DOI
10.1080/01900692.2019.1665067

Summary
Over the past 40 years, implementation of public policy has been developed into a mature but heterogenous field of research. Despite much attention paid to the context in which implementation occurs, studies thus far has only to a limited extent been concerned with how major sociotechnological transitions affect the conditions for implementing policy. As societies experience major socio-technological transitions that radically change our ways of living and working, these changes also affect the implementation process. But how? This paper explores how theories of socio-technological changes can be drawn upon to add layers of explanations to a canonized model of integrated implementation. Recent technological developments in the transport sector are applied to this discussion to illustrate the usefulness of the suggested layered approach. The paper concludes by suggesting how the integrated implementation model and implementation theory can be combined.

Relevance for Complex Systems Knowledge
This article investigates how major socio-technical changes radically change culture and practices in organizations and households, and also affect “how governments interact with society”,and how policy is implemented. The example is taken from the transport sector, where policy-making and implementation are characterized by high investment costs and long-term planning, which may be contested by socio-technological changes during the lifespan of the investment. The analytical framework chosen is an integration of two differing frameworks;  Geels´Multi-level perspective and Winter´s integrated policy implementation.

In the integrated policy implementation model, policy formulation and design are linked to outputs and outcomes through the implementation process. The process involves organization structures as well as management capabilities, and modes for uptake among street level bureaucrats and among the target groups.

The MLP framework look at the interplay between initiatives for socio-technical transitions at the micro-level (nisches) and the current regime (meso-level) where current ideas about the system governs. Both these levels are in turn influenced by occurrences in the socio-technical landscape (macro-level). The outcome depends how events at the three different levels reinforce each other.

The combination of the two frameworks is done by thinking the nisches and regimes as actors within the organizational framework. Nisches may also influence the target groups and street level bureaucrats. The Landscape is considered to lay beyond the model.

Point of Strength
The article may serve a discussion, but it does not provide sufficient detail to serve as a contribution to methods development. Both of the combined frameworks are too superficial too do more than pointing out a possible challenge. But it may be good as such. Requires a lecturer led discussion if used by students.