Collective cognition in context: Explaining variation in the management of Europe's 2015 migration crisis

Governance Pub Date : 2024-07-20 DOI:10.1111/gove.12887
Marlene Jugl
{"title":"Collective cognition in context: Explaining variation in the management of Europe's 2015 migration crisis","authors":"Marlene Jugl","doi":"10.1111/gove.12887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cognition is an essential first step in crisis management. This article conceptualizes crisis cognition as a collective and context‐dependent process. Drawing on cognitive sociology, I argue that governmental structures and culture/identity shape cognitive schemas and communicative practices essential for collective cognition. I apply this framework to compare governments' recognition of the 2015 migration crisis in Luxembourg and Germany, which showed a puzzling gap in crisis preparation. The qualitative analysis triangulates interviews and other sources. In Germany, complex responsibilities, adversarial bureaucratic identities, and hubris inhibited cognition. In small Luxembourg, simple government structures and collective identity emphasizing vulnerability fostered timely cognition and preparation. I consider country size as macro‐level context that shapes government structures and officials' identities, and critically discuss its role as an underlying explanation. This study introduces a sociological perspective on cognition to public administration, shows through which mechanisms context affects collective behavior, and proposes a comparative explanation for effective crisis management.","PeriodicalId":501138,"journal":{"name":"Governance","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12887","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cognition is an essential first step in crisis management. This article conceptualizes crisis cognition as a collective and context‐dependent process. Drawing on cognitive sociology, I argue that governmental structures and culture/identity shape cognitive schemas and communicative practices essential for collective cognition. I apply this framework to compare governments' recognition of the 2015 migration crisis in Luxembourg and Germany, which showed a puzzling gap in crisis preparation. The qualitative analysis triangulates interviews and other sources. In Germany, complex responsibilities, adversarial bureaucratic identities, and hubris inhibited cognition. In small Luxembourg, simple government structures and collective identity emphasizing vulnerability fostered timely cognition and preparation. I consider country size as macro‐level context that shapes government structures and officials' identities, and critically discuss its role as an underlying explanation. This study introduces a sociological perspective on cognition to public administration, shows through which mechanisms context affects collective behavior, and proposes a comparative explanation for effective crisis management.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
背景下的集体认知:解释欧洲 2015 年移民危机管理中的差异
认知是危机管理必不可少的第一步。本文将危机认知概念化为一个集体的、依赖于环境的过程。借鉴认知社会学,我认为政府结构和文化/身份塑造了集体认知所必需的认知图式和沟通实践。我将这一框架应用于比较卢森堡和德国政府对2015年移民危机的认识,结果显示两国在危机准备方面存在令人费解的差距。定性分析对访谈和其他资料来源进行了三角测量。在德国,复杂的责任、对立的官僚身份和自大抑制了认知。而在小国卢森堡,简单的政府结构和强调脆弱性的集体认同促进了及时认知和准备。我将国家规模视为塑造政府结构和官员身份的宏观背景,并批判性地讨论了其作为基本解释的作用。本研究将认知社会学的视角引入公共行政领域,说明了环境通过哪些机制影响集体行为,并提出了有效危机管理的比较解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The political economy of open contracting reforms in low‐ and middle‐income countries In court we trust? Political affinity and citizen's attitudes toward court's decisions A red flag for public goods? The correlates of civil society restrictions Drivers of transnational administrative coordination on super‐wicked policy issues: The role of institutional homophily European union funding of interest groups: Reassessing the balancing function and the promotion of good organizational practices
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1