000170041 001__ 170041
000170041 005__ 20260316092630.0
000170041 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1177/09520767261428316
000170041 0248_ $$2sideral$$a148572
000170041 037__ $$aART-2026-148572
000170041 041__ $$aeng
000170041 100__ $$aØjvind Nielsen, Rasmus
000170041 245__ $$aThe role of legitimacy in robust crisis governance. Examining the failed European response to the turbulence of the 2015-16 refugee crisis
000170041 260__ $$c2026
000170041 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000170041 5203_ $$aThis article examines the European governance failures that occurred during the 2015-16 refugee crisis through the lens of robust crisis governance. The article asks whether these failures can be explained by a failure to meet the double criterion for robust governance proposed by Ansell and colleagues, which is (i) creating adaptive or innovative crisis responses and (ii) doing so while maintaining legitimacy. To answer this question, the article takes three main steps. First, the article develops the legitimacy dimension of Ansell et al.’s robust governance framework by integrating Beetham’s three-dimensional concept of legitimation as legality, justifiability and consent. Second, the article applies the resulting augmented framework to three national case studies, each of which demonstrate a different route to failure, namely: institutional inertia (Spain), unlawful neglect, (the Czech Republic), and opportunistic agility (Denmark). Third, the article conducts a historical analysis of European migration policy to understand how incoherences between the three dimensions of legitimation contributed to the failures at robust governance observed in the case studies. By examining cases of failure through a legitimation lens, the article puts meat on the bone of Ansell et al.’s previously underdeveloped assumption that legitimacy is a necessary condition for robust crisis governance. The analysis implies that, to a degree not generally recognized by the crisis management literature, robustness in national crisis management relies on the preexistence of coherent legitimation structures, i.e., structures that explicate and manage contradictions among legal frameworks, policy goals and stakeholders.
000170041 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aAll rights reserved$$uhttp://www.europeana.eu/rights/rr-f/
000170041 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
000170041 700__ $$aPettrachin, Andrea
000170041 700__ $$aPina, Vicente
000170041 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-4623-1448$$aTorres, Lourdes$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000170041 700__ $$aNemec, Juraj
000170041 700__ $$aŠpacek, David
000170041 7102_ $$14002$$2230$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Contabilidad y Finanzas$$cÁrea Economía Finan. y Contab.
000170041 773__ $$pPublic policy adm.$$tPublic Policy and Administration$$x0952-0767
000170041 8564_ $$s475840$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/170041/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yPostprint
000170041 8564_ $$s2412414$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/170041/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yPostprint
000170041 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:170041$$particulos$$pdriver
000170041 951__ $$a2026-03-16-08:17:26
000170041 980__ $$aARTICLE