References

• Adler, M. (2003). A socio-legal approach to administrative justice. Law & Policy, 25(4), 323–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0265-8240.2003.00153.x
   Google Scholar
• Andersson, L. (2022). Coordination patterns and institutional settings: A comparative study of labour market programs for unemployed youth in Sweden and the United Kingdom. Policy Studies, 43(1), 90–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2020.1724924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson, L., & Minas, R. (2021). Reaching without outreaching: A comparative policy study of EU member states policy agenda on youth unemployment. International Journal of Social Welfare, 30(3), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12470
   Google Scholar
• Atfield, G., & Green, A. E. (2019). The impact of the youth obligation on disadvantaged young people. Warwick Institute for Employment Research/Centrepoint Publications. https://centrepoint.org.uk/media/4208/6-the-impact-of-the-youth-obligation-warwick-university-report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Brinkman, A., & Kvale, S. (2014). Interviews – Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cagliesi, G., & Hawkes, D. (2015). Mind the gap between the policy announcements and implementation: The Youth Contract and Jobcentre Plus advisers’ role as careers educators for 18–24-year olds. London Review of Education, 13(2), 60–69.
   Google Scholar
• Christie, F., & Swingewood, A. (2022). Greater Manchester’s Hiddent talent: Final evaluation and assessment. GMCVO. https://www.gmcvo.org.uk/system/files/publications/HiddenTalentFinalReport.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, M., Sornalingam, S., & O’Donnell, C. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy: An underused theoretical model for general practice? British Journal of General Practice, 65(636), 376–377. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X685921
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crisp, R., Damm, C., Green, A., Pearson, S., Sanderson, E., & Wells, P. (2018). Talent match evaluation: Progression to employment. https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/talentmatch/files /2018/10/talent-match-eval-progression-employment.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• de Vries, R., Reeves, A., & Geiger, B. (2017). Inequalities in the application of welfare sanctions in Britain. Working paper 15. https://bit.ly/3gzUcdx.
   Google Scholar
• Dunlop, C. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2016). Policy learning in the Eurozone crisis: Modes, power and functionality. Policy Sciences, 49(2), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9236-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DWP. (2019). Youth obligation support programme statistics. https://bit.ly/3qJTQ8Q.
   Google Scholar
• Edmiston, D., Robertshaw, D., Young, D., Ingold, J., Gibbons, A., Summers, K., Scullion, L., Geiger, B. B., & de Vries, R. (2022). Mediating the claim? How ‘local ecosystems of support’ shape the operation and experience of UK social security. Social Policy & Administration, 56(5), 775–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12803
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frøyland, K. (2019). Vital tasks and roles of frontline workers facilitating job inclusion of vulnerable youth. European Journal of Social Work, 22(4), 563–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2018.1423547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furlong, A. (2006). Not a very NEET solution: Representing problematic labour market transitions among early school-leavers. Work, Employment and Society, 20(3), 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017006067001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gjersøe, H. M. (2016). Regulating inflow or outflow: a comparison of the work capability assessments in the UK and Norway. Journal of Social Policy, 45(1), 141–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gubrium, E., Harsløf, I., Lødemel, I., & Moreira, A. (2014). Norwegian activation reform on a wave of wider welfare state changes. Activation or workfare: Governance and the neo-liberal convergence. In I. Lødemel, & A. Moreira (Eds.), Activation or workfare? Governance and the neo-liberal convergence (pp. 19–46). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halvorsen, R., & Hvinden, B. (2018). Youth, diversity and employment: Comparative perspectives on labour market policies. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Heidenreich, M., & Rice, D. (Eds.). (2016). Integrating social and employment policies in Europe: Active inclusion and challenges for local welfare governance. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Holstein, J., & Gubrium, J. (1995). The active interview. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee (2017). Employment opportunities for young people. Ninth Report of Session 2016–17.
   Google Scholar
• Janssens, J., & Van Mechelen, N. (2022). To take or not to take? An overview of the factors contributing to the non-take-up of public provisions. European Journal of Social Security, 24(2), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627221106800
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, K. (2019). No strings attached? An exploration of employment support services offered by third sector homelessness organisations. In P. Dwye (Ed.), Dealing with welfare conditionality (pp. 91–118). Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, K. (2021). Understanding adult education in community contexts: A critical realist perspective. British Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 674–691.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, K., Martin, P., Kelly, A. (2018). Hidden young people in Salford: exploring the experiences of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) and not claiming benefits. University of Salford.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufmann, J. (2020). Intensity, moderation, and the pressures of expectation: Calculation and coercion in the street-level practice of welfare conditionality. Social Policy and Administration, 54(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12559
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennett, P., & Yeates, N. (2001). Defining and constructing the research process. In P. Kennett (Ed.), Comparative social policy: Theory and research (pp. 40–61). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, S. (2019). Dealing with cross-country variation in the comparative study of public administration and street-level bureaucracy. In P. Hupe (Ed.), Research handbook on street level bureaucracy. The ground floor of government in context (pp. 240–261). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Leseth, A. B., Vilhena, S., & Gjersøe, H. M. (2020). Aktivitetspliktens innside og utside: Unge mottakere av sosialhjelp og deres erfaringer med aktivitetsplikt. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning, 23(2), 126–139.
   Google Scholar
• Lidén, H., & Trætteberg, H. S. (2019). Aktivitetsplikt for unge mottakere av sosialhjelp. Report 2019:2, Institute for Social Research.
   Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. (1980). Street level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Lødemel, I. (1989). The quest for institutional welfare and the problem of the residuum. The case of income maintenance and personal social care policies in Norway and Britain 1946 to 1966. PhD Thesis. London School of Economics and Political Science.
   Google Scholar
• Mashaw, J. L. (1983). Bureaucratic justice: Managing social security disability claims. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching. Sage Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Molander, A. (2016). Discretion in the welfare state: Social rights and professional judgment. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pickvance, C. (1986). Comparative urban analysis and assumptions about causality. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 10(2), 162–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1986.tb00010.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raspanti, D., & Saruis, T. B. (2022). Trapped into reverse asymmetry: Public employment services dealing with employers. Journal of Social Policy, 51(1), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279420000756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, R. (1991). Comparing forms of comparative analysis. Political Studies, 39(3), 446–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1991.tb01622.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sainsbury, R. (2008). Administrative justice, discretion and the ‘welfare to work’ project. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 30(4), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649060802580995
   Google Scholar
• Shore, J., & Tosun, J. (2019). Assessing youth labour market services: Young people’s perceptions and evaluations of service delivery in Germany. Public Policy and Administration, 34(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076717722192
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Social Welfare Act [sosialtjenesteloven]. (2009). Norway. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2009-12-18-131.
   Google Scholar
• Solheim, I. J., Gudmundsdottir, S., Husabø, M., & Øien, A. M. (2020). The importance of relationships in the encounter between NAV staff and young, vulnerable users. An action research study. European Journal of Social Work, 24(4), 671–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2020.1783213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torsvik, G., Molander, A., & Terum, L. I. (2022). The will to sanction: How sensitive are caseworkers to recipients’ responsibility when imposing sanctions on non-compliance in a welfare-to-work programme? International Journal of Social Welfare, 31(1), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tosun, J., Unt, M., & Wadensjö, E. (2017). Youth-oriented active labour market policies: Explaining policy effort in the Nordic and the Baltic States. Social Policy & Administration, 51(4), 598–616. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Oorschot, W. (2002). Targeting welfare: On the functions and dysfunctions of means-testing in social policy. In P. Townsend, & D. Gorden (Eds.), World poverty: New policies to defeat an old enemy (pp. 171–194). The Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Parys, L., & Struyven, L. (2013). Withdrawal from the public employment service by young unemployed: A matter of non-take-up or of non-compliance? How non-profit social work initiatives may inspire public services. European Journal of Social Work, 16(4), 451–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2012.724387
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vike, H. (2018). Politics and bureaucracy in the Norwegian welfare state. Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Vilhena, S. (2020). Is it because you can’t, or don’t want to? The implementation of frontline sanctions in Norwegian social assistance. European Journal of Social Work, 24(3), 418–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2020.1713052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watts, B., & Fitzpatrick, S. (2018). Welfare conditionality. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, S., Fletcher, D. R., & Stewart, A. B. (2020). Punitive benefit sanctions, welfare conditionality, and the social abuse of unemployed people in Britain: Transforming claimants into offenders? Social Policy & Administration, 54(2), 278–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12577
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacka, B. (2017). When the state meets the street: Public service and moral agency. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar