Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by May, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wood, R. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13:117-139 (2003)
© 2003 Public Management Research Association

At the Regulatory Front Lines: Inspectors' Enforcement Styles and Regulatory Compliance

Peter J. May and Robert S. Wood

University of Washington
Center for American Politics and Public Policy

This study contributes to the understanding of how those street-level bureaucrats who are at the front lines of regulatory enforcement help to bring about compliance with regulations. Hypotheses concerning the impact of inspectors' differing enforcement styles on compliance are examined for data concerning municipal enforcement of building codes. Building inspectors vary in their day-to-day style of interaction with homebuilders with respect to facilitation—how helpful and supportive they are—and with respect to formalism—how rigid and picky they are. We fail to find a direct effect of differing enforcement styles on compliance. However, enforcement styles influence homebuilders' knowledge of rules and the degree of cooperation between homebuilders and inspectors. We attribute the limited impact of enforcement style to inconsistencies in inspection that tend to immunize homebuilders to stylistic differences among inspectors. This suggests a downside to "responsive regulation" as a preferred mode of regulatory enforcement: such inconsistencies undermine regulatees' understanding of rules and the development of shared expectations concerning compliance.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Urban StudHome page
R. Imrie and E. Street
Risk, Regulation and the Practices of Architects
Urban Stud, November 1, 2009; 46(12): 2555 - 2576.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Public Adm Res TheoryHome page
S. Gilad
Juggling Conflicting Demands: The Case of the UK Financial Ombudsman Service
J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., July 1, 2009; 19(3): 661 - 680.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Administration & SocietyHome page
E. Lee
Socio-Political Contexts, Identity Formation, and Regulatory Compliance
Administration Society, November 1, 2008; 40(7): 741 - 769.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Public Adm Res TheoryHome page
D. P. McCaffrey, A. E. Smith, and I. J. Martinez-Moyano
"Then Let's Have a Dialogue": Interdependence and Negotiation in a Cohesive Regulatory System
J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., April 1, 2007; 17(2): 307 - 334.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.