Governmental Response to Crises and Its Implications for Street-Level Implementation: Policy Ambiguity, Risk, and Discretion during the COVID-19 Pandemic

63Citations
Citations of this article
99Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

What are the implications of governmental responses to crises for street-level implementation? The COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity to compare the formal role that decision-makers require of street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) during a crisis. Textual analysis of 36 legislative documents and emergency regulations in Israel indicates that the additional duties assigned to police officers, teachers, and physicians reflect three interrelated changes in street-level implementation: increased policy ambiguity, higher risk exposure, and expanded discretion. Decision-makers’ expectations of SLBs during a crisis highlight the inherent limit of policy-as-written to account for the operational, action-imperative essence of on-the-ground service delivery.Note: In the interests of space, street-level theory and the pandemic context underpinning the articles for this Special Issue are discussed in detail in the Introduction to the Issue.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Davidovitz, M., Cohen, N., & Gofen, A. (2021). Governmental Response to Crises and Its Implications for Street-Level Implementation: Policy Ambiguity, Risk, and Discretion during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 23(1), 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2020.1841561

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free