a. Compa ed o exclusi e beha io , including ci il socie y ac o s in c isis managemen
inc eases he pe cei ed public legi imacy o he c isis managemen p ocess.
Hypo hesis H2b. When inclusion akes ampan ai s, he legi imacy o he c isis managemen p o-
cess dec eases compa ed o exclusion.
3.3 |Resou ce dilemma: Equali y e sus needs-based dis ibu ion
The hi d dilemma add esses he esou ce dilemma ha public adminis a ions encoun e in c isis managemen . A c i-
sis esponse in ol es he deli e y o help o indi iduals bu also adminis e ing help ac oss socie al g oups
(Hens a, 2010; Ri e a & Knox, 2022; Su e & Smi h, 2017). Ye , c isis managemen is usually accompanied by a
sca ci y o esou ces and he ques ion o adequa e dis ibu ion. The esou ce dilemma pe ains o he ques ion o
dis ibu i e jus ice, whe ein adminis a ions mus decide be ween dis ibu ing esou ces based on equi y o on he
basis o needs (Anaya-A enas e al., 2018). Hence, au ho i ies mus decide how he esou ces will be dis ibu ed,
whe he unds om some policy a eas a e o be ealloca ed and edi ec ed o c isis elie , and which social g oups
will bene i . Du ing a c isis, some g oups migh be mo e a ec ed, mo e dep i ed o esou ces, and mo e in need o
help han o he s. Adminis a ions ace a dilemma in ol ing he choice be ween sa egua ding he mos ulne able
and p o iding assis ance whe e i is u gen ly equi ed, e sus add essing he b oade communi y-wide needs wi h a
ocus on ensu ing equi y (Gadson, 2020).
The esou ce dilemma di e s om he wo abo e in ha i desc ibes wo compe ing al e na i es bu does no
p esen a ampan ca ego y. Ins ead, he esou ce dilemma is cha ac e ized by a di e en pi all o c isis manage s:
Au ho i ies mus weigh he e ec o esou ce dis ibu ion on he e iciency o he c isis esponse and on ai ness
simul aneously (Gadson, 2020; Ri e a & Knox, 2022). Needs-based dis ibu ion is cha ac e ized by i s e iciency in
swi ly ealloca ing esou ces o add ess he mos u gen conce ns. Howe e , i may be pe cei ed as less equi able,
as only he mos a ec ed sub-g oup eaps he bene i s. A he same ime, including equi y in o he equa ion is di i-
cul , as du ing c ises a pio i knowledge o wha cons i u es a ai dis ibu ion is o en unknown since he exac conse-
quences o he edis ibu ion and he ac ual esou ce equi emen s canno ye be es ima ed (Su e & Smi h, 2017).
Hence, esou ce alloca ion conside a ions a e highly unp edic able, making i challenging o iden i y he associa ed
bene i s and d awbacks.
In his con ex , p io esea ch by Mazepus and an Leeuwen (2019) disco e ed ha edis ibu ion a o ing he
collec i e in e es o e indi idual in e es s enhances legi imacy in c isis si ua ions. Addi ional s udies on pe cep ions
o ai ness in esou ce alloca ion unde sco e he ele ance o social psychological ac o s, such as in e pe sonal us
and g oup iden i y, in managing a sho age ( an Vug & Samuelson, 1999). In con es ed c ises, whe e pola iza ion
a ound he opic, opposing a enas, and opinions a e dominan in he public deba e, i becomes almos impossible o
he public adminis a ion o de e mine wha a ai esou ce dis ibu ion is (Rosen hal e al., 2001). The Co id-19 pan-
demic, o example, showed ha while all pa s o he popula ion we e a ec ed by he c isis, di e en g oups ha e
ecei ed help as e and less bu eauc a ically han o he s. Du ing he 2015/16 mig a ion c isis in Eu ope, discussions
we e e en mo e pola ized, as some social g oups el inancially disad an aged compa ed o he newly a i ing e u-
gees (Innes, 2010; Koch e al., 2020). P e ious indings show ha h ea pe cep ions, ins i u ional us , and poli ical
ideology a e impo an indi idual-le el p edic o s o suppo in na ional help o e ugees. A he same ime, pe cep-
ions o he dese ingness o e ugees migh in e e e wi h ai ness pe cep ions ega ding esou ce alloca ions
(Koos & Seibel, 2019).
Hypo hesis H3. Compa ed o needs-based esou ce dis ibu ion, equi y-based dis ibu ion inc eases
he public legi imacy o he c isis managemen p ocess.
LENZ 1403
4|DATA AND METHODS
4.1 |Case selec ion: The 2015/16 mig a ion c isis in Ge many as guideline
The 2015/16 mig a ion c isis in Eu ope is exempla y o such a ansbounda y c isis. I was bounda y spanning and
in ol ed a plu alism o public sec o se ices, equi ing coope a ion wi hin and be ween o ganiza ions om he
public and nongo e nmen al sec o s. In Ge many alone, he numbe o e ugee-seeking people has g own expo-
nen ially be ween 2014 and 2016, eaching i s peak in 2015 wi h o e 1 million newly egis e ed pe sons. F om
2014 o 2016, he numbe o asylum seeke s g ew om 77.651 o 745.545 pe yea . In con as , om 2011 o
2013, only a ound 260.000 new egis a ions we e lis ed (BAMF, 2017). Especially he Sep embe 2015 decision
o allow e ugees ma ooned in Hunga y o c oss Ge man bo de s lead o an ab up inc ease in people ha had o
be ca ed o .
The si ua ion was pa icula ly challenging o adminis a ions a he local le el in Ge many, whe e a la ge pa o
he c isis managemen compe ence is loca ed. While he adminis a i e sys em o asylum and mig a ion policy in
Ge many is agmen ed among all h ee ede al le els, he local le el dis ic s—dis ic - ee ci ies and coun ies—a e
mainly in cha ge o all aspec s ega ding eme gency esponse: hey manage he accommoda ion, supply and suppo
o he e ugees as well as he complex adminis a i e p ocedu es lying behind ha . Fu he mo e, hey o e see med-
ical and social suppo o asylum seeke s. As such, hey can be conside ed key ac o s in managing he Ge man e u-
gee c isis (Bogumil e al., 2016; Meye , 2016). Howe e , he local adminis a ion in mos a eas aced emendous
di icul ies eac ing o he massi e in lux o e ugees; in many a eas, he adminis a ion los con ol o he si ua ion.
Apa om di e en deg ees o a ec edness and exposu e o he in lux o e ugees, he local adminis a ion also di -
e ed in hei capaci y o eac o he si ua ion. While in some egions, c isis managemen s uc u es could be applied
ela i ely lexible, and ci ic engagemen could be in eg a ed in o he adminis a i e esponse, in o he egions, he
adminis a ion s uggled o adap quickly and was cha ac e ized by ine ia and b eakdown (Bogumil e al., 2016;
Eckha d e al., 2021).
This local-le el a ia ion makes an excellen case o s udy legi imacy pe cep ions ega ding c isis managemen
decisions, as ypical c isis managemen dilemmas mani es ed qui e clea ly du ing 2015/16 and he e o e p opose
ealis ic scena ios o he expe imen al design. Fo example, he e a e se e al examples o semilegal ac ion and
decision-making du ing he e ugee c isis 2015/16, such as housing and i e p e en ion egula ion o ende ing p o-
cesses. While p agma ism and lexibili y we e necessa y o espond o he u gency o he c isis, in some cases,
ad e se lexibili y has p o oked nega i e consequences, especially o public pe cep ion. In such si ua ions, he
ade-o migh ha e been oo big o jus i y a posi i e pe o mance assessmen . Fo example, he neglec ion o en-
de ing p ocedu es can hus lead o sho e p ocessing pe iods on he one hand while esul ing in excessi e spending
o a o i ism on he o he hand (I D, 2016, Ki maie & Zimme ly, 2015).
Simila obse a ions ha e been epo ed o ade-o s ega ding he inclusion o ci il-socie y ac o s: On he
one hand, he p omo ion, ne wo king, and coo dina ion o olun ee s wi h ull- ime bu eauc a s is cos ly and
equi es coo dina ion commi ees, ield o ices, and s a bodies and wa e s down accoun abili y (Hamann
e al., 2016). On he o he hand, olun a y engagemen was impo an o local esilience and also he adminis a-
i e abili y o ac in ligh o o e bu dening (Hamann e al., 2016). The ques ion o ai ness and esou ce dis ibu-
ion is also pa icula ly in e es ing in he case o he 2015/16 mig a ion c isis, as he indi iduals a ec ed by he
c isis we e a ulne able g oup ha was no pa o he hos socie y. Dis ibu ional ai ness is, he e o e, ele an
among e ugees as well as be ween e ugees and he hos popula ion. Al hough his dis ibu ion con lic is no
new, i may ha e been exace ba ed by he c isis. A su ey in he Uni ed Kingdom, o example, showed as ea ly as
2004 ha 71% o o e s pe cei ed ha e ugees we e p io i ized ega ding public se ice p o ision compa ed o
ci izens (Innes, 2010; Koch e al., 2020). A he same ime, suppo and solida i y wi h e ugees we e e y p o-
nounced in he public discou ses in Eu ope, and he majo i y o Eu opean ci izens suppo ed na ional help o e u-
gees (Koos & Seibel, 2019).
1404 LENZ
pa icula ly wi h ega ds o dis ibu ional jus ice, bu po en ially also wi h ega ds o he in e nal and ex e nal
dilemma. Fo ins ance, i is easonable o expec ha ad e se e ec s migh be mo e ole able when indi iduals eel a
s onge sense o iden i ica ion wi h he a ec ed popula ion. Fu he mo e, he s udy was conduc ed among a
Ge man popula ion sample, and he e is a possibili y o a ying e ec s among ci izens in di e en coun ies ha
canno be con olled o . The e o e, he indings o his s udy can only be p elimina y insigh s owa d a be e
unde s anding o he in e play be ween c isis managemen al e na i es and pe cei ed h oughpu legi imacy. Tes ing
he e ec s o c isis managemen go e nance on h oughpu legi imacy o a ious c ises and ac oss di e en
coun ies would be an impo an a enue o u u e esea ch.
Addi ionally, he indings a e limi ed o he ea men condi ions in expe imen s. In his a icle, lexibili y,
inclusion, and ai ness we e ope a ionalized as dilemmas wi h speci ic cha ac e is ics. The esul s could change gi en
o he ope a ionaliza ions. Replica ing he expe imen wi h an adap ed ope a ionaliza ion o he ea men s could also
be a ui ul op ion o u u e esea ch. Finally, expe imen al esea ch allows o he inclusion o a limi ed numbe o
a iables, and andomiza ion only accoun s o speci ic con ounding ac o s. Howe e , due o he speci ic igne e
su ey design, some alidi y due o he c oss-sec o ea u es was achie ed, and se e al addi ional a iables could
be included (Mu z, 2011). Conside ing he ela i ely small size o a iance in legi imacy ha is explained by he
o ganiza ional c isis go e nance in he analysis, o he ac o s on he indi idual le el as well as a he le el o c isis
managemen ou comes ha could no be included in his s udy should be u he in es iga ed.
7|CONCLUSION
This esea ch aims o in es iga e how he c isis managemen p ocess ela es o public legi imacy. I combines li e a u e on
o ganiza ion heo y, c isis managemen esea ch and legi imacy li e a u e and cen e s a ound h ee cen al o ganiza ional
and c isis managemen dilemmas— lexibili y e sus s abili y in in e nal eac ions,inclusion e sus exclusion o ex e nal ac o s,
and equi y e sus needs-based esou ce dis ibu ion—which a e hen heo e ically linked o hei e ec s on public legi imacy.
By ocusing on hese h ee manage ial dilemmas, he pape emphasizes p ocess legi imacy, di ec ly asking how manage-
men decisions o beha io a ec how he public pe cei es c isis managemen . Empi ically, he pape d aws on a igne e
expe imen wi h su ey da a om 2.630 Ge man esponden s. The expe imen al design allows p esen ing he esponden s
wi h hypo he ical c isis scena ios ha we e managed in di e en ways. While hese hypo he ical se ings a e cons uc ed
and come wi h limi a ions, he me hod ne e heless enables s udying public pe cep ions du ing c ises. Because o he
highly ulne able con ex o c isis, su eying hose a ec ed in ac ual disas e s is echnically and e hically di icul .
The indings con ibu e o he cu en s a e o c isis managemen li e a u e by co obo a ing he ele ance o he
go e nance p ocess o c isis managemen e alua ions and pe cei ed public legi imacy (Mazepus & an Leeuwen,
2019; Ri e a & Knox, 2022). The indings highligh he ele ance o anspa ency and legali y, inclusion, and ai ness o
c isis managemen , while a he same ime concep ualizing ad e se e ec s o speci ic manage ial op ions on p ocess
legi imacy. As such, he indings di ec ly speak o he bigge conund um be ween in e nal go e nance e ec i eness
and ex e nal go e nance legi imacy in c isis managemen (Boin & Rhina d, 2022; Ch is ensen e al., 2016;Miz ahi
e al., 2021a) and add a public pe spec i e on he p ima ily echnical and o ganiza ional ield o s udies. Mo e b oadly
speaking, he indings esona e wi h o he s who discuss he legi imacy o bu eauc a ic disc e ion and associa ed legi i-
macy dilemmas be ween e ec i eness h ough ule s e ching (Denha d & Denha d , 2000;Keise ,1999;Ri e a&
Knox, 2023) e sus iola ions o no ms and subjec i i y o indi idual judgmen s (Bell e al., 2021).
The indings o his esea ch also ha e en a i e p ac ical implica ions o he way how adminis a ions should
hink abou he legi imacy o hei c isis esponse. Adminis a ions a e dependen on public legi imacy, as i a ec s
go e nmen capaci y. Highe le els o legi imacy and us in public o ganiza ions inc ease ci izen compliance wi h laws
and egula ions, hus enhancing he e ec i eness o he c isis esponse (Bee ham, 1991; Eas on, 1967;Ma ien&
Hooghe, 2011;Sch a ,2020). Some go e nance p ac ices, howe e , while inc easing in e nal e ec i eness, a e associ-
a ed wi h dec eased le els o pe cei ed h oughpu legi imacy. Fu he mo e, legi imacy pe cep ions depend on ci izen
LENZ 1411
expec a ions; public adminis a ions need o conside expec a ions and mo i a ions bu also unde s and ha hei
go e nance decisions will po en ially sa is y some bu no o he s. In conclusion, as a p o ession, public adminis a ion
needs a be e unde s anding o he public's pe cep ion o ai ness and legi imacy in c isis managemen and how i can
be pu sued h ough ce ain go e nance al e na i es mo e han o he s.
Finally, his s udy o e s p elimina y esul s o how legi ima e ci izens pe cei e he ac ions o go e nmen s
du ing c isis managemen . Conside ing he compa able ele ance o bo h p ocess and ou come legi imacy
(Van Ryzin, 2011; Vigoda-Gado & Miz ahi, 2016), his s udy se es as addi ion o he exis ing esea ch, which has
so a p edominan ly ocused on he pe cep ions o ou comes. Howe e , he bounda ies o his a icle also ex end
an in i a ion o explo e a b oade esea ch agenda ha add esses he ela ionship be ween p ocess and ou comes
o c isis managemen legi imacy. The e is s ill a lack o knowledge abou he ex en o which p ocess and ou come
legi imacy in e ac wi h each o he , o example, o wha ex en hey mu ually ein o ce o con adic each o he .
Mo eo e , he legi imacy o c isis managemen p ocess could se e o legi imize pa icula ou comes o e en
ansla e, o some ex en , in o b oade di use legi imacy o public adminis a ion (Flink & Xu, 2024;Ma&
Ch is ensen, 2019; S a k, 2010). A mo e ex ensi e explo a ion o he mul idimensional ela ionship be ween p ocess
and ou comes is hus necessa y, and could u he explo e a eas such as he disc epancy be ween ac ual pe o -
mance and ci izen pe cep ions (S ipak, 1979) o he ole o ou come a o abili y (Mazepus & an Leeuwen, 2019).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The au ho wishes o hank S e en Eckha d, Sebas ian Koos, Maximilian Haag, and F anziska G a o hei eedback
and commen s on he pape . The au ho is also hank ul o he cons uc i e eedback ecei ed du ing p esen a ions
a IRSPM and ECPR, as well as he help ul sugges ions om he anonymous e iewe s. Open Access unding enabled
and o ganized by P ojek DEAL. WOA Ins i u ion: ZEPPELIN UNIVERSITAET GGMBH. Conso ia Name:
P ojek DEAL.
FUNDING INFORMATION
The da a collec ion o his a icle has been conduc ed in he con ex o he HybO g esea ch p ojec (h ps://www.
hybo g-p ojek .de/en/), unded by he Ge man Fede al Minis y o Educa ion and Resea ch (g an no. 01UG1826BX).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The au ho has no con lic o in e es o decla e
OPEN RESEARCH BADGES
This a icle has ea ned a P e egis e ed Resea ch Designs badge o ha ing a p e egis e ed esea ch design, a ailable
a h ps://os .io/3u 6h.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The da a ha suppo he indings o his s udy a e a ailable on eques om he co esponding au ho .
Supplemen al ma e ial o his a icle is a ailable online. The p e egis a ion is a ailable a h ps://os .io/3u 6h.
ORCID
Alexa Lenz h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-8286-5101
1412 LENZ
ENDNOTES
1
In he li e a u e, he e a e se e al go e nance dilemmas ha a e associa ed wi h c isis managemen . See, o example,
also he dilemma be ween cen aliza ion and decen aliza ion (Al amimi e al., 2022; ' Ha e al., 1993), o immedia e
ac ion e sus long- e m e ec i eness (Rosen hal e al., 2001).
2
See p e egis a ion plan h ps://os .io/3u 6h.
3
Weinbe g e al. (2014) ind suppo o he app op ia eness o popula ion-based online panels o conduc ing ac o ial su eys.
4
Field pe iod was scheduled in ad ance and he e o e coincides wi h he Co id-19 pandemic. To no in e e e wi h
esponden s' cu en ea s and isk pe cep ions o he ongoing pandemic, he au ho delibe a ely chose a di e en c isis
scena io un ela ed wi h he pandemic.
5
The backg ound o he 379 d opou s di e s om he emaining sample wi h ega ds o gende and age. See Appendix I,
o de ails and cha ac e is ics o he emaining sample.
6
De ailed in o ma ion abou he sampling p ocedu e can be ound in he Appendices Iand II. A powe analysis con i med
he iabili y o he sample o a be ween-subjec design (Champely e al., 2017), wi h he assump ion o a small sized
e ec ( =0.1) (Cohen, 1988). The analysis indica ed a minimum sample size o 1.980 (n=110 pe igne e) wi h a 0.5
signi icance alue and powe o 0.8.
7
P e es (N=40) was conduc ed in o de o e i y ha he igne es we e comp ehensible.
8
Fo he comple e wo ding o all he igne es, see Appendix IV.
9
The majo i y o empi ical s udies on he legi imacy o public adminis a ion ha e so a ocused on he aspec o ins i u-
ional us . The e, common p oxies o legi imacy a e us , sa is ac ion, o con idence (e.g., Rölle, 2009; Van de Walle
e al., 2008; Van de Walle & Migchelb ink, 2020).
10
Gende : Chi
2
=21.677, d =17, p- alue =0.197; pa y a ilia ion: Chi
2
=129.08, d =119, p- alue =0.2486; age:
ANOVA d =17, F=1.033, p> 417; poli ical in e es : ANOVA d =17, F=1.162, p> 288.
11
All analyses ha e been conduc ed wi h his sa is ac ion a iable as dependen a iable, simila ends ha e been obse ed
in he esul s, all esul s a e epo ed in he Appendix IV.
12
Appendix IV p o ides he esul s o all ANOVAs.
13
Con ols a e epo ed in Table 3and in he Appendices IV and V, and include olun a y engagemen , age, gende , poli ical
in e es , pa y iden i ica ion, educa ion, and income.
14
Fu he in o ma ion on he olun ee subg oup and he ull analysis a e epo ed in Appendix V.
REFERENCES
Alb is, K. & Lau a, K.C. (2021) Causing w ong while doing good: on he ques ion o liabili y o olun ee s in eme gencies.
En i onmen al Haza ds,20(1), 78–91. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/17477891.2019.1651687
Al amimi, H., Liu, Q. & Jimenez, B. (2022) No oo much, no oo li le: cen aliza ion, decen aliza ion, and o ganiza ional change.
Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,33, 170–185. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/jopa /muac016
Anaya-A enas, A.M., Ruiz, A. & Renaud, J. (2018) Impo ance o ai ness in humani a ian elie dis ibu ion. P oduc ion
Planning & Con ol,29(14), 1145–1157. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09537287.2018.1542157
Ansell, C. & Boin, A. (2019) Taming deep unce ain y: he po en ial o p agma is p inciples o unde s anding and imp o ing
s a egic c isis managemen . Adminis a ion & Socie y,51(7), 1079–1112. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/
0095399717747655
Ansell, C., Boin, A. & Kelle , A. (2010) Managing ansbounda y c ises: iden i ying he building blocks o an e ec i e
esponse sys em. Jou nal o Con ingencies and C isis Managemen ,18(4), 195–207. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.
1111/j.1468-5973.2010.00620.x
A zmülle , C. & S eine , P.M. (2010) Expe imen al igne e s udies in su ey esea ch. Me hodology,6(3), 128–138.
Auspu g, K. & Hinz, T. (2014) Fac o ial su ey expe imen s. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
BAMF. (2017) Das Bundesam in Zahlen 2017: Asyl. Nü nbe g: Bundesam ü Mig a ion und Flüch linge. A ailable om
h p://www.bam .de/Sha edDocs/Anlagen/DE/Publika ionen/B oschue en/bundesam -in-zahlen-2017-asyl.pd ?
__blob=publica ionFile
Ba sky, L., T aino , J., To es, M. & Agui e, B. (2007) Managing olun ee s: FEMA's u ban sea ch and escue p og amme and
in e ac ions wi h una ilia ed esponde s in disas e esponse. Disas e s,31(4), 495–507. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/
10.1111/j.1467-7717.2007.01021.x
LENZ 1413
Bech el, M.M. & Hainmuelle , J. (2011) How las ing is o e g a i ude? An analysis o he sho - and long- e m elec o al
e u ns o bene icial policy. Ame ican Jou nal o Poli ical Science,55(4), 852–868. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.
1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00533.x
Bee ham, D. (1991) The legi ima ion o powe . Basings oke: Palg a e Macmillan.
Bell, E., Te -Mk chyan, A., Wehde, W. & Smi h, K. (2021) Jus o unjus ? How ideological belie s shape s ee -le el bu eau-
c a s' pe cep ions o adminis a i e bu den. Public Adminis a ion Re iew,81(4), 610–624. A ailable om: h ps://doi.
o g/10.1111/pua .13311
Bogumil, J., Ha ne , J. & Kuhlmann, S. (2016) Ve wal ungshandeln in de Flüch lingsk ise. Vollzugsde izi e und
Koo dina ionschaos bei de E s au nahme und de Asylan agsbea bei ung. Die Ve wal ung,49(2), 289–300. A ailable
om: h ps://doi.o g/10.3790/ e w.49.2.289
Bogumil, J. & Kuhlmann, S. (2015) Legi ima ion on Ve wal ungshandeln—Ve ände ungen und Kons an en. Bud ich Jou nals,
8(2), 237–251.
Boin, A. & Rhina d, M. (2022) C isis managemen pe o mance and he Eu opean Union: he case o COVID-19. Jou nal o
Eu opean Public Policy,30, 655–675. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13501763.2022.2141304
Bo ens, M. (2007) Analysing and assessing accoun abili y: a concep ual amewo k. Eu opean Law Jou nal,13(4), 447–468.
Bo ens, M. & Schillemans, T. (2011) The challenge o mul iple accoun abili y. Does edundancy lead o o e load? In:
Dubnick, M.J. & F ede ickson, H.G. (Eds.) Accoun able go e nance. P oblems and p omises. A monk, NY: M.E. Sha pe,
pp. 3–21.
Ca lson, E.J., Poole, M.S., Lambe , N.J. & Lamme s, J.C. (2017) A s udy o o ganiza ional eponses o dilemmas in in e -
o ganiza ional eme gency managemen . Communica ion Resea ch,44(2), 287–315. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.
1177/0093650215621775
Champely, S., Eks om, C., Dalgaa d, P., Gill, J., Weibelzahl, S., Anandkuma , A. e al. (2017) pw : basic unc ions o powe
analysis.
Ch is ensen, T., Fim ei e, A.L. & Læg eid, P. (2011) C isis managemen : he pe cep ions o ci izens and ci il se an s in
No way. Adminis a ion & Socie y,43(5), 561–594.
Ch is ensen, T., Laeg eid, P. & Rykkja, L.H. (2016) O ganizing o c isis managemen : building go e nance capaci y and legi i-
macy. Public Adminis a ion Re iew,76(6), 887–897. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/pua .12558
Ch is ensen, T., Læg eid, P. & Rykkja, L.H. (2019) O ganizing o socie al secu i y and c isis managemen : go e nance capac-
i y and legi imacy. In: Læg eid, P. & Rykkja, L.H. (Eds.) Socie al secu i y and c isis managemen : go e nance capaci y and
legi imacy. Cham: Sp inge In e na ional Publishing, pp. 1–23.
Cohen, J. (1988) S a is ical powe analysis o he beha io al sciences, 2nd edi ion. New Yo k: Rou ledge.
Com o , L.K. (2007) C isis managemen in hindsigh : cogni ion, communica ion, coo dina ion, and con ol. Public Adminis a-
ion Re iew,67, 189–197.
Deephouse, D.L., Bundy, J., Tos , L.P. & Suchman, M.C. (2017) O ganiza ional legi imacy: six key ques ions. In:
G eenwood, R., Meye , R.E., Law ence, T.B. & Oli e , C. (Eds.) The SAGE handbook o o ganiza ional ins i u ionalism.
London: Sage, Vol. 4, pp. 27–54.
Denha d , R.B. & Denha d , J.V. (2000) The new public se ice: se ing a he han s ee ing. Public Adminis a ion Re iew,
60(6), 549–559 A ailable om h p://www.js o .o g/s able/977437
De e ell, E. (2010) Flexibili y and igidi y in c isis managemen and lea ning a Swedish public o ganiza ions. Public Manage-
men Re iew,12(5), 679–700. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14719031003633946
D abek, T. & McEn i e, D. (2003) Eme gen phenomena and he sociology o disas e : lessons, ends and oppo uni ies om
he esea ch li e a u e. Disas e P e en ion and Managemen ,12(2), 97–112. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/
09653560310474214
Eas on, D. (1967) A sys ems analysis o poli ical li e. New Yo k: Wiley.
Eckha d, S., Lenz, A., Seibel, W., Ro h, F. & Fa ke, M. (2021) La en hyb idi y in adminis a i e c isis managemen : he
Ge man e ugee c isis o 2015/16. Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,31(2), 416–433. A ailable om:
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/jopa /muaa039
Flink, C. & Xu, X. (2024) Cu back managemen s a egies and ci izen e alua ion o go e nmen . Public adminis a ion,102(2),
715–732. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/padm.12947
Fü e e -Akili, S. (2022) Co ona als Tü ö ne ü Ko up ion? Eine heo e ische Diskussion. In: Wol , S. & G ae , P. (Eds.)
Co ona und Ko up ion: Gesellscha swissenscha liche Analysen. Wiesbaden: Sp inge Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 19–56.
Gadson, D.N. (2020) Ad ancing equi y in public adminis a ion: p io i izing equali y o ou comes in he COVID-19 c isis.
Risk, Haza ds & C isis in Public Policy,11(4), 449–457. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/ hc3.12206
Gau, J.M., Co sa o, N., S ewa , E.A. & B unson, R.K. (2012) Examining mac o-le el impac s on p ocedu al jus ice and police
legi imacy. Jou nal o C iminal Jus ice,40(4), 333–343. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jc imjus.2012.05.002
Hamann, U., Ka akayali, S., Wallis, M. & Hö le , L. (2016) Koo dina ionsmodelle und He aus o de ungen eh enam liche
Flüch lingshil e in den Kommunen. Be lin: Be line Ins i u ü empi ische In eg a ions und Mig a ions o schung.
1414 LENZ
Ha is, M., Shaw, D., Scully, J., Smi h, C.M. & Hieke, G. (2017) The in ol emen /exclusion pa adox o spon aneous
olun ee ing: new lessons and heo y om win e lood episodes in England. Nonp o i and Volun a y Sec o Qua e ly,
46(2), 352–371.
Hens a, D. (2010) E alua ing local go e nmen eme gency managemen p og ams: wha amewo k should public manage s
adop ? Public Adminis a ion Re iew,70(2), 236–246. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02130.x
He ian, M.N., Hamm, J.A., Tomkins, A.J. & Py lik Zillig, L.M. (2012) Public pa icipa ion, p ocedu al ai ness, and e alua ions
o local go e nance: he mode a ing ole o unce ain y. Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,22(4),
815–840.
H idman, U. & Ande sen, S.C. (2016) Pe cep ions o public and p i a e pe o mance: e idence om a su ey expe imen .
Public Adminis a ion Re iew,76(1), 111–120. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/pua .12441
I D. (2016) Si ua ion und S a egien in den Kommunen. Zum Umgang mi de ak uellen Zuwande ung on Asylsuchenden.
Allensbach am Bodensee, Ge many: Ins i u ü Demoskopie (I D) Allensbach.
Innes, A.J. (2010) When he h ea ened become he h ea : he cons uc ion o asylum seeke s in B i ish media na a i es.
In e na ional Rela ions,24(4), 456–477. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0047117810385882
Iusmen, I. & Boswell, J. (2017) The dilemmas o pu suing ‘ h oughpu legi imacy’ h ough pa icipa o y mechanisms. Wes
Eu opean Poli ics,40(2), 459–478. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01402382.2016.1206380
Johansson, R., Danielsson, E., K a nlö , L., E iksson, K. & Ka lsson, R. (2018) A he ex e nal bounda y o a disas e esponse
ope a ion: he dynamics o olun ee inclusion. Jou nal o Con ingencies and C isis Managemen ,26(4), 519–529.
A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1468-5973.12228
Jung, K., Song, M. & Pa k, H.W. (2018) Filling he gap be ween bu eauc a ic and adap i e app oaches o c isis managemen :
lessons om he Sewol Fe y sinking in Sou h Ko ea. Quali y & Quan i y,52(1), 277–294. A ailable om: h ps://doi.
o g/10.1007/s11135-017-0467-x
Kapucu, N. (2006) Public-nonp o i pa ne ships o collec i e ac ion in dynamic con ex s o eme gencies. Public Adminis a-
ion,84(1), 205–220. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.0033-3298.2006.00500.x
Ka akayali, S. (2019) The Welcome s: how olun ee s ame hei commi men o e ugees. In: Feischmid , M., P ies, L. &
Can a , C. (Eds.) Re ugee p o ec ion and ci il socie y in Eu ope. Cham: Sp inge In e na ional Publishing, pp. 221–241.
Keise , L.R. (1999) S a e bu eauc a ic disc e ion and he adminis a ion o social wel a e p og ams: he case o social secu i y
disabili y. Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,9(1), 87–106. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/
ox o djou nals.jpa .a024407
Ki maie , C. & Zimme ly, T. (2015) Güll wi e Ve e nwi scha . Me ku . A ailable om h ps://www.me ku .de/lokales/
dachau/landk eis/guell-wi e - e e nwi scha -5628029.h ml [Accessed 1s Ap il 2023].
Koch, C.M., Moise, I., Helbing, D. & Donnay, K. (2020) Public deba e in he media ma e s: e idence om he Eu opean
e ugee c isis. EPJ Da a Science,9(12), 1–27. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.2957362
Koos, S. & Seibel, V. (2019) Solida i y wi h e ugees ac oss Eu ope. A compa a i e analysis o public suppo o helping
o ced mig an s. Eu opean Socie ies,21(5), 704–728. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14616696.2019.1616794
Laeg eid, P. & Rykkja, L.H. (2015) O ganizing o “wicked p oblems”—analyzing coo dina ion a angemen s in wo policy
a eas. In e na ional Jou nal o Public Sec o Managemen ,28(6), 475–493. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/
IJPSM-01-2015-0009
Lakoma, K. (2024) A compa a i e s udy o go e nance changes on he pe cep ions o accoun abili y in i e and escue
se ices in England. Public Adminis a ion,102(1), 3–20. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/padm.12923
Lenz, A. (2022) T us in Times o c isis: oppo uni ies and pi alls o coope a ion be ween olun ee s and local go e nmen s.
Bud ich Jou nals,15(1), 130–148. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.3224/dms. 15i1.09
Lenz, A. & Eckha d, S. (2023) Concep ualizing and explaining lexibili y in adminis a i e c isis managemen : a c oss-dis ic
analysis in Ge many. Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,33(3), 485–497. A ailable om: h ps://doi.
o g/10.1093/jopa /muac038
Lewis, M.W. & Smi h, W.K. (2014) Pa adox as a me a heo e ical pe spec i e: sha pening he ocus and widening he scope.
The Jou nal o Applied Beha io al Science,50(2), 127–149. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0021886314522322
Ma, L. & Ch is ensen, T. (2019) Go e nmen us , social us , and ci izens' isk conce ns: e idence om c isis managemen
in China. Public Pe o mance & Managemen Re iew,42(2), 383–404. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/
15309576.2018.1464478
Malho a, N. & Kuo, A.G. (2008) A ibu ing blame: he public's esponse o hu icane Ka ina. The Jou nal o Poli ics,70(1),
120–135.
Ma ien, S. & Hooghe, M. (2011) Does poli ical us ma e ? An empi ical in es iga ion in o he ela ion be ween poli ical
us and suppo o law compliance. Eu opean Jou nal o Poli ical Resea ch,50(2), 267–291. A ailable om: h ps://doi.
o g/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01930.x
LENZ 1415
Ma in, E.C. & Nol e, I.M. (2020) Migh less accoun abili y be mo e? INGO- olun ee ela ionships in he Eu opean e ugee
esponse. Public Managemen Re iew,22(3), 408–431. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14719037.2019.
1599057
Mazepus, H. & an Leeuwen, F. (2019) Fai ness ma e s when esponding o disas e s: an expe imen al s udy o go e nmen
legi imacy. Go e nance,33(3), 621–637. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/go e.12440
McLennan, B.J., Whi ake , J., K uge , T. & Handme , J. (2021) Na iga ing au ho i y and legi imacy when ‘ou side ’ olun-
ee s co-p oduce eme gency managemen se ices. En i onmen al Haza ds,20(1), 7–22. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/
10.1080/17477891.2020.1727829
Meye , H. (2016) Mig a ion, Asyl und In eg a ion als o ganisa o ische He aus o de ung ü Land und Kommunen. VM
Ve wal ung & Managemen ,22(3), 144–157. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.5771/0947-9856-2016-3-144
Miz ahi, S., Vigoda-Gado , E. & Cohen, N. (2021a) D i e s o us in eme gency o ganiza ions ne wo ks: he ole o
eadiness, h ea pe cep ions and pa icipa ion in decision making. Public Managemen Re iew,23(2), 233–253. A ailable
om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14719037.2019.1674367
Miz ahi, S., Vigoda-Gado , E. & Cohen, N. (2021b) How well do hey manage a c isis? The go e nmen 's e ec i eness du ing
he COVID-19 pandemic. Public Adminis a ion Re iew,81(6), 1120–1130. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/
pua .13370
Miz ahi, S., Vigoda-Gado , E. & Van Ryzin, G.G. (2010) Public sec o managemen , us , pe o mance, and pa icipa ion: a
ci izens su ey and na ional assessmen in he Uni ed S a es. Public Pe o mance & Managemen Re iew,34(2), 268–312.
A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.2753/PMR1530-9576340207
Moon, M.J. (2020) Figh ing COVID-19 wi h agili y, anspa ency, and pa icipa ion: wicked policy p oblems and new go e nance
challenges. Public Adminis a ion Re iew,80(4), 651–656. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/pua .13214
Moo e, M.H. (1995) C ea ing public alue: s a egic managemen in go e nmen . Camb idge: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess.
Moynihan, D.P. (2009) The ne wo k go e nance o c isis esponse: case s udies o inciden command sys ems. Jou nal o
Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,19(4), 895–915. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/jopa /mun033
Mu z, D.C. (2011) Popula ion-based su ey expe imen s. P ince on: P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
Noh s ed , D., Bynande , F., Pa ke , C. & ' Ha , P. (2018) Managing c ises collabo a i ely: p ospec s and p oblems—a
sys ema ic li e a u e e iew. Pe spec i es on Public Managemen and Go e nance,1(4), 257–271. A ailable om: h ps://
doi.o g/10.1093/ppmgo /g x018
Olsen, O.E., K uke, B.I. & Ho den, J. (2007) Socie al sa e y: concep , bo de s and dilemmas. Jou nal o Con ingencies and C i-
sis Managemen ,15(2), 69–79. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2007.00509.x
Pe e s, B.G. (2001) The poli ics o bu eauc acy: An in oduc ion o compa a i e public adminis a ion. 5 h edi ion. London:
Rou ledge.
Ri e a, J.D. & Knox, C.C. (2022) De ining social equi y in eme gency managemen : a c i ical i s s ep in he nexus. Public
Adminis a ion Re iew,83, 1170–1185. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/pua .13574
Ri e a, J.D. & Knox, C.C. (2023) Bu eauc a ic disc e ion, social equi y, and he adminis a i e legi imacy dilemma: complica-
ions o new public se ice. Public Adminis a ion Re iew,83(1), 65–77. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/pua .
13550
Rölle, D. (2009) Ve auen in die ö en liche Ve wal ung im in e na ionalen Ve gleich: Gemeinsamkei en, Un e schiede und
de en E klä ungs ak o en. In: Hill, H. (Ed.) Ve wal ungsmode nisie ung im eu opäischen Ve gleich. Baden-Baden: Nomos,
pp. 291–310.
Rosen hal, U., Boin, A. & Com o , L.K. (2001) The changing wo ld o c ises and c isis managemen . In:
Rosen hal, U., Boin, A. & Com o , L.K. (Eds.) Managing c ises: h ea s, dilemmas, oppo uni ies. Sp ing ield, Illinois: Cha les
C Thomas Publishe , pp. 5–27.
Scha p , F.W. (1999) Regie en in Eu opa: E ek i und demok a isch?. F ank u a.M: Campus Ve lag.
Schmid , A. (2019) Tensions and dilemmas in c isis go e nance: esponding o ci izen olun ee s. Adminis a ion & Socie y,
51(7), 1171–1195. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0095399719836734
Schmid , V. (2013) Democ acy and legi imacy in he Eu opean Union e isi ed: inpu , ou pu and ‘ h oughpu ’.Poli ical
S udies,61(1), 2–22. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00962.x
Schmid , V. & Wood, M. (2019) Concep ualizing h oughpu legi imacy: p ocedu al mechanisms o accoun abili y,
anspa ency, inclusi eness and openness in EU go e nance. Public Adminis a ion,97(4), 727–740.
Sch a , D. (2020) Poli ical us du ing he Co id-19 pandemic: ally a ound he lag o lockdown e ec s? Eu opean Jou nal
o Poli ical Resea ch,60(4), 1007–1017. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1475-6765.12425
Seo, M.-G. & C eed, W.D. (2002) Ins i u ional con adic ions, p axis, and ins i u ional change: a dialec ical pe spec i e.
Academy o Managemen Re iew,27(2), 222–247.
Smi h, W.K. & Besha o , M.L. (2019) Bowing be o e dual gods: how s uc u ed lexibili y sus ains o ganiza ional hyb idi y.
Adminis a i e Science Qua e ly,64(1), 1–44. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0001839217750826
1416 LENZ
Smi h, W.K. & Lewis, M.W. (2011) Towa d a heo y o pa adox: a dynamic equilib ium model o o ganizing. Academy o
Managemen Re iew,36(2), 381–403. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/am .2009.0223
S a k, A. (2010) Legisla u es, legi imacy and c ises: he ela ionship be ween ep esen a ion and c isis managemen . Jou nal
o Con ingencies and C isis Managemen ,18(1), 2–13.
S a k, A. (2014) Bu eauc a ic alues and esilience: an explo a ion o c isis managemen adap a ion. Public Adminis a ion,
92(3), 692–706.
S ipak, B. (1979) Ci izen sa is ac ion wi h u ban se ices: po en ial misuse as a pe o mance indica o . Public Adminis a ion
Re iew,39(1), 46–52. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.2307/3110378
Suchman, M.C. (1995) Managing legi imacy: s a egic and ins i u ional app oaches. Academy o Managemen Re iew,20(3),
571–610.
Su e , D. & Smi h, D.J. (2017) Coo dina ion in disas e : nonp ice lea ning and he alloca ion o esou ces a e na u al disas-
e s. The Re iew o Aus ian Economics,30(4), 469–492. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11138-016-0369-5
' Ha , P., Rosen hal, U. & Kouzmin, A. (1993) C isis decision making: he cen aliza ion hesis e isi ed. Adminis a ion &
Socie y,25(1), 12–45.
Twigg, J. & Mosel, I. (2017) Eme gen g oups and spon aneous olun ee s in u ban disas e esponse. En i onmen and
U baniza ion,29(2), 443–458. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0956247817721413
Van de Walle, S. & Migchelb ink, K. (2020) Ins i u ional quali y, co up ion, and impa iali y: he ole o p ocess and ou come
o ci izen us in public adminis a ion in 173 Eu opean egions. Jou nal o Economic Policy Re o m,25(1), 9–27. A ail-
able om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/17487870.2020.1719103
Van de Walle, S., Van Roosb oek, S. & Bouckae , G. (2008) T us in he public sec o : is he e any e idence o a long- e m
decline? In e na ional Re iew o Adminis a i e Sciences,74(1), 47–64. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/
0020852307085733
Van Ryzin, G.G. (2011) Ou comes, p ocess, and us o ci il se an s. Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,
21(4), 745–760.
Van Slyke, D.M. & Roch, C.H. (2004) Wha do hey know, and whom do hey hold accoun able? Ci izens in he
go e nmen –nonp o i con ac ing ela ionship. Jou nal o Public Adminis a ion Resea ch and Theo y,14(2), 191–209.
A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/jopa /muh013
an Vug , M. & Samuelson, C.D. (1999) The impac o pe sonal me e ing in he managemen o a na u al esou ce c isis: a
social dilemma analysis. Pe sonali y and Social Psychology Bulle in,25(6), 735–750. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.
1177/0146167299025006008
Vigoda-Gado , E. & Miz ahi, S. (2016) Managing democ acies in u bulen imes. Be lin: Sp inge .
Webe , M. (2002) Wi scha und Gesellscha , 5 h e edi ion, Tübingen, Ge many: J. C. B. Moh . (1922).
Webb, G.R. & Che eau, F.-R. (2006) Planning o imp o ise: he impo ance o c ea i i y and lexibili y in c isis esponse.
In e na ional Jou nal o Eme gency Managemen ,3(1), 66–72. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1504/IJEM.2006.
010282
Weinbe g, J.D., F eese, J. & McElha an, D. (2014) Compa ing da a cha ac e is ics and esul s o an online ac o ial su ey
be ween a popula ion-based and a c owdsou ce- ec ui ed sample. Sociological Science,1, 292–310.
Whi ake , J., McLennan, B. & Handme , J. (2015) A e iew o in o mal olun ee ism in eme gencies and disas e s: de ini-
ion, oppo uni ies and challenges. In e na ional Jou nal o Disas e Risk Reduc ion,13, 358–368. A ailable om: h ps://
doi.o g/10.1016/j.ijd .2015.07.010
Willems, J. (2020) Public se an s e eo ypes: i is no (a ) all abou being lazy, g eedy and co up . Public Adminis a ion,
98(4), 807–823. A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/padm.12686
Wu, W.-N. & Jung, K. (2016) A missing link be ween ci izen pa icipa ion, sa is ac ion, and public pe o mance: e idences
om he ci y and coun y o San F ancisco. In e na ional Jou nal o Public Sec o Pe o mance Managemen ,2(4), 392–410.
A ailable om: h ps://doi.o g/10.1504/IJPSPM.2016.079720
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Addi ional suppo ing in o ma ion can be ound online in he Suppo ing In o ma ion sec ion a he end o his
a icle.
How o ci e his a icle: Lenz, A. (2024). Managing c ises as i no one is wa ching? Go e nance dilemmas
om a public pe spec i e. Public Adminis a ion,102(4), 1397–1417. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/padm.12980
LENZ 1417
