Administrative Burden in Public Policy and Service Delivery: A Comprehensive Literature Review

Ruizhao  Han

doi:10.54691/1cz5c764

Authors

Ruizhao Han

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/1cz5c764

Keywords:

Administrative Burden, Red Tape, Literature Review.

Abstract

Administrative burden, as a core research topic in the field of public administration, focuses on the various frictional costs faced by actors (citizens, businesses, administrative personnel) in interactions with the government and the implementation of policies. With the deepening of public governance practices, the theoretical system of administrative burden has gradually expanded from its Western origins to the localised context in China, forming a systematic research framework covering conceptual definitions, structural dimensions, measurement methods and influencing factors. Based on existing literature, this paper systematically reviews the conceptual evolution and connotation analysis of administrative burden, thoroughly examines its core structural dimensions and multiple measurement approaches, comprehensively explains the influencing factors at the political, policy and individual levels, and evaluates the achievements and shortcomings of existing research, ultimately looking forward to future research directions. The study aims to integrate the academic framework of the field of administrative burden and provide a theoretical reference for administrative reform and the optimisation of public services.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Altreiter C, Leibetseder B. Constructing inequality: deserving and undeserving clients in austrian social assistance offices. Journal of Social Policy, 2015, 44(1): 127-145.

[2] Baekgaard M, Moynihan D P, Thomsen M K. Why do policymakers support administrative burdens? The roles of deservingness, political ideology, and personal experience. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2021, 31(1): 184-200.

[3] Barnes C Y, Henly J R. “they are underpaid and understaffed”: how clients interpret encounters with street-level bureaucrats. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 2018, 28(2): 165-181.

[4] Burden B C, Canon D T, Mayer K R, et al. The Effect of Administrative Burden on Bureaucratic Perception of Policies: Evidence from Election Administration. Public Administration Review, 2012, 72(5): 741-751.

[5] Campbell J W, Pandey S K, Arnesen L. The ontology, origin, and impact of divisive public sector rules: a meta‐narrative review of the red tape and administrative burden literatures. Public Administration Review, 2023, 83(2): 296-315.

[6] Carey G, Malbon E, Blackwell J. Administering inequality? The national disability insurance scheme and administrative burdens on individuals. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2021, 80(4): 854-872.

[7] Chudnovsky M, Peeters R. The unequal distribution of administrative burden: a framework and an illustrative case study for understanding variation in people’s experience of burdens. Social Policy & Administration, 2021, 55(4): 527-542.

[8] Fox A M, Stazyk E C, Feng W. Administrative easing: rule reduction and medicaid enrollment. Public Administration Review, 2020, 80(1): 104-117.

[9] Glaser B G, Strauss A L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company, 1967.

[10] Herd Pamela, Moynihan Donald P. Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 2018.

[11] Heinrich C J. The bite of administrative burden: a theoretical and empirical investigation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2016, 26(3): 403-420.

[12] Heinrich C J, Brill R. Stopped in the name of the law: administrative burden and its implications for cash transfer program effectiveness. World Development, 2015, 72: 277-295.

[13] Lavertu S, Lewis D E, Moynihan D P. Government reform, political ideology, and administrative burden: the case of performance management in the bush administration. Public Administration Review, 2013, 73(6): 845-857.

[14] Madsen J K, Mikkelsen K S. How salient administrative burden affects job seekers’ locus of control and responsibility attribution: evidence from a survey experiment. International Public Management Journal, 2022, 25(2): 241-260.

[15] Madsen J K, Mikkelsen K S, Moynihan D P. Burdens, sludge, ordeals, red tape, oh my!: a user’s guide to the study of frictions. Public Administration, 2022, 100(2): 375-393.

[16] Mack G, Ritzel C, Heitkämper K, et al. The effect of administrative burden on farmers’ perceptions of cross‐compliance‐based direct payment policy. Public Administration Review, 2021, 81(4): 664-675.

[17] Moynihan D P, Herd P, Harvey H. Administrative Burden: Learning, Psychological, and Compliance Costs in Citizen-State Interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2015, 25(1): 43-69.

[18] Moynihan D P, Herd P, Ribgy E. Policymaking by other means: do states use administrative barriers to limit access to medicaid?. Administration & Society, 2016, 48(4): 497-524.

[19] Moynihan D, Gerzina J, Herd P. Kafka’s bureaucracy: immigration administrative burdens in the trump era. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2022, 5(1): 22-35.

[20] Nichols A L, Zeckhauser R J. Targeting transfers through restrictions on recipients. American Economic Review, 1982, 72(2): 372-377.

[21] Ntaliani M, Costopoulou C. Reduction of administrative burdens for SMEs. Administration & Society, 2017, 49(8): 1143-1164.

[22] Peeters R, Gofen A, Meza O. Gaming the system: responses to dissatisfaction with public services beyond exit and voice. Public Administration, 2020, 98(4): 824-839.

[23] Peeters R, Widlak A. The digital cage: administrative exclusion through information architecture – the case of the dutch civil registry’s master data management system. Government Information Quarterly.

[24] Ma Liang. Administrative Burden: Research Review and Theoretical Prospects Journal of Gansu Administrative College, 2022(1): 4-14 124.

[25] Liao Fuchong. 'Streamline Administration and Delegation' Reform and the Development of SMEs Relief——From the Perspective of Policy Tools Journal of the Party School of Ningbo Municipal Committee of CPC, 2020, 42(4): 58-66.

[26] Ma Liang. Relationships, Favouritism and Administrative Burden——Also on Public Administration in Daily Life Journal of Public Administration, 2025, 22(1): 17-27 169.

[27] He Yanling, Wang Zheng. Returning to a People-Oriented Approach: Reflections on Administrative Burden Research and Implications for Urban Government Service Reform Journal of Tongji University (Social Sciences Edition), 2022, 33(5): 63-74.

[28] Zhu Chunkui, Tong Peishan. Research Progress and Prospects of Administrative Burden in the Field of Public Administration Public Administration Review, 2023, 16(5): 158-176, 199-20.

[29] Guo Jinyuan, Chen Zhixia, Yuanshuai. Revisiting Red Tape: Concepts, Measurement and Its Three-Dimensional Control Model Public Management Review, 2021, 3(1): 91-121.

[30] Wang Hongru. Study on Public Service Satisfaction under Government-Citizen Interaction——Individual Differences and Influences of Citizens' Perception of Administrative Burden Social Scientist, 2020(5): 156-160.

[31] Liang Pinghan, Zou Wei, Hu Chao. Time is Money: Paperless Tax Refund Reform, Administrative Burden and Business Export World Economy, 2020, 43(10): 52-73.

[32] Liao Fuchong. Empirical Study on Smoothing Communication Channels between Government and Enterprises during the 'Streamline Administration and Delegation' Reform Journal of Central South University (Social Sciences Edition), 2021, 27(2): 183-191.

[33] Li Peng, Zhang Qilin. Research on Precise Identification of Social Assistance Recipients Driven by Digital Intelligence from the Perspective of Administrative Burden Journal of Lanzhou Studies, 2024(1): 58-74.