Search

The paper discusses how institutions can be introduced into the Multiple Streams Framework. While the existing literature does not systematically integrate political institutions that structure the decision-making process into the Multiple Streams Framework, the article suggests distinguishing two coupling processes, one for agenda setting and one for decision making. During the latter coupling, the main issue is the adoption of proposals – and formal institutions play an important role here. Political entrepreneurs can ensure the adoption of their bills under conditions of institutional pluralism by conceding concessions, proposing package deals or manipulating the severity or salience of problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article adapts the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) to the European Union (EU) agenda-setting process. Therefore, it defines functional equivalents of the framework's elements in the EU and clarifies which changes in the problem stream and political stream open policy windows. The article probes the usefulness of proposed adaptations by examining the rise of issues contained in the three natural gas directives passed in 1998, 2003, and 2009 on the EU's decision agenda. The findings support the MSF explanation of the first and third gas directives, but not all necessary conditions were met regarding the second gas directive process. Building on these insights, the article enriches MSF scholarship and charts a course for future research that overcomes limitations with adapting the framework to the EU policy process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses content analysis of recent Multiple Streams Approach (MSA) research to determine the scope of MSA applications, examining the consistency, and coherence with which concepts of MSA are applied. Our analysis examines peer-reviewed articles testing MSA concepts available in English published from 2000 through 2013 ( N = 311). Among other findings, we observe that MSA is applied to study 65 different countries, at multiple levels of governance, across 22 different policy areas, and by researchers spanning the globe. Our findings suggest that while MSA is prolific, consistency across applications-in terms of operationalization of MSA core concepts-is needed to facilitate theoretical development of the approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction to the forum section on the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) developed by John W. Kingdon argues that the conditions under which policy making takes place today increasingly resemble the assumptions upon which Kingdon built his lens. At the same time, while the framework is extremely successful with regard to citations and has been applied in various contexts that often differ remarkably from those for which the framework was originally developed, a systematic theoretical debate about the Multiple Streams Framework is still lacking. It is the intention to spark such a debate with this forum section. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]