The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The multi-layer problem in implementation research
Abstract
This article argues that many discussions of implementation deal inadequately with the fact that several layers of government are often involved in policy processes. It thus identifies a multi-layer problem in the literature on implementation, and explores its dimensions. It argues that a failure to deal adequately with the problem leads to two particular pitfalls. One is that the notion of ‘dashed’ expectations on the part of one layer suggests either that there has been a failure of control, or that there have been interventions in the policy process that are seen as illegitimate. The other is that the relationship between layers is a simple and uniform phenomenon that can be expected to have similar characteristics in dissimilar situations. It then offers some proposals to deal with these pitfalls, and looks at what this reframing of the problem means for implementation research.
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
Just Institutions Matter: The Moral and Political Logic of the Universal Welfare State
Rothstein, B. (1998) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511598449 · Cited by 1,403
Cited by
What happens on the ground: Persistent issues in implementation research
Hupe, P. (2014) · Public Policy and Administration · doi:10.1177/0952076713518339 · Cited by 146
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hill, M., & Hupe, P.
- Venue
- Public Management Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 471-490
- ISSN
- 1461-667X (ISSN-L)
- 1471-9037
- 1471-9045
- OpenAlex
- W1977912056
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.36
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The multi-layer problem in implementation research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/1471903032000178545
- The paper
- Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2003). The multi-layer problem in implementation research. Public Management Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/1471903032000178545
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.