Implementation and the choice of evaluation methods

Bent Flyvbjerg

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

3 Citationer (Scopus)

Resumé

The development of evaluation and implementation processes has been closely interrelated in both theory and practice. Today, two major paradigms of evaluation and implementation exist: the programmed paradigm with its approach based on the natural science model, and the adaptive paradigm with an approach founded more in phenomenology and social science. The role of analytical methods is viewed very differently in the two paradigms as in the conception of the policy process in general. Allthough analytical methods have come to play a prominent (and often dominant) role in transportation evaluation as definded by the programmed paradigm, the way in which analytical methods have been applied in practice can be criticized for narrowing and biasing policy formulation and implementation. The adaptive paradigm has its own problems, one being a less developed theoretical and methodological basis than the programmed paradigm. By emphasizing the importance of the process of social interaction and subordinating analysis to this process, the adaptive paradigm reduces the likelihood of analytical methods narrowing and biasing implementation. To fulfil this subordinate role and to aid social interaction, analytical methods have to comply with certain requirements. These requirements are outlined in this paper, and a Danish example of a public transportation evaluation method developed on the basis of the requirements is described.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftTransport policy and decision making
Vol/bind2
Udgave nummer3
Sider (fra-til)291-314
ISSN0166-1957
StatusUdgivet - 1984

Fingerprint

analytical method
implementation process
evaluation method
evaluation
policy

Citer dette

Flyvbjerg, Bent. / Implementation and the choice of evaluation methods. I: Transport policy and decision making. 1984 ; Bind 2, Nr. 3. s. 291-314.
@article{194d9b30002411dab4d5000ea68e967b,
title = "Implementation and the choice of evaluation methods",
abstract = "The development of evaluation and implementation processes has been closely interrelated in both theory and practice. Today, two major paradigms of evaluation and implementation exist: the programmed paradigm with its approach based on the natural science model, and the adaptive paradigm with an approach founded more in phenomenology and social science. The role of analytical methods is viewed very differently in the two paradigms as in the conception of the policy process in general. Allthough analytical methods have come to play a prominent (and often dominant) role in transportation evaluation as definded by the programmed paradigm, the way in which analytical methods have been applied in practice can be criticized for narrowing and biasing policy formulation and implementation. The adaptive paradigm has its own problems, one being a less developed theoretical and methodological basis than the programmed paradigm. By emphasizing the importance of the process of social interaction and subordinating analysis to this process, the adaptive paradigm reduces the likelihood of analytical methods narrowing and biasing implementation. To fulfil this subordinate role and to aid social interaction, analytical methods have to comply with certain requirements. These requirements are outlined in this paper, and a Danish example of a public transportation evaluation method developed on the basis of the requirements is described.",
keywords = "Public transportation, Implementation, Method assessment, Evaluation, Evaluation methods",
author = "Bent Flyvbjerg",
year = "1984",
language = "English",
volume = "2",
pages = "291--314",
journal = "Transport Policy and Decision Making",
issn = "0166-1957",
publisher = "Brill | Nijhoff",
number = "3",

}

Implementation and the choice of evaluation methods. / Flyvbjerg, Bent.

I: Transport policy and decision making, Bind 2, Nr. 3, 1984, s. 291-314.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementation and the choice of evaluation methods

AU - Flyvbjerg, Bent

PY - 1984

Y1 - 1984

N2 - The development of evaluation and implementation processes has been closely interrelated in both theory and practice. Today, two major paradigms of evaluation and implementation exist: the programmed paradigm with its approach based on the natural science model, and the adaptive paradigm with an approach founded more in phenomenology and social science. The role of analytical methods is viewed very differently in the two paradigms as in the conception of the policy process in general. Allthough analytical methods have come to play a prominent (and often dominant) role in transportation evaluation as definded by the programmed paradigm, the way in which analytical methods have been applied in practice can be criticized for narrowing and biasing policy formulation and implementation. The adaptive paradigm has its own problems, one being a less developed theoretical and methodological basis than the programmed paradigm. By emphasizing the importance of the process of social interaction and subordinating analysis to this process, the adaptive paradigm reduces the likelihood of analytical methods narrowing and biasing implementation. To fulfil this subordinate role and to aid social interaction, analytical methods have to comply with certain requirements. These requirements are outlined in this paper, and a Danish example of a public transportation evaluation method developed on the basis of the requirements is described.

AB - The development of evaluation and implementation processes has been closely interrelated in both theory and practice. Today, two major paradigms of evaluation and implementation exist: the programmed paradigm with its approach based on the natural science model, and the adaptive paradigm with an approach founded more in phenomenology and social science. The role of analytical methods is viewed very differently in the two paradigms as in the conception of the policy process in general. Allthough analytical methods have come to play a prominent (and often dominant) role in transportation evaluation as definded by the programmed paradigm, the way in which analytical methods have been applied in practice can be criticized for narrowing and biasing policy formulation and implementation. The adaptive paradigm has its own problems, one being a less developed theoretical and methodological basis than the programmed paradigm. By emphasizing the importance of the process of social interaction and subordinating analysis to this process, the adaptive paradigm reduces the likelihood of analytical methods narrowing and biasing implementation. To fulfil this subordinate role and to aid social interaction, analytical methods have to comply with certain requirements. These requirements are outlined in this paper, and a Danish example of a public transportation evaluation method developed on the basis of the requirements is described.

KW - Public transportation

KW - Implementation

KW - Method assessment

KW - Evaluation

KW - Evaluation methods

M3 - Journal article

VL - 2

SP - 291

EP - 314

JO - Transport Policy and Decision Making

JF - Transport Policy and Decision Making

SN - 0166-1957

IS - 3

ER -