Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

European Union Policy-Making pp 23–72Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Theoretical Approach to the Policy Process: The Multiple Streams Framework

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: International Series on Public Policy ((ISPP))

Abstract

Building on an extensive literature review, Herweg modifies the multiple streams framework (MSF) in order to explain agenda change and policy change in the European Union (EU). She suggests considering two coupling processes, one capturing agenda-setting (called agenda coupling) and another one capturing decision-making (called decision coupling). Next, Herweg defines functional equivalents of the MSF’s core concepts in the EU, given that the framework was derived from observations of agenda change in the United States. As one of the book’s key objectives is testing how well the MSF fares in explaining EU policy processes, she spells out the framework’s causal mechanisms and derives a set of hypotheses regarding agenda change and policy change in the EU, which guide the book’s empirical analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • (EEC) No 31, (EAEC) No 11. Regulation Laying Down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 160/2009 of 23 February 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackrill, Robert, and Adrian Kay. 2011. Multiple Streams in EU Policy-Making: The Case of the 2005 Sugar Reform. Journal of European Public Policy 18(1): 72–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackrill, Robert, Adrian Kay, and Nikolaos Zahariadis. 2013. Ambiguity, Multiple Streams, and EU Policy. Journal of European Public Policy 20(6): 871–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, Svein S. 1993. Towards a Common EC Energy Policy. In Making Policy in Europe: The Europeification of National Policy-Making, ed. Svein S. Andersen and Kjell A. Eliassen, 133–154. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Araral, Eduardo, Scott Fritzen, Howlett Michael, M. Ramesh, and Xun Wu, eds. 2013. Routledge Handbook of Public Policy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bache, Ian. 2013. Measuring Quality of Life for Public Policy: An Idea Whose Time Has Come? Agenda-Setting Dynamics in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 20(1): 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, Caner. 2009. Policy Entrepreneurship and Institutional Change: Multilevel Governance of Central Banking Reform. Governance 22(4): 571–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, Frank R., Christoffer Green-Pedersen, and Bryan D. Jones. 2006. Comparative Studies of Policy Agendas. Journal of European Public Policy 13(7): 959–974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendor, Jonathan, Terry M. Moe, and Kenneth W. Shotts. 2001. Recycling the Garbage Can. An Assessment of the Research Program. American Political Science Review 95(1): 169–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkland, Thomas A. 1997. After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events. American Governance and Public Policy. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blankenau, Joe. 2001. The Fate of National Health Insurance in Canada and the United States: A Multiple Streams Explanation. Policy Studies Journal 29(1): 38–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boscarino, Jessica E. 2009. Surfing for Problems: Advocacy Group Strategy in U.S. Forestry Policy. Policy Studies Journal 37(3): 415–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burstein, Paul, Shawn Bauldry, and Paul Froese. 2005. Bill Sponsorship and Congressional Support for Policy Proposals, from Introduction to Enactment or Disappearance. Political Research Quarterly 58(2): 295–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, Paul, and Tanya Heikkila. 2014. A Comparison of Theories of the Policy Process. In Sabatier and Weible 2014, 363–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capano, Gilberto. 2013. Policy Dynamics and Change. The Never-Ending Puzzle. In E. Araral, S. Fritzen, M. Howlett, M. Ramesh, and X. Wu, Routledge Handbook of Public Policy, 451–461, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, Jeffrey J., and Sara R. Rinfret. 2013. The Environmental Protection Agency Regulates Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Is Anyone Paying Attention? Review of Political Research 30(3): 263–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowles, Green M. 1995. Setting the Agenda for a New Europe: The ERT and EC 1992. Journal of Common Market Studies 33(4): 501–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decker, Frank, and Jared Sonnicksen. 2011. An Alternative Approach to European Union Democratization: Re-Examining the Direct Election of the Commission President. Government and Opposition 46(2): 168–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dür, Andreas. 2008. Interest Groups in the European Union: How Powerful Are They? In Interest Group Politics in Europe: Lessons from EU Studies and Comparative Politics, ed. Jan Beyers, Rainer Eising, and William A. Maloney, 110–128. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dür, Andreas, Patrick Bernhagen, and David Marshall. 2015. Interest Group Success in the European Union: When (and why) Does Business Lose? Comparative Political Studies 48(8): 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dür, Andreas, and Dirk De Bièvre. 2007. Inclusion Without Influence? NGOs in European Trade Policy. Journal of Public Policy 27(1): 79–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dür, Andreas, and Gemma Mateo. 2014. Public Opinion and Interest Group Influence: How Citizen Groups Derailed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. Journal of European Public Policy 21(8): 1199–1217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eising, Rainer. 2000. Liberalisierung und Europäisierung: Die regulative Reform der Elektrizitätsversorgung in Grossbritannien, der Europäischen Gemeinschaft und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. 2006. White Paper on a European Communication Policy: COM(2006)35 Final.

    Google Scholar 

  • Exworthy, Mark, and Martin Powell. 2004. Big Windows and Little Windows: Implementation in the ‘Congested State’. Public Administration 102(12): 2294–2302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faletti, Tulia G., and Julia F. Lynch. 2009. Context and Causal Mechanisms in Political Analysis. Comparative Political Studies 42(9): 1143–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, Martha S. 1989. Order Without Design: Information Production and Policy Making. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finon, Dominique, and John Surrey. 1996. The Future of EU Energy Policy. In European Energy Policies in a Changing Environment, ed. Francis McGowan, 165–183. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, Neil. 2001. Institutional Entrepreneurs and Cultural Frames: The Case of the European Union’s Single Market Program. European Societies 3(3): 261–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, Klaus H. 2012. Political Time in the EU. In The Oxford Handbook of the European Union, ed. E. Jones, A. Menon, and S. Weatherill, 703–715. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grøn, Caroline H., and Heidi H. Salomonsen. 2015. Who's at the Table? An Analysis of Ministers Participation in EU Council of Ministers Meetings. Journal of European Public Policy 22(8): 1071–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes-Renshaw, Fiona, and Helen Wallace. 2006. The Council of Ministers. 2nd ed. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Herweg, Nicole. 2013. Der Multiple-Streams-Ansatz—ein Ansatz, dessen Zeit gekommen ist? Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 7(4): 321–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015a. Der Multiple Streams Ansatz. In Handbuch Policy-Forschung, ed. Georg Wenzelburger and Reimut Zohlnhöfer, 325–353. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015b. Explaining European Agenda-Setting Using the Multiple Streams Framework: The Case of European Natural Gas Regulation. Policy Sciences 49(1): 13–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Clarifying the Concept of Policy Communities in the Multiple Streams Framework. In Zohlnhöfer and Rüb 2016a, 125–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herweg, Nicole, Christian Huß, and Reimut Zohlnhöfer. 2015. Straightening the Three Streams: Theorizing Extensions of the Multiple Streams Framework. European Journal of Political Research 54(3): 435–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A. 1977. Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy. American Political Science Review 71: 1467–1487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, Simon, and Bjørn Høyland. 2011. The Political System of the European Union. 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, Michael. 1998. Predictable and Unpredictable Policy Windows: Institutional and Exogenous Correlates of Canadian Federal Agenda-Setting. Canadian Journal of Political Science XXXI(3): 495–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Immergut, Ellen M. 1992. Health Politics: Interests and Institutions in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jann, Werner, and Kai Wegrich. 2007. Theories of the policy cycle. In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, ed. Frank Fischer, Gerald Miller, and Mara S. Sidney, 43–62. Boca Raton: CRC/Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Clare L., Sylvia M. Tunstall, and Edmund C. Penning-Rowsell. 2005. Floods as Catalysts for Policy Change: Historical Lessons from England and Wales. International Journal of Water Resources Development 21(4): 561–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Michael D., Holly L. Petersen, Jonathan J. Pierce, Nicole Herweg, Amiel Bernal, Holly Lamberta, and Nikolaos Zahariadis. 2016. A River Runs Through It: A Multiple Streams Meta-Review. Policy Studies Journal 44(1): 13–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, David, and David Earnshaw. 2008. The European Parliament. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Keeler, John T.S. 1993. Opening the Window for Reform: Mandates, Crises, and Extraordinary Policy-Making. Comparative Political Studies 25(4): 433–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, John W. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1994. Agendas, Ideas, and Policy Change. In New Perspectives on American Politics, ed. Lawrence C. Dodd and Calvin C. Jillson, 215–230. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Updated 2nd ed. Longman/White Plains: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klüver, Heike. 2013. Lobbying in the European Union: Interest Groups, Lobbying Coalitions, and Policy Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • König, Thomas. 2007. Discontinuity: Another Source of the EU’s Democratic Deficit? European Union Politics 8(3): 411–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreutler, Maren. 2014. The Formation of Coalitions in the European Union: A Comparative Analysis of Initiatives to Influence European Energy Policy. 1st ed. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Publications, Landmarks. 2008. The European Public Affairs Directory 19 (2009): The Comprehensive Guide to Opinion-Formers in the Capital of Europe. Brussels: Landmarks Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Emergy G.I. 2003. Policy Windows on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Justice System Journal 24(3): 301–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lelieveldt, Herman, and Sebastiaan Princen. 2011. The Politics of the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, Björn, Anne Rasmussen, and Andreas Warntjen. 2008. Party Politics as Usual? The Role of Political Parties in EU Legislative Decision-Making. Journal of European Public Policy 15(8): 1107–1126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Martin. 2005. Review: Ambiguity and Choice in Public Policy: Political Decision Making in Modern Democracies by Nikolaos Zahariadis (2003). Public Administration 83(1): 260–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, Niklas. 1976. Generalized Media and the Problem of Contingency. In Explorations in General Theory in Social Science: Essays in Honor of Talcott Parsons, ed. Jan J. Loubser, Rainer C. Baum, Andrew Effrat, and Victor M. Lidz, 507–532. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone, Giandomenico. 1997. From the Positive to the Regulatory State: Causes and Consequences of Changes in the Mode of Governance. Journal of Public Policy 17(2): 139–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe. In A Reader on Regulation, ed. Robert Baldwin, Colin Scott, and Christopher Hood, 192–215. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Matláry, Janne H. 1997. Energy Policy in the European Union. London: MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mazey, Sonia, and Jeremy Richardson. 1993. Environmental Groups and the EC: Challenges and Opportunities. In A Green Dimension for the European Community: Political Issues and Processes, ed. David Judge, 109–128. London, England: Frank Cass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazey, Sonia P., and Jeremy J. Richardson. 1992. British Pressure Groups in the European Community: The Challenge of Brussels. Parliamentary Affairs 45(1): 92–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miebach, Bernhard. 2012. Organisationstheorie: Problemstellung—Modelle—Entwicklung. 2nd ed. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. The Garbage Can Model and the Study of the Policy-Making Process. In Routledge Handbook of Public Policy, ed. Eduardo Araral, Scott Fritzen, Michael Howlett, M. Ramesh, and Xun Wu, 320–328. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mucciaroni, Gary. 1992. The Garbage Can Model & the Study of Policy Making: A Critique. Polity 24(3): 459–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Münter, Michael. 2005. Verfassungsreform im Einheitsstaat: Die Politik der Dezentralisierung in Großbritannien. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B.G. 1994. Agenda-Setting in the European Community. Journal of European Public Policy 1(1): 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, Mark A. 1997. Delegation, Agency, and Agenda Setting in the European Community. International Organization 51(1): 99–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poptcheva, Eva-Maria. 2013. Parliament’s Legislative Initiative. Library Briefing, pp. 1–8, October 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. At a Glance. The European Commission’s Right to Withdraw a Legislative Proposal. European Parliament Research Service PE554.204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Princen, Sebastiaan. 2007. Agenda-Setting in the European Union: A Theoretical Exploration and Agenda for Research. Journal of European Public Policy 14(1): 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Princen, Sebastiaan, and Mark Rhinard. 2006. Crashing and Creeping: Agenda-Setting Dynamics in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 13(7): 1119–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli, Claudio M. 2000. Public Policy Comes of Age. Journal of European Public Policy 7(1): 130–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhinard, Mark. 2010. Framing Europe: The Policy Shaping Strategies of the European Commission. Dordrecht: Republic of Letters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, Jeremy. 2006. Policy-Making in the EU. Interests, Ideas and Garbage Cans of Primeval Soup. In European Union: Power and Policy-Making, 3rd ed., ed. J.J. Richardson, 3–30. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridde, Valéry. 2009. Policy Implementation in an African State: An Extension of Kingdon’s Multiple-Streams Approach. Public Administration 87(4): 938–954.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Nancy C., and Paula T. King. 1991. Policy Entrepreneurs: Their Activity Structure and Function in the Policy Process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 1(2): 147–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rüb, Friedbert W. 2008. Policy-Analyse unter den Bedingungen von Kontingenz: Konzeptionelle Überlegungen zu einer möglichen Neuorientierung. In Die Zukunft der Policy-Forschung: Theorien, Methoden, Anwendungen, 1st ed., ed. Frank Janning, 88–111. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, Paul A. 1991. Toward Better Theories of the Policy Process. PS: Political Science & Politics 24: 147–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Clear Enough to be Wrong. Journal of European Public Policy 7(1): 135–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007a. “Fostering the Development of Policy Theory.” In Sabatier 2007b, 321–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———., eds. 2007b. Theories of Policy Process. 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, Paul A., and Christopher M. Weible, eds. 2014. Theories of the Policy Process. 3rd ed. New York: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saetren, Harald. 2016. Lost in Translation: Re-Conceptualizing the Multiple Streams Back to its Source of Inspiration. In Zohlnhöfer and Rüb 2016a, 21–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, Fritz W. 1997. Games Real Actors Play: Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. In Theoretical Lenses on Public Policy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlager, Edella. 1999. A Comparison of Frameworks, Theories, and Models of Policy Processes. In Theories of the Policy Process, 1st ed., ed. Paul A. Sabatier, 233–260. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sierck, Gabriela M., Patrizia Robbe, and Carmen Sinnokrot. 2006. Bessere Rechtsetzung. Info-Brief/Wissenschaftliche Dienste des Deutschen Bundestages. Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag, Wissenschaftliche Dienste, WD 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, David A., E.B. Rochford Jr., Steven K. Worden, and Robert D. Benford. 1986. Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation. American Sociological Review 51(4): 464–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, Diane. 2000. Non-governmental Policy Transfer. The Strategies of Independent Policy Institutes. Governance 13(1): 45–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storch, Sabine, and Georg Winkel. 2013. Coupling Climate Change and Forest Policy: A Multiple Streams Analysis of Two German Case Studies. Forest Policy and Economics: 14–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, Wolfgang, and Philippe C. Schmitter. 1991. From National Corporatism to Transnational Pluralism: Organized Interests in the Single European Market. Politics & Society 19(2): 134–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallberg, Jonas. 2003. The Agenda-Shaping Powers of the EU Council Presidency. Journal of European Public Policy 10(1): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Leadership and Negotiation in the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Travis, Rick, and Nikolaos Zahariadis. 2002. A Multiple Streams Model of U.S. Foreign Aid Policy. Policy Studies Journal 30(4): 495–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, George, Christian B. Jensen, Anastassios Kalandrakis, and Amie Kreppel. 2001. Legislative Procedures in the European Union: An Empirical Analysis. British Journal of Political Science 31(4): 573–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Stigt, Rien, Peter P. Driessen, and Tejo J. Spit. 2013. A Window on Urban Sustainability. Integration of Environmental Interests in Urban Planning Through ‘Decision Windows’. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 42: 18–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1985. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriß der verstehenden Soziologie. With the assistance of J. Winckelmann. 5., Rev. Aufl.,. Tübingen: Mohr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weible, Christopher M. 2014. Advancing Policy Process Research. In Sabatier and Weible 2014: 391–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weir, Margaret. 1992. Politics and Jobs: The Boundaries of Employment Policy in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westlake, Martin. 1995. The Council of the European Union. London, New York: Cartermill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahariadis, Nikolaos. 1992. To Sell or Not to Sell? Telecommunications Policy in Britain and France. Journal of Public Policy 12(4): 355–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. Markets, States, and Public Policy: Privatization in Britain and France. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Selling British Rail: An Idea Whose Time has Come? Comparative Political Studies 29(4): 400–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. Political Decision Making in Modern Democracies. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. The Multiple Streams Framework: Structure, Limitations, Prospects. In Sabatier 2007b: 65–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Ambiguity and Choice in European Public Policy. Journal of European Public Policy 15(4): 514–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Building Better Theoretical Frameworks of the European Union’s Policy Process. Journal of European Public Policy 20(6): 807–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Ambiguity and Multiple Streams. In Sabatier and Weible 2014, 25–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohlnhöfer, Reimut, and Nicole Herweg. 2014. Paradigmatischer Wandel in der deutschen Arbeitsmarktpolitik: Die Hartz-Gesetze. In Rapide Politikwechsel in der Bundesrepublik. Gründe, Akteure, Dynamiken und Probleme, ed. Friedbert W. Rüb. Special issue, ZfP-Sonderband 6 (6): 91–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 18(3): 243–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohlnhöfer, Reimut, and Friedbert Rüb, eds. 2016a. Decision-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints: Assessing the Multiple Streams Framework. Colchester: ECPR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohlnhöfer, Reimut, and Friedbert W. Rüb. 2016b. Introduction: Policy-Making Under Ambiguity and Time Constraints. In Zohlnhöfer and Rüb 2016a, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Political Science, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Nicole Herweg

Authors
  1. Nicole Herweg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Herweg, N. (2017). Theoretical Approach to the Policy Process: The Multiple Streams Framework. In: European Union Policy-Making. International Series on Public Policy . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49400-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation