Kennet Lynggaard is Associate Professor at the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark.Mads Dagnis Jensen is Associate Professor at the Department of International Economics, Government, and Business at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.Michael Kluth is Associate Professor at the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark.

• 1. Covid-19 hit Europe: Patterns of government responses to the Pandemic.- 2. Introducing the Southern Grouping.- 3. Italy: Contested Centralisation Amid Political Uncertainty.- 4. Spain: Temporary Centralization Amidst Political Polarization.- 5. Greece: Command and Control Combined with Expert-Driven Responses?.- 6. Portugal: From Exception to the Epicentre.- 7. Cyprus: Exacerbating Authoritarianism.- 8. Malta: The Benefits of Centralised Politics9. Introducing the Eastern Grouping.- 10. Poland: The “Cardboard State” v. the Virus.- 11. Romania: Inconsistent and Unpredictable Policy Implementation.- 12. Czech Republic: Best or Worst in Covid Country?.- 13. Hungary: Populist Government Politics.- 14. Bulgaria: Swift Early Response by the Executive, Followed by a Complete Governance Failure.- 15. Slovakia: Anti-Pandemic Fight Victim of Extreme Politicization.- 16. Croatia: Breaking Fragile Trust: How the Politicisation of Covid-19 Deepened the Divide Between Politics and Citizens.- 17. Lithuania: Dominance of Executive Power in the Context of Usual Confrontational Politics.- 18. Slovenia: Ripe for Autocratisation.- 19. Latvia: From Hubris to Nemesis.- 20. Estonia: Empowering the Executive.- 21. Introducing the Northern Grouping.- 22. Sweden: A Decentralized, Coordinated Response to the Pandemic.- 23. Denmark: Executive Power Concentration, yet still Consensus-Oriented.- 24. Finland: Balancing Centralized Leadership and Regional Interests.- 25. Norway: A Pragmatic, Collaborative, and Legitimate Response.- 26. Iceland: Heeding the Experts.- 27. Introducing the Western Grouping.- 28. Germany: Governance via Federal-State Conferences.- 29. The United Kingdom: Policy as a Game of Two Halves.- 30. France: From Centralization to Defiance?).- 31. The Netherlands: The Acceptance of an Uncontrolled Centralization of Power.- 32. Belgium: Cooperation out of Necessity and Confirmation of Executive Dominance.- 33. Austria: A Strong StartFollowed by a Strong Descent.- 34. Switzerland: Experimental Governance and Polarized Consociationalism.- 35. Ireland: The Executive-Centred Politics of Covid-19.- 36. Luxembourg: All Hands on Deck.- 37 Comparing 31 European Countries’ Responses to the Covid-19 Crisis.

Kennet Lynggaard is Associate Professor at the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark.Mads Dagnis Jensen is Associate Professor at the Department of International Economics, Government, and Business at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.Michael Kluth is Associate Professor at the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark.

• 1. Covid-19 hit Europe: Patterns of government responses to the Pandemic.- 2. Introducing the Southern Grouping.- 3. Italy: Contested Centralisation Amid Political Uncertainty.- 4. Spain: Temporary Centralization Amidst Political Polarization.- 5. Greece: Command and Control Combined with Expert-Driven Responses?.- 6. Portugal: From Exception to the Epicentre.- 7. Cyprus: Exacerbating Authoritarianism.- 8. Malta: The Benefits of Centralised Politics9. Introducing the Eastern Grouping.- 10. Poland: The “Cardboard State” v. the Virus.- 11. Romania: Inconsistent and Unpredictable Policy Implementation.- 12. Czech Republic: Best or Worst in Covid Country?.- 13. Hungary: Populist Government Politics.- 14. Bulgaria: Swift Early Response by the Executive, Followed by a Complete Governance Failure.- 15. Slovakia: Anti-Pandemic Fight Victim of Extreme Politicization.- 16. Croatia: Breaking Fragile Trust: How the Politicisation of Covid-19 Deepened the Divide Between Politics and Citizens.- 17. Lithuania: Dominance of Executive Power in the Context of Usual Confrontational Politics.- 18. Slovenia: Ripe for Autocratisation.- 19. Latvia: From Hubris to Nemesis.- 20. Estonia: Empowering the Executive.- 21. Introducing the Northern Grouping.- 22. Sweden: A Decentralized, Coordinated Response to the Pandemic.- 23. Denmark: Executive Power Concentration, yet still Consensus-Oriented.- 24. Finland: Balancing Centralized Leadership and Regional Interests.- 25. Norway: A Pragmatic, Collaborative, and Legitimate Response.- 26. Iceland: Heeding the Experts.- 27. Introducing the Western Grouping.- 28. Germany: Governance via Federal-State Conferences.- 29. The United Kingdom: Policy as a Game of Two Halves.- 30. France: From Centralization to Defiance?).- 31. The Netherlands: The Acceptance of an Uncontrolled Centralization of Power.- 32. Belgium: Cooperation out of Necessity and Confirmation of Executive Dominance.- 33. Austria: A Strong StartFollowed by a Strong Descent.- 34. Switzerland: Experimental Governance and Polarized Consociationalism.- 35. Ireland: The Executive-Centred Politics of Covid-19.- 36. Luxembourg: All Hands on Deck.- 37 Comparing 31 European Countries’ Responses to the Covid-19 Crisis.

Kennet Lynggaard is Associate Professor at the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark.Mads Dagnis Jensen is Associate Professor at the Department of International Economics, Government, and Business at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.Michael Kluth is Associate Professor at the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark.

• 1. Covid-19 hit Europe: Patterns of government responses to the Pandemic.- 2. Introducing the Southern Grouping.- 3. Italy: Contested Centralisation Amid Political Uncertainty.- 4. Spain: Temporary Centralization Amidst Political Polarization.- 5. Greece: Command and Control Combined with Expert-Driven Responses?.- 6. Portugal: From Exception to the Epicentre.- 7. Cyprus: Exacerbating Authoritarianism.- 8. Malta: The Benefits of Centralised Politics9. Introducing the Eastern Grouping.- 10. Poland: The “Cardboard State” v. the Virus.- 11. Romania: Inconsistent and Unpredictable Policy Implementation.- 12. Czech Republic: Best or Worst in Covid Country?.- 13. Hungary: Populist Government Politics.- 14. Bulgaria: Swift Early Response by the Executive, Followed by a Complete Governance Failure.- 15. Slovakia: Anti-Pandemic Fight Victim of Extreme Politicization.- 16. Croatia: Breaking Fragile Trust: How the Politicisation of Covid-19 Deepened the Divide Between Politics and Citizens.- 17. Lithuania: Dominance of Executive Power in the Context of Usual Confrontational Politics.- 18. Slovenia: Ripe for Autocratisation.- 19. Latvia: From Hubris to Nemesis.- 20. Estonia: Empowering the Executive.- 21. Introducing the Northern Grouping.- 22. Sweden: A Decentralized, Coordinated Response to the Pandemic.- 23. Denmark: Executive Power Concentration, yet still Consensus-Oriented.- 24. Finland: Balancing Centralized Leadership and Regional Interests.- 25. Norway: A Pragmatic, Collaborative, and Legitimate Response.- 26. Iceland: Heeding the Experts.- 27. Introducing the Western Grouping.- 28. Germany: Governance via Federal-State Conferences.- 29. The United Kingdom: Policy as a Game of Two Halves.- 30. France: From Centralization to Defiance?).- 31. The Netherlands: The Acceptance of an Uncontrolled Centralization of Power.- 32. Belgium: Cooperation out of Necessity and Confirmation of Executive Dominance.- 33. Austria: A Strong StartFollowed by a Strong Descent.- 34. Switzerland: Experimental Governance and Polarized Consociationalism.- 35. Ireland: The Executive-Centred Politics of Covid-19.- 36. Luxembourg: All Hands on Deck.- 37 Comparing 31 European Countries’ Responses to the Covid-19 Crisis.