For most people, the Covid-19 pandemic is already a hazy memory of a strange time of loss, isolation, and perhaps creativity or hobbyism. Yet, with viral infections continuing to spread globally and growing threats of conflicts in many regions, we should take time to remember and understand how governments responded to the challenges of coordinating a multi-level crisis response during the early years of the Covid-19 pandemic.  

Switzerland is an especially interesting context for this analysis. Swiss federalism is highly developed and complex, requiring both vertical and horizontal coordination between governments at different levels. During the pandemic, the Swiss criticized their federal decision-making system for being slow and creating a "patchwork" of measures that were incomprehensible to citizens. At the same time, locally targeted approaches also proved their effectiveness. 

Switzerland’s federalism operates through vertical coordination between the central government (the Confederation) and its constituent units (cantons). It requires horizontal coordination, with one overarching Conference of Cantonal Governments (KdK), as well as other interministerial or sectoral conferences. This collaborative system also extends to the local level, where municipalities engage in similar conferences. This framework is further strengthened by more than 700 regional agreements, commonly referred to as inter-cantonal concordats. 

How did the COVID-19 crisis impact this collaborative system, and what lessons can be drawn for the future? International IDEA partners with the Legitimult consortium, a project that explores models for legitimate crisis management by combining academic insights with input from policymakers, practitioners, citizens, and the media. 

Our partner, the Institute of Federalism at the University of Fribourg, explores these questions with Dr. Christian Rathgeb, who served as Minister of Finance and Communal Affairs for the Canton of Graubünden during the COVID-19 crisis. He was also the President of the Conference of Cantonal Governments (KdK) during this period. In this role, Dr. Rathgeb played a key part in fostering cooperation between Switzerland's 26 cantons and the federal government, particularly during critical moments of the pandemic. He championed stronger inter-cantonal coordination and clear communication channels, aiming to harmonize policies across cantons and address inconsistencies in crisis responses. 

What were the main challenges faced by the Canton of Graubünden in managing a crisis within a federal system? 

Graubünden is a large canton, and towards the end of 2020, we took drastic measures, imposing significant restrictions on public life to reduce case numbers, with the goal of allowing shops to remain open for tourism during the holidays.  

Another major challenge, particularly at the beginning of the crisis, was addressing the Italian-speaking part of the canton, where communication was not adequately tailored to the situation. This led to significant dissatisfaction among the Italian-speaking community, but we managed to resolve and address it. 

As a border canton, we faced substantial challenges. We have a large number of guest workers who commute daily from Italy to work on construction sites. For example, when there was no mask mandate on our side, but there was in Italy, and when construction sites were closed in Italy but remained open with us, it gave the impression that we weren’t taking the pandemic seriously, which caused considerable tension. They also wanted us to test everyone at the border crossings, which of course was not possible. 

Could you tell us more about the challenges of vertical coordination during that time? 

I think the system did learn over time. Initially, it was very difficult, particularly at the national level, due to the issue of identifying the right points of contact. Then the Conference of Cantonal Health Directors (GDK) took the lead, which created challenges in delineating responsibilities from other conferences and the KdK. 

The cantons tolerated consultations running through the GDK for a long time until the KdK requested that these go directly to the cantons and be evaluated by the federal government. Initially, the federal government refused, which, from my perspective, was an avoidable challenge in vertical collaboration. A better willingness to cooperate could have resolved this. At one point, three of us—the GDK president, the president of the Economic Directors Conference, and I as KdK president—attended a Federal Council meeting to address this. Over time, it bore some fruit, but the issue of consultations remained problematic and was a source of frustration in the Canton of Graubünden as well.  

It was extremely important for the cantons to coordinate, especially through the interministerial conferences and despite all the criticism, I think it worked well. 

However, what did not work well were the regional agreements. From my perspective, it was almost disastrous that coordinating and aligning measures wasn’t possible, particularly in densely populated areas. For instance, when businesses on one side of the street were open while those on the other side were closed… it created confusion. I believe this fueled "federalism bashing" because it was simply incomprehensible. 

Over time, as we became more experienced and horizontal collaboration functioned better, I believe things improved. Compared to sectoral conferences, regional conferences were less successful. Everyone had their own ideas and wanted to do their best, but some cantons were more hesitant, while others pursued more progressive approaches. Ideally, these approaches should have been coordinated.  

From a nationwide perspective, this was disastrous because people couldn’t understand why measures varied in regions with similar infection rates. Early in the pandemic, when Canton Appenzell Ausserrhoden had zero infections per day and Geneva had almost 300, it was clear that a federalized approach made sense. But in situations like autumn 2020, when the pandemic was affecting the entire country, it was legally and practically obvious that the federal government should have taken charge instead of leaving it to each canton. That’s precisely why the federal government exists. 

This remains one of the key lessons for me: when the situation is similar across regions, inconsistent responses are incomprehensible and unacceptable. We need to improve regional coordination to avoid such confusion. This issue was a major weakness in horizontal collaboration during the pandemic. It’s something we addressed clearly in the evaluation report of the Conference of Cantonal Governments, but unfortunately, we couldn’t resolve it during the crisis itself.