How street-level dilemmas and politics shape divergence: The accountability regimes framework |
| |
Authors: | Eva Thomann James Maxia Jörn Ege |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany;2. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK;3. ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland |
| |
Abstract: | Hierarchical accountability often proves insufficient to control street-level implementation, where complex, informal accountability relations prevail and tasks must be prioritized. However, scholars lack a theoretical model of how accountability relations affect implementation behaviors that are inconsistent with policy. By extending the Accountability Regimes Framework (ARF), this paper explains how multiple competing subjective street-level accountabilities translate into policy divergence. The anti-terrorism “Prevent Duty” policy in the United Kingdom requires university lecturers to report any student they suspect may be undergoing a process of radicalization. We ask: what perceived street-level accountabilities and dilemmas does this politically contested policy imply for lecturers, and how do they affect divergence? An online survey of British lecturers (N = 809), combined with 35 qualitative follow-up interviews, reveals that accountability dilemmas trigger policy divergence. The ARF models how street-level bureaucrats become informal policymakers in the political system when rules clash with their roles as professionals, citizen-agents, or “political animals.” |
| |
Keywords: | accountability dilemmas policy divergence policy implementation theory public accountability street-level bureaucracy 政策实施 公共问责 街头官僚 implementación de políticas responsabilidad pública burocracia de nivel de ventanilla |
|
|