As widely identified in international research, frontline professionals, those who represent the state in face-to-face encounters with citizens, play a significant role in the manner in which public policies are implemented and experienced by citizens. While much has been studied on the different coping mechanisms frontline professionals employ, or their tendency towards state-centered or client-centered practice, one concept that has received little attention thus far has been frontline professional resistance, specifically the resistance that emerges in weak state institutional contexts in the Global South. This paper seeks to address this research gap by exploring what we identify as productive resistance, strategies in which frontline professionals use their agency creatively to address the needs of vulnerable citizens effectively. These actions seek actively and openly to contest the dehumanization produced by social programs implemented in neoliberal states with weak state institutions characterized by tight resource constraints and precarious employment conditions. Drawing on qualitative research conducted on the implementation of social programs in Chile, we identify how frontline professionals deploy productive resistance strategies in order to achieve program objectives and improve citizens’ wellbeing. While these specific productive resistances lead to improving program functioning, we conclude our paper by problematizing the responsibility placed on frontline professionals in neoliberal states working within weak state institutions in the Global South and how this leads to the reproduction of inequalities.
AndreottiAColettoDRioA (2024) Street-level bureaucrats’ discretion between individual and institutional factors: the analysis of the minimum income policy implementation in two Italian regions. Social Policy & Administration58(3): 368–384.
2.
Attrash-NajjarAStrierR (2020) Moral distress and privatisation: lost in neoliberal transition. Ethics and Social Welfare14(1): 21–38.
3.
AuyeroJ (2012) Patients of the State: The Politics of Waiting in Argentina. Durham: Duke University Press.
4.
BrodkinEZ (2011) Policy work: street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory21(Supplement 2): i253–i277.
5.
BröklingU (2015) El self emprendedor. Santiago: Editorial Universidad Alberto Hurtado.
6.
Cunill-GrauNLeytonC (2017) La cooperación entre actores estatales y organizaciones sin fines de lucro en el campo social ¿Cómo y cuándo propiciarla?Revista Espacios38(59): 1–24.
7.
DahlbergSHolmbergS (2014) Democracy and bureaucracy: how their quality matters for popular satisfaction. West European Politics37(3): 515–537.
8.
Edri-PeerOCohenN (2025) Revisiting coping mechanisms on the street-level: a systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory35(4): 397–421.
9.
EiróFLottaG (2024) On the frontline of global inequalities: a decolonial approach to the study of street-level bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory34(1): 67–79.
10.
EvansTHupePL (eds) (2019) Discretion and the Quest for Controlled Freedom. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
11.
GarretónMA (2012) Neoliberalismo corregido y progresismo limitado: los gobiernos de la concertación en Chile, 1990–2010, 1st edn.Santiago de Chile: CLACSO (Colección Pensar América Latina).
12.
GofenA (2014) Mind the gap: dimensions and influence of street-level divergence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory24(2): 473–493.
13.
González-MartínezNPeetersR (2024) Relational street-level bureaucracy: proximity policing and the construction of trust between citizens and municipal police officers in nezahualcóyotl, Mexico. Australian Journal of Public Administration84: 1467–8500.
14.
HarveyD (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15.
JuhilaKRaitakariSHallC (ed) (2017) Responsibilisation at the Margins of Welfare Services. London, New York: Routledge (Routledge Advances in Social Work).
16.
LaveeE (2021) Walking the talk of social equity? Street-level Bureaucrats’ decisionmaking about the provision of personal resources. The American Review of Public Administration52(1): 3–14.
17.
LaveeEKaplanA (2022) Invisible work at work and the reproduction of gendered social service organizations. Gender, Work & Organization29(5): 1463–1480.
18.
LaveeEStrierR (2019) Transferring emotional capital as coerced discretion: street-level bureaucrats reconciling structural deficiencies. Public Administration97(4): 910–925.
19.
LeytonCPinolA (2024) Traducciones y la gobernanza operacional en los procesos de implementacion de programas a nivel municipal. In: Implementación de políticas sociales en Chile. Santiago de Chile: RIL editores, 157–178.
20.
LipskyM (2010) Street-Level Bureaucracy Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
21.
LottaGKriegerMGMCohenN, et al. (2023) Not separate, but certainly unequal: the burdens and coping strategies of low-status street-level bureaucrats. Governance37(3): 907–926.
22.
LottaGLima-SilvaFFavaretoA (2022) Dealing with violence: varied reactions from frontline workers acting in highly vulnerable territories. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space40(2): 502–519.
23.
LottaGPiresR (2019) Street-level bureaucracy research and social inequality. In: HupeP (ed) Research Handbook on Street-Level Bureaucracy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 86–101.
24.
LottaGSMarquesEC (2020) How social networks affect policy implementation: an analysis of street-level bureaucrats’ performance regarding a health policy. Social Policy & Administration54(3): 345–360.
25.
LottaGSPiresRRC (2020) Categorizando Usuários ‘Fáceis’ e ‘Difíceis’: práticas Cotidianas de Implementação de Políticas Públicas e a Produção de Diferenças Sociais. Dados63(4): e20190112.
26.
LucciariniSSanturroMRimanoA (2025) Measuring organizational effects on street-level bureaucrats’ discretionality: a comparative study of three Italian contexts. Journal of Public Policy45(4): 761–779.
27.
MasoodANisarMA (2022) Repairing the state: policy repair in the frontline bureaucracy. Public Administration Review82(2): 256–268.
28.
MayJWilliamsAClokeP, et al. (2019) Welfare convergence, bureaucracy, and moral distancing at the food bank. Antipode51(4): 1251–1275.
29.
MayPJWinterSC (2009) Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: influences on policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory19(3): 453–476.
30.
Maynard-MoodySMushenoM (2022) Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service, new and expanded ed.Ann Arbor (Mich.): University of Michigan press.
31.
MumbyDKThomasRMartíI, et al. (2017) Resistance redux. Organization Studies38(9): 1157–1183.
32.
Muñoz ArceG (2019) The neoliberal turn in Chilean social work: frontline struggles against individualism and fragmentation. European Journal of Social Work22(2): 289–300.
33.
Muñoz ArceGPantazisC (2019) Social exclusion, neoliberalism and resistance: the role of social workers in implementing social policies in Chile. Critical Social Policy39(1): 127–146.
34.
Muñoz ArceGVillalobos DintransCReininger PollakT, et al. (2023) Trabajo no reconocido, trabajo ‘sucio’, trabajo precario: condiciones de implementación de programas sociales en la coyuntura del cambio constitucional en Chile. Revista Temas Sociológicos31: 133–156.
35.
PeakeGForsythM (2022) Street-level bureaucrats in a relational state: the case of bougainville. Public Administration and Development42(1): 12–21.
36.
PeetersRCamposSA (2022) Street-level bureaucracy in weak state institutions: a systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences89(4): 977–995.
37.
PeetersRLottaGSNietoF (eds) (2024) Street-level Bureaucracy in Weak State Institutions. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
38.
PiresR (2019) Implementando desigualdades: reprodução de desigualdades na implementação de políticas públicas. Rio de Janeiro: Ipea.
39.
PiresRSantosMPBrandãoB, et al. (2024) Underserving the disadvantaged: institutional failures and their consequences for frontline workers and vulnerable publics. In: PeetersRLottaGNieto-MoralesF (eds) Street-Level Bureaucracy in Weak State Institutions. Bristol, UK: Policy Press, 104–119.
40.
PriorDBarnesM (2011) Subverting social policy on the front line: agencies of resistance in the delivery of services: subverting social policy on the front line. Social Policy & Administration45(3): 264–279.
41.
ReiningerTDuboy LuengoMMuñoz ArceG, et al. (2026) Implementing proximate welfare programs in weak institutional contexts: lessons from the global south. Social Policy & Administration60(1): 168–178.
42.
ReiningerTVillalobosC (2024) Desafíos locales en la implementación de primera línea del Sistema de Protección Social en Chile. El caso del programa Familias. In: LeytonC (ed.) Implementación de políticas sociales en Chile. Santiago, Chile: RIL editores, 179–198.
43.
RiceD (2013) Street-Level bureaucrats and the welfare state: toward a micro-institutionalist theory of policy implementation. Administration & Society45(9): 1038–1062.
44.
RodríguezJP (2021) The politics of neoliberalism in Latin America: dynamics of resilience and contestation. Sociology Compass15(3): e12854.
45.
SchusterCMikkelsenKSCorreaI, et al. (2022) Exit, voice, and sabotage: public service motivation and guerrilla bureaucracy in times of unprincipled political principals. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory32(2): 416–435.
46.
SossJFordingRCSchramS (eds) (2011) Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism and the Persistent Power of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (Chicago Studies in American Politics).
47.
SpinkPLottaGBurgosF (2021) Institutional vulnerability and trust in public agencies: views from both sides of the street. Governance34(4): 1057–1073.
48.
StrierRBershtlingO (2016) Professional resistance in social work: counterpractice assemblages. Social Work61(2): 111–118.
49.
Timor-ShlevinS (2021) The controlled arena of contested practices: critical practice in Israel’s state social services. The British Journal of Social Work51(1): 279–296.
50.
TummersLLGBekkersVVinkE, et al. (2015) Coping during public service delivery: a conceptualization and systematic review of the literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory25(4): 1099–1126.
51.
Villalobos DintransCDuboy-LuengoMMirandaC, et al. (2025) Profiles of professional resistance in street-level bureaucracy programs. A quantitative-multidimensional typology. Journal of Social Work25(5): 685–710.
52.
WeinbergMBanksS (2019) Practising ethically in unethical times: everyday resistance in social work. Ethics and Social Welfare13(4): 361–376.
53.
WeinbergMTaylorS (2019) ‘Rogue’ social workers. Critical Social Work15(1): 74–86.
