Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Inspectors and Enforcement at the Front Line of Government pp 227–258Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

The Decision Made: On the Inspection Encounter

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Inspecting is a verb. It presupposes action, while as a public task it entails a range of activities. In the inspectors’ interaction with citizen-clients as inspectees the essence of those activities is decision making. When shortcomings are observed, broadly speaking a threefold repertoire is available for taking action: disciplining the client, merely documenting and reporting what has been observed or being responsive and showing compassion. Inspectors need to make such decisions in the situation at hand in a way that can be justified in multiple directions: to their political-administrative superiors, to their peers, but also to the inspectees concerned. In this chapter the relationship between decision making and circumstances will be explored, as well as the considerations on the side of the inspector. What decision is made and why?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Baviskar, S., & Winter, S. C. (2017). Street-level bureaucrats as individual policymakers: The relationship between attitudes and coping behavior toward vulnerable children and youth. International Public Management Journal, 20(2), 316–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, T., Müller, W. C., & Strøm, K. (2000). Introduction: Parliamentary democracy and the chain of delegation. European Journal of Political Research, 73(3), 255–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodkin, E. Z. (1997). Inside the welfare contract. Social Service Review, 71(1), 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodkin, E. Z. (2011). Policy work: Street level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 253–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, N. (2016). How culture affects street-level bureaucrats’ bending the rules in the context of informal payments for health care: The Israeli case. American Review of Public Administration, 48(2), 175–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, V. (2010). The bureaucrat and the poor. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, R. M. (1977). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, T., & Hupe. P. L. (Eds.). (2019). The Palgrave Macmillan handbook on discretion: The quest for controlled freedom. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrow, E., & Grusky, O. (2013). Institutional logic and street-level discretion: The case of hiv test counseling. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1), 103–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gofen, A. (2014). Mind the gap: Dimensions and influence of street-level divergence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 473–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanf, K. I. (1993). Enforcing environment laws: The social regulation of co-production. In M. J. Hill (Ed.), New agenda in the study of the policy process (pp. 88–89). Hemel Hampstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrits, G., & Møller, M. (2014). Prevention at the front line: How home nurses, pedagogues, and teachers transform public worry into decisions on special efforts. Public Management Review, 16(4), 447–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasenfeld, Y. (Ed.). (2010). Human services as complex organizations. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. J., & Hupe, P. L. (2014). Implementing public policy: An introduction to the study of operational governance (3rd, Rev. ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L. (1993). The politics of implementation: Individual, organizational and political co-production in social services delivery. In M. J. Hill (Ed.), New agenda in the study of the policy process (pp. 130–151). Hemel Hampstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L. (2013a). Dimensions of discretion: Specifying the object of street-level bureaucracy research. Der Moderne Staat. Zeitschrift für Public Policy, Recht und Management, 6(2), 425–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L. (2013b). Determinants of discretion: Explanatory approaches in street-level bureaucracy research. Paper (Unpublished) written during a Visiting Fellowship 2012–2013 at All Souls College, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L. (2014). What happens on the ground: Persistent issues in implementation research. Public Policy and Administration, 29(2), 164–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L. (Ed.). (2019a). The Edward Elgar research handbook on street-level bureaucracy: The ground floor of government in context. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L. (2019b). Explaining public task performance. In P. L. Hupe (Ed.), The Edward Elgar research handbook on street-level bureaucracy: The ground floor of government in context (Chapter 17). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., & Buffat, A. (2014). A public service gap: Capturing contexts in a comparative approach of street-level bureaucracy. Public Management Review, 16(4), 548–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., & Hill, M. J. (2007). Street-level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., & Hill, M. J. (2019). Positioning street-level bureaucracy research. In P. L. Hupe (Ed.), The Edward Elgar research handbook on street-level bureaucracy: The ground floor of government in context (Chapter 2). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., & van der Krogt, T. (2013). Professionals dealing with pressures. In M. Noordegraaf & A. Steijn (Eds.), Professionals under pressure: The reconfiguration of professional work in changing public services (pp. 55–72). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., Hill, M. J., & Buffat, A. (Eds.). (2015a). Understanding street-level bureaucracy. Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., Hill, M. J., & Buffat, A. (2015b). Introduction: Defining and understanding street-level bureaucracy. In P. L. Hupe, M. J. Hill, & A. Buffat (Eds.), Understanding street-level bureaucracy (pp. 3–24). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupe, P. L., Hill, M. J., & Buffat, A. (2015c). Conclusion: The present and future study of street-level bureaucracy. In P. L. Hupe, M. J. Hill, & A. Buffat (Eds.), Understanding street-level bureaucracy (pp. 323–347). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, C. J. (2007). Agents of the welfare state. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, C. J., & Glaser, B. E. (2006). Towards a general analytic framework: Organizational settings, policy goals and street-level behavior. Administration & Society, 38(3), 335–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keiser, L. R., & Soss, J. (1998). With good cause: Bureaucratic discretion and the politics of child support enforcement. American Journal of Political Science, 42(4), 1133–1156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, M. (1994). Theories of justice and street-level discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4(2), 119–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (1980/2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary expanded ed.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loyens, K. (2015). Law enforcement and policy alienation: Coping by labour inspectors and federal police officers. In P. L. Hupe, M. J. Hill, & A. Buffat (Eds.), Understanding street-level bureaucracy (pp. 99–114). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loyens, K., & Maesschalk, J. (2010). Toward a theoretical framework for ethical decision making of street-level bureaucracy: Existing models reconsidered. Administration & Society, 42(1), 66–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, L. E., Jr. (2008). The 2008 John Gaus lecture: New frontiers of public administration: The practice of theory and the theory of practice. PS: Political Science and Politics, XLI, 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, P. J., & Winter, S. C. (2012). Regulatory enforcement styles. In C. Parker & V. L. Nielsen (Eds.), Explaining compliance: Business responses to regulation (pp. 222–244). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2003). Cops, teachers, counselors. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard-Moody, S., & Portillo, S. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy theory. In R. F. Durant & G. C. Edwards III (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of American bureaucracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Møller, M. (2016). She isn’t someone I associate with pension—A vignette study of professional reasoning. Profession and Professionalism, 6, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, V. L. (2015). Law enforcement behaviour of regulatory inspectors. In P. L. Hupe, M. J. Hill, & A. Buffat (Eds.), Understanding street-level bureaucracy (pp. 115–131). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2007). Institutional rational choice: An assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 21–64). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raaphorst, N. (2017). Uncertainty in bureaucracy: Toward a sociological understanding of frontline decision making (Doctoral dissertation). Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raaphorst, N. (2018). How to prove, how to interpret and what to do? Uncertainty experiences of street-level tax officials. Public Management Review, 20(4), 485–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raaphorst, N., & Groeneveld, S. (2018). Double standards in frontline decision making: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Administration & Society, 50(8), 1175–1201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raaphorst, N., & Loyens, K. (2018). From poker games to kitchen tables: How social dynamics affect frontline decision making. Administration & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399718761651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, D. (2013). Street-level bureaucrats and the welfare state: Toward a micro-institutionalist theory of policy implementation. Administration & Society, 45, 1038–1062. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712451895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schama, S. (1997). The embarrassment of riches: An interpretation of Dutch culture in the golden age. New York: Vintage Books/Random House Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review, 87(2), 334–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuppan, T. (2015). Service workers on the electronic leash? Street-level bureaucrats in emerging information and communication technology work contexts. In P. L. Hupe, M. J. Hill, & A. Buffat (Eds.), Understanding street-level bureaucracy (pp. 243–260). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, P. G. (1997). Assessing determinants of bureaucratic discretion: An experiment in street-level decision-making. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(4), 729–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sevä, M., & Jagers, S. C. (2013). Inspecting environmental management from within: The role of street-level bureaucrats in environmental policy implementation. Journal of Environmental Management, 128, 1060–1070.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosin, M. R. (2010). Discretion in human service organizations: Traditional and institutional perspectives. In Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.), Human services as complex organizations (2nd ed., pp. 381–403). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soss, J., Fording, R., & Schram, S. (2011). Disciplining the poor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. A. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (Rev. ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomann, E., & Sager, F. (2017). Hybridity in action: Accountability dilemmas of public and for-profit food safety inspectors in Switzerland. In P. Verbruggen & T. Havinga (Eds.), Hybridization of food governance: Trends, types and results (pp. 100–120). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomann, E., Hupe, P., & Sager, F. (2018). Serving many masters: Public accountability in private policy implementation. Governance, 31(2), 299–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tummers, L. L. G. (2012). Policy alienation of public professionals: The construct and its measurement. Public Administration Review, 72(4), 516–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tummers, L. L. G. (2016). The relationship between coping and job performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(1), 150–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tummers, L. L. G., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., Vink, E., & Musheno, M. (2015). Coping during public service delivery: A conceptualization and systematic review of the literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1099–1126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Parys, L. (2016). On the street-level implementation of ambiguous activation policy: How caseworkers reconcile responsibility and autonomy and affect their clients’ motivation (Doctoral dissertation). Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, R. (1980). Implementing social programs: The view from the front-line. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. C. (2012). Implementation. In B. G. Peters & J. Pierre (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public administration (pp. 255–263). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. C., & May, P. J. (2015). Street-level bureaucrats and regulatory deterrence. In P. L. Hupe, M. J. Hill, & A. Buffat (Eds.), Understanding street-level bureaucracy (pp. 133–152). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zacka, B. (2017). When the state meets the street: Public service and moral agency. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zang, X., & Musheno, M. (2017). Exploring frontline work in China. Public Administration, 95(3), 842–855.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Michael Hill, Steven Maynard-Moody, Steven Van de Walle and Bernardo Zacka are acknowledged for their comments on an earlier version of this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Visiting Professor, Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Peter L. Hupe

Authors
  1. Peter L. Hupe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Steven Van de Walle

  2. Institute of Public Administration, Leiden University, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Nadine Raaphorst

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hupe, P.L. (2019). The Decision Made: On the Inspection Encounter. In: Van de Walle, S., Raaphorst, N. (eds) Inspectors and Enforcement at the Front Line of Government . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04058-1_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation