Implementation and the choice of evaluation methods

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.