jan erik lane concept implementation 3298-7941-1-pb

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


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.


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


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


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


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:


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 ) :


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


7/24


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.


8/24

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


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:


10/24


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-,


11/24


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


12/24


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 ) .


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

jan erik lane concept implementation 3298-7941-1-pb

Documents