This paper addresses public acceptance of a proposed sub-regional, hydrogen–electric, aviation service reporting initial empirical evidence from the UK HEART project. The objective was to assess public acceptance of a wide range of service features, including hydrogen power, electric motors, and pilot assistance automation, in the context of an ongoing realisable commercial plan. Both qualitative and quantitative data collection instruments were leveraged, including focus groups and stakeholder interviews, as well as the questionnaire-based Scottish National survey, coupled with the advanced discrete-choice modelling of the data. The results from each method are presented, compared, and contrasted, focusing on the strength, reliability, and validity of the data to generate insights into public acceptance. The findings suggest that public concerns were tempered by an incomplete understanding of the technology but were interpretable in terms of key service elements. Respondents’ concerns and opinions centred around hydrogen as a fuel, single-pilot automation, safety and security, disability and inclusion, environmental impact, and the perceived usefulness of novel service features such as terminal design, automation, and sustainability. The latter findings were interpreted under a joint framework of technology acceptance theory and the diffusion of innovation. From this, we drew key insights, which were presented alongside a discussion of the results.

Implementation is an important stage in the policy cycle yet is often considered the ‘black box’ within the public policy process. Since the late 1960s, implementation studies have grown substantially, and many scholars have attempted to address the missing links that often occur between policy decision intent and policy performance, or implementation outcome. In this chapter, we apply different understandings of implementation to analyse the issue of failed bus policy change in the UK and the challenges associated with bus policy implementation in a deregulated market. A hybrid understanding of implementation challenges is found to be valuable, which requires policymakers to not only think about clarifying goals, legislation, and funding but also about how they can facilitate participation and engagement for those on the ground.