Search

A Review of Literature on Street-Level Bureaucracy Theory

Author(s)

Wang Fuhao*

Affiliation(s)

School of Political Science and Law, University of Jinan, Jinan, Shandong, China *Corresponding Author.

Abstract

This paper reviews the "street-level bureaucracy" theory, originated by Lipsky (1980), focusing on frontline public servants with direct citizen interaction, high discretionary power, and resource constraints. Key features include direct public engagement, adaptive decision-making under scarcity, and role conflicts between institutional rules and public needs. The theory's evolution spans five stages: germination (Simon's bounded rationality), formalization (Lipsky's framework), global expansion, contextual localization (e.g., China), and technological integration (AI-driven accountability). Central debates revolve around discretionary power's dual role—enabling flexible policy implementation while risking arbitrariness. The review highlights its contribution to understanding grassroots policy dynamics but notes limitations in addressing systemic structures. Future research should balance discretion with technological oversight and deepen cultural adaptations.

Keywords

Street-Level Bureaucracy; Discretionary Power; Policy Implementation; Frontline Governance; Theoretical Localization

References

[1]Ye Juanli, Ma Jun. Street-level bureaucratic theory in public administration[J]. Journal of Wuhan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2003, (05): 612-618. [2]Lipsky M. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010. [3]Zhang Jing. Literature review on the research of street-level bureaucracy theory[J]. Journal of Mudanjiang University, 2013, 22(02): 87-89. [4]Lipsky M. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010. [5]Lipsky M. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010. [6]Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street‐Level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279-299. [7]Brodkin, E. Z. (2011). Policy work: Street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of public administration research and theory, 21(suppl_2), i253-i277. [8]Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretionary space. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547. [9]Gofen, A., Sella, S., & Gassner, D. (2019). Levels of analysis in street-level bureaucracy research. In Elgar Research Handbook on Street-Level Bureaucracy (pp. 1-15). Edward Elgar Publishing. [10]Lipsky M. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010. [11]Multiple conflicts and adjustments in the logic of street-level bureaucratic action. Administrative Forum, 23(2), 88-94. [12]Simon H A. A behavioral model of rational choice[J]. The quarterly journal of economics, 1955: 99-118. [13]Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1966). Organizational alienation: A comparative analysis. American sociological review, 497-507. [14]Lipsky, M. (1969). Toward a theory of street-level bureaucracy. Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin. [15]Lipsky, M. (1971). Street-level bureaucracy and the analysis of urban reform. Urban affairs quarterly, 6(4), 391-409 . [16]Prottas J M. The power of the street-level bureaucrats in public service bureaucracies[J]. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 1978, 13(3): 285-312 . [17]Chiang Chenguang, Chu Songyan. Research summary of Jietou bureaucracy [J]. Foreign Social Science, 2019, (03): 59-68. [18]Lipsky M. Street - level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010. [19]Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review. [20]Ye Juanli, Ma Jun. Street-level bureaucratic theory in public administration[J]. Journal of Wuhan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2003, (05): 612-618 [21]Evans, T. (2016). Professional discretion in welfare services: Beyond street-level bureaucracy. Routledge. [22]Lipsky M. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010. [23]Evans, T., & Harris, J. (2004). Street-Level Bureaucracy, Social Work and the (Exaggerated) Death of Discretion. British Journal of Social Work, 34, 871–895. [24]Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretionary space. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547. [25]Brodkin, E. Z. (2011). Policy work: Street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl_2), i253-i277. [26]Harrison, S. (1999). Needs Assessment, Street-Level Bureaucracy and the New Community Care. Social Policy and Administration, 33, 263–280. [27]Ranson, S., & Stewart, J. (1994). Management for the Public Domain: Enabling the Learning Society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan [28]Stone, D. (2002). Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. [29]Keiser, L., & Soss, J. (1998). With Good Reason: Bureaucratic Discretion and the Politics of Child Support Enforcement. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 1133–1156. [30]Rohr, J. (1989). Ethics for Bureaucrats: An Essay on Law and Values. New York: Routledge. [31]Wilson, JQ (1989). Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Basic Books. [32]Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2000). State agent or citizen agent: Two narratives of discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 329-358. [33]Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street-level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279-299. [34]Li Xuqin. Deviations and corrections of street-level bureaucrats in the implementation of public policies[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2009, 9(03): 50-54.