Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reconciling policy dissonance: patterns of governmental response to policy noncompliance

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction

The third law of motion, A. Newton

Abstract

Noncompliance is most often understood in the public policy literature as a problem of implementation and enforcement. Yet, this perhaps normative focus misses the role of noncompliance as a source of policy change. To demonstrate this unexplored role, this study conceptualizes noncompliance and subsequent governmental responses as an interactive, ongoing process, in which noncompliance may gain social acceptance and governmental reaction changes over time. Manifestations of noncompliance in health (immunization refusal, needle exchange programs), education (homeschooling), policing (community police), drug use (decriminalization of marijuana) and urban services (community gardening) suggest that governmental reaction is a dynamic, developing process, constituting a series of responses influenced by social acceptance of noncompliance and by the latter’s implications. Each response may take on one of four patterns of legitimization: embracement (legitimization), adaptation (reluctant legitimization), acceptance (implicit legitimization) and stricter enforcement (delegitimization). A more nuanced portrayal of the interaction between noncompliance and governmental reaction emphasizes a reciprocal relationship between policy makers and policy targets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alaimo, K., Packnett, E., Miles, R. A., & Kruger, D. J. (2008). Fruit and vegetable intake among urban community gardeners. J. of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 40(2), 94–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J. (2002). Defining the client in the public sector: A social-exchange perspective. Public Administration Review, 62(3), 337–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J. (2009). Engaging public sector clients: From service-delivery to co-production. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Alford, J., & Speed, R. (2006). Client focus in regulatory agencies: Oxymoron or opportunity? Public Management Review, 8(2), 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. M., & Rees, D. I. (2014). The legalization of recreational marijuana: How likely is the worst-case scenario? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33(1), 221–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, D. (2000). A survey of community gardens in upstate New York: Implications for health promotion and community development. Health & Place, 6(4), 319–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baggott, R. (1986). By voluntary agreement: The politics of instrument selection. Public Administration, 64(1), 51–67.

  • Bardach, E., & Kagan, R. A. (1982). Going by the book: The problem of regulatory unreasonableness. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartfeld, J., & Meyer, D. R. (1994). Are there really deadbeat dads? The relationship between ability to pay, enforcement, and compliance in nonmarital child support cases. The Social Service Review,, 68(2), 219–235.

  • Bayley, D. H. (2002). Law enforcement and the rule of law: Is there a tradeoff? Criminology & Public Policy, 2(1), 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekele, A., & Myers, W. E. (1995). First things first in child labour: Eliminating work detrimental to children. International Labour Organization: Geneva.

  • Blume, S. (2006). Anti-vaccination movements and their interpretations. Social Science and Medicine, 62(3), 628–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bluthenthal, R. N. (1998). Syringe exchange as a social movement: A case study of harm reduction in Oakland, California. Substance Use and Misuse, 33(5), 1147–1171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, V. (1995). Games of engagement: Postures within the regulatory community. Law & Policy, 17(3), 225–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burris, S., Finucane, D., Gallagher, H., & Grace, J. (1996). The legal strategies used in operating syringe exchange programs in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 86(8_Pt_1), 1161–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calef, D., & Goble, R. (2007). The allure of technology: How France and California promoted electric and hybrid vehicles to reduce urban air pollution. Policy Sciences, 40(1), 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caulkins, J. P., Hawken, A., Kilmer, B., & Kleiman, M. A. (2012). Marijuana legalization: What everyone needs to know. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2007). Syringe exchange programs—United States, 2005. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 56(44), 1164–1167.

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm, A. (2008). Growing bridges: Community gardens and civic governments. Royal Roads University. http://www.cityfarmer.org/GrowingBridgesThesis.pdf.

  • Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P. J. (2009). Medical marijuana: The conflict between scientific evidence and political ideology. Part one of two. Journal of Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy, 23(1), 4–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, B. S., & Sureau, J. (2007). The politics of homeschooling new developments, new challenges. Educational Policy, 21(1), 110–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan, M. P. (2011). Growing what you eat: Developing community gardens in Baltimore, Maryland. Applied Geography, 31(4), 1232–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Viswanathan, L., & Whitelaw, G. (2013). Sustainability through intervention: A case study of guerrilla gardening in Kingston, Ontario. Local Environment, 18(1), 71–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culpepper, P. D. (2005). Institutional change in contemporary capitalism. World Politics, 57(2), 173–199.

  • de Soto, H. (1990). The other path: The invisible revolution in the third world. New York City: Perennial Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deery, H. A. (2000). Hazard and risk perception among young novice drivers. Journal of Safety Research, 30(4), 225–236.

  • DeHart-Davis, L., & Bozeman, B. (2001). Regulatory compliance and air quality permitting: Why do firms overcomply? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(4), 471–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, M. A. (1997). Shot in the arm: Legal & social obstacles to United States needle exhange programs, A. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 17(1), 31–72.

  • Dickson, E. S., Gordon, S. C., & Huber, G. A. (2009). Enforcement and compliance in an uncertain world: An experimental investigation. The Journal of Politics, 71(04), 1357–1378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekema, D. S. (2009). Choices should have consequences: Failure to vaccinate, harm to others, and civil liability. Michigan Law Review First Impressions, 107, 90–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dingelstad, D., Gosden, R., Martin, B., & Vakas, N. (1996). The social construction of drug debates. Social Science and Medicine, 43(12), 1829–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Divoky, D. (1983). The new pioneers of the home-schooling movement. The Phi Delta Kappan, 64(6), 395–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dow, C. L. (2006). Benefits and barriers to implementing and managing well rooted community gardens in waterloo region, Ontario. Ontario: Queen’s University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earleywine, M. (2002). Understanding marijuana: A new look at the scientific evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L. B. (2008). Law at work: The endogenous construction of civil rights. In L. B. Nielsen, & R. L. Nelson (Eds.), Handbook of employment discrimination research (pp. 337–352). Berlin: Springer.

  • Edelman, L. B., & Talesh, S. A. (2011). To comply or not to comply—That isn’t the question: how organizations construct the meaning of compliance. In C. Parker, & V. L. Nielsen (Eds.),Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation (pp. 103–122).

  • Edwards, M. A. (2006). Law and the parameters of acceptable deviance. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97(1), 49–100.

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmett, R. (2011). Community gardens, ghetto pastoral, and environmental justice. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 18(1), 67–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, A., McDevitt, J., & Buerger, M. E. (2002). Moving police and community dialogues forward through data collection task forces. Police Quarterly, 5(3), 359–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. California: Stanford university press.

  • Fischlein, M., & Smith, T. M. (2013). Revisiting renewable portfolio standard effectiveness: Policy design and outcome specification matter. Policy Sciences, 46(3), 277–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaither, M. (2009). Home schooling goes mainstream. Education Next, 9(1), 10–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garofalo, J., & McLeod, M. (1988). Improving the use and effectiveness of neighborhood watch programs. US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/abstractdb/AbstractDBDetails.aspx?id=108618.

  • Gent, C. E. (2000). Needle exchange policy adoption in american cities: Why not? Policy Sciences, 33(2), 125–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilad, S. (2014). Beyond endogeneity: How firms and regulators co-construct the meaning of regulation. Law & Policy, 36(2), 134–164.

  • Gofen, A. (2012). Entrepreneurial exit response to dissatisfaction with public services. Public Administration, 90(4), 1088–1106.

  • Gofen, A. (2013). Citizens’ entrepreneurial role in public service provision. Public Management Review,. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.822533.

  • Gofen, A., & Needham, C. (2014). Service personalization as a response to noncompliance with routine childhood vaccination. Governance. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gove.12082/full.

  • Grabosky, P. N. (1995). Using non-governmental resources to foster regulatory compliance. Governance, 8(4), 527–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gust, D. A., Darling, N., Kennedy, A., & Schwartz, B. (2008). Parents with doubts about vaccines: Which vaccines and reasons why. Pediatrics, 122(4), 718–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haeder, S. F., & Weimer, D. L. (2013). You can’t make me do it: State implementation of insurance exchanges under the affordable care act. Public Administration Review. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12065/full.

  • Hall, D. J. (1996). Community gardens as an urban planning issue. Columbia: University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, N. D. (1997). Greening our garden: Public policies to support the new agriculture. Drake J. Agric. L., 2, 357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasenfeld, Y., Ghose, T., & Larson, K. (2004). The logic of sanctioning welfare recipients: An empirical assessment. Social Service Review, 78(2), 304–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasenfeld, Y., & Weaver, D. (1996). Enforcement, compliance, and disputes in welfare-to-work programs. The Social Service Review, 70(2), 235–256.

  • Hayden-Smith, R. (2007). Soldiers of the soil: The work of the United States school garden army during World War I. Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 6(1), 19–29.

  • Heiger-Bernays, W., Fraser, A., Burns, V., Diskin, K., Pierotti, D., Merchant-Borna, K., et al. (2009). Characterization and low-cost remediation of soils contaminated by timbers in community gardens. The International Journal of Soil, Sediment and Water: Documenting the Cutting Edge of Environmental Stewardship, 2(3). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3146259/

  • Heim, S., Stang, J., & Ireland, M. (2009). A garden pilot project enhances fruit and vegetable consumption among children. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109(7), 1220–1226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heimer, R., Kaplan, E. H., Khoshnood, K., Jariwala, B., & Cadman, E. C. (1993). Needle exchange decreases the prevalence of HIV-1 proviral DNA in returned syringes in New Haven, Connecticut. The American Journal of Medicine, 95(2), 214–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, D. J. (2009). Alternative pathways in science and industry: Activism, innovation and the environment in an era of globalization. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2007. 334 Pages. Science Studies 22(1):64–66.

  • Hibbs, D. A., & Piculescu, V. (2010). Tax toleration and tax compliance: How government affects the propensity of firms to enter the unofficial economy. American Journal of Political Science, 54(1), 18–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

  • Holland, L. (2004). Diversity and connections in community gardens: A contribution to local sustainability. Local Environment, 9(3), 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, S. F., Jolley, D. J., & Kaldor, J. M. (1997). Effectiveness of needle-exchange programs for prevention of HIV infection. The Lancet, 349(9068), 1797–1800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Im, T., Cho, W., Porumbescu, G., & Park, J. (2012). Internet, trust in government, and citizen compliance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. mus037.

  • Jacobus, J., Bava, S., Cohen-Zion, M., Mahmood, O., & Tapert, S. F. (2009). Functional consequences of marijuana use in adolescents. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 92(4), 559–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. S. (2011). The career girl murders: Gender, race, and crime in 1960s New York. WSQ: Women’s Studies Quarterly, 39(1), 244–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, N. (2010). Investigating the influence of social costs and benefits of environmental policies through social capital theory. Policy Sciences, 43(3), 229–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. University of Chicago Press

  • Kaplan, H. B., Martin, S. S., Johnson, R. J., & Robbins, C. A. (1986). Escalation of marijuana use: Application of a general theory of deviant behavior. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 27(1), 44–61.

  • Keiser, L. R., & Meier, K. J. (1996). Policy design, bureaucratic incentives, and public management: The case of child support enforcement. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(3), 337–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khatapoush, S., & Hallfors, D. (2004). ‘Sending the wrong message’: Did medical marijuana legalization in california change attitudes about and use of marijuana? Journal of Drug Issues, 34(4), 751–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York, USA: Harper Collins.

  • Kingsley, J. Y., Townsend, M., & Henderson-Wilson, C. (2009). Cultivating health and wellbeing: Members’ perceptions of the health benefits of a port melbourne community garden. Leisure Studies, 28(2), 207–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirp, D. L., & Bayer, R. (1993). The politics of needle exchange. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

  • Kurtz, H. (2001). Differentiating multiple meanings of garden and community. Urban Geography, 22(7), 656–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Porte, T. R., & Thomas, C. W. (1995). Regulatory compliance and the ethos of quality enhancement: Surprises in nuclear power plant operations 1. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5(1), 109–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, S. D., Lurie, P., Bowser, B. P., Kahn, J., & Chen, D. (2000). The coming of age of needle exchange: A history through 1993. In J. A. Inciardi, & L. D. Harrison (Eds.), Harm Reduction: National and International Perspectives. (pp. 47–68).

  • Lawson, L. J. (2005). City bountiful. California: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, J., & Xu, Feng. (2007). SARS in Canada and China: Two approaches to emergency health policy. Governance, 20(2), 209–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leask, J., & McIntyre, P. (2003). Public Opponents of vaccination: A case study. Vaccine, 21(32), 4700–4703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi, M., & Sacks, A. (2009). Legitimating beliefs: Sources and indicators. Regulation & Governance, 3(4), 311–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubell, M., & Fulton, A. (2008). Local policy networks and agricultural watershed management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 673–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubienski, C. (2003). A critical view of home education. Evaluation & Research in Education, 17(2–3), 167–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lurie, P., Reingold, A. L., Bowser, B., Chen, D., Foley, J., Guydish, J. et al. (1993). The public health impact of needle exchange programs in the United States and Abroad. Summary, conclusions and recommendations. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/abstractdb/AbstractDBDetails.aspx?id=165664.

  • Marx, G. T., & Archer, D. (1971). Citizen Involvement in the law enforcement process: The case of community police patrols. American Behavioral Scientist, 15(1), 52–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, P. J. (2004). Compliance motivations: Affirmative and negative bases. Law & Society Review, 38(1), 41–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, P. J. (2005a). Compliance motivations: Perspectives of farmers, homebuilders, and marine facilities. Law & Policy, 27(2), 317–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, P. J. (2005b). Regulation and compliance motivations: Examining different approaches. Public Administration Review, 65(1), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, P. J., & Wood, R. S. (2003). At the regulatory front lines: Inspectors’ enforcement styles and regulatory compliance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(2), 117–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, S. A., & Ray, B. D. (2000). The home education movement in context, practice, and theory: Editors’ introduction. Peabody Journal of Education, 75(1–2), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Morgan, D. R. (1982). Citizen compliance with public policy: The national maximum speed law. The Western Political Quarterly, 35(2), 258–273.

  • Meier, K. J., & Smith, K. B. (1994). Say it Ain’t So, Moe: Institutional design, policy effectiveness, and drug policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4(4), 429–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meighan, R. (1995). Home-based education effectiveness research and some of its implications. Educational Review, 47(3), 275–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard university press.

  • Moynihan, D. P. (2005). Why and how do state governments adopt and implement ‘managing for results’ reforms? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(2), 219–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Natapoff, A. (2006). Underenforcement. Fordham Law Review, 75(3), 1715–1776.

  • Nielsen, V. L., & Parker, C. (2009). Testing responsive regulation in regulatory enforcement. Regulation & Governance, 3(4), 376–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norberg-Bohm, V. (1999). Stimulating ‘green’ technological Innovation: An analysis of alternative policy mechanisms. Policy Sciences, 32(1), 13–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P. (2009). Debate: Delivering public services: Are we asking the right questions? Public Money & Management, 29(1), 5–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pacula, R. L., Chriqui, J. F., & King, J. (2003). Marijuana decriminalization: What does it mean in the United States? National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w9690.

  • Pacula, R. L., Chriqui, J. F., Reichmann, D. A., & Terry-McElrath, Y. M. (2002). State medical marijuana laws: Understanding the laws and their limitations. Journal of Public Health Policy, 23(4), 413–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacula, R. L., MacCoun, R., Reuter, P., Chriqui, J., Kilmer, B., Harris, K., Letizia P., & Schäfer, C. (2005). What does it mean to decriminalize marijuana? A cross-national empirical examination (Vol. 16, pp. 347–369). In M. Grossman, B. Lindgren, R. Kaestner, & K. Bolin (Eds.), Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

  • Parker, C. (2013). Twenty years of responsive regulation: An appreciation and appraisal. Regulation & Governance. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rego.12006/full.

  • Porter, T., & Ronit, K. (2006). Self-regulation as policy process: The multiple and criss-crossing stages of private rule-making. Policy Sciences, 39(1), 41–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, M. (2002). Penumbral crimes. American Criminology Law Review, 39(4), 1395–1439.

  • Reuter, P. (2010). Marijuana legalization: What can be learned from other countries. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodal, R., & Wilson, K. (2010). Could parents be held liable for not immunizing their children. McGill JL & Health, 4, 39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, D. P. (1988). Community crime prevention: A review and synthesis of the literature. Justice Quarterly, 5(3), 323–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, C. J. (2010). Fundamentalist challenges to core democratic values: Exit and homeschooling. William & Mary Bill of Rights, 18(4), 2012–2104.

  • Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment, in Theories of the Policy Process, P. Sabatier (ed), pp. 118-188.

  • Samad, L., Butler, N., Peckham, C., & Bedford, H. (2006). Incomplete immunisation uptake in infancy: Maternal reasons. Vaccine, 24(47), 6823–6829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review, 87(2), 334–347.

  • Schukoske, J. E. (1999). Community development through gardening: State and local policies transforming urban open space. NYUJ Legis. & Pub. Pol’y, 3, 351–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skogan, W. G. (1975). Groups in the policy process: The police and urban crime. Policy Studies Journal, 3(4), 354–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smailbegovic, M. S., Laing, G. J., & Bedford, H. (2003). Why do parents decide against immunization? The effect of health beliefs and health professionals. Child: Care, Health and Development, 29(4), 303–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steurer, R. (2010). The role of governments in corporate social responsibility: Characterizing public policies on CSR in Europe. Policy Sciences, 43(1), 49–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, M. L. (2003). The normalisation of homeschooling in the USA. Evaluation & Research in Education, 17(2–3), 90–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stimson, G. V. (1996). Commentaries drug injecting: the public health response in the next decade. Addiction, 91(8), 1089–1099.

  • Streeck, W. (2009). Industrial relations today: Reining in flexibility. Economics, Management, and Financial Markets, (3), 15–36.

  • Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: Institutional change in advanced political economies. In S. Wolfgang, & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies (pp. 4–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Teig, E., Amulya, J., Bardwell, L., Buchenau, M., Marshall, J. A., & Litt, J. S. (2009). Collective efficacy in Denver, Colorado: Strengthening neighborhoods and health through community gardens. Health & Place, 15(4), 1115–1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tickner, S., Leman, P. J., & Woodcock, A. (2010). Parents’ views about pre-school immunization: An interview study in southern England. Child: Care, Health and Development, 36(2), 190–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travaline, K., & Hunold, C. (2010). Urban agriculture and ecological citizenship in Philadelphia. Local Environment, 15(6), 581–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 375–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlahov, D., & Junge, B. (1998). The role of needle exchange programs in HIV prevention. Public Health Reports, 113(Suppl 1), 75–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, S., Yeudall, F., Taron, C., Reynolds, J., & Skinner, A. (2007). Growing urban health: Community gardening in south-east Toronto. Health Promotion International, 22(2), 92–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waliczek, T. M., & Zajicek, J. M. (1996). The effect of school gardens on self-esteem, interpersonal relationships, attitude toward School, and environmental attitude in populations of children. HortScience, 31(4), 608–608.

  • Weimer, D. L. (1993). The current state of design craft: Borrowing, tinkering, and problem solving. Public Administration Review, 53(2), 110–120.

  • Weaver, R. K. (2013). Compliance regimes and barriers to behavioral change. Governance, 27(2), 243–265.

  • Weimer, D. L. (2006). The puzzle of private rulemaking: Expertise, flexibility, and blame avoidance in US regulation. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 569–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisblay, E. (2008). Immunization in Israel. Knesset Center for Information and Research [in Hebrew].

  • Wekerle, G. R. (2004). Food justice movements policy, planning, and networks. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23(4), 378–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. C., & May, P. J. (2001). Motivation for compliance with environmental regulations. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(4), 675–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woods, N. D. (2013). Regulatory democracy reconsidered: The policy impact of public participation requirements. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory mut042.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank Julien Etienne for his insightful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus, 91095, Jerusalem, Israel

    Anat Gofen

Authors
  1. Anat Gofen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anat Gofen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gofen, A. Reconciling policy dissonance: patterns of governmental response to policy noncompliance. Policy Sci 48, 3–24 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-014-9202-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-014-9202-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation