جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی منطقه‌ای

جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی منطقه‌ای

راهبردهای تقویت صلاحدید بوروکرات های سطح خیابان در اجرای خط مشی ها

نوع مقاله : مقاله های برگرفته از رساله و پایان نامه

نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری گروه مدیریت دولتی- تصمیم گیری و خط مشی گذاری، واحد اصفهان (خوراسگان)، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اصفهان، ایران.
2 استاد، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد اصفهان (خوراسگان)، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اصفهان، ایران.
3 دانشیار، گروه مدیریت، واحد اصفهان(خوراسگان)، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اصفهان، ایران.
10.22034/jgeoq.2026.338510.3660
چکیده
هدف پژوهش حاضر طراحی چارچوبی برای تقویت صلاحدید بوروکرات‌های سطح خیابان در اجرای خط‌مشی‌ها، با تأکید بر اداره کل امور اقتصادی و دارایی استان اصفهان است. بوروکرات‌های سطح خیابان به‌عنوان مجریان مستقیم سیاست‌های عمومی، با برخورداری از اختیار قابل‌توجه در تصمیم‌گیری‌های روزمره، نقش تعیین‌کننده‌ای در کیفیت اجرا، تحقق عدالت و مشروعیت نظام اداری دارند. این پژوهش با رویکرد کیفی و به‌کارگیری روش نظریه داده‌بنیاد سیستماتیک انجام شده است. داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه‌های نیمه‌ساختاریافته با مدیران، اعضای هیئت علمی و کارشناسان، همچنین بررسی منابع کتابخانه‌ای، مقالات و رساله‌های مرتبط گردآوری شده‌اند. برای تأمین روایی از روش مثلث‌سازی منابع و روش‌ها استفاده شده و پایایی مدل با شاخص کاپا تأیید گردیده است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد راهبردهای تقویت صلاحدید در سه مقوله اصلی قابل طبقه‌بندی است: ۱) ارتقاء تعامل و ارتباطات از طریق تنوع‌بخشی به کانال‌های ارتباطی، ایجاد فضای گفتگو، تقویت نظام بازخورد و توسعه مهارت‌های ارتباطی؛ ۲) ارتقاء ظرفیت‌ها با توسعه مهارت‌های حرفه‌ای، انگیزش سازمانی، اشتراک‌گذاری تجارب و ارزیابی مهارت‌ها؛ ۳) تقویت امور اجرایی از طریق برنامه‌ریزی عملیاتی، بهینه‌سازی فرآیندها، چابک‌سازی و به‌کارگیری رویه‌های نوآورانه. این یافته‌ها می‌تواند به‌عنوان چارچوبی کاربردی برای مدیران و سیاست‌گذاران در راستای هدایت مسئولانه صلاحدید بوروکرات‌ها و ارتقای عدالت اجتماعی و اعتماد عمومی مورد استفاده قرار گیرد.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Strategies for Strengthening the Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Policy Implementation

نویسندگان English

Gholamreza Nasr Isfahani 1
akbar etebarian 2
Saeed Sharifi 3
1 PhD Candidate, Department of Public Administration - Decision Making and Policy Making, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Public Administration, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Management, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
چکیده English

The aim of this research is to design a framework for strengthening the discretion of street-level bureaucrats in policy implementation, with an emphasis on the General Directorate of Economic and Financial Affairs of Isfahan Province. Street-level bureaucrats, as direct implementers of public policies, possess significant discretion in everyday decision-making and play a decisive role in the quality of implementation, the realization of justice, and the legitimacy of the administrative system. This study adopts a qualitative approach and employs the systematic grounded theory method. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with managers, faculty members, and experts, as well as through a review of relevant library resources, articles, and theses. Validity was ensured through data source and method triangulation, and model reliability was confirmed using the Kappa index. The findings indicate that strategies for enhancing discretion can be categorized into three main themes: 1) Enhancing interaction and communication through diversifying communication channels, creating dialogic spaces, strengthening feedback systems, and developing communication skills; 2) Capacity building through professional skills development, organizational motivation, experience sharing, and skills assessment; 3) Strengthening executive affairs through operational planning, process optimization, agile management, and the application of innovative procedures. These findings can serve as a practical framework for managers and policymakers to guide the responsible exercise of bureaucratic discretion and to promote social justice and public trust.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Discretion
Street-Level Bureaucrats
Policy Implementation
Implementation Strategies
Directorate of Economic and Financial Affairs
باکی هاشمی, س، م، م. (1402). واکاوی مولفه‌های بروز تعارض در صلاحدیدهای رفتاری بروکرات‌های سطح خیابان با خط‌مشی‌‌های سازمانی (مورد مطالعه: مرکز اورژانس پیش بیمارستانی و مدیریت حوادث استان گیلان). مطالعات توسعه اجتماعی ایران, 15(57), 343-358.
حسین پور، د؛ الوانی، س، م؛ اصلی پور، ح؛ قربانی پاجی، ع. (1403). راهبردهای بوروکرات های سطح خیابان در اجرای خط مشی های زیست محیطی، فصلنامه مطالعات مدیریت راهبردی، 15(58)، 1-22. magiran.com/p2765749
حسینی، س، م؛  واعظی، ر؛ اصلی‌پور، ح؛ حسین پور، د. (1402). تبیین چارچوب مشارکت بوروکرات های سطح خیابان در طراحی خط‌مشی ها با استفاده از رویکرد مرور نظام مند ادبیات. فصلنامه انجمن علوم مدیریت ایران, 18(71), 25-54.
دانایی فرد، ح؛ گل وردی، م؛ مولوی، ز. (1397). نقش آزادی عمل اداری بوروکرات ها در تمایل به اجرای خط مشی های عمومی. علوم مدیریت ایران، 13(49 )، 63-76. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/373980/fa
سیاهکالی مرادی، ج؛ خسروانی، ف؛ ایازی، س، ع. (1396) ،ارائه مدل عوامل موثر بر بروز فساد اداری در بوروکرات های سطح خیابان، اولین همایش بین­المللی و سومین همایش ملی پژوهش­های مدیریت و علوم انسانی،تهران،https://civilica.com/doc/680938
شعبان پورلیاولی، و؛ نصرتی، ع؛ اسماعیل پور، ر؛ (1398)، نگاشت توانمندسازها با واکاوی پیشران ها در بروکرات های سطح خیابان (مطالعـه خـدمات مـشترکین توزیـع برق گیلان)، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، موسسه آموزش عالی راهبرد شمال، گیلان، رشت
شیخ بیکلو، س؛ دانش فرد، ک؛ طلوعی اشلقی، ع. (1397). آسیب شناسی نظام اختیار بروکرات های سطح خیابان در توسعه اجتماعی بخش عمومی. مطالعات توسعه اجتماعی ایران، 10(4)، 109-122. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/231869/fa
فقیه، س، م، ع. (1401). بررسی مدیریت بوروکراسی سازمان­های دولتی ایران براساس مطالعه فرا ترکیب. همایش ملی تحقیقات میان رشته­ای در مدیریت و علوم انسانی. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/949960/fa
ماه بانوئی، ب؛ قاسمی، ر. (1403). شناسایی شایستگی­های رفتاری بوروکرات­های سطح خیابان از منظر قرآن کریم، فصلنامه چشم انداز مدیریت دولتی، 15(59)، 130-154. magiran.com/p2787779
میرزمانی، ا؛ امیری، ع؛ یزدانی، ح؛ یمانی، م. (1403). محرک‌ها و موانع حمایت بوروکرات‏های سطح خیابان از نوآوری خط‌مشی؛ مطالعه موردی اجرای بودجه‌ریزی مبتنی بر عملکرد در ایران. سیاستگذاری عمومی, 10(1), 93-106. doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2024.97823
نصر اصفهانی، غ؛ اعتباریان، ا؛ شریفی، س. (1401). طراحی مدل صلاحدید بوروکرات های سطح خیابان در اجرای خط مشی‌ها (مورد مطالعه: اداره کل امور اقتصادی و دارایی استان اصفهان). ماهنامه جامعه شناسی سیاسی ایران, 5(12), 2396-2405. doi: 10.30510/psi.2022.303889.2278
 نهادی، ه؛ مرادی سیاهکالی، ج؛ حسینی، س، م. (1399). بررسی علل شکل گیری خشم سازمانی در بوروکرات‌های سطح خیابان (مطالعه موردی: سازمان تعاون روستایی استان قم). مطالعات بین‌ رشته‌ای دانش راهبردی, 10(38), 382-359.
 
 
Akella, N. (2024). Street-Level Bureaucracy in Instructional Design: Perspectives on Professional Identity and Institutional Culture in Higher Education. Taylor & Francis.
Akosa, F., & Asare, B. E. (2023). Street-level bureaucrats and the exercise of discretion. In Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy, and governance (pp. 12397-12402). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Alecu, A. I., Sadeghi, T., & Terum, L. I. (2024). Street-level bureaucrats’ attitudes towards clients in discretionary decision-making: Evidence from the Norwegian labour and welfare administration. Public Policy and Administration, 09520767241299078.
Alita, L., & Oosterveer, P. (2025). Co-design for public service innovation in china: The enabling role of street-level bureaucrats. Public Performance & Management Review, 1-29.
Almhairat, A. (2025). Bureaucracy Theory Revisited: Max Weber's Ideal Type and its Contemporary Relevance in Organizational Science. Australian Academic & Educational Services (AAES), Business and Administrative Studies, 2(3), 16-27.
Alshallaqi, M. (2024). The complexities of digitization and street-level discretion: a socio-materiality perspective. Public Management Review, 26(1), 25-47.
Andraszak, J., Alarcón, A., & Morlà Folch, T. (2023). What can we learn from the street-level bureaucracy approach regarding gender-based violence support services during the COVID-19 lockdown crisis?. Violence and gender10(1), 1-14.
Andreotti, A., Coletto, D., & Rio, A. (2024). Street‐level bureaucrats' discretion between individual and institutional factors: The analysis of the minimum income policy implementation in two Italian regions. Social policy & administration, 58(3), 368-384.
Banks, G. C., Woznyj, H. M., & Mansfield, C. A. (2023). Where is “behavior” in organizational behavior? A call for a revolution in leadership research and beyond. The Leadership Quarterly34(6), 101581.
Barral, S., & Ghosh, R. (2023). Between hierarchies and markets: How street‐level bureaucratic autonomy leads to policy innovations. European Policy Analysis, 9(4), 418-439.
Bassoli, M., Dallara, C., & Nesti, G. (2024). The Street-Level Bureaucracy (SLB) Revival: The State-of-the-Art and a New Research Agenda. Rivista Italiana di Politiche Pubbliche, 19(2), 175-188.
Bashir, M., & Masood, A. (2025). Enablers or deterrent? Role of street level managers in use of creativity at the frontlines. Governance, 38(1), e12866.
Becker, P., & Bodin, Ö. (2025). The impact of political attention on collaborative environmental governance among municipal street‐level bureaucrats. Policy Studies Journal.
Berg, J., Oldenhof, L., Putters, K., & van Wijngaarden, J. (2024). Which client is worthy of using discretion? Analysing storytelling practices of Dutch street-level bureaucrats in inter-departmental settings. Journal of Social Policy, 1-20.
Bersch, K., & Fukuyama, F. (2023). Defining bureaucratic autonomy. Annual Review of Political Science26(1), 213-232.
Bovens, M., & Zouridis, S. (2002). From street‐level to system‐level bureaucracies: How information and communication technology is transforming administrative discretion and constitutional control. Public administration review, 62(2), 174-184.
Brodkin, E. Z. (2015). Street-level organizations and the" real world" of workfare: Lessons from the US. Social Work & Society, 13(1).
Buffat, A., Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (Eds.). (2016). Understanding street-level bureaucracy. Bristol: Policy Press.
Busch, P. A. (2025). The Artificial Bureaucrat: Artificial Intelligence in Street-Level Work. Digital Government: Research and Practice.
Butt, J. S. (2023). The Role of Bureaucracy in Europe for Promoting Democracy, Equality, Good Governance and Social Justice. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Administratio, 15(1), 7-20.
Buzogány, A., & Pülzl, H. (2024). Top-down and bottom-up implementation. In Handbook of public policy implementation (pp. 116-126). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Cerna-Aragon, D., & García, L. (2025). Making the eyes of the state: algorithmic alienation and mundane creativity in Peruvian street-level bureaucrats. Policy Sciences, 1-18.
Chang, A. (2025). Recurring Street‐Level Encounters: How Bureaucratic Representation Changes Through Citizen Interactions. Public Administration Review.
Chang, A., & Brewer, G. A. (2023). Street-level bureaucracy in public administration: A systematic literature review. Public management review25(11), 2191-2211.
Chisika, S., & Yeom, C. (2023). Enhancing energy justice through solar power proliferation in Kenya's devolved units.
Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2011). Democracy and administrative policy: Contrasting elements of New Public Management (NPM) and post-NPM. European political science review3(1), 125-146.
Clarke, J. C. (2023). From here to IAPT?(improving access to psychological therapies), preview for a new deal for dynamic psychotherapies: The psychoanalyst as street‐level bureaucrat. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies20(2), 316-324.
Cohen, N., & Aviram, N. F. (2021). Street‐level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurship: When implementers challenge policy design. Public Administration99(3), 427-438.
Cookson, T. P., & Barrantes, A. (2024). Gender, social protection systems and street‐level bureaucrats. International Social Security Review, 77(4), 7-22.
Cornell, A., Knutsen, C. H., & Teorell, J. (2020). Bureaucracy and growth. Comparative Political Studies53(14), 2246-2282.
Crosby, A. (2025). The Discretionary Power of Street‐Level Bureaucrats From the Perspective of Illusio. Social Policy & Administration, 59(4), 618-626.
Dahl, A. (2023). What we do when we define morality (And why we need to do it). Psychological Inquiry34(2), 53-79.
Da Roit, B., & Busacca, M. (2024). Street-level netocracy: rules, discretion and professionalism in a network-based intervention. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 44(3/4), 296-310.
Davidovitz, M., & Cohen, N. (2023). Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity. Public Policy and Administration, 38(3), 309-328.
Davis, B., & Ybarra, M. (2023). Can case-management teams solve the dilemmas of the street-level bureaucrat? Evidence from a nonprofit case study. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 47(3), 194-217.
de Boer, N. (2021). The (un) intended effects of street-level bureaucrats’ enforcement style: Do citizens shame or obey bureaucrats?. Public Policy and Administration36(4), 452-475.
Debrunner, G., & Kaufmann, D. (2023). Land valuation in densifying cities: The negotiation process between institutional landowners and municipal planning authorities. Land Use Policy132, 106813.
de Oliveira, O. P., Romano, G. C., Volden, C., & Karch, A. (2023). Policy diffusion and innovation. In Theories of the Policy Process (pp. 230-261). Routledge.
Dubois, V., & Lotta, G. (2024). Street-level bureaucracy: Teaching policy (theory) in practice. In Handbook of teaching public policy (pp. 155-166). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Durose, C., & Lowndes, V. (2024). Gendering discretion: Why street-level bureaucracy needs a gendered lens. Political Studies, 72(3), 1026-1049.
Edri-Peer, O., & Cohen, N. (2025). Revisiting coping mechanisms on the street-level: a systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, muaf022.
Eiró, F., & Lotta, G. (2024). On the frontline of global inequalities: A decolonial approach to the study of street-level bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory34(1), 67-79.
Eriksson, E., & Andersson, T. (2024). The ‘service turn’in a new public management context: a street-level bureaucrat perspective. Public Management Review, 26(7), 2014-2038.
Eshuis, J., De Boer, N., & Klijn, E. H. (2023). Street‐level bureaucrats' emotional intelligence and its relation with their performance. Public Administration, 101(3), 804-821.
Esping-Andersen, G. (2024). The comparison of policy regimes: an introduction. In Stagnation and renewal in social policy (pp. 3-12). Routledge.
Evans, T. (2020). Street-level bureaucrats: Discretion and compliance in policy implementation. In Oxford research encyclopedia of politics.
Ewing, C. M. (2024). Publius’ Proleptic Constitution. American Political Science Review118(3), 1131-1144.
Exley, C. L., & Kessler, J. B. (2024). Equity concerns are narrowly framed. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 16(2), 147-179.
Eyal, G., & Fu, Z. (2025). The Work of Legitimacy. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 21.
Ezeanah, U. (2024). Formal processes and informal practices: how policy systems and corruption constrain the delivery of housing in Nigeria. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 1-18.
Ezeudu, T. S., & Okolie, C. A. (2025). Systemic Impacts of Policy Formation on Street-Level Bureaucracy in Nigeria: A Multi-Level Analysis. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(3), 2568-2589.
Faas, L., Houtgraaf, G., Kruyen, P., & van Thiel, S. (2025). Creative Discretion on the Frontline of Public Services: A Longitudinal Qualitative Digital Diary and Interview Study. Public Administration.
Fitriani, N., Anam, S., Maulana, A., & Sebgag, S. (2024). Building Literacy of Early Age Students' Language; Teacher Managerial Competence and Legal-Rational Authority of Boarding School Leaders. Munaddhomah: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam5(1), 41-50.
Fleming, C. J. (2020). Prosocial rule breaking at the street level: The roles of leaders, peers, and bureaucracy. Public Management Review22(8), 1191-1216.
Fowler, L. (2024). Policy Implementation and the Multiple Streams Framework: Key Findings and Future Research Directions. International Review of Public Policy, 6(6: 3).
Fording, R. C., Soss, J., & Schram, S. F. (2011). Race and the local politics of punishment in the new world of welfare. American Journal of Sociology, 116(5), 1610-1657.
Franklin, A. L., & Raadschelders, J. C. (2023). Administering Government Programs. In Introduction to Governance, Government and Public Administration (pp. 155-172). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
Friedrich, L. (2025). Coping With Political‐Ideological Pressure: How Street‐Level Bureaucrats Shield Policy Implementation From Politicization. Governance, 38(4), e70052.
Ganda, R., & Muna, W. (2023). Street level bureaucracy: resource availability among environmental officers and its effects on implementation of water quality regulation policy in Kisumu County, Kenya. Reviewed Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 4(1), 639-651.
Gareeb, N., & Rwelamila, P. M. D. (2024). Organisational Factors as Building Blocks in Project Management Maturity Model (PMMM) Concept Development: The Case of the South African Power Sector.
Gellner, B. (2024). Primary Care Physicians as Street-Level Bureaucrats. University of Washington.
Gillingham, C., Morley, J., & Floridi, L. (2025). The Effects of AI on Street-Level Bureaucracy: A Scoping Review. Digital Society, 4(1), 22.
Gofen, A., Rønning, R., & Sønderskov, M. (2025). Street-level bureaucracy and Co-creation: towards theory synthesis and cross-fertilization. Public Management Review, 27(8), 1912-1937.
Golan‐Nadir, N. (2024). Religion and public administration at the micro level: The lens of street‐level bureaucracy theory in democracies. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 83(4), 736-748.
Green, D. P., Lin, W., & Gerber, C. (2018). Optimal allocation of interviews to baseline and endline surveys in place-based randomized trials and quasi-experiments. Evaluation Review42(4), 391-422.
Guyot, J. F. (2016). Government bureaucrats are different. In Administrative Leadership in the Public Sector (pp. 177-187). Routledge.
Hald, K. S., & Spring, M. (2023). Actor–network theory: A novel approach to supply chain management theory development. Journal of Supply Chain Management59(2), 87-105.
Hanhörster, H., & Tippel, C. (2024). “We Stretched the Rules”: How Street-Level Bureaucrats in Schools Shape Newcomers’ Access to Resources. Urban Planning9.
Hassan, M. S., Al Halbusi, H., Ahmad, A. B., Abdelfattah, F., Thamir, Z., & Raja Ariffin, R. N. (2023). Discretion and its effects: analyzing the role of street-level bureaucrats’ enforcement styles. International Review of Public Administration28(4), 480-502.
Hassan, M. S., Ariffin, R. N. R., Mansor, N., & Al Halbusi, H. (2023). The moderating role of willingness to implement policy on street-level bureaucrats’ multidimensional enforcement style and discretion. International Journal of Public Administration, 46(6), 430-444.
Holler, M. J. (2007). Freedom of choice, power, and the responsibility of decision makers. Democracy, freedom and coercion: A law and economics approach. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 22-45.
Hominh, Y. (2024). Human agency and law as a social practice. In Practice Theory and Law (pp. 208-233). Routledge.Chicago
Hosseinpour, D., Alvani, M., Aslipour, H., & Ghorbani Paji, A. (2024). The strategies of street-level bureaucrats in the implementation of environmental policies. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 15(58), 1-22.
Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2020). Discretion in the policy process. Discretion and the quest for controlled freedom, 237-258.
Hupe, P. L., & Hill, M. J. (2016). ‘And the rest is implementation.’Comparing approaches to what happens in policy processes beyond Great Expectations. Public Policy and Administration, 31(2), 103-121.
Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street‐Level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public administration, 85(2), 279-299.
Huising, R. (2023). Professional authority. The Oxford Handbook of Expertise and Democratic Politics, 453.
Infantino, F. (2023). The interdependency of border bureaucracies and mobility intermediaries: A street-level view of migration infrastructuring. Comparative Migration Studies, 11(1), 1.
Jacobsson, K., & Johansson, H. (2025). Governing Street-Level Bureaucracies: The Organizational Shaping of Caseworkers (p. 167). Taylor & Francis Jenkins-Smith, H. C., & Weible, C. M. (2025). The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Origins, Theories, and the Textbook Version. In The Advocacy Coalition Framework (pp. 1-42). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
Jeong, B. G., & Kim, S. J. (2021). NPO/NGO education in public administration in South Korea. Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs7(2), 173-191.
Johansson, J. (2025). Research on digital discretion—The subjectification of street‐level work in public administration. Review of Policy Research, 42(1), 122-148.
Jung, H., & Camarena, L. (2024). Street-level bureaucrats & AI interactions in public organizations: An identity based framework. Public Performance & Management Review, 1-30.
Karabulut, N. (2024). Street‐level bureaucracy in weak state institutions. Public Administration & Development, 44(5).
Karaevli, Ö., Çeven, G., & Korumaz, M. (2024). Implementing education policy: Reflections of street-level bureaucrats. Asia Pacific Journal of Education44(2), 488-502.
Knill, C., Steinebach, Y., & Zink, D. (2024). How policy growth affects policy implementation: bureaucratic overload and policy triage. Journal of European Public Policy, 31(2), 324-351.
Kirk, T., & Pinnington, R. (2024). Introduction: Development practice, power and public authority. Global Policy15, 5-10.
Koven, S. G. (2024). Administrative evil and street level discretion. Public Organization Review, 24(3), 791-802.
Kristy, R. M., & Machdum, S. V. (2025). Organizational Control and Street-Level Bureaucrats’ Discretion in the Social Assistance Services of the ‘Journey’Project JRS Indonesia. Asian Journal of Management, Entrepreneurship and Social Science, 5(03), 1228-1243.
Kularathne, M. (2025). Shaping the Disposition of Street-Level Bureaucrats in the Implementation of Social Welfare Policy. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Review, 9(4).
Kutty, R., & Menon, A. (2025). Brokering Power: Bureaucratic Contestations in Participatory Forest Governance. Conservation and Society, 23(2), 41-51.
Labro, E., Lang, M., & Omartian, J. D. (2023). Predictive analytics and centralization of authority. Journal of Accounting and Economics75(1), 101526.
Lahat, L., Klenk, T., & Pitowsky‐Nave, N. (2023). Street‐level bureaucrats as policy entrepreneurs and collaborators: Findings from Israel and Germany. European Policy Analysis, 9(4), 397-417.
Lannutti, V. (2023). Street Level Bureaucrats Between Frustrations, Powerlessness, Bottom-up and Resilience Processes. Social Sciences12(3), 82-87.
Larsen, F., Møller, M. Ø., & Raaphorst, N. (2025). Public management and street-level bureaucrats. Public Management Review, 1-11.
Lavee, Einat, and Galia Cohen. "Street‐level bureaucrats' perceptions of “the job”: Deviation from professional particularities and micro creation of public value." Public Administration (2024).
Lee, H., & Park, N. (2025). Institutional dimensions of discretion and intrinsic motivation among street-level bureaucrats in social welfare: organizational position and communication satisfaction as moderators. International Review of Public Administration, 1-25.
Leonardi, D., Paraciani, R., & Raspanti, D. (2024). Guest editorial: Setting the scene for street-level bureaucracy in different Souths: opportunities and challenges in context-based approaches. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 44(3/4), 289-295.
Levitats, Z. (2024). Emotionally intelligent street-level bureaucracies: agenda setting for promoting equity in public service delivery. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 44(2), 191-214.
Litchfield, I., Gale, N., Burrows, M., & Greenfield, S. (2023). “You're only a receptionist, what do you want to know for?”: Street-level bureaucracy on the front line of primary care in the United Kingdom. Heliyon, 9(11).
Lieberherr, E., & Thomann, E. (2019). Street-level bureaucracy research and accountability beyond hierarchy. In Research handbook on street-level bureaucracy (pp. 223-239). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Lima-Silva, F., Sandim, T. L., Magri, G. M., & Lotta, G. (2020). Street-level bureaucracy in the pandemic: the perception of frontline social workers on policy implementation. Revista de Administração Pública54, 1458-1471.
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-Level Bureaucracy (New York: Russell Sage). Moving Toward Mixed Service Delivery31.
Lipsky, M. (2023). The critical role of Street level bureaucrats. In Social Work (pp. 194-198). Routledge.
Liu, L., & Wang, Y. (2023). How street-level bureaucrats collaborate for policy entrepreneurship: Insights from anti-poverty policy implementation in China. Administration & Society, 55(9), 1791-1818.
Lotta, G. S., & Meira, M. (2025). Policy implementation: the role played by street level bureaucrats in policy implementation in Brazil. In Handbook of Public Management in Latin America and the Caribbean (pp. 360-372). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Luo, J. Street-Level Bureaucratic Responses to Government Technology: Using a Systematic Review to Develop the Combined Framework of Technologist, Technology and User.
Lovell, D. (2024). Rethinking faculty as street-level bureaucrats: Exploring the role of ethics and administrative discretion in contemporary higher education. Public Integrity, 26(1), 23-39.
Mangla, A. (2024). Making Bureaucracy Work. Cambridge University Press.
Marienfeldt, J. (2024). Does digital government hollow out the essence of street‐level bureaucracy? A systematic literature review of how digital tools' foster curtailment, enablement and continuation of street‐level decision‐making. Social Policy & Administration.
May, P. J. (2012). Policy design and implementation. The Sage handbook of public administration, 279-291.
May, P. J., & Winter, S. C. (2009). Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: Influences on policy implementation. Journal of public administration research and theory, 19(3), 453-476.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
Meza, O., Pérez-Chiqués, E., & Gofen, A. (2024). Street-level bureaucrats in environments of systemic corruption: sources of influence. In Street-Level Bureaucracy in Weak State Institutions (pp. 61-76). Policy Press.
Miller, S. M., & Keiser, L. R. (2021). Representative bureaucracy and attitudes toward automated decision making. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(1), 150-165.
Mirza, Z. T., Anderson, T., Seadon, J., & Brent, A. (2024). A thematic analysis of the factors that influence the development of a renewable energy policy. Renewable Energy Focus, 100562.
Mousa, M. (2024). What determines the engagement of nurses in organizational learning post Covid-19? The role of street-level bureaucracy and Florence Nightingale theories. Public Integrity, 1-16.
ChicagoNazir, M. A., & Khan, M. R. (2024). Identification of roles and factors influencing the adoption of ICTs in the SMEs of Pakistan by using an extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Innovation and Development, 14(1), 189-215.
Ndlovu, N. P., & Nzuma, T. M. (2024). The implementation of agroforestry in Namibia: A street-level bureaucracy perspective. Forest Policy and Economics, 168, 103299.
Nilsson, S. (2023). The Charismatic Leader. In Kids of Knutby: Living in and Leaving the Swedish Filadelfia Congregation (pp. 55-88). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Northcott, E. W. (2025). Automating street‐level discretion: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Policy Studies Journal.
Pan, H. L. W., & Wiens, P. D. (2024). An investigation of receptivity to curriculum reform: Individual and contextual factors. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher33(1), 103-114.
Paquet, M. (2020). Immigration, bureaucracies and policy formulation: The case of Quebec. International Migration, 58(1), 166-181.
Peeters, R., & Campos, S. A. (2023). Street-level bureaucracy in weak state institutions: a systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences89(4), 977-995.
Peters, B. G. (2024). Bureaucracy and public administrations. In Handbook of Comparative Political Institutions (pp. 232-247). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Petrovsky, N., Xin, G., & Yu, J. (2023). Job satisfaction and citizen satisfaction with street-level bureaucrats: is there a satisfaction mirror?. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(2), 279-295.
Pokharel, G., Das, S., & Fowler, P. (2024, March). Discretionary trees: understanding street-level bureaucracy via machine learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 38, No. 20, pp. 22303-22312).
Potipiroon, W. (2022). Rule formalization, Bureaucratic red tape, and prosocial rule breaking among street-level Bureaucrats: a citizen-centered perspective. Public Performance & Management Review45(3), 638-671.
Pressman, J. (2020). Horizontal inequality and violent unrest in Jerusalem. Terrorism and political violence, 32(6), 1161-1185.
Rahman, S., Burns, P., Wolfram Cox, J., & Alam, Q. (2024). Exercising bureaucratic discretion through selective bridging: A response to institutional complexity in Bangladesh. Public Administration and Development, 44(2), 61-74.Chicago
Reed, E. J. (2024). Applying Street-Level Bureaucracy Theory to Understand Barriers to the Implementation of Restorative Justice in Public School Organizations. William & Mary Educational Review, 9(1), 4.
Rivera, J. D., & Knox, C. C. (2023). Bureaucratic discretion, social equity, and the administrative legitimacy dilemma: Complications of New Public Service. Public Administration Review83(1), 65-77.
Rossi, P., Tuurnas, S., & Stenvall, J. (2025). Street-level bureaucrats as policymakers in the implementation of information system in social services. Public Management Review, 27(3), 702-721.
Rowe, M. (2024). Researching street-level bureaucracy: Bringing out the interpretive dimensions. Taylor & Francis.
Ryan, M. (2023). Discretion in Welfare Bureaucracies: Understanding Decision-making in the Context of Rule Ambiguity. Rowman & Littlefield.
Sager, F., & Rosser, C. (2021). Weberian bureaucracy. Oxford research encyclopedia of politics.
Saglam, E. (2025). Paperwork as statecraft: documents, politics, and bureaucratic agency in street-level organisations. Third World Quarterly, 46(2), 117-135.
Santoso, A. D., & Lionardo, A. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of thematic developments in street-level bureaucracy research. Public Administration and Policy27(2), 206-219.
Schnapp, K. U. (2024). Need and Street-Level Bureaucracy: How Street-Level Bureaucrats Understand and Prioritize Need. In Priority of Needs? An Informed Theory of Need-based Justice (pp. 235-265). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Shahi, H. B. (2024). Significance of Bottom-Up Approach for Policy Implementation. PAAN Journal, 30(1), 1748-1752.
Shwartz-Ziv, T., & Strier, R. (2023). Community practice as street-level bureaucracy: community views and discretionary patterns. European Journal of Social Work, 26(6), 1031-1044.
Simmons, M. C. (2021). Racialized Pathways of Protection: The Politics of Family Preservation and Child Protection in New York City Foster Care, 1920s-1960s (Doctoral dissertation, UC Berkeley).
Slee, G. (2023). Of the state, against the state: Public defenders, street-level bureaucracy, and discretion in criminal court. Social Service Review97(4), 675-718.
Smith, C., & Bhaduri, M. (2025). A recipe for systems change: Predictive modeling and street-level bureaucracy among homeless services. Plos One, 20(8), e0328822.
Smith, S. R. (2012). Street-level bureaucracy and public policy. Handbook of public administration, 431-446.
Stauffer, B., & Hadorn, S. (2024). Political involvement in street‐level policy implementation as a two‐way relationship—The effect of policy capacity. Australian Journal of Public Administration.
Sulaiman, M. A. B. A., & Asad, M. (2023). Organizational learning, innovation, organizational structure and performance evidence from Oman. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-17). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
Sun, F., Pang, X., & Niu, W. (2025). Street‐Level Bureaucrats and Public Value Conflicts: Role Ambiguity, Flexible Role Orientation, and Performance. Public Administration and Development.
Svendsen, E. S., Campbell, L. K., Plitt, S., & Johnson, M. L. (2021). Open for All: How are federal and municipal land management agencies adapting to the COVID-19 pandemic alongside increased societal recognition of racial injustice. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities3, 725620.
Thomann, E., & Zgaga, T. (2024). Practical implementation of European Union policies by member state administrations and street-level bureaucrats. In Handbook on European Union Public Administration (pp. 279-293). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Tu, W., Hsieh, C. W., Chen, C. A., & Wen, B. (2024). Public service motivation, performance-contingent pay, and job satisfaction of street-level bureaucrats. Public Personnel Management, 53(2), 256-280.
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547.
Visser, E. L. (2025). Enabling street-level work: minimal structures for customized social services. Public Management Review, 27(4), 1050-1067.
Vredenburgh, K. (2025). AI and bureaucratic discretion. Inquiry, 68(4), 1091-1120.
Vaughn, J., & Otenyo, E. E. (2007). Managerial discretion in government decision making: Beyond the street level. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Wang, Y. (2025). Street-level bureaucracy meets Big Data: The moral economy of taxation in China in the digital age. Big Data & Society, 12(1), 20539517251321751.
Weible, C. M., Fischer, M., & Ingold, K. (2024). The advocacy coalition framework and policy implementation. In Handbook of Public Policy Implementation (pp. 180-192). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Wongpreedee, A., & Sudhipongpracha, T. (2024). Street-level quasi-bureaucracy and professional discretion: how transformational leadership and public service motivation influence village health volunteers' professional discretion. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 44(3/4), 390-407.
Wijaya, T. T., Cao, Y., & Habibi, A. (2024). Critical factors affecting the participation of mathematics teachers in professional development training. Current Psychology, 1-16.
Wolff, J. (2024). WHEN TO FOLLOW, WHEN TO BREAK, WHO TO BLAME: CITIZEN PERCEPTIONS OF STREET-LEVEL SERVICE INTERACTIONS.
Young, S. L., & Tanner, J. (2023). Citizen participation matters. Bureaucratic discretion matters more. Public Administration, 101(3), 747-771.
Yu, S. (2024). “Although Burdened, Do We Need to Do More?” Street-Level Bureaucrats’ Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in Poverty Alleviation Policy Implementation. Administration & Society, 56(9-10), 1212-1244.
Zafarullah, H., & Kaiser, Z. A. (2025). Beyond weber: The Bangladesh bureaucracy and the limits of theoretical models. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 20578911251363717.
Zang, X. (2020). Research on street-level bureaucracy in China: Past, present, and future. In Handbook of public policy and public administration in China (pp. 378-391). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Zarychta, A., Grillos, T., & Andersson, K. P. (2020). Public sector governance reform and the motivation of street‐level bureaucrats in developing countries. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 75-91.
Zhang, H., Yang, L., Walker, R., & Wang, Y. (2022). How to influence the professional discretion of street-level bureaucrats: transformational leadership, organizational learning, and professionalization strategies in the delivery of social assistance. Public Management Review, 24(2), 208-232.