A street‐level perspective on government transparency and regulatory performance: Does relational distance matter?

Boer, Noortje de; Eshuis, Jasper

doi:10.1111/padm.12517

Cited by 26 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Street‐level bureaucrats are the workers whom the public interacts every day (de Boer & Eshuis, 2018; Hupe, 2019; Maynard‐Moody & Musheno, 2003; Sager et al, 2020; Thomann, 2015). They are responsible for translating the state's policies into action by providing the public with the goods and services to which they are entitled (Brodkin, 2011; Keiser, 2010; Lavee, 2021).…”

Section: Street‐level Bureaucrats and Policy Entrepreneurshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Street‐level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurship: When implementers challenge policy design

Cohen

Aviram

2021

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linking street‐level bureaucracy with policy entrepreneurship is a new, ongoing trend in the literature. We claim that in various cases one must consider street‐level policy entrepreneurship in order to fully understand policy processes. Therefore, we call on public policy and administration scholars to devote more resources to this important link. The symposium will promote our understanding of this still underresearched area. We will explore both theoretically and empirically how bureaucrats who interact with the public on a daily basis not only implement policy but also influence how it is designed. We will also assess the contribution of the symposium papers in light of the existing scholarly debate. We will conclude by reflecting on the challenges of studying street‐level policy entrepreneurship and suggest future avenues for research in this field.

show abstract

Section: Street‐level Bureaucrats and Policy Entrepreneurshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Street‐level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurship: When implementers challenge policy design

Cohen

Aviram

2021

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is little scholarship on the citizen side of service provision. Scholars have focused primarily on how bureaucrats deal with, behave, and make decisions during citizen encounters (e.g., de Boer and Eshuis ; Dubois ; Jensen and Pedersen ; Lipsky ; Loyens and Maesschalck ; Maynard‐Moody and Musheno ; Tummers et al ). As a result, little is known about how citizens assess bureaucrats or the implications for citizens’ assessments of the implementation of policies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Citizens Assess Street‐Level Bureaucrats’ Warmth and Competence? A Typology and Test

Boer

2020

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizens encounter many street‐level bureaucrats in their lifetime. How do they assess the traits of the bureaucrats they meet? Understanding citizens’ assessments of bureaucrats is important, because citizens are not passive receivers of policies. This article explores citizens’ classifications of street‐level bureaucrats based on their core task. Using a factorial survey (n = 580), three clusters of bureaucrats are identified: those who are regulation oriented, those who are service oriented, and those who are both regulation and service oriented. Then, the article tests how these three types of bureaucrats are assessed on warmth and competence and whether their gender matters. A between‐subjects experiment (n = 1,602) reveals that regulation‐oriented bureaucrats are assessed as least competent and warm. Moreover, regardless of core task, female bureaucrats are assessed as warmer than males. Female and male bureaucrats are assessed as equally competent. This article shows that bureaucrats are stereotyped by citizens and discusses the implications for the public management literature. Evidence for Practice While researchers and practitioners tend to focus on commonalities between street‐level bureaucrats, focusing on differences—for instance, in terms of core task and gender—may be helpful to understand how citizens see and react to their encounters with bureaucrats. Much like street‐level bureaucrats’ stereotypical notions of citizens, citizens stereotype the bureaucrats they encounter. These stereotypes are based on cues related to the bureaucrats’ core task and gender. Especially for regulation‐oriented organizations and street‐level bureaucrats, such as inspectorates, being aware of stereotypes may be useful when engaging with citizens because they are rated as the least competent and warm.

show abstract

“…Responsive regulation is expected to be more effective if the regulated sector knows that the regulator will follow through on its escalation strategy (Short & Toffel 2010; Toffel & Short 2011); likewise, if the regulator is known to be “soft,” this is likely to undermine overall compliance in the industry (van Erp 2011). In a nutshell, it may be helpful for a regulator to explain the responsive regulation strategy to its targets at the start of the regulatory relationship, and to have in place transparent public procedures and other measures that help to prevent the relationship between regulator and target from becoming too intimate (de Boer & Eshuis 2018). For example, when bringing third parties into a regulatory regime, regulators may have to explain exactly why it is in their interests to be involved (Kingsford Smith 2011).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why meta‐research matters to regulation and governance scholarship: An illustrative evidence synthesis of responsive regulation research

Heijden

2020

Regulation & Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is an introduction to meta‐research, a systematic and replicable process of synthesizing research findings across a body of original research. After introducing the reader to the core of meta‐research methodology, meta‐research logic and tools are applied to present an evidence synthesis of empirical research on responsive regulation. The article concludes with a meta‐research agenda for regulation and governance scholarship, and five key lessons from the empirical responsive regulation literature.

show abstract

A street‐level perspective on government transparency and regulatory performance: Does relational distance matter?

Cited by 26 publications

References 57 publications

Street‐level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurship: When implementers challenge policy design

Street‐level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurship: When implementers challenge policy design

How Do Citizens Assess Street‐Level Bureaucrats’ Warmth and Competence? A Typology and Test

Why meta‐research matters to regulation and governance scholarship: An illustrative evidence synthesis of responsive regulation research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About