Conference Agenda

The discretion of street-level bureaucrats is a classic issue in public administration and political science. Existing research focuses on how street-level bureaucrats use discretion in policy implementation. However, discretion also has another dimension: street-level bureaucrats face the dilemma of discretion dissolution. Although numerous studies have explained the mechanisms of discretion dissolution from different perspectives, there is still room for research on the behavioral choices of street-level bureaucrats after power dissolution and the mechanisms through which they counteract power dissolution.

The study selects the demolition of illegal constructions in District N as a case adopts a case study approach and obtains comprehensive data on the demolition of illegal constructions in District N from 2016 to 2020 through participant observation. In the context of urban demolition, where private disputes are transferred to the public sector for resolution, there are unclear boundaries of power and scarce resources, leading to street-level enforcement officers usually adopting flexible enforcement methods, which result in the dissolution of policy implementation effectiveness. Through multidimensional power repair, grassroots enforcement officers in District N resolve the dilemma of power dissolution. Based on this, the study needs to answer the following questions: First, how is the discretion of grassroots enforcement officers dissolved in the policy context of flexible enforcement of illegal construction demolition in urban areas? Second, what dimensions are involved in the restoration of dissolved power? Third, how does power restoration address the problem of discretion dissolution among street-level bureaucrats?

The study proposes the concept of "power restoration" and constructs a "multilevel power restoration" framework, which explains how street-level bureaucrats solve the problem of discretion dissolution through institutional, personnel, and resource restoration, and responds to the mechanisms of discretion dissolution among street-level bureaucrats. The study finds that the core of flexible enforcement as a mechanism of discretion dissolution lies in concealing or transferring the fundamental contradictions among multiple stakeholders, resulting in the dissolution of policy implementation effectiveness.Specifically, in the three dimensions of executive agency, executive subject, and executive resources, the resolution and anti-resolution mechanisms of discretionary power are formed, which are: (1) the lack and re-clarity of legal boundaries; (2) inter-subject interest conflicts and resets; (3) The shortage of law enforcement resources and the empowerment of technology can improve the efficiency of law enforcement.

The study focuses on another dimension of discretion among street-level bureaucrats, namely, the dilemma they face when their discretion is dissolved, the behavioral choices of street-level bureaucrats after power dissolution, and the mechanisms through which they counteract power dissolution. The study proposes the concept of "power restoration" to explain the behavioral choices of street-level bureaucrats after power dissolution and the mechanisms through which they counteract power dissolution. The study generalizes the phenomenon of flexible enforcement in the Chinese context to the dissolution mechanism of discretion among street-level bureaucrats.

The implementation of China's public policy is faced with the problem of information distortion and conflicts between different levels of government. The policy of higher level of vertical contracting and lower level of competition for horizontal promotion is regarded as the most challenging policy for policy implementation. However, why do the same kind of policies have different implementation effects? By analyzing the case of public cultural service "demonstration area", this paper attempts to objectively explain how the design and adjustment of the policy structure affect the effect of policy implementation. The paper proposes that: firstly, the problem of vertical stratification of policies can be broken through the construction of a hierarchical governance implementation structure through the "middle layer". Secondly, the offline work of "soft indicators" can be transformed into the central work of local governments through the coordination of ministries and commissions and urban areas, which can solve the incentive problem brought by "soft indicators".Thirdly, local governments transform the completion of the central work of local governments into the governance of public-private partnership networks through governance tools, and mobilize multiple resources to promote the implementation of policies. On this basis, the paper proposes that the "policy structure" should be brought back to the study of the implementation process of public policy, and its impact on the governance of large countries should be further discussed.

In the dynamic socio-political landscape of India, street-level professionals and organizations are instrumental in translating ambitious public policies into tangible service delivery outcomes. Amidst rising societal challenges such as climate change, systemic discrimination, political polarization, and diminishing public trust, understanding the interplay between service delivery modes and street-level behaviour becomes crucial. This study applies the theoretical frameworks of New Public Governance (NPG) and Street-Level Bureaucracy (SLB) to explore these dynamics within India, providing a comprehensive view of the pressures and adaptations faced by frontline workers. The NPG framework supports this study's focus on the collaborative nature of modern public governance, emphasizing the integration of multiple stakeholders, including non-profit organizations, for-profit firms, and various governmental bodies. These collaborations are essential in a landscape where traditional direct-delivery models of public services are continuously challenged by global trends such as democratic backsliding and political polarization. Conversely, SLB theory allows an in-depth examination of how individual public service workers, confronted with complex societal issues and external pressures like media scrutiny and political conflicts, adjust their behaviours and decision-making processes in the absence of formal policy changes.

Through a mixed-methods approach combining qualitative interviews with service providers and quantitative analysis of service delivery outcomes, this study dissects the nuances of policy implementation on the ground. It identifies how external and internal pressures reshape the operational tactics of street-level professionals, exploring the extent to which these adaptations align with or diverge from intended policy outcomes. This approach facilitates a multifaceted understanding of the practical challenges and innovative strategies emerging within India’s public service delivery framework. Moreover, the research delves into the substantial increase in third-party participation in public service provision, a trend that highlights the shift towards more decentralized and collaborative governance models. By examining these partnerships, the study assesses their impact on enhancing service effectiveness and rebuilding public trust, particularly in sectors most susceptible to polarization and governance challenges. Ultimately, this comprehensive study not only contributes to the theoretical discourse on public policy implementation and service delivery but also proposes actionable insights for improving public service mechanisms. By detailing the interactions between policy, practice, and collaboration in India's public sector, the research offers generalizable knowledge that can be applied to similar challenges globally. The findings advocate for a nuanced understanding of street-level interdependencies and the critical role of adaptive behaviours and collaborative governance in navigating the complexities of contemporary public service delivery.