Implementation remains a somewhat neglected dimension within urban planning research after a surge of interest during the 1960s and 1970s in contrast to related cognitive disciplines, particularly healthcare research which has seemingly grappled with the phenomenon with more gusto. Here, we assess the state of urban planning implementation science and compare these efforts with healthcare frameworks explaining implementation to ascertain what new insights can be gleaned on how we investigate the phenomenon.
AlexanderERFaludiA (1989) Planning and plan implementation: Notes on evaluation criteria. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design16: 127–140.
2.
AllmendingerPThomasH (1998) Urban Planning and the British New Right, London: Routledge.
3.
BakerMHincksS (2009) Infrastructure delivery and spatial planning, the case of English local development frameworks. Town Planning Review80(2): 173–199.
4.
BarrettSFudgeC (1981) Policy and Action: Essays on the Implementation of Public Policy, London: Methuen.
5.
BiddulphMFranklinBTaitM (2003) From concept to completion, a critical analysis of the urban village. Town Planning Review74(2): 165–193.
6.
BoothP (2011) Culture, place and path dependency: Some reflections on the problems of comparison. Town Planning Review82(1): 39–54.
7.
CliffordBTewdwr-JonesM (2014) The Collaborating Planner? Practitioners in the Neoliberal Age, Bristol: Policy Press.
8.
CullingworthBNadinV (2006) Town and Country Planning in the UK, 14th ed. Abbingdon: Routledge.
9.
DamschroderLJAronDCKeithREet al. (2009) Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science4(50): 1–15.
10.
DavidoffP (1965) Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners31(4): 544–555.
11.
DaviesHTONutleySMSmithPC (2000) Learning from the past, prospects for the future. In: DaviesHTONutleySMSmithPC (eds) What Works? Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Public Services, Bristol: The Policy Press, pp. 351–366.
12.
deLeonPdeLeonL (2002) What ever happened to policy implementation? An alternative approach. Journal of Public Administration and Theory12(4): 467–492.
13.
FischerTB (2007) Theory and Practice of Strategic Environmental Assessment, London: Earthscan.
14.
FischerTBSmithMCSykesO (2013) Can less sometimes be more? Integrating land use and transport planning on Merseyside (1965–2008). Urban, Planning and Transport Research1(1): 1–27.
15.
FriedmanJ (1969) Notes on societal action. Journal of the American Institute for Planners35: 311–318.
GilgAWKellyMP (1997) The delivery of planning policy in Great Britain: Explaining the implementation gap. New evidence from a case study in rural England. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy15: 19–36.
18.
GoldacreB (2008) Bad Science, London: Fourth Estate.
19.
GreenhalghTRobertGMacFarlaneFet al. (2004) Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly82(4): 581–629.
HealeyP (2010) Making Better Places; The Planning Project in the Twenty-First Century, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
22.
HelfrichCDDamschroderLJHagedornHJet al. (2010) A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework. Implementation Science5(82): 1–20.
23.
HogwoodBWGunnLA (1984) Policy Analysis for the Real World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
HullA (2008) Policy integration: What will it take to achieve more sustainable transport solutions in cities?Transport Policy15: 94–103.
25.
KirkMAKelleyCYankeyNet al. (2016) A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation Science11(72): 1–13.
26.
KitsonAHarveyGMcCormackB (1998) Enabling the implementation of evidence based practice: A conceptual framework. Quality in Health Care7: 149–158.
27.
LaurianLDayMBackhurstMet al. (2004) What drives planning implementation? Plans, planning agencies and developers. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management47(4): 555–577.
28.
LindblomCE (1959) The science of “muddling through”. Public Administration Review19: 79–88.
29.
MageeB (1973) Popper, Glasgow: Colins/Fontana.
30.
MarchJGOlsenJP (1989) Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics, New York: Free Press.
31.
MayC (2013) Towards a general theory of implementation. Implementation Science8(18): 1–14.
32.
MossbergerKStokerG (2001) The evolution of urban regime theory: The challenge of conceptualization. Urban Affairs Review36(6): 810–835.
33.
NilsenP (2015) Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implementation Science10(53): 1–13.
34.
NutleySWalterIDaviesHTO (2003) From knowing to doing: A framework for understanding the evidence into practice agenda. Evaluation9(2): 125–148.
PopperKR (1963) Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, London: Routledge.
37.
PressmanJLWildavskyAB (1973) Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington are Dashed in Oakland, Berkeley: University of California Press.
38.
RicherCHasiakS (2014) Territorial opportunities of tram-based systems. Town Planning Review85(2): 217–236.
39.
RiotE (2014) A European perspective on the planning of major railway stations. Town Planning Review85(2): 191–201.
40.
RittelHWJWebberMM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences4: 155–169.
41.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed. New York: Free Press.
42.
Rycroft-MaloneJHarveyGSeersKet al. (2004) An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing13: 913–924.
43.
RydinY (2003) Urban and Environmental Planning in the UK, 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
44.
RydinY (2011) The Purpose of Planning, Creating Sustainable Towns and Cities, Bristol: The Policy Press.
45.
SandercockL (1998) Towards Cosmopolis, Chichester: Wiley.
46.
SmithMC (2014) Integrating policies, plans and programmes in local government: An exploration from a spatial planning perspective. Local Government Studies40(3): 473–493.
47.
SmithMCRocksSAPollardSJT (2011) Uncertainty, Risk and Decision Making in Local Government Report, London: Local Authority and Research Council Initiative.
48.
SmithMCSykesOFischerTB (2014) Derailed: Understanding the implementation failures of Merseytram. Town Planning Review85(2): 237–260.
49.
SteadDGeerlingsHMeijersE (2003) Integrated Land Use Planning, Transport and Environmental Policy-Making: An International Comparison, Delft: Delft University Press.
50.
StokerGMossbergerK (1994) Urban regime theory in comparative perspective. Environment and Planning C: Governance and Policy12: 195–212.
