Assessing the interaction between transport policy targets and policy implementation—A Finnish case study

Abstract This article explores the potential of a target analysis method in acting as a link between policy objectives, targets, measures and their implementation in order to intensify the policy process. The context is the information-abundant policy environment where feasibility conditions keep constantly changing. The policy process frameworks for bounded rationality and experiential incrementalism are used as a basis for exploration and complemented with our target analysis, which is tested with a case of Finnish transport policy targets. We argue that by studying synergies and conflicts as well as other dependencies between the targets presented in policy statements and also by examining the possible support or opposition of main stakeholder groups for the policy measures to meet the targets, we can appraise the potential success of the transport policy implementation. Our case study, the Finnish transport policy, presented targets with quite a clear direction, with a lot of weak synergies and only a few serious conflicts. The implementation of the policy measures, presented to meet these targets will, however, be demanding because of several reasons related to the challenges to governance that are emerging from the complex and continually changing linkages between and among transport (policy) problems, targets and their consequences. The method we presented and tested proved to be useful in bringing transport policy targets closer to policy implementation by considering policy measures to meet the targets and their acceptance as a part of the target or objective analysis process. The findings suggest that linking these often detached parts of the policy process together the co-ordination will be improved and the process hence intensified. The target analysis presented could act as an originator for a more open, interactive and particularly systematic process in transport policy formulation, leading through social learning into a more successful implementation of policies.

[1]  Ilkka Tuomi,et al.  From Periphery to Center: Emerging Research Topics on Knowledge Society , 2001 .

[2]  Peter Bonsall,et al.  Performance Targets in Transport Policy , 2006 .

[3]  Thomas A. Birkland,et al.  An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Making , 2001 .

[4]  P. Nijkamp,et al.  Guide for Strategic Assessment on CTP-issues , 2000 .

[5]  M. Dodgson,et al.  Think, Play, Do: Technology, Innovation, and Organization , 2005 .

[6]  Antti Talvitie,et al.  Things planners believe in, and things they deny , 1997 .

[7]  Mark Mau,et al.  The Information Society and the Welfare State: The Finnish Model , 2004 .

[8]  Dennis L. Meadows,et al.  Limits to growth : the 30-year update , 2004 .

[9]  C. Jotin Khisty,et al.  Possibilities of steering the transportation planning process in the face of bounded rationality and unbounded uncertainty , 2005 .

[10]  Georg Vonkrogh.  Networks of Innovation: Change and meaning in the age of the Internet , 2003 .

[11]  P Hidas,et al.  THE SUSTAINABLE CITY II. URBAN REGENERATION AND SUSTAINABILITY. TARGETS AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE URBAN TRANSPORT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT PRACTICE IN SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA , 2002 .

[12]  Susan Hanson,et al.  Critical mass: forging a politics of sustainable mobility in the information age , 2001 .

[13]  Mattias Höjer,et al.  How much transport can the climate stand?--Sweden on a sustainable path in 2050 , 2006 .

[14]  C. Lindblom.  THE SCIENCE OF MUDDLING THROUGH , 1959 .

[15]  C A Brebbia,et al.  The Sustainable City III , 2004 .

[16]  Janne Hukkinen,et al.  Institutions in Environmental Management: Constructing Mental Models and Sustainability , 1998 .

[17]  M. Borowitzka.  Limits to Growth , 1998 .

[18]  Antti Talvitie,et al.  Experiential Incrementalism: On the Theory and Technique to Implement Transport Plans and Policies , 2006 .

[19]  Liisa Välikangas,et al.  The quest for resilience. , 2003, Harvard business review.

[20]  Evert Vedung,et al.  Public Policy and Program Evaluation , 1997 .

[21]  V Himanen.  TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT EVALUATION. BASIC PROBLEMS AND CONCEPTS , 1987 .

[22]  K. Christensen.  Coping with Uncertainty in Planning , 1985 .

[23]  Frank Fischer,et al.  Evaluating Public Policy , 1995 .

[24]  C. Waddington.  Limits of Growth , 1972, Nature.

[25]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos , 1998 .

[26]  E R Alexander,et al.  Highway priority setting through alternative use of multiple-objective decision methods , 1987 .

[27]  Ernest R. Alexander,et al.  After Rationality, What? A Review of Responses to Paradigm Breakdown , 1984 .

[28]  J. Brown,et al.  The Only Sustainable Edge: Why Business Strategy Depends On Productive Friction And Dynamic Specialization , 2005 .