1995Journal of Public Administration Research and TheoryRequires access

Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict Model of Policy Implementation

Richard E. Matland

Open publisher page 1,514 citations

Abstract

A review of the policy implementation literature finds the field split into two major schools, top-down and bottom-up. Previous attempts to reconcile these models are described, followed by an alternative model. This model reconciles these approaches by concentrating on the theoretical significance of ambiguity and conflict for policy implementation. A number of factors crucial to the implementation process are identified as varyingly dependent on a policy's ambiguity and conflict level. Four policy implementation paradigms are identified and the relevance of the existing literature to these conditions is discussed. The four paradigms are low conflict-low ambiguity (administrative implementation), high conflict-low ambiguity (political implementation), high conflict-high ambiguity (symbolic implementation), and low conflict-high ambiguity (experimental implementation).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A review of the policy implementation literature finds the field split into two major schools, top-down and bottom-up. Previous attempts to reconcile these models are described, followed by an alternative model. This model reconciles these approaches by concentrating on the theoretical significance of ambiguity and conflict for policy implementation. A number of factors crucial to the implementation process are identified as varyingly dependent on a policy's ambiguity and conflict level. Four policy implementation paradigms are identified and the relevance of the existing literature to these conditions is discussed. The four paradigms are low conflict-low ambiguity (administrative implementation), high conflict-low ambiguity (political implementation), high conflict-high ambiguity (symbolic implementation), and low conflict-high ambiguity (experimental implementation).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1514 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A review of the policy implementation literature finds the field split into two major schools, top-down and bottom-up. Previous attempts to reconcile these models are described, followed by an alternative model. This model reconciles these approaches by concentrating on the theoretical significance of ambiguity and conflict for policy implementation. A number of factors crucial to the implementation process are identified as varyingly dependent on a policy's ambiguity and conflict level. Four policy implementation paradigms are identified and the relevance of the existing literature to these conditions is discussed. The four paradigms are low conflict-low ambiguity (administrative implementation), high conflict-low ambiguity (political implementation), high conflict-high ambiguity (symbolic implementation), and low conflict-high ambiguity (experimental implementation).

Key concepts: Ambiguity, Relevance (law), Politics, Role conflict, Field (mathematics), Process (computing), Political science, Computer science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict Model of Policy Implementation — Research Paper | ScholarLens