Multiple streams framework

Last updated

The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) is a prominent approach for analyzing public policymaking processes. It emphasizes the unpredictable and complex nature of policy development, proposing that three distinct, yet interconnected streams influence the process:

The MSF highlights that policy change occurs when elements from each stream converge in a policy window.

History and Development

The MSF was first proposed by John W. Kingdon to describe the agenda setting stage of the policy making process. [1] In developing his framework Kingdon took inspiration from the garbage can model of organizational choice, [2] which views organizations as anarchical processes resulting from the interaction of four streams: 1) choices, 2) problems, 3) solutions, and 4) energy from participants. Kingdon adapted this general idea to understand agenda setting in the federal government. While his MSF only includes three streams (problems, policies, politics), the general logic is similar: Separate streams run through the organization (of government), each with a life of its own. Solutions are developed whether or not they respond to a problem. Likewise sudden changes can occur in the political landscape, potentially leaving the policy community and existing problems unaddressed. According to Kingdon, the key to understanding agenda and policy change is the coupling of streams, again an idea taken from the garbage can model. At critical times, a problem is recognized, a solution is available, and the political climate allows for action. Kingdon called this situation a "policy window", which is open only for a short time. Only then, the three stream can be coupled in just the right way to yield a significant agenda change. The agents that archive such coupling have been called policy entrepreneurs by Kingdon.

Whereas Kingdon himself did little to encourage others to apply the MSF in different settings, [3] the framework has since been widely adopted and refined by other policy scholars. It was taken up in the field of comparative policy analysis, generalized to policy making systems different from the United States, and combined with the concept of the policy cycle, allowing it to be used to study not only agenda setting but all stages of the policy process, including policy formulation, decision-making, implementation, and evaluation. [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] In terms of actors and agency, Kingdon mainly focused on the role of the policy entrepreneur, raising questions about the role of other actors, especially collective policy actors. [9] As a consequence, leading scholars now describe the different streams in the multiple-streams framework as being populated by distinct collective actors, most notably epistemic communities in the problem stream, policy instrument constituencies in the policy stream, and advocacy coalitions in the politics stream. [9] [10] [11]

Related Research Articles

Public policy is an institutionalized proposal or a decided set of elements like laws, regulations, guidelines, and actions to solve or address relevant and real-world problems, guided by a conception and often implemented by programs. These policies govern and include various aspects of life such as education, health care, employment, finance, economics, transportation, and all over elements of society. The implementation of public policy is known as public administration. Public policy can be considered to be the sum of a government's direct and indirect activities and has been conceptualized in a variety of ways.

An epistemic community is a network of knowledge-based experts who help decision-makers to define the problems they face, identify various policy solutions and assess the policy outcomes. The definitive conceptual framework of an epistemic community is widely accepted as that of Peter M. Haas. He describes them as

"...a network of professionals with recognised expertise and competence in a particular domain and an authoritative claim to policy relevant knowledge within that domain or issue-area."

Policy is a deliberate system of guidelines to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes. A policy is a statement of intent and is implemented as a procedure or protocol. Policies are generally adopted by a governance body within an organization. Policies can assist in both subjective and objective decision making. Policies used in subjective decision-making usually assist senior management with decisions that must be based on the relative merits of a number of factors, and as a result, are often hard to test objectively, e.g. work–life balance policy. Moreover, Governments and other institutions have policies in the form of laws, regulations, procedures, administrative actions, incentives and voluntary practices. Frequently, resource allocations mirror policy decisions.

Agenda-setting theory suggests that the communications media, through their ability to identify and publicize issues, play a pivotal role in shaping the problems that attract attention from governments and international organizations, and direct public opinion towards specific issues. The theory suggests that the media can shape public opinion by determining what issues are given the most attention, and has been widely studied and applied to various forms of media. The way news stories and topics that impact public opinion are presented is influenced by the media. It is predicated on the idea that most individuals only have access to one source of information on most issues: the news media. Since they establish the agenda, they may affect how important some things are seen to be.

Policy analysis or public policy analysis is a technique used in the public administration sub-field of political science to enable civil servants, nonprofit organizations, and others to examine and evaluate the available options to implement the goals of laws and elected officials. People who regularly use policy analysis skills and techniques on the job, particularly those who use it as a major part of their job duties are generally known by the title policy analyst. The process is also used in the administration of large organizations with complex policies. It has been defined as the process of "determining which of various policies will achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies and the goals."

Environmental policy is the commitment of an organization or government to the laws, regulations, and other policy mechanisms concerning environmental issues. These issues generally include air and water pollution, waste management, ecosystem management, maintenance of biodiversity, the management of natural resources, wildlife and endangered species. For example, concerning environmental policy, the implementation of an eco-energy-oriented policy at a global level to address the issues of global warming and climate changes could be addressed. Policies concerning energy or regulation of toxic substances including pesticides and many types of industrial waste are part of the topic of environmental policy. This policy can be deliberately taken to influence human activities and thereby prevent undesirable effects on the biophysical environment and natural resources, as well as to make sure that changes in the environment do not have unacceptable effects on humans.

In politics, a political agenda is a list of subjects or problems (issues) to which government officials as well as individuals outside the government are paying serious attention to at any given time.

In the social sciences, framing comprises a set of concepts and theoretical perspectives on how individuals, groups, and societies organize, perceive, and communicate about reality. Framing can manifest in thought or interpersonal communication. Frames in thought consist of the mental representations, interpretations, and simplifications of reality. Frames in communication consist of the communication of frames between different actors. Framing is a key component of sociology, the study of social interaction among humans. Framing is an integral part of conveying and processing data daily. Successful framing techniques can be used to reduce the ambiguity of intangible topics by contextualizing the information in such a way that recipients can connect to what they already know.

Governance is a broader concept than government and also includes the roles played by the community sector and the private sector in managing and planning countries, regions and cities. Collaborative governance involves the government, community and private sectors communicating with each other and working together to achieve more than any one sector could achieve on its own. Ansell and Gash (2008) have explored the conditions required for effective collaborative governance. They say "The ultimate goal is to develop a contingency approach of collaboration that can highlight conditions under which collaborative governance will be more or less effective as an approach to policy making and public management" Collaborative governance covers both the informal and formal relationships in problem solving and decision-making. Conventional government policy processes can be embedded in wider policy processes by facilitating collaboration between the public, private and community sectors. Collaborative Governance requires three things, namely: support; leadership; and a forum. The support identifies the policy problem to be fixed. The leadership gathers the sectors into a forum. Then, the members of the forum collaborate to develop policies, solutions and answers.

Network governance is "interfirm coordination that is characterized by organic or informal social system, in contrast to bureaucratic structures within firms and formal relationships between them. The concepts of privatization, public private partnership, and contracting are defined in this context." Network governance constitutes a "distinct form of coordinating economic activity" which contrasts and competes with markets and hierarchies.

An epistemic community in international relations (IR) is a network of professionals with recognized knowledge and skill in a particular issue-area. They share a set of beliefs, which provide a value-based foundation for the actions of members. Members of an epistemic community also share causal beliefs, which result from their analysis of practices that contribute to set of problems in their issue-area that then allow them to see the multiple links between policy and outcomes. Third, they share notions of validity, or internationally defined criteria for validating knowledge in their area of know-how. However, the members are from all different professions. Epistemic communities also have a common set of practices associated with a set of problems towards which their professional knowledge is directed, because of the belief that human welfare will benefit as a result. Communities evolve independently and without influence of authority or government. They do not have to be large; some are made up of only a few members. Even non-members can have an influence on epistemic communities. However, if the community loses consensus, then its authority decreases.

John Wells Kingdon is Professor Emeritus and was Acting Chair of Political Science at the University of Michigan. He is a graduate of Oberlin College and the University of Wisconsin–Madison. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and was a Guggenheim fellow. He resides in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He is also a fellow at the Center for Advanced Behavioral Studies at Stanford. He served as Chair of the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan and as President of the Midwest Political Science Association, and has often been a Guest Scholar at the Brookings Institution.

Transition management is a governance approach that aims to facilitate and accelerate sustainability transitions through a participatory process of visioning, learning and experimenting. In its application, transition management seeks to bring together multiple viewpoints and multiple approaches in a 'transition arena'. Participants are invited to structure their shared problems with the current system and develop shared visions and goals which are then tested for practicality through the use of experimentation, learning and reflexivity. The model is often discussed in reference to sustainable development and the possible use of the model as a method for change.

Political feasibility analysis is used to predict the probable outcome of a proposed solution to a policy problem through examining the actors, events and environment involved in all stages of the policy-making process. It is a frequently used component of a policy analysis and can serve as an evaluative criterion in choosing between policy alternatives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental policy of the European Union</span> Environment protection policy

The European Union (EU) Environmental Policy was initiated in 1973 with the "Environmental Action Programme" at which point the Environmental Unit was formed. The policy has thereafter evolved "to cover a vast landscape of different topics enacted over many decades" (Reuters) and in 2015 the Institute for European Environmental Policy estimated that "the body of EU environmental law" amounted to 500+ directives, regulations and decisions.

"Over the past decades the European Union has put in place a broad range of environmental legislation. As a result, air, water and soil pollution has significantly been reduced. Chemicals legislation has been modernised and the use of many toxic or hazardous substances has been restricted. Today, EU citizens enjoy some of the best water quality in the world"

Policy entrepreneurs are individuals who exploit opportunities to influence policy outcomes so as to promote their own goals, without having the resources necessary to achieve this alone. They are not satisfied with merely promoting their self-interests within institutions that others have established; rather, they try to create new horizons of opportunity through innovative ideas and strategies. These persistent individuals employ innovative ideas and nontraditional strategies to promote desired policy outcomes. Whether from the private, public or third sector, one of their defining characteristics is a willingness to invest their own resources – time, energy, reputation and sometimes money – in hope of a future return. While policy entrepreneurs may try to block changes proposed by others, entrepreneurial activities usually seek to change the status quo rather than preserve it. It should be stressed, however, that although the literature has focused mainly on entrepreneurs who have led successful changes in policy, not all policy entrepreneurship ends in success. Finally, policy entrepreneurship is but one form of political participation. It is a process that involves individuals who are willing to take risks, identify policy problems and solutions, and use their political skills and timing to achieve a specified outcome". Most accounts and case studies address these individuals in a national context but the emergence of transnational policy entrepreneurs is increasingly apparent.

Epistemic democracy refers to a range of views in political science and philosophy which see the value of democracy as based, at least in part, on its ability to make good or correct decisions. Epistemic democrats believe that the legitimacy or justification of democratic government should not be exclusively based on the intrinsic value of its procedures and how they embody or express values such as fairness, equality, or freedom. Instead, they claim that a political system based on political equality can be expected to make good political decisions, and possibly decisions better than any alternative form of government .   

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Garbage can model</span> Theory of organizational decison-making

The garbage can model describes the chaotic reality of organizational decision making in an organized anarchy. The model originated in the 1972 seminal paper, A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice, written by Michael D. Cohen, James G. March, and Johan P. Olsen.

Chemical game theory is an alternative model of game theory that represents and solves problems in strategic interactions, or contested human decision making. Differences with traditional game theory concepts include the use of metaphorical molecules called “knowlecules”, which represent choices and decisions among players in the game. Using knowlecules, entropic choices and the effects of preexisting biases are taken into consideration. A game in chemical game theory is then represented in the form of a process flow diagram consisting of unit operations. The unit operations represent the decision-making processes of the players, and have similarities to the garbage can model of political science.

A policy instrument constituency is a theoretical concept in political science and describes a network of actors focused on developing, promoting, and maintaining a specific policy instrument. Instrument constituencies have been identified as the key drivers of the "policy stream" in the multiple streams framework. By actively promoting the benefits and effectiveness of the instruments they promote, instrument constituencies can significantly influence the policy agenda. This influence can lead to the adoption of an instrument even when other tools might be more effective for a given challenge. Likewise, the influence of instrument constituency can lead to problem chasing, which is the situation in which the coupling of an instrument to a policy problem is driven by the former rather than the latter. On the other hand, encouraging the growth of instrument constituencies can also be beneficial, e.g. for fostering climate-friendly transitions.

References

  1. ↑ Kingdon, John (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
  2. ↑ Cohen, M. D.; March, J. G.; Olsen, J. P. (1972). "). Garbage can model of organizational choice". Administrative Science Quarterly. 17 (1): 1–25. doi:10.2307/2392088. JSTOR   2392088.
  3. 1 2 Zahariadis, Nikolaos (2007), "The Multiple Streams Framework: Structure, Limitations, Prospects", Theories of the Policy Process, Second Edition (2 ed.), Routledge, doi:10.4324/9780367274689-3/multiple-streams-framework-nikolaos-zahariadis, ISBN   978-0-367-27468-9 , retrieved 2024-02-29
  4. ↑ Howlett, Michael; McConnell, Allan; Perl, Anthony (August 2015). "Streams and stages: R econciling K ingdon and policy process theory". European Journal of Political Research. 54 (3): 419–434. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12064. ISSN   0304-4130.
  5. ↑ Herweg, Nicole; Huß, Christian; Zohlnhöfer, Reimut (August 2015). "Straightening the three streams: Theorising extensions of the multiple streams framework". European Journal of Political Research. 54 (3): 435–449. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12089. ISSN   0304-4130.
  6. ↑ Béland, Daniel; Howlett, Michael (2016-05-26). "The Role and Impact of the Multiple-Streams Approach in Comparative Policy Analysis". Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice. 18 (3): 221–227. doi: 10.1080/13876988.2016.1174410 . ISSN   1387-6988.
  7. ↑ Cairney, Paul; Zahariadis, Nikolaos (2016-10-28), "Multiple streams approach: a flexible metaphor presents an opportunity to operationalize agenda setting processes", Handbook of Public Policy Agenda Setting, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 87–105, doi:10.4337/9781784715922.00014, ISBN   978-1-78471-592-2 , retrieved 2024-02-29
  8. ↑ Herweg, Nicole (2023), "The Multiple Streams Framework: Foundations, Refinements, and Empirical Applications", Theories Of The Policy Process (5 ed.), Routledge, doi:10.4324/9781003308201-3/multiple-streams-framework-nicole-herweg-nikolaos-zahariadis-reimut-zohlnh%C3%B6fer, ISBN   978-1-003-30820-1 , retrieved 2024-02-29
  9. 1 2 Mukherjee, Ishani; Howlett, Michael P. (2015). "Who is a Stream? Epistemic Communities, Instrument Constituencies and Advocacy Coalitions in Multiple Streams Subsystems". SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2593626. ISSN   1556-5068.
  10. ↑ Simons, Arno; Voß, Jan-Peter (2017-09-26). "The concept of instrument constituencies: accounting for dynamics and practices of knowing governance". Policy and Society. 37 (1): 14–35. doi: 10.1080/14494035.2017.1375248 . ISSN   1449-4035.
  11. ↑ Béland, Daniel; Haelg, Léonore (2020-10-06), "Mapping policy agents: policy entrepreneurs, advocacy coalitions, epistemic communities and instrument constituencies", A Modern Guide to Public Policy, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 41–56, doi:10.4337/9781789904987.00009, ISBN   978-1-78990-498-7 , retrieved 2023-12-27
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.