Facets of Crises: How Problem Indicators and Public Perceptions Affect Policy Change

ABSTRACT Crises are widely acknowledged as catalysts for policy change. Yet, our understanding of the policy effects of crises remains limited. Why do only some crises lead to major changes, while significant policy changes also occur during seemingly non‐crisis periods? This paper addresses this gap by distinguishing between two critical “components” of crises: objective problem pressures and public perceptions. We argue that these components often co‐occur but may not always align, leading to differing changes in policy outputs. Using migration policy in Switzerland as a crucial case study, we explore fluctuations in both objective metrics and public sentiment over a period of 25 years (1994 to 2019). Our analysis reveals that substantial policy changes typically occur when both components highlight crisis conditions. However, notable policy change can also be triggered by either high objective pressures or strong public perceptions of crisis. These findings highlight the significance of how scholars define and conceptualize crises, as well as the dimensions—whether objective or perceptual—that they use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Policy Studies Journal
Published
2026-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70126
Primary Topic
Policy Transfer and Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Facets of Crises: How Problem Indicators and Public Perceptions Affect Policy Change

Alexa Lenz, Constantin Kaplaner, Yves Steinebach, Vanessa Millich et al.
Policy Studies Journal
Policy Transfer and Learning
article

Facets of Crises: How Problem Indicators and Public Perceptions Affect Policy Change

Alexa Lenz, Constantin Kaplaner, Yves Steinebach, Vanessa Millich, Clara Fochler, Christoph Knill, Annika Kolbe
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Crises are widely acknowledged as catalysts for policy change. Yet, our understanding of the policy effects of crises remains limited. Why do only some crises lead to major changes, while significant policy changes also occur during seemingly non‐crisis periods? This paper addresses this gap by distinguishing between two critical “components” of crises: objective problem pressures and public perceptions. We argue that these components often co‐occur but may not always align, leading to differing changes in policy outputs. Using migration policy in Switzerland as a crucial case study, we explore fluctuations in both objective metrics and public sentiment over a period of 25 years (1994 to 2019). Our analysis reveals that substantial policy changes typically occur when both components highlight crisis conditions. However, notable policy change can also be triggered by either high objective pressures or strong public perceptions of crisis. These findings highlight the significance of how scholars define and conceptualize crises, as well as the dimensions—whether objective or perceptual—that they use.

Policy Studies Journal
Zeppelin Universität gemeinnützige GmbH (DE), University of Oslo (NO), LMU Klinikum (DE), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
European Research Council
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Policy Transfer and Learning
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.