The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis
Abstract
This paper first reviews the implementation literature of the past fifteen years, with particular emphasis on the relative strengths and weaknesses of the ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approaches. It also argues that the 4–6 year time-frame used in most implementation research misses many critical features of public policy-making. The paper then outlines a conceptual framework for examining policy change over a 10–20 year period which combines the best features of the ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approaches with insights from other literatures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
Cited by
Peters, D. H., Adam, T., Alonge, O., Agyepong, I. A., & Tran, N. (2014) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bmj.f6753 · Cited by 1,109
The implementation of EU environmental policy; a policy problem without a political solution?
Jordan, A. (1999) · Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy · doi:10.1068/c170069 · Cited by 229
What happens on the ground: Persistent issues in implementation research
Hupe, P. (2014) · Public Policy and Administration · doi:10.1177/0952076713518339 · Cited by 146
Hanf, K., & O'Toole, L. J. (1992) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00293.x · Cited by 112
Dougherty, K. J., & Natow, R. S. (2020) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-019-00491-4 · Cited by 92
Metadata
- Authors
- Sabatier, P. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Public Policy
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1986-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-48
- ISSN
- 0143-814X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7815
- OpenAlex
- W2147272684
- Cited by
- 1,863
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 41.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
