Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Policy Implementation Analysis× | Realist Evaluation× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo≠ | Public Administration | Public Policy |
| Familia | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Año de origen≠ | 1973 | 1997 |
| Autor original≠ | Jeffrey Pressman & Aaron Wildavsky | Ray Pawson & Nick Tilley |
| Tipo≠ | Process-tracing policy analysis | Theory-driven, generative evaluation approach |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN: 9780520053311 | Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9780761950097 |
| Alias≠ | Implementation Studies, Top-Down Implementation Analysis, Implementation Gap Analysis | Realistic Evaluation, Theory-Driven Realist Evaluation, CMO Configuration Analysis, Pawson-Tilley Evaluation |
| Relacionados | 4 | 4 |
| Resumen≠ | Policy implementation analysis studies what happens between the moment a policy is decided and the moment it reaches its intended effect, asking why outcomes so often fall short of stated objectives. The field was founded by Jeffrey Pressman and Aaron Wildavsky's 1973 study of a federal employment program in Oakland, which showed how a long chain of required agreements and clearances steadily eroded great expectations. The method traces the implementation chain — the actors, decision points and conditions through which a policy must pass — to locate where and why it succeeds or fails. Its central object is the implementation gap between policy as legislated and policy as delivered. | Realist evaluation is a theory-driven approach to evaluating programs and policies that asks not simply 'does it work?' but 'what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and why?'. Developed by Ray Pawson and Nick Tilley in their 1997 book Realistic Evaluation, it treats interventions as theories incarnate: programs offer resources or opportunities that trigger underlying mechanisms of reasoning and response in participants, and those mechanisms only fire in particular contexts. The unit of analysis is the Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configuration, and the goal is to build and refine middle-range theory that explains differential outcomes across settings. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|