Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-31T12:01:55.461Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does Ethnicity Affect Allocation of Unemployment-Related Benefits to Job Center Clients? A Survey-Experimental Study of Representative Bureaucracy in Denmark

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

ANDERS ESMARK Open the ORCID record for ANDERS ESMARK [Opens in a new window]  and
MIKKEL BECH LIENGAARD
ANDERS ESMARK
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Political Science, Øster Farimagsgade 5E, DK-1353 Copenhagen K, email: ae@ifs.ku.dk
MIKKEL BECH LIENGAARD
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Political Science, Øster Farimagsgade 5E, DK-1353 Copenhagen K
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The role of street-level bureaucracy in social policy has been taken up by two relatively distinct streams of research, based on Lipsky’s foundational work (2010). One group of literature has focused on the organizational working conditions, practices and coping mechanisms of street-level bureaucrats, their impact on the implementation of political programs and reforms, and the scope for discretion in the face of political pressures and institutional demands (Brodkin and Marston, 2013; Jessen and Tufte, 2014; Breit et al., 2016; Van Berkel et al., 2017; van Berkel, 2020). Starting from a focus on interaction with clients and the direct impact of discretionary decisions ‘on people’s lives’ (Lipsky, 2010, 8), a second group of studies has focused more on differences in allocation of benefits caused by perceived ‘deservingness’ and discrimination among street-level bureaucrats (Altreiter and Leibetseder, 2014; Terum et al., 2018; Jilke and Tummers, 2018).

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , January 2024 , pp. 107 - 128
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguinis, H. and Bradley, K.J. (2014), ‘Best Practice Recommendations for Designing and Implementing Experimental Vignette Methodology Studies’, Organizational Research Methods, 17, 4, 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agyapong, E. (2018), ‘Representative Bureaucracy: Examining the Effects of Female Teachers on Girls’ Education in Ghana’, International Journal of Public Administration, 41, 16, 1338–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albiero, P. and Matricardi, G. (2013), ‘Empathy towards people of different race and ethnicity: Further empirical evidence for the Scale of Ethnocultural Empathy’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37, 5, 648–662 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altreiter, C. and Leibetseder, B. (2015), ‘Constructing Inequality: Deserving and Undeserving Clients in Austrian Social Assistance Offices’, Journal of Social Policy, 44, 1, 127–145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, R., Ashworth, R. and Meier, K.J. (2014), Representative Bureaucracy and Fire Service Performance’, International Public Management Journal 17, 1, 1–24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atzmüller, C. and Steiner, P. M. (2010), ‘Experimental Vignette Studies in Survey Research’, Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 6, 3, 128–138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, M. and Duflo, E. (2017), ‘Field Experiments on Discrimination’, in Banerjee, A.V. and Duflo, E. (eds.), Handbook of Field Experiments, Amsterdam: North-Holland/Elsevier, 309–395 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradbury, M. and Kellough, J.E. (2011), ‘Representative Bureaucracy: Assessing the Evidence on Active Representation’, The American Review of Public Administration 41, 2,157–167 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bredgaard, T. and Thomsen, T.L. (2018), ‘Integration of Refugees on the Danish Labor Market’, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 8, 4, 7–26 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breit, E., Alm Andreassen, T., & Salomon, R. H. (2016), Modification of Public Policies by Street-Level Organisations: An Institutional Work Perspective, Journal of Social Policy, 45, 4, 709–728 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodkin, E. Z. and Marston, G. (2013), Work and the Welfare State. Street-Level Organizations and Workfare Politics, Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Carmel, E. and Sojka, B. (2020), ‘Beyond Welfare Chauvinism and Deservingness. Rationales of Belonging as a Concepttual Framework for the Politics and Governance and Migrants’ Rigths, Journal of Social Policy, online first July 24 2020Google Scholar
Caswell, D. and Larsen, F. (2017), ‘Frontline Work in the Delivery of Danish Activiation Policies’, in van Berkel, R. et al. (eds.), Frontline Delivery of Welfare-to-Work Policies in Europe: Activating the Unemployed, London: Routledge, 163–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, R. M. (2010), Immigration and conflict in Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, R. M. (2017), Dilemmas of Inclusion, Muslims in European Politics, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Google Scholar
Hong, S. (2017), ‘Black in Blue: Racial Profiling and Representative Bureaucracy in Policing Revisited’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27, 4, 547–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, D. C. and Pedersen, L. B. (2017), ’The Impact of Empathy—Explaining Diversity in Street-Level Decision-Making’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27. 3, 433–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jessen, J. and Tufte, P. (2014), ‘Discretionary Decision-Making in a Changing Context of Activiation Policies and Welfare Reforms’, Journal of Social Policy, 43, 2, 269–288 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jilke, S. and Tummers, L. (2018), ‘Which Clients are Deserving of Help? A Theoretical Model and Experimental Test’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28, 2, 226–238 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keiser, L. R. (2010), ‘Representative bureaucracy’, in Durant, R. F. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 715–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keiser, L. R., Wilkins, V. M., Meier, K. J. and Holland, C. A. (2002), ‘Lipstick and Logarithms: Gender, Institutional Context, and Representative Bureaucracy’, The American Political Science Review, 96, 3, 553–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, G. Tomz, M. and Wittenberg, J. (2000), ‘Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation’, American Journal of Political Science 44, 2, 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, H. (2006), ‘Representative Bureaucracy: Rethinking Substantive Effects and Active Representation’, Public Administration Review 66, 2, 193–204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, M. (1969), Toward a Theory of Street-Level Bureaucracy. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, (IRP) Working PaperGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, M. (2010 (1980)), Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services, New York: Russell Sage Foundation Google Scholar
Martinsen, D. S. (2020), ‘Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Denmark’, In: Lafleur, JM. and Vintila, D. (eds), Migration and Social Protection in Europe and Beyond, Cham: Springer, 123–137 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J. (2019), ‘Theoretical Frontiers in Representative Bureaucracy: New Directions for Research’, Perspectives on Public Management and Governance 2, 1, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J. and Hawes, D.P. (2009), ‘Ethnic Conflict in France:A Case for Representative Bureaucracy?’, The American Review of Public Administration 39, 3, 269–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J. and Nicholson-Crotty, J. (2006), ‘Gender, Representative Bureaucracy, and Law Enforcement: The Case of Sexual Assault’, Public Administration Review 66, 6, 850–860 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J. and Stewart, J. (1992), ‘The Impact of Representative Bureaucracies: Educational Systems and Public Policies’, American Review of Public Administration, 22, 1, 157–171 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, D. L., Boyle, G. J. and Chan, R. (2013), ‘Empathy Towards Individuals of the Same and Different Ethnicity when Depicted in negative and Positive Contexts’. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 1, 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J. and Rutherford, A. (2017), The Politics of African-American Education: Race, Partisanship and Educational Equity, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nielsen, J. S. (ed.) (2011), Islam in Denmark. The Challenge of Diversity, Lanham: Lexington Books Google Scholar
Pew Research Center (2015), The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010-2050, https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/ Google Scholar
Phillips, C. (2011), ‘Institutional Racism and Ethnic Inequalities: An Expanded Multilevel Framework’, Journal of Social Policy, 40, 1, 173–192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riccucci, N.M. and Meyers, M. (2004), ‘Linking Passive and Active Representation: The Case of Frontline Workers in Welfare Agencies, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14, 4, 585–597 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riccucci, N.M. and Ryzin, G.V. (2017), ‘Representative Bureaucracy: A Lever to Enhance Social Equity, Coproduction, and Democracy’, Public Administration Review 77, 1, 21–30 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riccucci, N.M., Ryzin, G.V. and Jackson, K. (2018), ‘Representative Bureaucracy, Race, and Policing: A Survey Experiment’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28, 4, 506–518 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selden, S.C. (1997), The Promise of Representative Bureaucracy: Diversity and Responsiveness in a Government Agency, London & New York: Routledge Google Scholar
Sniderman, P. M., Petersen, M. B., Slothuus, R. and Stubager, R. (2014), Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy, Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sowa, J.E. and Selden, S.C. (2003), ‘Administrative Discretion and Active Representation: An Expansion of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy’, Public Administration Review, 63, 6, 700–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistics Denmark. 2019a. Fact Sheet on Western and Non-Western Immigrants in Denmark https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/bagtal/2019/2019-02-18-fakta-om-indvandrere-og-efterkommere-i-danmark Google Scholar
Statistics Denmark. 2019b. Name Barometer. https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/emner/befolkning-og-valg/navne/Baro Google Scholar
Terum, L. I., Torsvik, G. and Øverbye, E. (2018), ‘Discrimination Against Ethnic Minorities in Activation Programme? Evidence from a Vignette Experiment’. Journal of Social Policy, 47, 1, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theobald, N. A. and Haider-Markel, D.P. (2009), ‘Race, Bureaucracy, and Symbolic Representation: Interactions between Citizens and Police’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 2, 409–426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, M., Wittenberg, J. and King, G. (2003), ‘CLARIFY: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results’, Journal of Statistical Software, 8, 1, 1–29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Berkel, H. H. (2020), ‘Making welfare conditional: a street-level perspective‘, Social Policy & Administration, 54, 2, 191–204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Berkel, R., Caswell, D., Kupka, P. and Larsen, F (Eds.) (2017), Frontline Delivery of Welfare-to-Work Policies in Europe: Activating the Unemployed, New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watts, B. and Fitzpatrick, S. (2018), Welfare Conditionality, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, V. M. (2006), ‘Exploring the Causal Story: Gender, Active Representation, and Bureaucratic Priorities’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 1, 77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, V. M. and Keiser, L. R. (2004), ‘Linking Passive and Active Representation by Gender: The Case of Child Support Agencies’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 1, 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y. (2019), ‘Representative Bureaucracy, Gender Congruence, and Student Performance in China’, International Public Management Journal, 22, 2, 321–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Esmark and Liengaard supplementary material

Appendices A and B

Download Esmark and Liengaard supplementary material(File)
File 405.7 KB