Abstract
In line with a general trend towards more responsive regulation, inspectors are expected to take inspectees’ needs and demands in account when making decisions. At the same time, inspection services increasingly apply instruments aimed at directing the inspectors’ actions. These contradictory signals can make the work of inspectors very difficult. By reviewing relevant literature, this chapter shows that not only inspectees’ behavior and characteristics, but also inspectors’ professional role identity, i.e. the way inspectors view their professional role, is critical to explain and predict decision making on the ground.
Alphabetic sequence: The first and second author contributed equally to this chapter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bartels, K. P. R. (2013). Public encounters: The history and future of face-to-face contact between public professionals and citizens. Public Administration, 91(2), 469–483.
Braithwaite, J. (2011). The essence of responsive regulation. UBC Law Review, 44(3), 475–520.
Braithwaite, V., Murphy, K., & Reinhart, M. (2007). Taxation threat, motivational postures, and responsive regulation. Law and Policy, 29(1), 137–158.
Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carter, D. P. (2017). Role perceptions and attitudes toward discretion at a decentralized regulatory frontline: The case of organic inspectors. Regulation and Governance, 11(4), 353–367.
Etienne, J. (2013). Ambiguity and relational signals in regulator-regulatee relationships. Regulation and Governance, 7(1), 30–47.
Feld, L. P., & Frey, B. S. (2007). Tax compliance as the result of a psychological tax contract: The role of incentives and responsive regulation. Law and Policy, 29(1), 102–120.
Jilke, S., & Tummers, L. (2018). Which clients are deserving of help? A theoretical model and experimental test. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(2), 226–238.
Leviner, S. (2008). An overview: A new era of tax enforcement—From ‘big stick’ to responsive regulation. Regulation and Governance, 2(3), 360–380.
Lipsky, M. (1980/2010). Street level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary expanded ed.). New York: The Russell Sage Foundation.
Loyens, K. (2012). Integrity secured: Understanding ethical decision making among street-level bureaucrats in the Belgian Labor Inspection and Federal Police (Doctoral dissertation). Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
Loyens, K., & Maesschalck, J. (2010). Toward a theoretical framework for ethical decision making of street-level bureaucracy: Existing models reconsidered. Administration and Society, 42(1), 66–100.
Mascini, P., & van Wijk, E. (2009). Responsive regulation at the Dutch food and consumer product safety authority: An empirical assessment of assumptions underlying the theory. Regulation and Governance, 3(1), 27–47.
May, P. J., & Wood, R. S. (2003). At the regulatory front lines: Inspectors’ enforcement styles and regulatory compliance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(2), 117–139.
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.
Maynard-Moody, S., & Portillo, S. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy theory. In R. F. Durant (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of American bureaucracy (pp. 252–277). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nielsen, V. L., & Parker, C. (2009). Testing responsive regulation in regulatory enforcement. Regulation and Governance, 3(4), 376–399.
Petersen, M. B. (2012). Social welfare as small-scale help: Evolutionary psychology and the deservingness heuristic. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), 1–16.
Raaphorst, N., & Groeneveld, S. (2018). Double standards in frontline decision making: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Administration and Society, 50(8), 1175–1201.
Raaphorst, N., & Loyens, K. (2018). From poker games to kitchen tables: How social dynamics affect frontline decision making. Administration and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399718761651.
Raaphorst, N., & Van de Walle, S. (2017). A signaling perspective on bureaucratic encounters: How public officials interpret signals and cues. Social and Policy Administration, 52(7), 1367–1378.
Robben, P. B. M. (2010). Toezicht in een glazen huis. Effectiviteit van het toezicht op de kwaliteit van de gezondheidszorg. Rotterdam: Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Rourke, F. E. (1992). Responsiveness and neutral competence in American bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 52(6), 539–546.
Rutz, S., Mathew, D., Robben, P., & de Bont, A. (2017). Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands. Regulation and Governance, 11(1), 81–94.
Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 747–773.
Schott, C. (2015). Playing a role—But which one? How public service motivation and professionalism affect decision-making in dilemma situations (Doctoral dissertation). Leiden University, The Netherlands.
Schott, C., Van Kleef, D. D., & Steen, T. P. (2018). The combined impact of professional role identity and public service motivation on decision-making in dilemma situations. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(1), 21–41.
Soss, J. (2005). Making clients and citizens: Welfare policy as a source of status, belief, and action. In A. L. Schneider & H. M. Ingram (Eds.), Deserving and entitled: Social constructions and public policy (pp. 291–328). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Stivers, C. (1994). The listening bureaucrat: Responsiveness in public administration. Public Administration Review, 54(4), 364–369.
Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 284–297.
Van Kleef, D., Schott, C., & Steen, T. (2015). Inspections services and inter-rater reliability: Differentiating professional role identities of Dutch veterinary inspectors. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(2), 132–142.
Van Kleef, D., Steen, T., & Schott, C. (2017). Informal socialization in public organizations: Exploring the impact of informal socialization on enforcement behaviour of Dutch veterinary inspectors. Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12375.
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008–1022.
Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 527–540.
Westerman, P. (2013). Pyramids and the value of generality. Regulation and Governance, 7(1), 80–94.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Loyens, K., Schott, C., Steen, T. (2019). Strict Enforcement or Responsive Regulation? How Inspector–Inspectee Interaction and Inspectors’ Role Identity Shape Decision Making. 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_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04058-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-04057-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-04058-1
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)