Revisiting coping mechanisms on the street-level: a systematic literature review

Ofek Edri‐Peer & Nissim Cohen

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory2025https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaf022article
AJG 4ABDC A
Weight
0.53

Abstract

Street-level bureaucrats’ (SLBs) coping mechanisms are an integral part of their interaction with clients, and as such have received much research attention. Since the last review of the behavioral coping mechanisms adopted by SLBs, conducted more than 10 years ago, many researchers have focused on understanding these mechanisms and what influences them. Using the PRISMA model, we conducted a systematic review of 165 studies to update our understanding and explore the manifestations of both old and new coping mechanisms identified in the literature. Moreover, we seek to determine the antecedents of these coping mechanisms. From our findings emerged a new family of coping mechanisms that we call “moving with clients.” These behaviors include intentional efforts to involve clients in the process of service delivery, for example, by deliberating and cooperating with them to achieve the desired policy goals. We find that most SLBs’ behaviors are associated with organizational and environmental factors. Personal factors, although highlighted frequently in the literature, are not associated with most coping behaviors.

8 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaf022

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ofek2025,
  title        = {{Revisiting coping mechanisms on the street-level: a systematic literature review}},
  author       = {Ofek Edri‐Peer & Nissim Cohen},
  journal      = {Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaf022},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Revisiting coping mechanisms on the street-level: a systematic literature review

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.53

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.70 × 0.15 = 0.10
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.