Advertisement

Multiple Streams and Multiple Couplings

  • Diego Sanjurjo
Chapter
Part of the International Series on Public Policy book series (ISPP)

Abstract

This Chapter introduces the reader to the conceptual framework that guides the main research of the book and which is applied in the following chapters: John Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework (MSF). The first section introduces the reader to the area of study known as policy studies and its main research themes: agenda-setting and policy formation. Their study requires the use of conceptual tools that incorporate their relation in the analysis and relate to the broader study of the policy process. In consequence, the second section addresses why the MSF is the most convenient theoretical framework for this research and then analyzes in-depth its assumptions, core elements, and functioning. Also discussed are a series of recently developed theoretical modifications that may enhance the explanatory capacity of the framework and which are also applied and evaluated in the following chapters. The chapter ends with a discussion on the framework’s limitations and theoretical contributions.

Keywords

Multiple Streams Framework Policy studies Theories of the policy process Policy change Agenda-setting 

References

  1. Bardach, Eugene. 2006. “Policy Dynamics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, edited by Michael Moran, Martin Rein, and Robert E. Goodin, 336–66. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baumgartner, Frank R., and Bryan D. Jones. 2009. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Birkland, Thomas A. 2006. “Agenda-Setting in Public Policy.” In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, edited by Frank Fischer, Gerald J. Miller, and Mara S. Sidney, 125: 43–62. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cairney, Paul, and Tanya Heikkila. 2014. “A Comparison of Theories of the Policy Process.” In Theories of the Policy Process, 3rd ed., edited by Paul A. Sabatier and Christopher M. Weible, 363–89. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cairney, Paul, and Michael D. Jones. 2016. “Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the Empirical Impact of This Universal Theory?” Policy Studies Journal 44 (1): 37–58.Google Scholar
  6. Capano, Giliberto. 2009. “Understanding Policy Change as an Epistemological and Theoretical Problem.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 11 (1): 7–31.Google Scholar
  7. Capano, Giliberto, and Michael Howlett. 2009. “Introduction: The Multidimensional World of Policy Dynamics.” In European and North American Policy Change: Drivers and Dynamics, edited by Gilberto Capano and Michael Howlett, 1–12. New York: Routledge and ECPR Studies in European Political Science.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, Michael D., James G. March, and Johan P. Olsen. 1972. “A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice.” Administrative Science Quarterly 17 (1): 1–25.Google Scholar
  9. Gallego, Raquel, Nicolás Barbieri, and Sheila González. 2016. “Reinterpreting the Multiple-Streams Framework from a Process Approach: Decision-Making and Policy-Shift in Public Health Management in Catalonia, 2003–7.” In Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework, edited by Reimut Zohlnhöfer and Friedbert W. Rüb, 231–50. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  10. Herweg, Nicole. 2016. “Clarifying the Concept of Policy-Communities in the Multiple-Streams Framework.” In Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework, edited by Reimut Zohlnhöfer and Friedbert W. Rüb, 125–45. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  11. Herweg, Nicole, Christian Huß, and Reimut Zohlnhöfer. 2015. “Straightening the Three Streams: Theorising Extensions of the Multiple Streams Framework.” European Journal of Political Research 54 (3): 435–49.Google Scholar
  12. Hogwood, Brian W., and Guy Peters. 1982. “The Dynamics of Policy Change: Policy Succession.” Policy Sciences 14: 225–45.Google Scholar
  13. Jann, Werner, and Kai Wegrich. 2007. “Theories of the Policy Cycle.” In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, edited by Benedikt Fischer, Gerald J. Miller, and Mara S. Sidney, 43–62. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  14. John, Peter. 1998. Analysing Public Policy. Critical Political Studies. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  15. ———. 2003. “Is There Life After Policy Streams, Advocacy Coalitions, and Punctuations: Using Evolutionary Theory to Explain Policy Change?” Policy Studies Journal 31 (4): 481–98.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2013. “New Directions in Public Policy: Theories of Policy Change and Variation Reconsidered.” International Conference on Public Policy, 1–36.Google Scholar
  17. Jones, Michael D., Holly L. Peterson, Jonathan J. Pierce, Nicole Herweg, Amiel Bernal, Holly Lamberta Raney, and Nikolaos Zahariadis. 2016. “A River Runs Through It: A Multiple Streams Meta-Review.” Policy Studies Journal 44 (1): 13–36.Google Scholar
  18. Kingdon, John W. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy. Colchester, UK: TBS The Book Service, Ltd.Google Scholar
  19. ———. 1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy. 2nd ed. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  20. Knaggård, Åsa. 2015. “The Multiple Streams Framework and the Problem Broker.” European Journal of Political Research 54 (3): 450–65.Google Scholar
  21. Kuhlmann, Johanna. 2016. “Clear Enough To Be Proven Wrong? Assessing the Influence of the Concept of Bounded Rationality Within the Multiple-Streams Framework.” In Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework, edited by Reimut Zohlnhöfer and Friedbert W. Rüb, 35–50. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lasswell, Harold D. 1956. The Decision Process: Seven Categories of Functional Analysis. College Park, MA: University of Maryland Press.Google Scholar
  23. ———. 1971. A Pre-View of Policy Sciences. New York: American Elsevier Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. Lindblom, Charles E. 1959. “The Science of ‘Muddling Through.’” Public Administration Review 19 (2): 79–88.Google Scholar
  25. Majone, Giandomenico. 2006. “Agenda Setting.” In The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, edited by Michael Moran, Martin Rein, and Robert E. Goodin, 228–50. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1976. Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations. Bergen, NO: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  27. Marier, P., and Jean F. Mayer. 2007. “Welfare Retrenchment as Social Justice: Pension Reform in Mexico.” Journal of Social Policy 36 (4): 585–604.Google Scholar
  28. Mucciaroni, Gary. 2013. “The Garbage Can Model and the Study of the Policy-Making Process.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Policy, edited by Eduardo Araral Jr., Scott Fritzen, Michael Howlett, M. Ramesh, and Xun Wu, 320–28. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Olsen, Johan P. 1972. “Public Policy-Making and Theories of Organizational Choice.” Scandinavian Political Studies Yearbook 7: 45–62.Google Scholar
  30. Ostrom, Elinor. 2007. “Institutional Rational Choice: An Assessment of the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework.” In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 21–64. Cambridge: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  31. Pierson, Paul. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependency, and the Study of Politics.” The American Political Science Review 94 (2): 251–67.Google Scholar
  32. Sabatier, Paul A. 2007a. “Fostering the Development of Policy Theory.” In Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed., edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 321–36. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  33. ———. 2007b. “The Need for Better Theories.” In Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed., edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 3–17. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  34. Sabatier, Paul A., and Hank C. Jenkins-Smith. 1999. “The Advocacy Coalition Framework: An Assessment.” In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 117–66. Theoretical Lenses on Public Policy Series. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sabatier, Paul A., and Christopher M. Weible. 2007. “The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Innovations and Clarifications.” In Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed., edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 189–220. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  36. Sætren, Harald. 2016. “Lost in Translation: Re-Conceptualising the Multiple-Streams Framework Back to Its Source of Inspiration.” In Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework, edited by Reimut Zohlnhöfer and Friedbert W. Rüb, 21–33. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  37. Schlager, Edella. 2007. “A Comparison of Frameworks, Theories and Models of the Policy Process.” In Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed., edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 293–319. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  38. Simon, Herbert A. 1957. Models of Man: Social and Rational. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  39. Spohr, Florian. 2016. “Path-Departing Labour-Market Reforms in the United Kingdom and Sweden: An Analysis Combining the Multiple-Streams Framework and Historical Institutionalism.” In Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework, edited by Reimut Zohlnhöfer and Friedbert W. Rüb, 251–69. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  40. Weible, Christopher M., and Paul A. Sabatier, eds. 2018. Theories of the Policy Process. 4th ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Zahariadis, Nikolaos. 1995. Markets, States and Public Policy. Privatization in Britain and France. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  42. ———. 2003. Ambiguity & Choice in Public Policy: Political Decision Making in Modern Democracies. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  43. ———. 2007. “The Multiple Streams Framework: Structure, Limitations, Prospects.” In Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed., edited by Paul A. Sabatier, 65–92. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  44. ———. 2016. “Delphic Oracles: Ambiguity, Institutions, and Multiple Streams.” Policy Sciences 49 (1): 3–12.Google Scholar
  45. Zahariadis, Nikolaos, and Christopher S. Allen. 1995. “Ideas, Networks, and Policy Streams: Privatization in Britain and Germany.” Policy Studies Review 14: 71–98.Google Scholar
  46. Zohlnhöfer, Reimut, and Friedbert W. Rüb. 2016. “Introduction: Policy-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints.” In Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple-Streams Framework, edited by Reimut Zohlnhöfer and Friedbert W. Rüb, 2–17. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  47. Zohlnhöfer, Reimut, Nicole Herweg, and Christian Huß. 2016. “Bringing Formal Political Institutions into the Multiple Streams Framework: An Analytical Proposal for Comparative Policy Analysis.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 18 (3): 243–56.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diego Sanjurjo
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Political ScienceUniversity of the Republic (UdelaR)MontevideoUruguay

Personalised recommendations