Combining democratic, regulatory and coordination hybridity for achieving robustness in turbulent times

In recent years, crisis has become the norm for governments. Rather than alternating between stable conditions and moments of crises, political and administrative institutions now experience consistent crisis-induced turbulence. This has affected the legitimacy of established institutions, as the overlap of short and long-term shocks puts pressure on existing structures, actors, processes and procedures. Governments have increasingly looked to foster both change and stability through robustness by means of reevaluating the decision-making venues (the ‘who’), the regulatory tools (the ‘what’) and modes of coordination (the ‘how’). This article aims to capture the complex dynamics in fostering robustness of policies through the lens of hybridity. To achieve this, the paper reconceptualizes hybridity in crisis response from the interconnected perspectives of democratic decision-making (representative; direct; deliberative), regulatory tools (substantive; framework; reflexive) and coordination (hierarchical; market; network). It does so through empirical examples drawn from 108 interviews across 19 case studies in nine European countries, focusing on responses to COVID-19 vaccination promotion and school closures. By understanding the interactions within the dimensions of governance in democratic decision-making, regulatory tools and coordination, we can better comprehend the enablers and limitations for robust crisis responses. The paper argues that hybridity is linked to robustness through the ability of actors to foster complementary effects by repurposing different ideal types (mixing) and substituting the conflicts that develop over time (matching).