In this chapter, we explore the linkages between policy styles as a theory of policymaking to crisis agenda setting, aiming at understanding how issues are prioritized in the political agenda in the aftermath of crises. We use the Zahariadis et al. (2022, 2023) conceptualization of policy styles to leverage the empirical material for this comparative case study of Greece and Sweden in their handling of forest fires crises. Based on the concepts of administrative capacity and degree of inclusion of societal actors in policymaking, Greece is classified as “administrative” (low administrative capacity, low inclusiveness of societal actors) and Sweden as “managerial” (high administrative capacity, high inclusion of societal actors). The chapter proposes two hypotheses: (H1) the degree of the politicization of the crisis as an issue rising in the agenda is higher in a country with an administrative policy style as opposed to a country with a managerial policy style, and that (H2) the policy solutions offered as remedies to crises in a country with administrative policy style are more symbolic and less substantive compared with those in a country with a managerial policy style. Our data support both hypotheses, contributing both to the literature on policy styles as well as the scholarship of crisis management.