| Sumario: | This special issue examines how multi-level polities govern crises and why performance varies. To identify what works, when, and why, we use three comparative lenses—within-country comparisons across crises, within-country variation across regions, and cross-national studies. The contributions converge on clear findings. Constitutional form, by itself, does not predict performance. The necessary condition lies in crisis-governance capacity linked to administrative and physical infrastructure, social protection, transparent crisis communication, intergovernmental forums, and policy learning. Yet capacity is not a sufficient condition. Translating capacity into outcomes depends on leadership commitment and a political culture that incentivizes collaboration and community engagement. Where these conditions hold, effective responses combine clear national direction with empowered local implementation. Intergovernmental forums direct overlapping competences into compensatory action rather than blame avoidance. In contrast, polarized contexts erode coordination. Overall, capacity sets the stage; politics decides the outcomes.
|
|---|