jan erik lane concept implementation 3298-7941-1-pb
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
1/24
The Concept of Implementation
B Y J A N - E R I K L A N E
I n t r o d u c t i o n *
Implementat ion analys i s appears to promise that
r a r e c o m b i n a t i o n o f r i g o r o u s m e t h o d o l o g y a n d
socia l re l evance so often sought in pol i cy analys i s .
In theory , implementat ion analys i s seems to offer
not just evaluat ion techniques for the assessment
of publ i c program performance but a l so guidance
i f not rul es for the successfu l at ta inment of pol i cy
obj ect iv es . In a seminal art i c l e , typica l of the s ta te
of implementat ion analys i s , P . Sabat i er and D.
M a z m a n i a n v e n t u r e d t o s t a t e c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e
accom pl i shm ent of a pol i cy obj ect iv e or e f fect ive
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( S a b a t i e r & M a z m a n i a n 1 9 7 9 ) .
Implementat ion analys i s would , i f i t s potent ia l i s
real i zed , take pol i cy analys i s further than evalua
t ion research (ER) or soc ia l impact analys i s
( S I A ) ;
as opposed to the narrow focus of tradi
t i onal publ i c admini strat ion on program execu
t i o n ,
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s i s w o u l d n o t o n l y
highl ight the extent to which the pol i cy object ives
had been atta ined but would a l so come up wi th
direct ives to p lanners and pol i cy-makers as to how
they should mould the i r program in order to
a c h i e v e e f f e c t iv e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( H a r g r o v e ) .
In the introduct ion to the volume Studying Im
plementation (1982) W. Wi l l i ams goe s as far as to
stat e that the primary cri ter ion for the wor th of
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n s t u d i e s i s p o l i c y r e l e v a n c e ( W i l
l i a m s 1 9 8 2 : 1 ) . H o w e v e r , s o m e w o r d s o f w a r n i n g
a g a i n st e x c e s s i v e o p t im i s m a b o u t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
analys i s would not be out of p lace i f they were to
result in a real istic understanding of the difficul
t i es invo lved in doing implem enta t ion analys i s ,
* I w i s h to th a n k P ro fes s o r H a ro l d G u etzk o w a n d
P h . D . - c a n d i d a t e D e s m o n d K i n g at N o r t h w e s t e r n U n i
v ers i ty a n d Aa ro n W i l d a v s k y a t B erk e l ey fo r g en ero u s
co mmen ts a s to th e i mp ro v emen t o f th e a rg u men t p re
s en ted . P a t S h r i mp to n a t Umeå Un i v ers i ty ch eck ed th e
E n g l i s h .
whi l e at the same t ime such an understanding in
turn may rescue the concept of implementat ion
from the narrowly pess imist i c not ion that imple
mentat ion analys i s cannot be anything but evolu
t ion analys i s .
Di st inct ion betwee n stat i cs and dynamics
I t s e e m s t h a t t h e c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n b e
longs to a set of con cepts w hich i s character i zed by
a surface clarity but at the same t ime compri ses a
problema tic deep structure. W e b s t e r ' s D i c t i o n a r y
( 1 9 7 1 ) s t a t e s t h a t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n m e a n s t h e
act of implementing or the s tate of be ing im
ple me nte d, and it presen ts the fo l lowing k ey
w o r d s f o r i m p l e m e n t :
to carry out: accompl i sh , fu l fu l l ; to g ive pract ical effect
to and ensure of actual fu l f i l lment by concrete measures;
to p ro v i d e i n s t ru men ts o r m ea n s o f p ra c ti cal e x p res s i o n
for . . .
To carry out som ethin g or to accom pl i sh
som ethin g may sound inte l l i g ib l e and require
l i t t l e expl i cat ion . A formal def in i t i on might be:
D E F . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n = F ( I n t e n t i o n , O u t p u t ,
O u t c o m e )
w h e r e , o f c o u r s e , t h e p r o c e s s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
refers to the br inging about of outcomes that are
congruent wi th the or ig inal intent ion(s) by means
of outputs .
However , once one s tarts to analyze the def in i
t i on the number of re l evant and troublesome
quest ions i s pract i ca l ly wi thout end: what i s im
p l e m e n t e d ? w h o i m p l e m e n t s w h a t ? w h o d o e s
w h o e v e r - i t - i s i m p l e m e n t w h a t ? t o w h o m h a s w h o -
ever- i t - i s implemented what and why? wi th what
h a s w h o e v e r - i t - i s i m p l e m e n t e d w h a t t o w h o m e v -
er- i t - i s? e tc . These quest ions only refer to the
V
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
2/24
18 Jan-Erik Lane
variables of a complete implementation proposi
tion,
and they may be augmented by the addition
of questions pertaining to the meaning of imple
ment ati on in the sense of carry out or accom
plish .
To put the matter differently: what state of
affairs would be regarded as
non-implementation?
It seems to be the case that various criteria may be
employed in order to measure the effectiveness of
implementation; thus, non-implementation may
not be easily detected or it may be too easily
detected. It is simply not clear what non-imple
mentation stands for: program malfunctioning,
causal ineffectiveness, failure to achieve goals, the
bringing about of unintended outcomes or the
accomplishment of dysfunctional goals.
Obviously, to give practical effect to something
or to ensure the actual fulfillment of something
may be a very simple thing to observe, but when
the something to be accomplished is a policy or a
set of political decisions that which is to be carried
out may have an extremely intricate structure.
There are actually a number of difficult theore tical
and conceptual problems involved in the simple
implementation equation introduced above when
it is a matter of identifying policy objectives,
measuring outcomes and defining a relationship
betwe en outputs, outcomes and objectives . A
public policy is a binary entity (objectives, out
puts)
the occurrence of which takes place in an
environment which may be analyzed in terms of
outcomes. Implementation analysis focuses on
the operation of a public policy and its consequ
ences and it includes logically three separate acti
vities:
(a) clarification of the objectives involved
the
goal function)
(b) state ment of the relationship betw een outputs
and outcomes in terms of causal effecti veness
the causal function)
(c) clarification of the relation between objec
tives and outcomes in order to affirm the ex
tent of goal achievement the accomplishment
function)
Eac h of the three tasks of impleme ntation analysis
present their own peculiar difficulties; together
they imply that it is difficult to judge the effective
ness of implementation and thus arrive at recom
mendations about what measures are conducive to
successful implementation; in any case, these
three tasks should be kept clearly separate.
In order to illuminate some basic problems in
implementation research I will try to state- the
logical structure of a complete implementation
proposition. Before embarking on this task let me
introduce a fundamental distinction that is ger
mane to much of the thinking about policy imple
mentation. I wish to distinguish sharply between
two equally valid questions about implementa
tion,
the
static
problem and the
dynamic
problem:
(1) What state of affairs must obtain in order for
the concept of implementation to apply? Or,
put differently, when is it accurate to state
about a policy that it has been implemented?
(2) How is implementation brought about? Or:
what are the typical properties of processes of
implementation?
The static aspect of the concept of implementatio n
deals with the identification of a policy, a set of
outcomes and the relationship(s) between these
two entities. The dynamic aspect of the concept of
implementation refers to the process of imple
mentati on, ho w policies are carried out in an envi
ronment conducive to policy accomplishment or
policy failure — what is usually referred to as
stages of implementation (Mazmanian & Sabatier
1983).
The static aspect of implementation
Policy and outcome appear to be the keystones in
an implementation propositon. Thus, we have:
DEF.
X implemen ts Z =
d e
f .
X brings about outcome Z which is a policy
objective
Successful impleme ntation does not only require a
state of affairs in which there is a policy objective
and an outcome (or several objectives or outcom
es) for, in addition, the conce pt of implementa tion
implies that these two entities - objectiv e and
out com e - satisfy two different relationsh ips: the
causal function and the accomplishment function.
Tw o ideas are fundamental to the concept of im
plementation: that the policy program is the out
put that brings about the outcomes (the causal
function) in such a way that the outcomes accom
plish the objectives of the policy (the accomplish
ment function). It is vital to make a distinction
between these two relationships, because they
present difieren analysis problems. Let us begin
with the accomplishment function.
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
3/24
T h e C o n c e p t of I m p l e m e n t a t i o n 19
The Wildavsky Problem
S u c c e s s f u l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n r e q u i r e s t h a t
the
o b j e c t i v e ( s )
and the
o u t c o m e ( s ) s a t i sf y
the re
q u i r e m e n t s
o f a
v e r y s p e c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h e a c h
o t h e r : w h a t
is
i m p l e m e n t e d
is an
o b j e c t i v e ( i n t e n
t i o n ) t h a t exists before
t h e
o u t c o m e
a n d
i m p l e
m e n t a t i o n
is th e
p r o c e s s
of
e f f e c t i n g
an
o u t c o m e
t h a t
is the
r e a l i z a t i o n
of the
o b j e c t i v e ,
i .e . , the
o u t c o m e th a t c o m e s a b o u t
as a
f u n c t i o n
of th e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
is th e
o b j e c t i v e w h i c h m e a n s t h a t
t h e o b j e c t i v e exists after
t h e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h i s
s o u n d s l i k e
a
c o n t r a d i c t i o
in
a d i e c t o .
A .
W i l d a v s
k y
h as
d e a l t w i t h t h i s p r o b l e m u n d e r
t h e
h e a d i n g
o f " t h e c h i c k e n
and the
e g g "
in a fe w
i m p l e m e n t a
t i o n s t u d i e s l i k e Implementation ( w i t h
J.
P r e s s
m a n )
a n d
" I m p l e m e n t a t i o n
as
e v o l u t i o n " ( w i t h
G . M a j o n e ) .
T h e
f o l l o w i n g
t w o
q u o t a t i o n s i l lu
s t r a t e
his
l i n e
of
t h o u g h t :
".
. . the
a t t e m p t
to
s t u d y i mp l eme n t a t i o n r a i s e s
the
mo s t b a s i c q u es t i o n a b o u t
th e
r e l a t i o n b e t w e en t h o u g h t
a n d a c t i o n :
Ho w can
i d ea s ma n i f e s t t h e ms e l v e s
in a
w o r l d
of
b e h a v i o r ? " ( W i l d a v s k y 1 9 7 8 ,
p. 103)
" A v er b l i k e ' i mp l emen t " mu s t h a v e
an
o b j ec t l i k e
' p o l i cy ' . Bu t p o l i c i e s n o r ma l l y - co n t a i n b o t h g o a l s and
t h e mea n s f o r a ch i ev i n g t h em. H o w , t h en , d o we d i s t i n g
u i sh b e t w e e n
a
pol icy and
its
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ? I n e v e r y
d a y d i s co u r s e
w e
use pol icy (whe n referr ing to decis ion s)
i n s ev er a l s t r i k in g l y d i ff er en t w a y s . S o m et i me s p o l i cy
m e a n s a s t a t e m e n t of i n t e n t i o n . . . O t h er t i mes w e
s p e a k
of
p o l i cy
a s if
it w er e eq u i v a l en t
to
a c tu a l b eh a v i o r
. . . B o t h t h e s e m e a n i n g s o f pol ic y ru le out the poss ib i l i
ty of s t u d y i n g i mp l emen t a t i o n . . . We ca n w o r k n e i t h er
w i t h a d e f i n i t i o n of p o l i cy th a t ex c l u d es a n y i m p l emen t a
t ion
nor one
t ha t i n c l u d es
all
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . " ( W i l
d a v s k y 1 9 7 3 , pp. x i i i - x i v )
T h e r e s e e m s
to be a
r e a l d i l e m m a h e r e : p o l i c y
i n v o l v e s e n d s
a n d
m e a n s
a n d
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
is
t h e e m p l o y m e n t
of the
m e a n s
t o
a c h i e v e
t h e
e n d s ,
y e t p o l i c y
is to be
s o m e t h i n g t h a t
is
s e p a r a t e f r o m
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
H o w i s the
d i s t i n c ti o n b e t w e e n
p o l i c y
a n d
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ,
s o
c r u c i a l
in
i m p l e
m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s i s,
to be
p r e s e r v e d u s i n g
a
m e a n s - e n d t e r m i n o l o g y ?
I n o r d e r t o s o l v e the W i l d a v s k y p r o b l e m a d i s
t i n ct i o n b e t w e e n t w o d i m e n s i o n s in an i m p l e
m e n t a t i o n p h e n o m e n o n has to be i n t r o d u c e d : the
i n t e n t io n a l d i m e n s i o n and the b e h a v i o r a l d i m e n
s i o n t o be d e n o t e d by i and a ( a c t u a l l e v e l )
r e s p e c t i v e l y . If t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n is a c c e p t e d it be
c o m e s p o s si b l e t o d i s t i n g ui s h b e t w e e n i n t e n d e d
e n d s — " e n d ; " — and a c c o m p l i s h e d o r a c t u a l
e n d s — " e n d s
a
" ; m o r e o v e r , a s i m i l a r d i s t i n c t i o n -
m e a n S j a n d m e a n s
a
- ma y be m a d e . T h u s , w e
a r r i v e at D i a g r a m 1.
B e f o r e g o i n g i n t o
t h e
i m p l i c a t i o n s
of the
D i a
g r a m
for th e
W i l d a v s k y p r o b l e m
the key
w o r d s
in
t h e D i a g r a m s h o u l d
b e
d e f i n e d f o r m a l l y :
an
e n d ;
is
a n y b e h a v i o r
o r
s t a t e s u c h
as an
a c t o r
— an
i n d i
v i d u a l
o r an
o r g a n i z e d c o l l e c t i v i t y
-
c o n c e i v e s
it
w h i c h
t h e
a c t o r wants
t o
b r i n g a b o u t .
A
m e a n s ;
is
a n y
b e h a v i o r s u c h
as the
a c t o r p e r c e i v e s
it an d
wants
t o
p e r f o r m
in
o r d e r
t o
a c c o m p l i s h
an end .
W h a t
is
d e n o t e d
by
t h e s e w o r d s , " e n d ; "
and
" m e a n s i "
are
i n t e n t i o n a l o b j e c t s . " M e a n s - e n d
re
l a t i o n s h i p ; " s t a n d s
for a
b e l i e f
on the
p a r t
o f th e
a c t o r ,
t h e
b e l i e f t h a t
if
m e a n s ;
is
a c c o m p l i s h e d
t h e n t h a t w i l l i m p l y
th e
a c c o m p l i s h m e n t
of an
e n d j . S u c h b e l i e f s
in
m e a n s - e n d c o n n e c t i o n s
m ay
i n t e g r a t e
a
n u m b e r
o f
e n d s .
It is
o f t e n p o i n t e d
out
i n p o l i c y a n a l y s i s t h a t
t h e
d i s t in c t i o n b e t w e e n
m e a n s
a n d
e n d s
is a
r e l a t i v e
on e in the
s e n s e t h a t
Diagram 1. Dimensions
of
Implementation
B e h a v i o r L e v e l
( A c t u a l L e v e l )
I n t e n t i o n a l L e v e l
B e h a v i o r L e v e l
( A c t u a l L e v e l )
M e a n S j E n d ;
M e a n s - E n d R e l a t i o n s h i p j
M e a n s , ,
a
R e a l i z e d M e a n s
E n d s „
a
R e a l i z e d End
M e a n s - E n d
R e l a t i o n s h i p
a
I n t e g r a t e d M e a n s - E n d
A c t i o n
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
4/24
20 Jan-Erik Lane
a n en d in i ts t ur n ca n be a me a n s t o a not h er e nd ,
e t c . T h e S i m o n c o n c e p t s o f a m e a n s - e n d c h a i n
a n d o f a m e a n s - e n d h i e r a r c h y c o v e r s u c h p h e
n o m e n a ( S i m o n 1 9 7 6 ) , w h i c h m a y b e a n a l y z e d i n
t he s a me ma n ner in t er ms of t he dis t inct ions in t he
D i a g r a m . T h e w o r d s " e n d
a
" a n d " m e a n s
a
" refer
t o a ct ua l obj ec t s , t o s t a tes or beha v ior s or s imply t o
b e h a v i o r , w h e r e a s a m e a n s - e n d r e l a ti o n s h i p ., i s a n
a ct ua l ca us a l r e la t ions hip bet ween t he end a nd t he
m e a n s , n o t s i m p l y a p e r c e i v e d r e l a t i o n s h i p .
Th us , in or der t o int r oduce a sha r p d is t inct ion
b e t w e e n p o l i c y a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , p o l i c y m a y
b e a p p r o a c h e d a s a c o m b i n a t i o n o f a m e a n s ; , a n d
e n d ; a n d a m e a n s - e n d r e l a t i o n s h i p ; , w h e r e a s i m
p l e m e n t a t i o n m a y b e a n a l y z e d a s a c o m b i n a t i o n
o f m e a n s
a
, a n d e n d
a
a n d a m e a n s - e n d r e l a t i o n s h i -
p
a
. Suppos e a n a ct or ha s a pol icy: t he f a ct t ha t
s om et h ing i s ca l l ed a n "end " s igni f ies tha t t he
a ct or wa nt s t o a ccompl is h t his ( end; ) a nd t he f a ct
t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s c a l l e d a " m e a n s " c o n v e y s t h e
idea t ha t t he a ct or wa nt s t o br ing t his a bout in
or de r t o a r r ive a t s om et hin g e l s e , t he end ( m ea n s ; ) .
The s ucces s of t h is ef f or t depends on t her e being
r ega r dles s of wha t t he a ct or wa nt s or bel ieves a
c o r r e s p o n d i n g e n d
a
t o t he end; a nd a cor r e s pon
d i n g m e a n s
a
t o m e a n s ; a n d t h a t t h e m e a n s
a
is
c o n d u c i v e t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f e n d
a
, i .e. a
m e a n s - e n d r e l a t i o n s h i p . , c o r r e s p o n d s t o a m e a n s -
end r ela t ions hip; . I f t hes e condi t ions a r e f ul f i l l ed
— wh ich i s cer t a inly not a lwa ys the ca s e - t he
p o l i c y h a s b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d . T h e c o n c e p t s i n t r o
d u c e d i n t h e D i a g r a m m a y b e e m p l o y e d t o s t a t e a
f or ma l def in i t ion of t he con cept of s ucces s f ul im p
lement a t ion: l et pol icy obj ect ives = mea ns ; a nd
e n d s ; ,
l et pol icy out put s = mea ns
a
a n d o u t c o m e s
= e n d s
a
; t hen, t he a ccompl is hment f unct ion r equ
ir es t ha t t he f o l lowing r ela t ions a r e s a t i s f ied:
( i ) m e a n s
a
= mea ns ;
( i i ) e n d s
a
= ends; .
Mor eover , t he ca us a l f unct ion r equir es t ha t a
third relat ionship is sat isf ied:
( i i i ) m e a n s - e n d r e a l t i o n s h i p
a
= mea ns -end r ela t ions hip;
T h e c o n c e p t o f s u c c e ss f u l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n m a y
be r ega r ded a s a n idea l cons r uct a s i t ma y be in
s t r ument a l r a t her in det ect ing t he devia t ions f r om
t he t hr ee r equir ement s . I t i s ha r dly l ikely t ha t
out comes wi l l per f ect ly a ccor d wit h t he goa l s or
t ha t t he out p ut s wi ll in ef f ect be a s ins t r umen t a l a s
w a s o r i g i n a l l y h o p e d f o r . T h e c o n c e p t o f s u c c e s s
f ul implement a t ion ma y be j us t a s us ef ul a na lyt i
ca l ly even i f i t i s r ega r ded on ly a s a r egula t ive n ot ion
( N a k a m u r a & S m a l l w o o d 1 9 8 0 ) .
T h i s c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n i n t r o d u c e d i n D i a g r a m 1
s olve s t he Wilda vs k y pr o blem a s pol icy is d i f f er ent
f r o m i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , p o l i c y c o m e s b e f o r e i m p l e
m e n t a t i o n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n m a y b e e v a l u a t e d
in t er ms of t he pol icy a f t er wa r ds . Th e l es s on t o be
lea r ned f r om t his con cept u a l exer c is e i s t ha t wh en
cons id er ing a n y r ef or m or ma j or pol i t ica l dec is ion
i t i s es s ent ia l t o d i f f er ent ia t e bet ween t he s t a t ed
int en t ions a nd wh a t wa s a ct ua l ly put int o pr a ct ice .
I t i s one t hing t o der ive a r t icula t e mea ns -end
cha ins f r om gover nment a l pol icy s our ces a nd
quit e a d i f f er ent t hing t o pin down wha t a ct ua l
m e a n s w e r e e m p l o y e d t o w h a t e f f e c t . I m p l e
m e n t a t i o n a n a l y si s c o v e r s b o t h d i m e n s i o n s , policy
objectives a n d policy practices.
The policy formator and the policy implementor
Th e end s a nd mea ns - t he int ent ion s - o f pol ic ies
a r e f or mula t ed a nd ena ct ed by va r ious k inds of
actors in the pol it ical process . What is an end; or a
mea ns ; i s a n int ent iona l obj ect to s o m e a c t o r ,
w h i c h m e a n s t h a t a n y c o m p l e t e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
pr op os i t ion mu s t speci f y t he a ct or s involved in t he
pr oces s . Thes e a ct or s ma y be div ided int o t wo
s e t s , t h e f o r m a t o r s a n d t h e i m p l e m e n t o r s . T h u s ,
we arrive at:
D E F . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n = F ( P o l i c y , O u t c o m e ,
F o r m a t o r , I m p l e m e n t o r )
The idea i s impl ic i t in implement a l i s t t heor y t ha t
t he a ct or s wh o decide o n pol icy a r e di f f er ent f r om
t he a ct or s t ha t a r e r es pons ible f or t he imple
m e n t a t i o n o f p o l i c y . T h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s
i s bui l t up a r ound a n a s ymmet r ic r e la t ions hip be
t ween t he f or ma t or s of pol icy a nd t he im
plement or s of pol icy . The f or ma t or s ma y not be
the init iators of pol icy; be that as it may, the
t heor y of implement a t ion a s s umes t ha t publ ic
pol icy becomes a l egi t ima t e concer n f or im
plement or s once i t ha s been decided upon in f or
ma l ly def ined wa ys . I t i s a cce pt ed t ha t t he f or ma
t or s a nd t he implement or s ma y be e i t her na t iona l ,
r egiona l or loca l bod ies ( Dia gr a m 2) . Thu s , we
ha ve:
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
5/24
The Concept of Implementation 21
D i a g r a m 2 . Impleme ntation Relationships
I m p l e m e n t o r
For ma t or ——
Na t iona l Level
Reg iona l Level Loca l Level
Na t ion a l Level Ca s e I
Cas e II Case III
Regiona l Level
Case IV
Case
Loca l Level
Case VI
Th e s t a nda r d dis t inct ion bet we en a pol icy f or
ma t or a nd ena ct or on t he one ha nd a nd a pol icy
implement or on t he ot her i s r e la t ed t o a n a s s ump
t ion a b out a t ypica l pa t t er n o f t he div is ion of a u
t hor i t y . I t s ee ms coun t er int ui t ive t o a dmit t he pos
s ibi l i t y t ha t r egiona l or loca l gover nment s ma y s et
t he dir ect ives which t he na t iona l gover nment i s
ins t r uct ed t o implement .
I t mus t , however , be empha s ized t ha t t her e a r e
t wo di f f er ent pr oblems involved her e , which
s hould be kept s epa r a t e: ( i ) whet her a n or ga niza
t iona l uni t p la ced a t a lowe r l evel could eve r be t he
f or ma t or of a pol icy t o be imp leme nt ed by a n
or ga niza t iona l uni t p la ced a t a h igher l evel , a nd
( i i ) whet her a ut hor i t y i s t he t ypica l or neces s a r y
r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e f o r m a t o r a n d t h e i m
plement or , which could be e i t her of t hes e k inds of
uni t s . The dis t inct ions int r oduced in Dia gr a m 2
imply t ha t t he a ns wer t o t he f i r s t pr oblem is nega
t ive , but t he s econd pr oblem a ppea r s t o be a n
o p e n q u e s t i o n .
I t i s of t en a s s umed t ha t t he concept of imple
me nt a t io n impl ies a con cep t of a ut hor i t y , a s t he
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s i s m o d e l e d a s a o n e - w a y
int er a ct ion in which one s et of a ct or s communi
ca t es t o a not her s et of a ct or s t ha t s omet hing i s t o
be do ne — dir ect ives f or a ct ion which t he la t t er
g r o u p o b e y . A c t u a l l y , t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n r e l a
t ion a ppea r s t o s a t i s f y s ome of t he cha r a ct er is t ics
of a ut hor i t y s t r uct ur es a s li s t ed by H. Eck s t e in a nd
T. R. Gurr in their Patterns of Authority ( 1975) :
( a ) a s y m m e t r y
( b) s uper or dina t ion or s ubor dina t ion
( c) t he comm unic a t ion of or der s or dir ect ives f or
a ct ion ( Ecks t e in & Gur r 1975: 22-3) .
Wher ea s ( a ) a nd ( c) a r e cer t a inly pr es ent in t he
implement a t ion r e la t ions hip i t i s doubt f ul
whet her ( b) i s a necessary e l e m e n t i n i m p l e m e n t a
t i o n .
O b v i o u s l y , a gr e a t d e a l o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
l i t er a t ur e ha s f ocus s ed upo n t he ca pa ci ty of pol icy
ma ker s in f or ma l ly s peci f ied a ut hor i t y s t r uct ur es
t o ha ve s ubor dina t e a ct or s implement r ef or ms
( R o d g e r s a n d B u l l o c k 1 9 7 2 a n d 1 9 7 6 , M u r p h y
1 9 7 1 , M c L a u g h l i n 1 9 7 5 , J o n e s 1 9 7 5 ) . M o r e o v e r ,
t he r e la t ions hip bet ween f or ma t or a nd im
p l e m e n t o r h a s b e e n m o d e l e d o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e
a u t o n o m y o f t h e i m p l e m e n t o r . E . F ar r ar , J . D e -
Sa nct i s a nd D . K. Coh en dis t inguis h be t we en
t h r e e m o d e l s o f t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i n t e r a c t i o n :
( a ) a cent er - t o-per ip her y pr o ces s
(b) a bi- later al proc ess
( c) a mul t i - l a t er a l pr oces s ( pp. 1 -2 )
T h e c e n t e r - t o - p e r i p h e r y m o d e l c o m e s c l o s e t o
Wilda vs ky' s cont r ol model ( Wilda vs ky 1977, p .
105—107) , a s bot h include e l ement s of a s imple
r a t iona l decis ion model :
( i ) u n a m b i g u o u s p o l i c y g o a l s
( i i ) c l ea r a nd pr edict a ble t echn ology, i . e . , t he
mea ns -end hier a r chy i s int egr a t ed a nd r el i
a ble
( i i i ) s imple enf or cement r ules bet ween t he f or
ma t or a nd ena ct or of pol icy ( s uper or dina t e)
a n d t h e i m p l e m e n t o r ( s u b o r d i n a t e ) .
Th e s eve r e cr i t ic i s m l evel l ed a t t he a ppl ica bi li t y of
a s imp le r a t iona l decis ion mode l t o or ga niza t iona l
c h o i c e ( M a r c h & S i m o n , C y e r t & M a r c h , L i n d -
blom) ha s l ed, na t ur a l ly , t o s chola r s f or mula t ing
a l t e r n a t i v e m o d e l s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e a u
t h o r s o f " A l t e r n a t i v e C o n c e p t i o n s o f I m p l e
m e n t a t i o n " c o n t r a s t t h e c e n t e r - t o - p e r i p h e r y m o
del wi t h a mul t i - l a t er a l model , which ha ppens t o
coincide wit h Wilda vs ky' s int er a ct ion model ( Wil
d a v s k y 1 9 7 8 , p p . 1 0 7 - 1 0 8 ) :
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
6/24
2 2 J a n - E r i k L a n e
" E r o mt h e ce n t er , t h e p er ip h er y i s a co l l ec t i o n o f h u r d l es
a n d o b s t a c l e s b l o ck i n g t h e f ed er a l g o v er n men t ' s p r o
g r a ms , p l a n s a n d p r i o r i t i e s . B u t a t t h e p er i p h er y , t h e
cen t er ' s p r o g r a ms , p l a n s , a n d p r i o r i t i e s a r e a mi n o r d i
s t r a c t i o n i n a r i o t o f co m p et i n g co n cer n s : i mm ed i a t e
a g r eemen t s , r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , a n d o n - g o i n g r e l a t i o n s
h i p s . A t t h e cen t er , t h e p r o g r a ms , p l a n s , a n d p r i o r i t i e s
a r e t h e ch i e f co n cer n , b u t a t t h e p er i p h er y , t h ey a r e a
d u l l b a ck g r o u n d n o i s e w h i ch ca p t u r es a t t en t i o n i n t er
mi t t en t l y , i f a t a l l . A t t h e cen t er , t h e i mp l emen t a t i o n
p r o g r a m ma y b e v i e w ed a s a l in ea r o r b i - l a t er a l p r o ces s ;
b u t a t t h e l o ca l l ev e l , t h e i mp l emen t a t i o n p r o ces s i s
ex p e r i en ced d a i l y a s a mu l t i - la t er a l p r o c es s " ( F a r r a r
e t a l , p p . 1 2 - 1 3 )
I t ma y be point ed out t ha t t he bi - l a t er a l model i s
s imply a combina t in of f ea t ur es f r om bot h t hes e
t w o m o r e b as i c m o d e l s - t h e c e n t e r - p e r i p h e r y
on e a nd t he mul t i l a ter ia l md del s . Th e exis t en ce of
v a r i o u s m o d e l s o f t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s
c a n n o t b e t a k e n a s c o n c l u s i v e e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e
c o n c e p t o f i m p l m e n t a t i o n i s o b s c u r e ; i t m e r e
ly indic a t es t ha t t her e i s a mul t ipl ic i t y of im ple
m e n t a t i o n p h e n o m e n a w h i c h a w a i t m o r e e l a b o r a
t e a t t empt s t o cons t r uct a t ypology.
Yet , i t s hould be s t r ongly empha s ized t ha t t he
r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n p o l i c y f o r m a t o r a n d p o l i c y i m p
l e m e n t o r m a y a t l e a st th e o r e t i c a ll y b e m o d e l e d
wit hou t a ut hor i t y a s t he dis tinct ive ch a r a ct er is t ic
in t he r e la t ions hip. R. E . E lmo r e dis t ingu s ihes
b e t w e e n f o u r m o d e l s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n — t h e
s y s t e m s m a n a g e m e n t m o d e l , t h e b u r e a u c r a t i c
p r o c e s s m o d e l , t h e o r g a n i z a ti o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t
model a nd t he conf l ict a nd ba r ga ining model ( El
m o r e 1 9 7 8 ) . In th e t w o l a st m e n t i o n e d m o d e l s
b a r g a i n i n g , r e c i p r o c a l i n t e r a c t i o n a n d e x c h a n g e
a r e r ecogn ized a s pos s ible mech a n is ms f or t he
a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f o b j e c t i v e s . A n a t i o n a l g o v e r n
m e n t m a y a p p r o a c h a l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t i m p l e
m e n t i n g a n a t i o n a l p o l i c y not only on t he ba s is of
w h a t e v e r a u t h o r it y it m a y c o m m a n d ; c l e a r l y ,
o t h e r m e c h a n i s m s f o r t h e s e c u r i n g o f a g r e e m e n t
a nd s uppor t on t he pa r t of t he loca l gover nment
a r e b o t h r e le v a n t a n d f r e q u e n t . E x c h a n g e s e e m s
t o be pa r t icula r ly r e l eva nt f or t he implement a t ion
of int er r egiona l a nd int er loca l pol ic ies a r r ived a t
b y m e a n s o f v o l u n t a r y c o o r d i n a t i o n .
T h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s i n v o l v e s a n u m b e r
of pa r t ic ipa nt s ; a r e s ome mor e impor t a nt t ha n
ot he r s ? R. F . E lmo r e a r gues convin cing ly t ha t
m u c h o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s i s h a s f o c u s s e d
upon t hos e pla ced high up in t he publ ic a ut hor i t y
s t r u c t u r e , w h e r e a s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s i s a c t u
a l ly dema nds t ha t a t t ent ion be f ocus s ed upon t ho
s e r es pons ible f or t he pr oduct ion.of out comes on a
da y- t o-da y ba s is . The cr ucia l nexus in t he imple-
ment ion pr oces s i s t he beha vior of t hos e who a r e
pla ced mos t c los ely t o t he pr oduct ion of out put s ,
i . e . t hos e pla ced f a r down in t he hier a r chy. E lmo
re argues:
" R eca l l t h e l o g i c o f b a ck w a r d ma p p i n g o u t l i n ed ea r l i er :
B eg i n w i t h a co n cr e t e s t a t em en t o f t h e b eh a v i o r t h a t
cr ea t es t h e o cca s i o n f o r a p o l i cy i n t er v en t i o n , d es cr i b e a
s e t o f o r g a n i za t i o n a l o p er a t i o n s t h a t ca n b e ex p ec t ed t o
a f f ec t t h a t b eh a v i o r , d es cr i b e t h e ex p ec t ed e f f ec t o f
t h o s e o p er a t i o n s , a n d t h en d e s cr i b e f o r ea ch l ev e l o f t h e
i mp l emen t a t i o n p r o ces s w h a t e f f ec t o n e w o u l d ex p ec t
t h a t l ev e l t o h a v e o n t h e t a r g e t b eh a v i o r a n d w h a t r e
sources are required for that effect to occur . The advan
t a g e o f b eg i n n i n g w i t h a co n c r e t e b eh a v i o r a n d f o cu s s i n g
on the del ivery - l evel mech an ism for affect ing that
behavior is that i t focusses attention on reciprocity and
d i s cr e t i o n . " ( E l m o r e 1 9 8 2 : 2 8 )
Ev en i f a gr ea t dea l of imp leme nt a t io n a na lys i s
ha s f ocus s ed s in glem ind edly on t he f or ma t or of
pol icy a nd even i f a na ive a s s ump t ion a bo ut t he
pos s ibi l i t y of h ier a r chica l cont r ol ha s pla gued
much of publ ic a dmin is t r a t ion - a s Elm or e s t a t es
— it is hardly fruitful to reve rse th ese e xag ger a
t ions in t he oppos i t e d ir ect ion ma king t he imple
ment or t he s ole cr ucia l pa r t y t o t he implement a
t ion ga me. I t i s not c l ea r wha t i s mea nt by a
"beha vior t ha t cr ea t es t he occa s ion f or a pol icy
int er vent ion"; t her e i s pr a ct ica l ly no l imit t o t he
number of ins t a nces of s uch beha vior t ha t t he
s chola r ma y f ind, but ho w a r e t hey t o be s e l ect ed i f
one ca nnot s t udy t hem a l l . A neces s a r y compo
nent of a n imp leme nt a t i on p er s pect ive i s t he en
a ct ment of a s et of goa l s by a n ena ct or or , a s
m e n t i o n e d i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n , a f o r m a t o r . T h e
goa l s of t he f or ma t or ma y not be pr ecis e or c l ea r ,
a nd t hey ma y cha nge over t ime or be in conf l ict
wit h t he goa l s of t he implement or . Yet , wi t hout
inclus ion of t he f or ma t or a nd t he goa l s ena ct ed t he
implement a t ion ha s no det er mina t e f ocus . I f t her e
a r e no goa l s ena ct ed, how could t her e by a nyt hing
t o b e i m p l e m e n t e d ?
The initiator and the alternatives
Two int r ins ic a s pect s of t he concept of imple
ment a t ion ha ve r ema ined impl ic i t in t he a na lys i s
s o fa r . Pol icy f or mula t ion ma y n ot be pol icy in i tia
t ion. I t is not enoug h t o poin t out t he f or ma t or a nd
e n a c t o r o f a p o l i c y ; a c o m p l e t e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
pr opos i t ion ha s t o g ive t he a ct or who in i t ia t ed t he
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
7/24
The Concept of Implementation 23
pol icy — i t s end s or mea n s or bot h: t he
initiator.
Wh ile a s ha r p s epa r a t ion be t we en t he s et of a ct or s
t ha t cons t i t ut es t he f or ma t or of pol icy a nd t he s et
of a ct or s t ha t compr is es t he implement or of pol icy
a ppea r s t o be a concept ua l neces s i t y , t h is d is t inc
t ion does not a pply t o t he s et of in i t ia t ing a ct or s .
The in i t ia t or ma y be t he f or mula t or , t he ena ct or
or t he implement or , t hough i t mus t not be t he ca s e
t ha t t he in i t ia t or i s t he f or ma t or w ho i s t he imple
m e n t o r . B a s i c t o t h e i d e a o f a n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
p r o c e s s is t h e in t e r a c t io n p h e n o m e n a b e t w e e n t w o
dis t inct s et s of a ct or s , t he one s et communica t ing
dir ect ive s a s t o wha t i s t o be do ne a nd how is t o be
d o n e t o t h e o t h e r s e t . I n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s
s es wher e a ut hor i t y s t r uct ur es a r e involved i t ma y
f r equent ly be t he ca s e t ha t t he lower l evel imple
ment or i s a l s o t he in i t ia t or , t he f ina l pol icy being
decided upon by t he f or ma t or or ena ct or pla ced a t
a h i g h e r l e v e l . A c t u a l l y , i n t e r r e st i n g i m p l e m e n t a
t i o n p h e n o m e n a o f t e n t a k e p l a c e w h e n t h e i n i t i
a t o r a n d t h e i m p l e m e n t o r c o i n c i d e , b e c a u s e a t
l ea s t one condi t ion f or s uces s f ul implement a t ion i s
f ul f i l l ed, v iz . mot iva t ion on t he pa r t of t he imple-
m e n t o r s . H o w e v e r , t h e f a c t t h a t t h e i m p l e m e n t o r
ha s ha d a n oppor t uni t y t o inf luence t he des ign of
pol icy does not imply t ha t t he pol icy ena ct ed wi l l
be t he one in i t ia t ed. The dis t inct ion bet ween pol i
c ies t ha t in i t ia t ed f r om t he implement or a nd pol i
c i e s th a t h a v e s i m p l y b e e n c o m m u n i c a t e d w i t h o u t
pa r t ic ipa t ion f or execut ion i s a va l id one a s i t
d i s c r i m i n a t e s b e t w e e n p o l i c i e s .
T h e c o n c e p t o f alternative is as basic to pol icy as
i s t he concept of a n obj ect ive . Wha t ever def in i
t ion of "publ ic pol icy" i s em plo yed t he t heo r et ica l
a s s umpt ion i s t ha t pol icy-ma ker s f a ce choices as to
bot h ends a nd mea ns . I f a pol icy compr is es mor e
t ha n on e end t her e mus t be a s e l ect ion b et w een a
number of a l t er na t ives . The pr oces s of det er mi
ning end s a nd mea ns i s of t en a s t r uggle over a
va r iet y of a l t er na t ives , s t a t es or beha vior s t ha t
ca nnot exis t a t t he s a me t ime. The r a t iona l i t y of
t he pr oces s of a r r iv ing a t t he pol icy t o be imple
ment ed i s a f unct ion of how t he int ent iona l s ide of
t he pol icy i s def ined; i f t he mea ns a nd ends of t he
pol icy a r e chos en under t he r es t r ict ion:
( i ) P ( ends : = en ds
a
) 1= .9
( i i ) P m e a n S j =
means
a
)
= 7 9
( i i i) P ( m e a n s - e n d r e l a t io n , = m e a n s - e n d r e l a
tion.,) = .9
t hen t he pol icy ha s a s ubs t a nt ia l cha n ce ( .73) of
s ucces s . I f , on t he cont r a r y, goa l s a r e chos en t ha t
are not feas ible or at least not feas ible under the
s elect io n of a cer t a in s et of mea ns , or i f me a n s a r e
s elect ed t ha t bea r l i t t l e r es embla nce of t he a ct ua l
out put s employed, t hen t her e i s l i t t l e pr oba bi l i t y
t ha t t he pol icy wi l l meet wi t h s ucces s f ul imple
m e n t a t i o n . P o l i c i e s m a y b e c o m p a r e d u s i n g t h e
s i m p l e s c h e m a i n t r o d u c e d a b o v e ; a p o l ic y
P
x
m a y
be decla r ed a s mor e r a t iona l tha n a pol icy P
2
if
bot h pol ic ies, ha ve t he s a me g oa l f unct ion — ( i ) —
but pol icy P dis pla ys a h igher pr oba bi l i ty va lue on
t he me a n s f unct ion - ( i i ) — or t he mea n s -en d
f unct ion — ( i i i ) — a nd s o o n.
T h e a u t o n o m y o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s e s t a
king pla ce in a ut hor i t y s t r uct ur es is a f unct ion of
h o w n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d t h e p o l i c y t o b e i m p l e m e n
t ed i s . Pol ic ie s a r e s et s of d ir ect ives a s t o end s a n d
mea ns of a ct ion t o be ca r r ied out ; t he f or ma t or
ma y s t a t e t he ends t ha t a r e t o be a chieved u na m bi
g u o u s l y b u t l e a v e t h e i m p l e m e n t o r s o m e degree of
freedom a s t o t he choic e bet w een t he me a ns t o be
e m p l o y e d , . o r t h e f o r m a t o r m a y o n l y l a y d o w n
s om e gener a l d ir ect ives a s t o wha t is t o be a cco mp
l i s hed l ea ving t he choice of mea ns t o t he imple
ment or ent ir e ly . The mor e a l t er na t ives t ha t a r e
not r uled out by t he f or mula t or t he gr ea t er t he
a u t o n o m y o f th e i m p l e m e n t o r . I n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
pr oces s es t ha t r es ul t f r om excha nge or ba r ga ining
t he implement or a nd t he f or ma t or a r r ive a t a n
under s t a nding of wha t ends a r e t o be pur s ued a nd
wha t mea n s a r e con s ider e d sui t a ble cons t r a inin g
t he f ur t her pr oces s of implment a t ion. Of t en t he
implement or ha s no f r eedom of a ct ion wit h r ega r d
t o t he en ds of t he pol icy , but t he implem ent or m a y .
c o m m a n d s o m e a u t o n o m y c o n c e r n i n g t h e s e l e c
t i o n o f m e a n s , i . e . , t h e i m p l e m e n t o r m a k e s c h o
ices wi t h r ega r d t o a l t er na t ives for t he a cco mpl is h
m e n t o f p o l i c y o b j e c t i v e s . T h e i m p l e m e n t o r m a y
f a ce het er onomy in r e la t ion t o pol icy obj ect ives
but a ut on om y wit h r ega rd t o me a n s . If t he im ple
m e n t o r w e r e t o h a v e a u t o n o m y a s r e g a r d s b o t h
e n d s a n d m e a n s t h e f o r m a t o r w o u l d b e c o m e s u
per f luous .
Succes s f ul implement a t ion r ef er s not only t o a
s i t ua t ion w her e t he a l t er na t ives in i t ia l ly def ined —
t he ends ; a nd t he mea ns , — cor r es pon d t o a ct ua l
o u t p u t s a n d o u t c o m e s - t h e e n d s
a
a n d t h e m e a -
n s
a
. I t i s not eno ugh t ha t t he a ccom pl is hm ent
f unct ion i s sa t i s f ied; s ucces s f ul implem ent a t io n a l
s o neces s a r i ly impl ies t ha t t he mea ns employed
br ing a bout t he ends des ir ed, i . e . , t he ca us a l f unc
t ion i s t he s econd impor t a nt r es t r ict ion t ha t ha s t o
be me t . L et us cons id er wha t . th is r equir em ent
impl ies a nd t he di f f icul t ies t ha t a r e involved.
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
8/24
24 Jan-Erik Lane
The Concept of mJDutcpme
T h e c o n c e p t o f o u t c o m e h a s b e e n m u c h d e b a t e d i n
t he pol icy l i t er a t ur e , t he pr oblem being t he def in i
t i o n o f th e d i s ti n c t i o n b e t w e e n o u t p u t s a n d o u t c o
m e s ( D y e 1 9 6 6 , D y e 1 9 7 6 ) . L e t u t l o o k
a t a s olut ion t o t his pr ob lem s ug ges t ed by F. L evy ,
A . M el t s n er a nd A. W ilda 'vs ky in their Urban
Outcomes ( 1974) in or der t o get s om e per s pe ct ive
on t he di f f icul t ies involved; t hes e concept ua l pr o
b l e m s a r e , o f c o u r s e , e x t r e m e l y r e l e v a n t t o t h e
c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a s it h a s " o u t c o m e " a s
o n e o f i ts k e y w o r d s . L e v y , M e l t s n e r a n d W i l d a v s -
ky ident i f y t wo ba s ic pr oper t ies of a n out come:
( a ) c o n s e q u e n c e o f a n o u t p u t
( b ) v a l u a t i o n ( p p . 1 - 2 3 )
The f ir s t pr oper t y s eems wel l ent r enched in pol icy
a n a l y s i s , a s t h e r e i s a g r e e m e n t a m o n g s c h o l a r s
t h a t o u t c o m e s s h o u l d n o t b e m i x e d u p w i t h g o
ver nment a l out put s . Ther e r ema ins t he di f f icul t
pr oblem of f inding pos i t ive cr i t er ia f or t he ident i
f ica t ion of t he
consequences of
out put s . Wha t i s a
c o n s e q u e n c e o f a n o u t p u t ? T h e a u t h o r s o f
Urban
Outcomes
ha s t en t o qua l i f y t heir def in i t ion of
" o u t c o m e " a s t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f o u t p u t b y r e m o
v i n g u l t i m a t e c o n s e q u e n c e s :
"Just as outcomes are seen as the near consequences of
outpu ts, so also do we want to explain ou tcomes by their
most imm ediate causes. We cling to close causation part
ly because more distant causes are difficult to disentang-
le ."
(p . 4 )
A f a ir int er pr et a t ion of t h is pa s s a g e ma y look
s o m e t h i n g l i k e :
D E F . " Y i s a n o u t c o m e o f X "
=
d e f
. " Y i s c a u s e d b y o u t p u t X , w h i c h p r e c e d e s Y
wit hin t ime s pa n T"
T h e r e a r e t w o m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s i n v o l v e d
in t he pr opos ed def in i t ion t ha t t he a ut hor s do not
s olve . Fir s t ly , t her e i s t he va gue expr es s ions "nea r
c o n s e q u e n c e " a n d " c l o s e c a u s a t i o n " , w h i c h c o u l d
b e s p e c i f i e d i n a n y n u m b e r o f
w a y s ;
i . e . , t he va lu es
of t he va r ia ble T a r e not s peci f ied in t he d ef in i t io n.
S e c o n d l y , t w o v a l i d q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g a n
o u t p u t m a y b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d :
( i ) Wh a t wer e t he out com es ( ef f ect s ) of a n
o u t p u t ? ( T h e c a u s a t i o n p r o b l e m )
( i i ) Wh a t ou t com es a r e r e l eva nt t o t he eva lua
t i o n o f a p o l i c y ? ( T h e r e l e v a n c e p r o b l e m ) .
Th e ca u s a t ion f ocus i s .cer t a inly not ident ica l , wi t h
t he r e l eva nce per s pect ive . A pol icy P
t
m a y
t hr ough i t s out put s , r es ul t in out comes Oi in t he
s en s e t ha t Pi i s s om eh ow ca us a l ly r e la t ed t o Oi ;
t his i s not t he pla ce t o o pe n u p a dis cus s ion a bout
t he va r ious mea nings of "ca us a t ion"; s uf f ice i t t o
her e not e t ha t a ny s t r ict concept ion of ca us a t ion
would a dmit t he pos s ibi l i t y t ha t Pi i s a t t ended by
o u t c o m e s
—
0
2
- that are not to be attr ibuted to
Pi . Pi ma y f a i l t o ca us e a ny out comes or P] ma y
f a il t o a chieve i t s obj e ct ive s beca us e ot her o per a
t ing f or ces ca us e out comes t ha t a r e count er pr o
duct ive t o Pj . I n a ny ca s e we ma y r ecognize t wo
s et s of out comes :
( i) State s of affa irs that we re cau sed by Pi =
O i
( i i) State s of affa irs that we re not cau sed by Pi
but f o l low Pi in t ime a nd a r e r e l eva nt t o Pi
= o
2
.
Clea r ly , implement a t ion a na lys i s cover s bot h t y
p e s o f o u t c o m e s , O i a n d 0
2
. T h u s t h e o u t c o m e s
include not only t he ef f ect s of out put s .
Wit h r ega r d t o t he ca us a l int er pr et a t ion of
o u t c o m e s t h e r e r e m a i n s a f o r m i d a b l e p r o b l e m a s
t he implement a t ion a na lys t us ing t he ca us a l de
f in i t ion ha s t o come up wit h oper a t ion a l cr i t er ia of
ca us a l ef f ect ivene s s of out p ut s . I t i s v i ta l t o s epa r a
t e t he ques t ion of pol icy a ccompl is hment f r om t he
que s t ion of ca us a l ef f ect iv ene s s , a s t he a chiev e
m e n t o f a p o l i c y o b j e c t i v e m a y d e p e n d u p o n o t h e r
f a ct or s t ha n s imply t he out put s pr oduced in t he
pol icy . A pol icy P
t
m a y b e a t t e n d e d b y a n u m b e r
of out comes r e l eva nt f or t he a ccompl is hment of i t s
o b j e c t i v e s , t h o u g h t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n P
t
a nd
t h e s e o u t c o m e s 0
2
ma y be a s pur ious on e. Th e
r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n policy effectiveness a n d policy
accomplishment i s v i s ua l ized in Dia gr a m 3.
Let me begin wit h t ype I , t he occur r ence of pol icy
ef f ect ivenes s a nd pol icy f a i lur e , which on t he s ur
f a ce a ppea r s a s cont r a dict or y. A pol icy Pi ma y be
f o l l o w e d b y o u t c o m e s o f t y p e O i , i . e . , t h e p o l i c y
ma y dis pla y ef f ect ivenes s , yet t h is ma y not be
enough. The pol icy Pi ma y r equir e f or t he a c
compl is hment of i t s obj ect ives out comes t ha t a r e
di f f er ent f r om Oi . This i s exa ct ly wha t ha ppens
w h e n a p o l ic y h a s c o n s e q u e n c e s o t h e r t h a n t h o s e
i n t e n d e d . N o n - i n t e n d e d o r u n i n t e n d e d o u t c o m e s
a r e a s r e l eva nt t o implement a t ion a na lys t s a s a r e
i n t e n d e d o u t c o m e s . A p o l i c y m a y b e e ff e c t iv e a n d
a c h i e v e c e r t a i n o u t c o m e s , b u t t h e s e m a y b e t h e
wr o ng on es . Fr o m t he f a ct tha t a pol icy Pi ha s
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
9/24
T h e C o n c e p t o f I m p l e m e n t a t i o n 2 5
Diagram
3 .
The Causal and Accomplishment Functions
A c c o m p l i s h m e n t
Ca us a l i t y —
Pol icy Fa i lur e
P o l i c y S u c c e s s
P o l i c y E f f e c t i v e n e s s
I
II
P o l i c y I n e f f e c t i v e n e s s
III
I V
o u t c o m e s o f t y p e O i e v e n i f t h e s e w e r e u n i n t e n
ded it does not fol low logical ly that Pi is a fa ilure.
This could ver y wel l be t r ue, but i t does not ha ve
t o be: a pol icy ma y be det r iment a l t o i t s own
p u r p o s e s b y b r i n g i n g a b o u t c o n s e q u e n c e s t h a t a r e
c o n t r a d i c t o r y t o t h e o u t c o m e s t h a t w o u l d a c c o m p
l i s h t he obj ect ives of t he pol icy . Such s e l f -def ea
t ing pol ic ies a r e by no mea n s int er es t ing only f r om
a t heor et ica l point of v iew. However , in a ddi t ion
t o O j o u t c o m e s a p o l ic y P ] m a y h a v e o u t c o m e s o f
t ype 0
2
which s a t i s f y t he obj ect ives of Pj . The
l e s s o n i s , o f c o u r s e , t h a t u n i n t e n d e d o u t c o m e s a r e
not a lwa ys dys f unct iona l .
When a pol icy i s ef f ect ive a nd i t s obj ect ives a r e
a cco mp l is hed w e ha ve t ype I I ; a ga in , it s hould be
p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e a c c o m p l i s h m e n t m a y b e d u e
t o t he occur r ence of t ype 0
2
o u t c o m e s at t h e s a m e
t i m e a s t y p e O i o u t c o m e s o c c u r b e c a u s e th e s e t w o
t ypes of out comes ma y not be cont r a dict or y or
o p p o s e d t o e a c h o t h e r . T h e y m a y e v e n b e c o m p l e
ment a r y or s ubs t i t ut a ble not t o ment ion neut r a l
vis a vis each other. Thus, it is apparent that the
ca s e in whic h a pol icy is ef f ect ive a nd by means of
i t s ef f ect iven es s br ings a bout t he a ccom pl is hm ent
of i ts obj e ct ive s is only on e a m on g s ever a l pos s ible
t ypes of combina t ion of t he ca us a l a nd t he r e l e
va nt int er pr et a t ions of t he concept of out comes .
Types I I I a nd I V des er ve a br ief comment : t ha t
pol ic ies which a r e inef f ect ive a l s o ha ppen t o s pel l
f a i lur e comes a s no s ur pr is e t o t he pol icy a na lys t
( t ype I I I ) , but t he occur r ence of bot h inef f ect ive
nes s a nd pol icy s ucces s ( t ype I V) ma y r equir e a n
e x p l a n a t i o n . A p o l i c y P j , l a c k i n g o u t c o m e s o f t y
pe Oi ma y, in s pi t e of t h is , ha ve out comes of t ype
0
2
, which a ccompl is h t he obj ect ives of P] , Pol i
c ies ma y be int r oduced a t t he r ight t ime in t he
r ight s et t ing; t hey ma y cont r ibut e l i t t l e t hem s elves
t o t heir s ucces s , yet t hey f ind t heir obj ect ives
r ea l ized ( t ype I V) . To put i t t he ot her wa y
around: it does not fol low from the fact that the
analyst may establ ish that a pol icy is successful ,
that the analyst may attr ibute the success of the
o p e r a t i o n t o t h e p o l i c y T h e im p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a
lyst mus t be a wa r e of bot h set s of out com es - Oi
& 0
2
— in order to carry out two essent ia l tasks of
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s i s :
( a ) t o eva lua t e t he ext en t of goa l a chi evem ent
( b) t o unr a vel pa t t er ns of ca us a l ef f ect iven es s
The idea that valuat ion is an intr ins ic part of an
o u t c o m e i s v e r y m u c h e m p h a s i z e d b y L e v y , M e l t -
s ner a nd Wilda vs ky:
" O u r co n cep t o f o u t c o m es i n c l u d es a s u b j ec t i v e e l em en t
o f ev a l u a t i o n b eca u s e i t i n v o l v es h u ma n p r e f er en ces -
l i k es ,
d is l ikes , pain and p leasure. In th is book we are the
evaluators , and we s tudy the d is tr ibution of outputs
p r ec i s e l y i n o r d er t o ma k e n o r ma t i v e j u d g emen t s . "
( p p. 2 - 3 )
T h i s e m p h a s i s o n " n o r m a t i v e j u d g e m e n t s " m a y
b e q u e s t i o n e d . T h e f a c t t h a t o u t c o m e s i n c l u d e
s u b j e c t i v e p h e n o m e n a l i k e p e o p l e s ' e m o t i o n a l
s t a t es does not imply t ha t t he concept of a n out co
m e i s a n o r m a t i v e c o n c e p t . A c t u a l l y , i m p l e m e n t a
t ion would be com e a s ubs p ecies of et hics ( or
es t het ics ) i f out come wer e not t o be a des cr ipt ive
concept . At l ea s t in t heor y, i t s eems a s i f t he
out comes of a pol icy ca n be des cr ibed a nd a na ly
zed in a va lue-neut r a l f a s hion.
Time
B y d e v e l o p i n g t h e o r i g i n a l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n f o r
mula :
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n = F ( I n t e n t i o n , O u t p u t ,
O u t c o m e )
we a r e now a t a s t a ge wher e a mor e power f ul a nd
c o m p l e x c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n m a y b e i n tr o
duced:
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
10/24
2 6 J a n - E r i k L a n e
D E F . I m p = F ( P o l i c y , O u t c o m e , F o r m a t o r , I m p -
l e m e n t o r , I n i t i a t o r , T i m e )
Th e r equir e men t of a t ime va r ia ble in a com ple t e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o p o s i t i o n i s b a s e d o n t h e f o l l o
w i n g a r g u m e n t : s u p p o s e o n e a s k s a b o u t a p o l i c y
P j w h e t h e r i t h a s b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d ; t h e n o n e
n e e d s i n f o r m a t io n a b o u t t h e e x te n t o f c o n g r u e n c e
b e t w e e n p o l i c y o b j e c t i v e s a n d o u t c o m e s , b u t t h a t
i s not enough. I n a ddi t ion, t her e ha s t o be a deci
s ion concer ning t he t ime s pa n t ha t ma y pa s s bef o
r e a n implementation judgement can be said to be
nei t her pr ema t ur e nor bela t ed: when i s i t a ppr op
r iat e t o a s k a bout a pr ogr a m w het he r i t s obj e ct ive s
h a v e b e e n r e a l i z e d ?
Ob vio us ly , d if f er ent k inds of pr ogr a ms r equir e
di f f er ent t ime s pa ns f or t heir obj ect ives t o be a c
com pl is hed , but t he pr oblem is t o s peci f y t he cr i te
r ia b y w h i c h t o m a k e t h e d e c i s i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e
a ppr opr ia t e t ime s pa n. Of t en pol ic ies ha ve t ime
la gs a t t a ched t o t hem s t a t ing of f ic ia l ly a pr e dict ion
o f w h e n t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e p o l i c y c a n b e
j u d g e d c o m p l e t e d . O f c o u r s e , th e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
a na lys t m a y s ta r t f r om s uch t ime decis i on s , but t he
a na lys t need not do s o a nd ma y f ind i t a ppr opr ia t e
t o inquir e int o t he ext ent of goa l a chievement
bef o r e or a f t er s uch of fic ia l ly s t ipula t ed t im e int er
v a l s .
W ha t mu s t be emph a s ize d i s t ha t i t ma y ma ke
a d i f f e r e n c e w h e n a n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n j u d g e m e n t
i s s t a t e d ; t i m e m a y b e c o n d u c i v e t o t h e a c c o m p
l i s h m e n t o f o b j e c t i v e s m e a n i n g t h a t a n i m p l e
ment a t ion a na lys i s t oda y ma y di f f er f r om one con
duct ed t omor r ow; or a pol icy t ha t us ed t o be s uc
ces s f ul ma y be l es s wel l implement ed la t er on.
A n y j udge me nt a bou t t he . ext en t of s ucces s f ul
implement a t ion mus t s peci f y in a ddi t ion t o t he
p o l i c y , t h e a c t o r s a n d t h e o u t c o m e s i n v o l v e d , t h e
t ime s pa n t ha t ha s pa s s ed s ince t he pol icy wa s
ena ct ed, a s wel l a s t he impl ica t ions of va r ious t ime
int er va l s f or t he pot ent ia l
implementability
of the
p o l i c y .
This i s t he
statics
o f t h e c o n c e p t of i m p l e m e n t a
t i o n . W h e n w e m o v e t o t h e
dynamics
o f i m p l e
m e n t a t i o n t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s s e e m t o
cr op up ever ywher e. I t a ppea r s t ha t i t i s ea s ier t o
i n t r o d u c e a fo r m a l c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
t ha n t o l a y down cr i t er ia f or wha t pol icy imple
ment a t ion mea ns in a ct ua l pr a ct ice or how t he
e v o l v i n g i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s i s t o b e m o d e
l ed. I wi l l fi rs t point out a f ew ma j or me t ho dol ogi
ca l d i f f icul t ies inher ent in t he a ppl ica t ion of t he
c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .
The dyna mic a s pect of implement a t ion
I t does not f o l low t ha t implement a t ion exis t s j us t
beca us e i t i s pos s ible t o s t a t e wha t imp lemen t a t ion
wou ld a mou nt t o if i t ca m e a bou t . We could po s
s es s a c l ea r a nd a r t icula t e concept of implement a
t ion but we ma y f a i l t o ident i f y ca s es of imple
ment a t ion. Act ua l ly , t her e a r e di f f er ent a r gu
ment s in t he l i t er a t ur e t o t he ef f ect t ha t imple-
met a t ion or s ucces s f ul implement a t ion a t l ea s t do
es not exis t , beca us e ea ch a nd ever y pr oces s of
implement a t ion f a i l s in i t s pur pos e . I f imple
men t a t ion i s impo s s ible or di f f icult , i t i s not beca u
s e w e l a c k a n a d e q u a t e c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
but beca us e t he r e la t ions hip bet ween pol icy a nd
a ct ion i s s uch t ha t pr oc es s es of im plem ent a t ion
ha ve a number of pr oper t ies t ha t a r e not conduci
ve t o t he occur r ence of s ucces s f ul implement a
t ion. Let us f ocus upon t he impl ica t ions of imple
me nt a t io n a s a pr oc es s for t he conc ept .
Ob viou s ly , a n imp lem en t or g ives pr a ct ica l ef
f ect t o a pol icy by t a king a ct ion in r e la t ion t o t he
obj ect ives of t he pol icy . Hopef ul ly , t he imple
ment or i s s ooner or l a t er conf r ont ed wit h a s et of
out comes t ha t a r e pos i t ively r e l eva nt t o t he r ea
l iza t ion of t he obj ect ives . I f t hes e out comes a r e
congr uent wi t h t he obj ect ives t hen t her e wi l l be
s u c c e s s f u l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . H o w e v e r , i n a d y n a
mic per s pect ive t he concept of pol icy a ccompl is h
m e n t i s t r o u b l e s o m e . T h e l o g i c o f p o l i c y a c c o m p
l i s hmen t ma y be v is ua l ized in t he f o l lowin g
m a n n e r i n D i a g r a m 4 .
If the set of outcomes is related to the set of
obj ect ives in s uch a wa y t ha t t o ea ch obj ect ive
t her e i s a con gr uen t ou t co m e a nd vice ver s a —
wha t t he logic ia ns ca l l a one- t o-one r e la t ions hip —
t h e n w e h a v e p o l i c y a c c o m p l i s h m e n t p a r p r e f e r e n
c e . B ut t his i s only t heo r y. I n a ct ua l pr a ct ice obj ec
t ives do not f ind t heir out comes a nd t her e a r e
o u t c o m e s t h a t l a c k o b j e c t i v e s . O u t c o m e s h a v e t o
be int er pr et ed in t er ms of t he obj ect ives a nd one
obj ect ive ma y be pa r t ly s a t i s f ied by s ever a l d i f f e
r ent out comes , or i t ma y be s a t i s f ied by one out co
me but be in oppos i t ion t o a not her . A pol icy con
t a ins a number of goa l s — e n d s a n d m e a n s c o n c e r
ning va r ious pol icy a s pect s — a nd s om e.o f t h es e
goa l s ma y f ind t heir out comes wher ea s ot her s ma y
conf r ont out comes t ha t a r e cont r a r y t o t hes e
o b j e c t i v e s . N o o b j e c t i v e p r o c e d u r e f o r s u m m i n g
up t he pa r t ia l a ccompl is hment s of obj ect ives or
a dding a nd s ubt r a ct ing pr os a nd cons i s known.
I t ma y eve n be a r gued t ha t a j udge men t a b out
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n d e p e n d s o n h o w o n e v i e w s t h e
e n v i r o n m e n t i n w h i c h i m p l e m e n t a t i o n t a k e s pla-,
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
11/24
The Concept of Implementation 27
Diagram 4 .
Policy Accomplishment
Set of Obj ect ives Con gr ue nce
S e t o f O u t c o m e s
c e s ;
i f a pol icy i s only pa r t ly implement a ble f r om
t he ver y beginning t hen ma ybe t his ha s t o be a d-
'ded t o t he equa t ion. - I t ma y ver y wel l be a r gued
t ha t implement a t ion a na lys i s r equir es eva lua t ion
cr i t er ia t ha t a r e not s tr ictly int er s ubj ec t ive . Wh et
her a goa l ha s been a chieved or not depends on
ho w t he goa l ' a nd t he ou t co me s a r e per ce ived by
t he a ct or s involved in t he implement a t ion pr oces s .
Mo r e ove r , i f i t could be a r gue d t ha t whe t her t her e
is pol icy s uc ces s or .policy f a i lur e d epe nds on how
t he a ct or s per ceive t he envir onment a nd j udge t he
implement a bi l i t y of t he pol icy or on t he mea ns t o
b e e m p l o y e d , t h e n c e r t a i n l y j u d g e m e n t s a b o u t
pol icy eu- or dys f unct ioning wi l l va r y; wha t i s
s ucces s f ul implement a t ion t o one gr oup i s f a i lur e
t o a n o t h e r g r o u p b e c a u s e t h e s e g r o u p s p e r c e i v e
t he ends , t he mea ns a nd t he out comes di f f er ent ly .
Ther e i s no s imple s olut ion t o t hes e pr oblems . The
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s t h a s , h o w e v e r , t o r e c o g n i
ze t hem a nd s t a t e c l ea r ly wha t cr i t er ia t he
he him
self
employs f or t he s e l ect ion of obj ect ives a nd
out comes a s wel l a s ma ke c l ea r how t he r e la t ions
h i p b e t w e e n o b j e c t i v e s a n d o u t c o m e s i s i n t e r p r e
t ed a nd s umma r ized in a s t a t ement a bout t he ex
t ent t o which t he implement a t ion wa s s ucces s f ul .
I n s ome ins t a nces s uch cr i t er ia of s e l ect ion a nd
int er pr et a t ion a r e not pr oblema t ica l , but in ot her
ins t a nces t he a na lys t ma y ha ve t o a ccept wor king
with alternat ive sets of cr iter ia .
The Paradox of Implementation
Rec ent imp leme nt a t ion l i t er a t ur e ha s ca s t doubt
on t he a ppl ica bi l i t y of t he concept of implement a
t ion: decid e on t he goa l s , f ind t he mea ns a nd br ing
a bout t he ou t co me s ; it i s a r gued t ha t the f o l lowin g
d y n a m i c p r o p e r t i e s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s e s
nega t e s uch a decis io n a n a lys i s :
( a ) i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n o b j e c t i v e s a n d o u t c o m e s
( b) r ede f in i t ion or r e inv ent ion of obj ect ives
( c ) r e i n t e r p r e t a ti o n o f o u t c o m e s w h e n c o n v e
nient
I t us ed t o be a r gued t ha t implement a t ion wa s
dif
f er ent f r om t he s imple execut ion of pol ic ies ( Wil -
d a v s k y 1 9 7 3 ) ; i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s is c o m b i n e d
as a matter of fact the tradit ional public admi
nis t r a t ion f ocus upon execut ion wit h t he emer ging
int er es t in eva lua t ion met hodology. I f imple
ment a t ion i s mor e t ha n execut ion t hen pol icy
obj ec t ives mus t be det er m ined in or der t o m a ke
eva lua t ion p os s ible — i t wa s a r gued. Thus , t he
concept of implement a t ion impl ies t ha t obj ect ives
be di f f er ent ia t ed f r om out comes a nd obj ect ives
a nd out comes held cons t a nt . I f t he concept of a
p r o c e s s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i m p l i e s t h e o p p o s i t e
t hen we en d up in a pa r a do x: t he concept of imple
ment a t ion ha s t he oppos i t e pr oper t ies t o t hos e of
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
12/24
2 8 J a n - E r i k L a n e
t he concept of -a pr oces s of implement a t ion. W- i l -
da vs ky ha s int r oduced t his new idea a bout a pr o
ces s of implem ent a t ion a s r es ul t ing not in imple
me nt a t ion but in evo lut ion ; he s t a t es :
" I m p l em en t a t i o n i s ev o l u t i o n . S i n ce i t t a k es p l a ce i n a
w o r l d w e n ev er ma d e , w e a r e u s u a l l y r i g h t i n t h e mi d d l e
o f t h e p r o ces s , w i t h ev en t s h a v i n g o ccu r r ed b e f o r e a n d
( w e h o p e ) co n t i n u i n g a f t er w a r d . A t ea ch p o i n t w e mu s t
co p e w i t h n ew c i r cu ms t a n ces t h a t a l l o w u s t o a c t u a l i ze
d i f f er en t p o t en t i a l s i n w h a t ev er p o l i cy i d ea s w e a r e i mp
l em en t i n g . " ( W i l d a v s k y 1 9 7 8 , p . 1 1 4 )
I f imp leme nt a t i on i s t he r edef in i t ion of ob j ect iv es
a nd t he r e int er pr et a t ion of out co me s — i f imp le
m e n t a t i o n i s c o n t i u n u o u s — h o w c a n t h e r e b e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ? T h e e v o l u t i o n a r y c o n c e p t i o n o f
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i m p l i e s t h a t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o
ces s es ma y not be nea t ly s epa r a t ed f r om s t a ges of
p o l i c y f o r m u l a ti o n m i n g l i n g o b j e c t i v e s a n d o u t c o
m e s .
I t a l s o impl ies — a n d t his is t he pa r a dox — that
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i s e n d l e s s : " I m p l e m e n t a t i o n w i l l
a lwa ys be evolut iona r y; i t wi l l inevi t a bly r ef or mu
la t e a s wel l a s ca r r y out pol icy" ( Wilda vs ky 1977,
p .
11 6) . The count er -a r gum ent i s a s imp le one : a ll
e m p i r i c a l p h e n o m e n a a r e i n a s e n s e a s e a m l e s s
we b whic h def ies a ny s et of con cep t s ; t h is i s t r ue of
t he concept of implement a t ion a s i t i s t r ue of a ny
s ocia l s c ience concept . The a ppl ica bi l i t y of a con
c e p t , l i k e th e c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , d e p e n d s
upon t he choice of t he ca s e t o be a na lyzed; in
s o m e g e n e r a l s e n s e a l l c o n c e p t s a r e i n a d e q u a t e
b e c a u s e o f
Panta Rei.
The f a ct t ha t empir ica l phenomena va r y in t heir
s us cept a bi l i t y t o a na lys i s impl ies t ha t i t devolves
u p o n t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s t t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e
b e t w e e n p o l i c i e s ; s o m e p o l i c i e s m a y b e m o r e s u
s c e p t i b l e t o i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y si s th a n o t h e r s .
A p r o m i s i n g l i n e t o fo l l o w in i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a
lys i s ma y l ie in a t t empt ing t o ident i f y s uch cr i t er ia ;
obvious ly , pol ic ies t ha t do not ha ve a r t icula t e
o b j e c t i v e s a t t a c h e d t o t h e m o r w h o s e o b j e c t i v e s
cha nge r a pidly would not be ver y int er es t ing f or
t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s t . H o w e v e r , i t s h o u l d
be point ed out t ha t on t he ot her ha nd t he occur
r ence of cha nges in t he goa l f unct ion of a pol icy i s
n o t a m a j o r p r o b l e m i n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n a l y s i s ;
on t he cont r a r y, i t s f ocus i s h ighly s ui t a ble f or t he
ident i f ica t ion of pol icy r edef in i t ions a nd ou t co me
r eint er pr et a t ion". The a na lys t of implement a t ion
p r o c e s s e s m a y f a c e a t y p e o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p h e
n o m e n o n c h a r a c t e r i ze d b y a s t e p - w i s e i m p l e
m e n t a t i o n , i . e . , s u b g o a l s e n t e r i n g i n t o a l a r g e r
goa l f unct ion a r e- bein g implem ent e d, a t d is cr et e
point s of t ime over a longer t ime int er va l . I t ma y
be t he ca s e t ha t t he implement a t ion of one s et of
s ubgo a l s i s f o l low ed by a pr oc es s of r edef in ing t he
next s et of s ubgoa l s t o be implement ed. I t ha s
bee n a r g ued t ha t t her e ha s t o be a pr oce s s of
r edef in i t ion a s pol icy f a i lur e i s inevi t a ble:
" U n l es s a p o l i cy ma t t er i s n a r r o w a n d u n i n t er es t i n g ( i . e .
p r ep r o g r a m med ) t h e p o l i cy w i ll n ev er b e a b l e t o co n t a i n i t s
o w n c o n s e q u e n c e s " . ( W i l d a v s k y 1 9 7 8 :1 1 6 )
This is an
empirical
a r gum ent tha t i s op en t o r e
f ut a t ion pending a ma j or s ur vey of pr ogr a m a c
compl is hment s , i f i t i s pos s ible t o a r r ive a t a con
s ens us a s t o wha t i s a n int er es t ing pr ogr a m a nd
whet her a pa r t icula r pr ogr a m r ea l ly ha s a t t a ined
i t s pol icy obj e ct ive s . I s f or exa mp le t he Wilda vs ky
gener a l iza t ion t r ue of t he implement a t ion of a
s ys t em of h igher educa t ion in t he nor t h of Sweden
a f t er Wor ld Wa r Tw o ( La n e 198 3) ?
Impossibility of Implemen tation
A n o t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l a r g u m e n t a b o u t i m p l e m e n t a
t ion f a i lur e a s s er t s not t ha t pr oces s es of imple
ment a t ion of neces s i t y t r a ns f or m t he e l ement s of
implement a t ion but t ha t t he idea of a n imple
m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s c o n t a i n s s p e c i a l a s s u m p t i o n s
a b o u t c o n d i t i o n s t h a t a n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s
must sat isfy in order to be successful .
In his
The Limits of Administration
( 1976) C. C.
H o o d v e n t u r e s t o s u g g e s t s o m e h y p o t h e s e s a b o u t
w h a t t y p e o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s w o u l d " p r o
d u c e p e r f e c t p o l i c y i m p l e m e n t a t i o n " ( H o o d
1976: 6) . Such a pr oces s would s a t i s f y t he condi
t ions of "per f ect a dminis t r a t ion", l i s t ed a s
- a uni t a r y a dminis t r a t ive s ys t em wit h a s ingle
l ine of authority
- enf o r cem ent of uni f or m r ules or obj ec t ives
- a s et of c l ea r a nd a ut hor i t a t ive obj ect ives imp-
lement a ble on t he ba s is of per f ect obedience or
per f ect a dminis t r a t ive cont r ol
- per f ect coor d ina t io n a nd per f ect inf or ma t ion
wit hin a nd bet ween a dminis t r a t ive uni t s
- a bs e nce of t ime pr es s ur e
- unl imit ed ma t er ia l r es our c es f or t a ckl ing t he
p r o b l e m
- una mb iguou s over a l l obj ec t ives a nd per f ect
pol i t ica l a ccept a bi l i t y of t he pol ic ies pur s ued.
( H o o d 1 9 7 6 : 6 - 8 ) .
-
8/18/2019 Jan Erik Lane Concept Implementation 3298-7941-1-PB
13/24
T h e C o n cep t o f I mp l em en t a t i o n 2 9
The model of per f ect a dminis t r a t ion s ugges t ed by
Hood i s int ended a s a n idea l - t ype cons t r uct t o be
ins t r ume nt a l in f inding s ys t ema t ic l imit s in a ct ua l
ly occur r ing pr oce s s es of imp leme nt a t io n f a i lur e
( H o o d 1 9 7 6 : 1 9 0 - 2 0 7 ) . I t i s t h u s p o i n t le s s to c ri ti
c ize Hood f or s t a t ing unr ea l i s t ic a s s umpt ions ; t he
w e a k n e s s o f t h e H o o d a r g u m e n t l i e s e l s e w h e r e .
Wha t i s ques t iona ble i s not t he ext ent t o which a •
c o n c r e t e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s a d h e r e s t o t h e
idea l - t ype pr oper t ies t r ue of "per f ect a dminis t r a
t ion" a nd "per f ect pol icy implement a t ion"; but
t h e a b s tr a c t h y p o t h e s e s a b o u t t h e c o n d i t i o n s c o n
ducive t o s ucces s f ul implement a t ion pr oces s es a r e
p r o b l e m a t i c i n t h e m s e l v e s .
Fir s t a minor obj ect ion: t hes e a s s umpt ions a p
pr oa ch implement a t ion f r om t he na r r ow f ocus of
t he con cep t of a ut hor i t y , j us t a s t he cha r a ct er is t ics
of a ut hor i t y r e la t ions - h ier a r chy, ob edi en ce,
cont r o l a nd per f ect coor din a t ion - a r e v iew ed a s
t h e m e c h a n i s m f o r th e a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f s u c c e s s
f ul implement a t ion in s uch pr oces s es . I t i s t r ue
t ha t it ha s been a r gued t ha t a ba s ic expla na t ion f or
f a i lur es in na t iona l gove r n me nt pol icy i s t o be
f ound in t he f act t ha t t he na t iona l gove r nm ent
ma y ha ve t oo l i t t l e a ut hor i t y . I n a n of t -quot ed
s t a t ement Ma r t ha Der t hick a s s er t ed:
" D u e t o t h e d i v i s i o n o f a u t h o r i t y a mo n g g o v er n men t s i n
t h e f ed er a l s y s t em, t h e f ed er a l g o v er n men t ca n n o t o r d er
t h es e g o v er n men t s t o d o a n y t h i n g . I t g e t s t h em t o ca r r y
out i ts purposes by offer ing incentives in the form of a id ,
w h i ch t h ey ma y a ccep t o r n o t , a n d b y a t t a ch i n g co n d i
t ion s to the a id" . (Der th ick 1972 , p . 84) .
An d J . T. M ur phy a r r ives a t a s imi la r co nclus io n
a bout t he v i t a l impor t a nce of a ut hor i t y t o imple
ment a t ion s ucces s es in his a na lys i s of f eder a l
educa t ion r ef or m ef f or t s in t he US:
" T h e p r i ma r y ca u s e , h o w e v er , i s p o l i t i ca l . T h e f ed er a l
s y s t em
—
with i ts d ispers i on of pow er and contr ol - not
o n l y p er mi t s b u t en co u r a g es t h e ev a s i o n a n d d i l u t i o n o f
f ed er a l r e f o r m , ma k i n g i t n ea r l y i mp o s s i b l e f o r t h e f ed e
r a l a d mi n i s t r a t o r t o i mp o s e p r o g r a m p r i o r i t i e s ; t h o s e n o t
d i l u t ed b y C o n g r es s i o n a l i n t er v en t i o n ca n b e i g n o r ed
d u r i n g s t a t e a n d l o ca l i mp l emen t a t i o n " . ( M u r p h y 1 9 7 1 ,
p . 6 0 ) .
H o w e v e r , o t h e r e m p i r i c a l w o r k o n h o w i m p l e
ment a t ion comes a bout ha s r es ul t ed in a d i f f er ent
f inding, v iz . t ha t mecha nis ms mor e s ymmet r ica l in
n a t u r e s u c h a s e x c h a n g e , b a r g a i n i n g a n d n e g o t i a
t i o n a r e m o r e g e r m a n e t o t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o
ces s t ha n a ut h or i t y a nd i t s cha r a ct er is tics ( Ba r r et t
& F u d g e ( 1 9 8 1 ) Policy and Action: Essays on the
implementation of public policy). Empir ica l ly ,
t h e s e m e c h a n i s m s f o r t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f p o l i
cy a ppea r t o be a s impor t a nt a s s t r uct ur es of a u
t hor i t y i f t he wor k of E . Ba r da ch i s cons ul t ed,
Implementation Game ( 1 9 7 7 ) . A n d w h e n a u t h o r i
t y f a i l s excha nge a t l ea s t ma y do no wor s e , s ince
bot h t ypes of mecha nis ms f or deciding on col l ect i
ve a ct ion a r e vulner a ble t o bot h t he complexi t y of
j o int a ct ion a nd t he t ypica l expr es s ion of r es i s t a n
ce t o cha nge, v iz . dela ys ( Wilda vs ky
1 9 7 3 : 8 7 - 1 2 4 ) .
A mo r e f und a me nt a l o bj ect io n i s t hat it i s que s
t iona ble , t o s a y t he l ea s t , whet her condi t ions lis
t ed r ea l ly a r e conducive t o per f ect implement a
t ion. I f no a ct ua l implement a t ion pr oces s es s a t i s f y
t he mo del , t hen m a ybe i t i s t he model wh ich i s
imper f ect r a t her t ha n t he pr oces s es of imple
ment a t ion t ha t a r e f a i lur es . Ar e per f ect inf or ma
t ion, complet e cont r ol a nd unl imit ed r es our ces
neces s a r y t o s ucces s f ul implement a t ion? Such a
hypot hes is does not f o l low f r om t he int er pr et a t ion
o f t h e c o n c e p t o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n s u g g e s t e d a b o
v e . Ar e per f ect coor dina t ion, uni t a r y a dminis t r a
t ive structure and perfect pol it ical acceptabil ity
s uf f ic ient t o ens ur e s ucces s ful im plem ent a t ion?
T h e s e t h e o r e t i c a l a s s u m p t i o n s a r e c o n n e c t e d m o
r e wi t h a n int er pr et a t ion of t he concept of imple
ment a t ion t ha n wit h t he eva lua t ion of empir ica l
e v i d e n c e c o n c e r n i n g p r o c e s s e s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .
C . Fudge a nd S. Ba r r et t s t a t e:
"Part of the l i terature we reviewed suggests that control
o v er p o l i cy ex ecu t i o n o r t h e a b i li t y t o en s u r e co m p l i a n ce
w i t h p o l i cy o b j ec t i v es i s a k ey f a c t o r d e t er mi n i n g t h e
success or fa i lure of the pol icy . . . However , i f imple
men t a t i o n i s s een a s ' g e t t i n g s o met h i n g d o n e ' , th en p er
f o r ma n ce r a t h er t h a n co n f o r m a n ce i s t h e ma in o b j e c t i v e
a n d co mp r o m i s e a mea n s o f a ch i ev i n g i t ". (B a r r e t t &
F u d g e 1 9 8 1 : 2 5 8 . )
Act ua l ly , bot h Hood a nd Fudge & Ba r r et t a s s ume
t ha t t he int er pr et a t ion of t he concept of a n imple
men t a t ion p r oces s f o l lows f rom t he pa r t icula r con
cept of implement a t ion. I f implement a t ion i s not
"put t ing pol icy int o