Coping with political interference and resource scarcity: Governance in the former tribal regions of Pakistan

References

• Ahmed, R. Q., Ishaq, M., & Shoaib, M. (2021). The changing political trends in erstwhile FATA: A study of the last three elections. International Area Studies Review, 24(4), 335–348. doi:10.1177/22338659211013652
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahn, M. J., & Bretschneider, S. (2011). Politics of e‐government: E‐government and the political control of bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 71(3), 414–424. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02225.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akins, H. (2017). FATA and the frontier crimes regulation in Pakistan: The enduring legacy of British colonialism. The Howard H. Baker Jr. Center for Public Policy Brief (vol. 5, pp. 17). Knoxville, Tenessee, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Alavi, H. (1972). The state in post-colonial societies Pakistan and Bangladesh. New Left Review, (74), 59. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1301902376?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true&imgSeq=2
   Google Scholar
• Ali, H., & Ali, Z. (1989). The West Pakistan buildings & roads, department code, Karachi, Pakistan. The Ideal Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Asmerom, H. K., & Reis, E. P. (2016). Democratization and bureaucratic neutrality. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Besley, T., & Persson, T. (2014). Why do developing countries tax so little? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), 99–120. doi:10.1257/jep.28.4.99
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloor, M. (2001). Focus groups in social research. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Boräng, F., Cornell, A., Grimes, M., & Schuster, C. (2018). Cooking the books: Bureaucratic politicization and policy knowledge. Governance, 31(1), 7–26. doi:10.1111/gove.12283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. (2002). Theme: Local government: Concepts and indicators of local authority performance: An evaluation of the statutory frameworks in England and Wales. Public Money and Management, 22(2), 17–24. doi:10.1111/1467-9302.00303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organizational theories. Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, D., & Hutter, S. (2016). Political trust, extra-representational participation and the openness of political systems. International Political Science Review, 37(2), 151–165. doi:10.1177/0192512114559108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brierley, S. (2020). Unprincipled principals: Co‐opted bureaucrats and corruption in Ghana. American Journal of Political Science, 64(2), 209–222. doi:10.1111/ajps.12495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cyan, M. R., & Pasha, O. (2017). A symbiosis of civil service and politics in transfers: The case of Pakistan’s management cadres. Public Administration, 95(4), 1077–1091. doi:10.1111/padm.12355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dasgupta, A., & Kapur, D. (2020). The political economy of bureaucratic overload: Evidence from rural development officials in India. American Political Science Review, 114(4), 1316–1334. doi:10.1017/S0003055420000477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Jong, M., & Ho, A. T.-K. (2019). Lessons about integrating performance with budgeting in high-income countries: An evolving exercise. In Performance budgeting reform (pp. 110–130). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351055307-7
   Google Scholar
• Dee, T. S., Jacob, B. A., Rockoff, J. E., & McCrary, J. (2011). Rules and discretion in the evaluation of students and schools: The case of the New York regents examinations. Columbia Business School Research Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Demir, T., & Nyhan, R. C. (2008). The politics–administration dichotomy: An empirical search for correspondence between theory and practice. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 81–96. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00839.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dias, J. J., & Maynard-Moody, S. (2006). For-profit welfare: Contracts, conflicts, and the performance paradox. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(2), 189–211. doi:10.1093/jopart/mul002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downe‐Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International, 13(3), 313–321. doi:10.1080/07399339209516006
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubois, V. (2016). The bureaucrat and the poor: Encounters in French welfare offices. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, K. (2007). Direct payments and social work practice: The significance of ‘street-level bureaucracy’in determining eligibility. British Journal of Social Work, 37(3), 405–422. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcm013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, K. (2011). Street‐level bureaucracy’revisited: The changing face of frontline discretion in adult social care in England. Social Policy & Administration, 45(3), 221–244. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00766.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, T. (2011). Professionals, managers and discretion: Critiquing street-level bureaucracy. British Journal of Social Work, 41(2), 368–386. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcq074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finch, H., Lewis, J., & Turley, C. (2003). Focus groups. Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage Publishing. p. 170–198.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick, J., Goggin, M., Heikkila, T., Klingner, D., Machado, J., & Martell, C. (2011). A new look at comparative public administration: Trends in research and an agenda for the future. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 821–830. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02432.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flick, U. (2004). Triangulation in qualitative research. A Companion to Qualitative Research, 3, 178–183.
   Google Scholar
• Fredrickson G (2007). Whatever happened to public administration? Governance, governance everywhere. In: Ferlie E, Lynn Jr, LE and Pollitt C (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Public Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 284–304.
   Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. (2013). What is governance? Governance, 26(3), 347–368. doi:10.1111/gove.12035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gailmard, S. (2014). Conceptual flavor of principal-agent theory. In M. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, & T. Schillemans (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 90–105). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gans-Morse, J., Borges, M., Makarin, A., Mannah-Blankson, T., Nickow, A., & Zhang, D. (2018). Reducing bureaucratic corruption: Interdisciplinary perspectives on what works. World Development, 105, 171–188. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.12.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrone, P., Grilli, L., & Rousseau, X. (2013). Management discretion and political interference in municipal enterprises. Evidence from Italian utilities. Local Government Studies, 39(4), 514–540. doi:10.1080/03003930.2012.726198
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Girth, A. M. (2014). A closer look at contract accountability: Exploring the determinants of sanctions for unsatisfactory contract performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 317–348. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glückler, J., & Armbrüster, T. (2003). Bridging uncertainty in management consulting: The mechanisms of trust and networked reputation. Organization Studies, 24(2), 269–297. doi:10.1177/0170840603242004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goggin, M. L. (1986). The "too few cases/too many variables" problem in implementation research. Western Political Quarterly, 39(2), 328–347. doi:10.1177/106591298603900210
   Google Scholar
• Gonen, R. (2005). Shirking and shifting policies; Uncooperative political appointees in Israeli local government. London School of Economics and Political Science.
   Google Scholar
• Gould, W., Sherman, T. C., & Ansari, S. (2013). The flux of the matter: Loyalty, corruption and the “everyday state” in the post-partition government services of India and Pakistan. Past & Present, 219(1), 237–279. doi:10.1093/pastj/gts045
   Google Scholar
• Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C., & McDonald, D. (2011). Triangulation: Establishing the validity of qualitative studies. Edis, 2011(8), 3–3. doi:10.32473/edis-fy394-2011
   Google Scholar
• Harwood, T. G., & Garry, T. (2003). An overview of content analysis. The Marketing Review, 3(4), 479–498. doi:10.1362/146934703771910080
   Google Scholar
• Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2006). Informal institutions and democracy: Lessons from Latin America. Jhu Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, M., & Hupe, P. L. (2014). Implementing Public Policy: An Introduction to the Study of Operational Governance. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street‐level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279–299. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00650.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyer, L., & Mani, A. (2012). Traveling agents: political change and bureaucratic turnover in India. Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(3), 723–739. doi:10.1162/REST_a_00183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kairuz, T., Crump, K., & O'Brien, A. (2007). Tools for data collection and analysis. Pharmaceutical Journal, 278, 371–373.
   Google Scholar
• Khan, F. (2016). Combating corruption in Pakistan. Asian Education and Development Studies, 5(2), 195–210. doi:10.1108/AEDS-01-2016-0006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, S. (2008). “Special Status of FATA: Illegal Becoming Licit.” Central Asia, 63 Area Study Centre (Russia, China & Central Asia), University of Peshawar.
   Google Scholar
• Lane, J.-E. (2006). Public administration & public management: the principal-agent perspective. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Leftwich, A. (1993). Governance, democracy and development in the third world. Third World Quarterly, 14(3), 605–624. doi:10.1080/01436599308420345
   Google Scholar
• Lehne, J., Shapiro, J. N., & Vanden Eynde, O. (2018). Building connections: Political corruption and road construction in India. Journal of Development Economics, 131, 62–78. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn, L. E., Jr, Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J. (2000). Studying governance and public management: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 233–262. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024269
   Google Scholar
• Masood, A., & Azfar Nisar, M. (2021). Administrative capital and citizens’ responses to administrative burden. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(1), 56–72. doi:10.1093/jopart/muaa031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masood, A., & Nisar, M. A. (2022). Repairing the state: policy repair in the frontline bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 82(2), 256–268. doi:10.1111/puar.13414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, P. J., & Winter, S. C. (2009). Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: Influences on policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3), 453–476. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard‐Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2012). Social equities and inequities in practice: Street‐Level workers as agents and pragmatists. Public Administration Review, 72(s1), S16–S23. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02633.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard‐Moody, S., & Portillo, S. (2010). Street‐level bureaucracy theory. In Robert F. Durant (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of American bureaucracy. Oxford University Press Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Moe, T. M. (2006). Political control and the power of the agent. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 22(1), 1–29. doi:10.1093/jleo/ewj011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moss, S. A., McFarland, J., Ngu, S., & Kijowska, A. (2007). Maintaining an open mind to closed individuals: The effect of resource availability and leadership style on the association between openness to experience and organizational commitment. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(2), 259–275. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.03.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D., & Herd, P. (2010). Red tape and democracy: How rules affect citizenship rights. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(6), 654–670. doi:10.1177/0275074010366732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., Walker, J., Walker, J. M., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, games, and common-pool resources. University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Panaccio, A., & Vandenberghe, C. (2009). Perceived organizational support, organizational commitment and psychological well-being: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(2), 224–236. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2009.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2017). The shirking bureaucrat: A theory in search of evidence? Policy & Politics, 45(2), 157–172. doi:10.1332/030557317X14845830916703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portillo, S., & Rudes, D. S. (2014). Construction of justice at the street level. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 10(1), 321–334. doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102612-134046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. A. (2000). Governance and public administration. Debating Governance, 54, 90.
   Google Scholar
• Ritz, A., Brewer, G. A., & Neumann, O. (2016). Public service motivation: A systematic literature review and outlook. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 414–426. doi:10.1111/puar.12505
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogger, D. (2018). The Consequences of Political Interference in Bureaucratic Decision Making: Evidence From Nigeria. Development Economics Development Research Group. Policy Research Working Paper 8554. The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbloom, D. (2008). The politics–administration dichotomy in US historical context. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 57–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salamon, L. M. (2000). The new governance and the tools of public action: An introduction. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28, 1611.
   Google Scholar
• Sharma, C. K. (2001). ‘Tribal Land Alienation in Assam: Government’s Role’, Economic and Political Weekly, 36 (52): 4791–95.
   Google Scholar
• Smart, A. (2018). The unbearable discretion of street-level bureaucrats: Corruption and collusion in Hong Kong. Current Anthropology, 59(S18), S37–S47. doi:10.1086/695694
   Google Scholar
• Spicer, M. W. (2010). In defense of politics in public administration: A value pluralist perspective. University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Svara, J. H. (2001). The myth of the dichotomy: Complementarity of politics and administration in the past and future of public administration. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 176–183. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L. (2017). The relationship between coping and job performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(1), 150–162. doi:10.1093/jopart/muw058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L., & Rocco, P. (2015). Serving clients when the server crashes: How frontline workers cope with E‐government challenges. Public Administration Review, 75(6), 817–827. doi:10.1111/puar.12379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L. L., Bekkers, V., Vink, E., & Musheno, M. (2015). Coping during public service delivery: A conceptualization and systematic review of the literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1099–1126. doi:10.1093/jopart/muu056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ullah, A., & Umar Hayat, S. (2018). The merger of FATA with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: An historical analysis. Journal of Political Studies, 25(2), 39–53.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, B. D., & Waterman, R. W. (1991). The dynamics of political control of the bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 85(3), 801–828. doi:10.2307/1963851
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacka, B. (2017). When the state meets the street: Public service and moral agency. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar