JOP — 2026-05-18
Original Cadre networks and bureaucratic careers in autocracies
Alexander De Juan, Felix Haass, Jan H. Pierskalla
Abstract
(原文未提供摘要)
中文 威权政体中的干部网络与官僚职业生涯
Alexander De Juan, Felix Haass, Jan H. Pierskalla
PSJ — 2026-05-14
Original Beyond the Binary: A Framework for Examining the In/Formality of Institutions in Social‐Ecological Systems
PMR — pp. 1-28 2026-05-12 Original Strategic planning and organizational performance in Turkish public hospitals: the mediating roles of strategy implementation, stakeholder participation, and accountability
PA — 2026-05-12
Original Fairness Perception, Administrative Burden, and Social Welfare Participation
Yongdong Shen, Wenchi Wei, Chao An, Zhouyi Chen
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study examines whether and how fairness perception and administration burden relate to citizen participation in social welfare programs. We theoretically argue that both participation costs and citizens' perceptions of distributive fairness play critical roles in determining individuals' willingness to engage with welfare programs. We further propose that compliance burden (costs) may constrain frontline officials' discretion in benefit allocation, thereby reinforcing perceptions of fairness and encouraging program participation. Using a nationally representative sample from the China Urban and Rural Low‐Income Household Survey, we find that perceived unfairness is negatively associated with welfare participation, and administrative burdens constitute substantial barriers to access. Moreover, compliance burden weakens the negative correlation between perceived unfairness and welfare participation, suggesting that rigid procedures are linked with stronger perceptions of distributive fairness and institutional trust. These findings underscore the complex interplay between procedural design and citizen perceptions in shaping welfare participation in China.
PAR — 2026-05-11
Original Seeking Legitimacy Through Accountability: Is Institution‐Based Accountability More Legitimate Than Campaign‐Based Accountability?
PMR — pp. 1-28 2026-05-11 Original Managing how street-level bureaucrats make sense of the past: a case study of managerial sensegiving and its limits for policy intervention
PMR — pp. 1-25 2026-05-11 Original Do third parties matter for citizens’ public programme participation? Evidence from an administrative burden perspective
PAR 86/5 pp. 1255-1264 2026-05-10 Original Navigating the Power of the Purse—Fiscal Irresponsibility, Process Failures, and the New Constitutional Stress Test
PMR — pp. 1-33 2026-05-09 Original Social impact bond- ing ? Evidence on interorganizational relationships in social impact bonds across the United Kingdom
Elaine De Gruyter, Michael Gibson, Eleanor Carter, Fernando Deodato Domingos, Franziska Rosenbach
JPART 36/3 pp. 361-377 2026-05-07 Original Who is this for? How felt accountability shapes the enactment of accountability in public service delivery
Margit Ernst
Abstract
Abstract What makes accountability work? To answer this question, public administration research has long focused on formal mechanisms—–rules, audits, and performance indicators—intended to ensure that public employees answer for their actions. Yet these mechanisms alone rarely determine how accountability plays out in practice. Rather, it depends on how they are recognized, internalized, and enacted by those expected to comply. This realization has spurred growing interest in how employees perceive and enact accountability in the context of public service delivery. Based on ethnographic fieldwork, this study unpacks how street-level bureaucrats navigate tensions between formal accountability demands and their internalized perceptions of accountability. The findings reveal how employees weigh, reinterpret, or reframe accountability based on what they perceive to be at stake. To conceptualize this, the article introduces a concentric model of accountability.