Reducing Administrative Burden in Remote Subdistrict Services: A Theory-to-Practice Review for Citizen-Centred Administration

Authors

  • Bernad Bernad Universitas Dr. Soetomo
  • Eny Haryati Universitas Dr. Soetomo Surabaya
  • Ulul Albab Universitas Dr. Soetomo Surabaya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62951/ijss.v3i3.720

Keywords:

Administrative Burden, Citizen-Centred Administration, Public Service Delivery, Remote Subdistrict Services, Theory-To-Practice Review

Abstract

Citizen-facing public services can require people to discover eligibility and procedures, assemble documents, travel or wait, navigate digital channels, and manage uncertainty or stigma. These demands are particularly consequential in geographically extensive or remote subdistrict settings, where access conditions and administrative capacity may intensify citizen–state interaction costs. This conceptual review reconstructs Administrative Burden Theory and translates it into a practice-oriented framework for citizen-centred administration. A Theory-Focused Narrative Literature Review with a Theory-to-Practice orientation was conducted using Scopus as the sole bibliographic database. Five documented search runs yielded a final analytical corpus of 26 eligible peer-reviewed journal articles, all verified in full text. The synthesis confirms learning, compliance, and psychological costs as the theory’s diagnostic core, while later applications identify frontline interaction, digital task transfer, administrative capacity, cross-agency coordination, burden distribution, and state reflexivity as important conditioning mechanisms. These findings are organized into six domains: navigational clarity and assisted access; procedural simplicity and documentary continuity; respectful frontline interaction and human assistance; inclusive digital and multichannel service design; administrative capacity and cross-agency coordination; and equitable, proportionate, and reflexive burden governance. The review contributes a source-traceable conceptual and translational framework linking theory mechanisms to diagnostic questions, conditional design options, implementation conditions, risks, and monitoring needs. The framework supports structured inquiry for Kecamatan Sebuku and comparable settings but does not establish local burden prevalence, causal effects, or intervention effectiveness without local empirical evidence

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aguado-Riveros, U. I., Espinoza-Quispe, L. E., Santillán-Enciso, C. L., Silva-Infantes, M., Barrionuevo-Inca-Roca, Y. A., Astuñaupa-Flores, S. N., Poma-Lagos, L. A., Navarro-Véliz, J. A., & González-Prida, V. (2026). Reducing administrative burden through simplification and document management in local governments: Evidence from a district-level public organization. Societies, 16(3), 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16030091

Astudillo-Rodas, M., Venancio-Rodriguez, J., & Hetling, A. (2024). Assessing unintended administrative burdens of technology: The case of swipe card attendance for child care subsidies. Journal of Policy Studies, 39(4), 123–142. https://doi.org/10.52372/jps.e674

Baekgaard, M., & Madsen, J. K. (2024). Anticipated administrative burdens: How proximity to upcoming compulsory meetings affect welfare recipients’ experiences of administrative burden. Public Administration, 102(2), 425–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12928

Bell, E., Christensen, J., Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. (2023). Health in citizen-state interactions: How physical and mental health problems shape experiences of administrative burden and reduce take-up. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 385–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13568

Bielefeld, S. (2021). Administrative burden and the Cashless Debit Card: Stripping time, autonomy, and dignity from social security recipients. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 80(4), 891–911. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12509

Chudnovsky, M., & Peeters, R. (2022). A cascade of exclusion: Administrative burdens and access to citizenship in the case of Argentina’s National Identity Document. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(4), 1068–1085. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320984541

Daigneault, P.-M., Journeault, M., Lauzon-Rhéaume, L., & Birch, L. M. (2025). Measuring administrative burden: Bringing the state “back in” as a reflexive actor in burden reduction. Public Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70036

Daigneault, P.-M., & Macé, C. (2020). Program awareness, administrative burden, and non-take-up of Québec’s Supplement to the Work Premium. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(6), 527–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1636397

Fox, A., Feng, W., & Reynolds, M. (2023). The effect of administrative burden on state safety-net participation: Evidence from food assistance, cash assistance, and Medicaid. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13497

Halling, A., & Baekgaard, M. (2024). Administrative burden in citizen-state interactions: A systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 34(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muad023

Ilea, P., & Ilea, I. (2024). Administrative burden for patients in U.S. health care settings post-Affordable Care Act: A scoping review. Social Science & Medicine, 345, 116686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116686

Kang, I., Sievert, M., & Na, C. (2025). Development of a scale to measure perceived administrative burden, with broad applicability beyond direct policy clients. Governance, 38(3), e70026. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70026

Madsen, C. Ø., Lindgren, I., & Melin, U. (2022). The accidental caseworker: How digital self-service influences citizens’ administrative burden. Government Information Quarterly, 39(1), 101653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101653

Mikkelsen, K. S., Madsen, J. K., & Baekgaard, M. (2024). Is stress among street-level bureaucrats associated with experiences of administrative burden among clients? A multilevel study of the Danish unemployment sector. Public Administration Review, 84(2), 248–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13673

Moynihan, D., Gerzina, J., & Herd, P. (2022). Kafka’s bureaucracy: Immigration administrative burdens in the Trump era. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvab025

Moynihan, D., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2015). Administrative burden: Learning, psychological, and compliance costs in citizen-state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu009

Petersen, O. H., Hansen, J. R., & Houlberg, K. (2024). The administrative burden of doing business with the government: Learning and compliance costs in business-government interactions. Public Administration, 102(1), 188–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12904

Ritzel, C., Mack, G., Portmann, M., Heitkämper, K., & El Benni, N. (2020). Empirical evidence on factors influencing farmers’ administrative burden: A structural equation modeling approach. PLoS ONE, 15(10), e0241075. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241075

Schneider, V. C., & Rubenstein, R. (2026). Can administrative capacity moderate the distributional effects of administrative burden? The case of FAFSA completion. Research in Higher Education, 67(4), 24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-026-09901-w

Senghaas, M., Köppen, M., & Röhrer, S. (2026). Welfare conditionality as administrative burden: The perceived costs of (potential) sanctions and how welfare claimants cope with it. Social Policy & Administration, 60(5), 761–770. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.70041

Soler-Buades, L., & Ferraioli, F. (2025). The nexus between welfare rescaling and administrative burden: The case of minimum income provision in Spain. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 41(3), 248–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2025.10039

St. John, V. J., Wilson, G. D., Tran, L., Applin, L., & Evans, D. (2026). Administrative burden in higher education: Race, criminal records, and street-level bureaucrats in college admissions. Public Administration Review, 86(3), 662–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70042

Storseth, O., McNeil, K., Grudniewicz, A., Correia, R. H., Gallant, F., Thelen, R., & Lavergne, M. R. (2025). Administrative burden in primary care: Critical review. Canadian Family Physician, 71(6), 417–423. https://doi.org/10.46747/cfp.7106417

Tarshish, N., & Holler, R. (2024). “You didn’t ask, so you don’t know”: Information and administrative burden in social benefit claims. Social Policy & Administration, 58(5), 800–813. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12992

Vogel, R., Dahlweg, A., & Hattke, F. (2025). Do vulnerable citizens (really) perceive higher bureaucracy costs? Testing a key claim of the administrative burden framework. Public Administration Review, 85(4), 1098–1114. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13932

Zhou, S., & Mast, E. (2026). Explaining burden reduction in municipal service delivery: The case of streamlined electric vehicle charger permitting in California. Public Administration Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70088

Downloads

Published

2026-09-04

How to Cite

Bernad Bernad, Eny Haryati, & Ulul Albab. (2026). Reducing Administrative Burden in Remote Subdistrict Services: A Theory-to-Practice Review for Citizen-Centred Administration. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 3(3), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.62951/ijss.v3i3.720

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.