The Attractions and Limitations of Pragmatist Crisis Management: A Discussion in Light of COVID-19 Experiences

Arjen Boin,Martin Lodge

doi:10.31389/lseppr.22

Abstract

In a crisis, the temptation for political leaders to ‘go big and do it fast’ can be overwhelming. Societal pressure to act decisively can lead to crisis measures that in hindsight may well be considered overwrought and impulsive. The so-called pragmatist approach to crisis management offers an attractive alternative to the ‘big decision’ approach that was also popular during the COVID-19 crisis. At least in theory, this alternative offers solutions for the often-observed shortcomings of large-scale crisis responses. In this paper, we consider the possibilities and limitations of the Pragmatist approach, using illustrations from the ongoing Covid-19 crisis.

Highlights

The lure of big decisions and a possible antidote The first two decades of the 21st century have offered an array of valuable insights for students of crisis management [1]
We argue that the Covid-19 crisis exposed the demanding pre-requisites for a pragmatically informed approach towards crisis management
A pragmatist approach towards crisis management Crises require decision-making under conditions of uncertainty: decisions aimed at taking away causes, the dampening or de-escalation of unfolding crises, or the limiting of consequences

Summary

Introduction

The lure of big decisions and a possible antidote The first two decades of the 21st century have offered an array of valuable insights for students of crisis management [1]. A pragmatist approach towards crisis management Crises require decision-making under conditions of uncertainty: decisions aimed at taking away causes, the dampening or de-escalation of unfolding crises, or the limiting of consequences.

Results

Conclusion