M. Ackrén, N. Hokkala, P. Lægreid, E. Palmujoki, A. Trengereid, Á. E. Bernhardsdóttir, M. Koraeus, R. Olavson, B. Thorhallsson and K. Vrangbæk (pages 423-440)

This paper analyzes whether the seven Nordic countries, by virtue of their limited administrative size and less formalized governance arrangements, were particularly well-suited to fostering rapid knowledge sharing and adaptive policy responses during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. The cases reveal a spectrum of governance arrangements, with informality and social intimacy most pronounced and impactful in the smallest jurisdictions (Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Iceland), hybrid models dominating in mid-sized states (Finland, Norway, and Denmark), and formal structures prevailing in larger systems (especially Sweden). Our findings suggest that, while informal governance and elite proximity proved invaluable in certain contexts, their effectiveness depended heavily on structural factors unique to each state. Administrative size matters as a key variable that interacts with governance design, expert integration, and political leadership to shape crisis response outcomes. Smallness, when understood not merely as constraint but as a distinct administrative condition, can be a potent asset in navigating complex crises; if, however, it is accompanied by the right balance of informality, coordination, and institutional coherence.