公共行政

GOV 39/4 2026-07-29 Original Legislative Pork‐Barrel Funding and Public Policy Outcomes: The Role of Local‐Level Factors

PMR — pp. 1-23 2026-07-28 Original Rethinking plural policing and network governance: internal and external mechanisms in the governance of security Charlotte Geertman, Richard Van Herzeele

JPART — 2026-07-28 Original Institutionalized enforcement of administrative compliance: state regulator use of noncompliance burdens Mingxu (Emma) Li, Daniel L Fay Abstract Abstract Administrative burden scholarship typically examines rules and regulations affecting access to public benefits during initial citizen–state interactions. Scholars agree that individual burdens function as “hidden politics” because policy changes during implementation through bureaucratic discretion. Less is known about bureaucratic behavior or hidden politics enforced on third-party service providers maintaining compliance. In this article, we address this by examining noncompliance burdens imposed on abortion providers to understand if regulators emulate peers’ behavior. Using an institutional theoretical framework and administrative records from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (FAHCA) on abortion provider oversight, we construct a directed dyadic event history model using 1540 dyad-year observations to predict isomorphism or divergence of sanction activities across regulatory field offices. We find that regulatory field offices emulate behavior of others based on peer’s previous sanction behavior and oversight workload. We also find that regulators diverge from peers based on the regulatory conditions of their own jurisdiction.

PNAS 123/31 pp. e2606267123-e2606267123 2026-07-27 Original When coordination is avoidable: A monotonicity analysis of organizational tasks Harang Ju Abstract Organizations devote substantial resources to coordination, yet which tasks actually require it for correctness remains unclear. The problem is acute in multiagent AI systems, where coordination cost is directly measurable and can exceed the cost of the work itself. Distributed systems theory provides a precise criterion: Coordination is required when a task specification is nonmonotonic, meaning that as histories grow, new information can invalidate prior conclusions. Here we show that Thompson's classic taxonomy of interdependence maps to that criterion, yielding a decision rule for when coordination is required for correctness. We formalize the correspondence in a bridge theorem, apply the rule to 65 workflows from the American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC), and (with a calibrated large language model (LLM), 13,417 Occupational Information Network (O*NET tasks), and illustrate it in multiagent AI simulations. Under our decompositions, 74% of workflows and 42% of O*NET tasks are monotonic, implying that up to 24 to 57% of coordination spending is unnecessary for correctness.

PAR — 2026-07-27 Original Linking Decision Roles to Knowledge Utilization in US State Governments: A Mixed‐Method Study

JCC — pp. 1-17 2026-07-24 Original When the Mass Line Encounters the Ground: Public-Oriented Accountability and Frontline Coping in China Huan He Abstract While the consolidation of state control in China is well-documented, less attention has been given to the reinforcement of public-oriented accountability, which emphasizes citizen satisfaction with complaint resolution in government performance assessments. Drawing on statistical data and fieldwork interviews, this study finds that while public-oriented accountability can partially promote substantive government responsiveness by imposing institutional pressure on frontline officials, it also fosters a public perception of an omnipotent government and exacerbates the predicament of grassroots incapacity. This not only traps frontline bureaucrats in administrative burden caused by blame-avoidance strategies, but may also fuel frustration among mobilized citizens with heightened expectations. The findings reveal the institutional sources and constraints of government responsiveness and highlight the potential challenges of operationalizing the mass line to consolidate legitimacy.

PMR — pp. 1-32 2026-07-23 Original Visualizing & strategizing public value: an unexpected path to invisibilizing Camille Guirou, Laurent Beduneau-Wang Abstract Whereas public value has become a central concern in public management, its visibility within strategic decision-making remains a major challenge. This article examines how visual tools contribute to visualizing and strategizing public value. Drawing on an action research conducted in a French municipality, we show that issue maps shape strategizing by making public value visible, discussable, and strategically actionable. We demonstrate that these tools direct attention, support deliberation and structure meaning, creating public value. Surprisingly, they also generate resistance and processes of invisibilizing: some values become unseen. These findings highlight the inherently selective and political nature of visualizing.

PAR — 2026-07-22 Original Recruiting Street‐Level Bureaucrats Through Co‐Design: The Effects of Incorporating Citizen Insights Into Job Advertisements

PMR — pp. 1-27 2026-07-22 Original Digital transformations in public welfare services: risks and benefits of digital co-production Maria Taivalsaari Røhnebæk, Sigrid Myklebø, Inge Hermanrud, Asbjørn Kårstein

PNAS 123/30 pp. e2509742123-e2509742123 2026-07-20 Original Legal infrastructure for transformative AI governance Gillian K. Hadfield Abstract Most of our AI governance efforts focus on substance: What rules do we want in place? What limits or checks do we want to impose on AI development and deployment? But a key role for law is not only to establish substantive rules but also to establish legal and regulatory infrastructure to generate and implement rules. The transformative nature of AI calls especially for attention to building legal and regulatory frameworks. In this Perspective, I review three examples: the creation of registration regimes for frontier models; the creation of registration and identification regimes for autonomous agents; and the design of regulatory markets to facilitate a role for private companies to innovate and deliver AI regulatory services.