When Worlds Collapse into Each Other: The Quest for Successful Crisis Management entangled between Public Administration and Politics in the New Era

跨界逆境新时代公共行政与政治的纠缠——跨界危机下公务员与政治家关系变化的考察由于现代危机很容易超越传统的地理、功能和时间界限，传统的政治行政制度难以跟上危机的动态。然而，政治和公共行政领导人要为危机管理的失败负责。面对公众的压力，处于国家核心的官僚和政客之间的关系变得政治化、紧张，并受到考验。结合公共管理、组织/管理和更广泛的关于危机的政治文献的见解，该研究考察了通过公共服务交易（PSB）概念化的官僚-政治关系在高度政治化逆境的特定背景下是如何变化的。它提出了一个简单的分析框架，通过该框架将危机管理分为三个大致阶段，即危机前、危机紧急应对和危机后阶段。在这三个阶段，包括八项危机管理职能（准备、发现、意义制定、决策、协调、意义制定/沟通、缓解/危机终止和学习），考察了公务员与更广泛的政治体系之间关系的变化。特别是，它检查了政治化是否可能发生，以及在这八项任务中，政治家和公共行政人员之间的PSB的哪些变化是可取的。在仔细考虑了预先存在的制度特征、个体历史和国家的全球嵌入性以及最终的危机结果后，在不同安排下执行这些任务的表现在不同国家和经历过的危机中得到了经验审查。为此，从半结构化访谈中收集数据，并通过定性内容分析进行分析，以便更系统地了解如何在政治与公共行政之间的相互作用中进行跨界危机管理。通过这种方式，它还旨在确定哪些安排有利于有效的危机管理，它还为官僚和政治决策者提供政策建议，这些决策者在面对这种新型危机时越来越需要帮助。

When Worlds Collapse into Each Other: The Quest for Successful Crisis Management entangled between Public Administration and Politics in the New Era of Transboundary Adversities - An Examination of the Change in the Relationship between Public Servants and Politicians in the Face of Transboundary Crises As modern crises easily transcend traditional geographical, functional, and temporal boundaries, traditional political-administrative systems struggle to keep up with their dynamics. Yet, political and public-administrative leaders are held accountable for failures in crisis management. In the face of public pressure, the relationships between bureaucrats and politicians, at the heart of the state, are politicised, strained, and put to the test.Combining insights from the public administration, organisation/management and broader political literature on crises, the research examines how exactly the bureaucratic-political relationship, conceptualised through the Public Service Bargain (PSB), changes in the specific context of highly politicised adversities. It advances a simple analytical framework through which crisis management is separated into three rough phases, namely the pre-crisis, acute crisis response and post-crisis phases. Along these three phases, which encompass eight crisis management functions (preparation, detection, sense-making, decision-making, coordination, meaning-making/communication, mitigation/crisis termination, and learning), the change in the relationship between civil servants and the wider political system is inspected. In particular, it is examined whether politicisation is likely to occur and which variations of the PSB between politicians and public administrators are desirable across these eight tasks. In careful consideration of the pre-existing system characteristics, individual history, and global embeddedness of the country, as well as the eventual crisis outcome, the performance of conducting these tasks within different arrangements is empirically scrutinised across various countries and endured crises. For this, data is gathered from semi-structured interviews and analysed through qualitative content analysis in order to arrive at a more systematic understanding of how transboundary crisis management can be conducted in the interplay between politics and public administration. As it, in this way, also aims to ascertain which arrangements are conducive to efficient crisis management, it additionally provides policy advice to bureaucratic and political decision-makers calling increasingly for help in the face of this new type of crises.