IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/padxxx/v42y2022i2p159-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Handling in the frontline: A case study of “whistle gathering” in Beijing

Author

Listed:
  • Shenghao Guo
  • Bo Wen
  • Natalie Wai‐Man Wong

Abstract

The larger role that street‐level bureaucracy has played in urban governance has been one of the focuses of public administration for several decades. This commentary presents a case study of whistle gathering (WG), which helps to eliminate the cooperative dilemma at the microlevel. As an innovative mechanism whereby organizational structures and communication systems are streamlined, WG occurs when departments/agencies convene and coordinate to participate in a joint task force in order to more efficiently respond to and solve every day problems at the community level. Underperforming participants are reprimanded and face administrative consequences. Since WG must meet certain prerequisites for successful implementation, policymakers and researchers are encouraged to further analyze the potential disadvantages of this system.

Suggested Citation

  • Shenghao Guo & Bo Wen & Natalie Wai‐Man Wong, 2022. "Handling in the frontline: A case study of “whistle gathering” in Beijing," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(2), pages 159-164, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:padxxx:v:42:y:2022:i:2:p:159-164
    DOI: 10.1002/pad.1975
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1975
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pad.1975?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Hupe & Aurélien Buffat, 2014. "A Public Service Gap: Capturing contexts in a comparative approach of street-level bureaucracy," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 548-569, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahrum Chang, 2022. "A formal model of street-level bureaucracy," Rationality and Society, , vol. 34(1), pages 6-27, February.
    2. Gabriela Lotta & Roberto Pires & Michael Hill & Marie Ostergaard Møller, 2022. "Recontextualizing street‐level bureaucracy in the developing world," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(1), pages 3-10, February.
    3. Berrick, Jill Duerr & Dickens, Jonathan & Pösö, Tarja & Skivenes, Marit, 2018. "Care order templates as institutional scripts in child protection: A cross-system analysis," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 40-47.
    4. Einat Lavee & Amit Kaplan, 2022. "Invisible work at work and the reproduction of gendered social service organizations," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 1463-1480, September.
    5. Koen PR Bartels, 2018. "Collaborative dynamics in street level work: Working in and with communities to improve relationships and reduce deprivation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(7), pages 1319-1337, November.
    6. Yue Wang & Honggen Zhu & Noshaba Aziz & Yu Liu, 2023. "Does Social Capital Improve the Effectiveness of Public Service? An Insight from Rural-to-Urban Migrants in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 165(2), pages 431-452, January.
    7. Changkun Cai & Qiyao Shen & Na Tang, 2022. "Do visiting monks give better sermons? “Street‐level bureaucrats from higher‐up” in targeted poverty alleviation in China," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(1), pages 55-71, February.
    8. Carmine Bianchi & Robinson Salazar Rua, 2022. "A feedback view of behavioural distortions from perceived public service gaps at ‘street‐level’ policy implementation: The case of unintended outcomes in public schools," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 63-84, January.
    9. Mette Sønderskov & Rolf Rønning, 2021. "Public Service Logic: An Appropriate Recipe for Improving Serviceness in the Public Sector?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, June.
    10. Suzanne Rutz & Dinah Mathew & Paul Robben & Antoinette de Bont, 2017. "Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 81-94, March.
    11. Peltomaa, Juha & Hildén, Mikael & Huttunen, Suvi, 2016. "Translating institutional change - forest journals as diverse policy actors," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-180.
    12. Hyunkuk Lee, 2021. "Does the Medium Matter? Linking Citizens’ Use of Communication Platform for Information about Urban Policies to Decision to Trust in Local Government," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    13. Sergio A. Campos & Rik Peeters, 2022. "Policy improvisation: How frontline workers cope with public service gaps in developing countries—The case of Mexico's Prospera program," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(1), pages 22-32, February.
    14. Anita Heindlmaier, 2020. "‘Social Citizenship’ at the Street Level? EU Member State Administrations Setting a Firewall," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1252-1269, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:padxxx:v:42:y:2022:i:2:p:159-164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0271-2075 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.