Enacting healthy checkout policies: lessons from Berkeley and Perris, California.

Kingdon's multiple streams framework (MSF) is very influential, but problems exist with its application. Most applications neither fully use the MSF's problem stream, policy stream, politics stream, policy entrepreneur, and policy window concepts nor all their subcomponents. These trends indicate a lack of shared language and understanding of the policy process necessary for the MSF's theoretical development. Most applications employing the concepts identify subcomponents but disregard their operationalizations. Moreover, research overwhelmingly cites Kingdon's 1984 publication while neglecting studies contributing to new MSF understandings. Using the Obama administration's No Child Left Behind waiver policy, this article applies the MSF concentrating on its contemporary understandings, the focus concepts, and the concepts' subcomponents while operationalizing them. This allows an enhanced analysis and MSF's policy process understanding, identifies the MSF's strengths and weaknesses, notes nuances, offers new insights, and recommends future research.Related ArticlesDavid, Charles‐Philippe. 2015. “Policy Entrepreneurs and the Reorientation of National Security Policy under the G. W. Bush Administration (2001‐04).” Politics & Policy 43 (1): 163‐195. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12106Rawat, Pragati, and John Charles Morris. 2016. “Kingdon's ‘Streams’ Model at Thirty: Still Relevant in the 21st Century?” Politics & Policy 44 (4): 608‐638. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12168Tanaka, Yugo, Andrew Chapman, Tetsuo Tezuka, and Shigeki Sakurai. 2020. “Multiple Streams and Power Sector Policy Change: Evidence from the Feed‐In Tariff Policy Process in Japan.” Politics & Policy 48 (3): 464‐489. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12357

Kingdon’s Multiple Streams, a framework to analyze agenda-setting process is widely considered as a ‘universal’ theoretical framework because of its flexibility to be applied. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the validity of this ‘universal’ term.By using the case of the establishment of Law No.13 of 2012 concerning the Privilege of Yogyakarta Special Region, this research aims to apply and examine the Kingdon’sframework. The research has been done by using the qualitative method. Interviewing key persons and interpreting written documents are main techniques in data collection process. As the result, this framework remains applicable in the Yogyakarta case. There are 3 factors that brought Yogyakarta issues into the central government’s agenda encompass problem, policy, and politics. Politics is the most dominant factor indicated byYogyakartans strong political movement and Sultanate of Yogyakarta’s political approach. In addition, Sultanate of Yogyakarta canalso be discussed as a policy entrepreneur. As the conclusion, this research has a significant contribution to Kingdon’s multiple streams framework which is still able to explain social phenomena in policy making studies although there are some concerns that need to be explored further, particularly regarding the role of media and policy entrepreneur. Kingdon,s Multiple Streams, sebuah kerangka kerja untuk menganalisis proses agenda setting secara luas dianggap sebagai kerangka kerja 'universal' karena fleksibilitasnya untuk diterapkan. Oleh karena itu, perlu untuk menyelidiki validitas dari istilah 'universal' ini. Dengan menggunakan kasus pembentukan Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2012 tentang Hak Istimewa Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menerapkan dan memeriksa kerangka kerja Kingdon. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode kualitatif. Mewawancarai informan-informan kunci dan menafsirkan dokumen tertulis adalah teknik utama dalam proses pengumpulan data. Akibatnya, kerangka kerja ini tetap berlaku dalam kasus Yogyakarta. Ada 3 faktor yang membawa masalah Yogyakarta ke dalam agenda pemerintah pusat yang mencakup masalah, kebijakan, dan politik. Politik adalah faktor paling dominan yang ditunjukkan oleh gerakan politik kuat orang Yogya dan pendekatan politik Kesultanan Yogyakarta. Selain itu, Kesultanan Yogyakarta juga dapat didiskusikan sebagai pengusaha kebijakan. Sebagai kesimpulan, penelitian ini memiliki kontribusi yang signifikan terhadap kerangka aliran ganda Kingdon yang masih mampu menjelaskan fenomena sosial dalam studi pembuatan kebijakan meskipun ada beberapa kekhawatiran yang perlu dieksplorasi lebih lanjut, terutama mengenai peran media dan pengusaha kebijakan.

Note from the Editor

A Multiple Streams analysis of the decisions to fund gender-neutral HPV vaccination in Canada.

While several federal laws including the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Family Medical Leave Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act provide some freedom from discrimination due to pregnancy and breastfeeding-related conditions, many pregnant workers in Kentucky were not covered under these existing laws. The intent of Senate Bill 18, the Kentucky Pregnant Workers Act, was to provide clarity to employers about the protections afforded to pregnant workers by law as well as the need for employers to provide the same level of accommodations for pregnant workers that are available for those who are disabled. Similar bills had been filed during the 2015 to 2018 legislative sessions, and in 2019, Senate Bill 18 passed 87-5 and was signed by the Governor on April 9, 2019. The purpose of this article is to analyze a pregnancy anti-discrimination bill that passed during the 2019 Kentucky General Assembly utilizing Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework. This article also contains multiple policy alternatives, interest group involvement related to pregnancy anti-discrimination policy, unintended consequences of policy implementation as well as potential issues with enforcement of the Kentucky Pregnant Workers Act.

Various factors limit access to and utilization of health services even when provided at subsidized cost. This results in poor utilization of services that contributes to further economic impoverishment and health care disparity. Many countries are experimenting with various approaches to tackle the poor utilization of health care services including demand-side financing policy. This paper explains the policymaking process during the formulation of safe delivery incentive program, a conditional cash transfer program in Nepal using Kindgon's multiple streams framework. Analysis of earlier policies and programs around safe motherhood concludes that high transportation cost was a major cause for poor utilization of institutional obstetric care, despite being provided at free of cost. Health was recognized as fundamental constitutional right in 2007. This assured societal support and political commitments for protecting health constitutionally. Furthermore, there was commitment from external development partners (EDPs) for investment in maternal health. Together, these problem, policy, and politics opened Kingdon's "windows of opportunity" for formulation of conditional cash transfer policy. This paper presents evolution of Aama Surakshya Karyakram and uses Kingdon's multiple streams framework to explain how problem, policy, and politics streams converged together to allow this program to be introduced in Nepal.

The Parliament of Malaysia passed the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2019 unanimously on July 16, 2019, to lower the voting age from twenty-one years old to eighteen years old. The voting reform idea emerged in 2017 before it was swiftly adopted in 2019. This study explores the agenda-setting process for this reform to understand how the idea advanced to the decision agenda. The study uses John Kingdon's multiple streams framework to identify the factors and characteristics in problem, policy, and political stream, key individuals, and policy windows that lead to lowering the voting age as agenda. The results show that the framework's attributes are evident but suggest some limitations on the study. The study contributes theoretical insights into Kingdon’s multiple streams framework.

John Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) constitutes a powerful tool for understanding the policy process, and more specifically, agenda‐setting, through three separate streams: problems, policies and politics. This article argues that the MSF would benefit from further development of the problem stream. It introduces a clearer conception of agency into the problem stream by suggesting the inclusion of the problem broker. The problem broker is a role in which actors frame conditions as public problems and work to make policy makers accept these frames. The problem broker makes use of knowledge, values and emotions in the framing of problems. The use of these three elements is seen as a prerequisite for successful problem brokering – that is, for establishing a frame in the policy sphere. Other important factors are: persistence, access to policy makers, credibility and willingness. Problem brokers also need to know who to talk to, how and when in order to make an impact. The context, in terms of, for example, audience and national mood, is also crucial. The inclusion of the problem broker into the MSF strengthens the analytical separation between streams. According to Kingdon, policies can be developed independently from problems. The MSF, therefore, enables a study of policy generation. The inclusion of the problem broker, in the same sense, makes it possible to investigate problem framing as a separate process and enables a study of actors that frame problems without making policy suggestions. The MSF is, in its current form, not able to capture what these actors do. The main argument of this article is that it is crucial to study these actors as problem framing affects the work of policy entrepreneurs and, thereby, agenda‐setting and decision making.

This article applies agenda‐setting theory, and the multiple streams framework in particular, to consider why assisted dying/assisted suicide (AD/AS) has not been legalized in the United Kingdom, and also what the prospects are for policy change. AD/AS provides an interesting test case for agenda‐setting theory, which tends to focus on governmental agendas (Kingdon 2011, 3) and has thus been said to ‘say less about the policy outcomes of such nonpoliticized policy processes’ (Green‐Pedersen 2007, 286) that generally characterize morality polices. Agenda‐setting theory provides valuable insights into this case, which reveals an important role for government even on this free vote matter of conscience. However, the case highlights aspects of agenda‐setting theory relating to assumptions on legitimacy and the power of persuasion that fare less well, and which have implications for the future study of morality policies. Related Articles Angervil, G. 2021. “A Comprehensive Application of Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework: An Analysis of the Obama Administration's No Child Left Behind Waiver Policy.” Politics & Policy 49, no. 5: 980–1020. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12432 . Knackmuhs, E., Farmer, J., and Knapp, D. 2020. “The Interaction of Policy Narratives, Moral Politics, and Criminal Justice Policy Beliefs.” Politics & Policy 48, no. 2: 288–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12343 . Silagadze, N. 2021. “Abortion Referendums: Is There a Recipe for Success?” Politics & Policy 49, no. 2: 352–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12398 .

Bringing in critical frameworks to investigate agenda-setting for the social determinants of health: Lessons from a multiple framework analysis.

An Analysis of policy decision process using Kingdon's multiple streams framework - Focusing on laws concerning prohibition of solicitation and procurement of gifts

The fourth and final 2009 issue of PSJ showcases the international breadth as well as the rigorous theoretically-driven scholarship found in contemporary public policy research. Readers will find applications on implementation and network analysis, the multiple streams framework, the advocacy coalition framework, attribution theory, policy disruptions, and policy entrepreneurs. This issue features articles on a wide range of issue-areas, including poverty, welfare policy, central-bank independence, education policy, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual rights. As editors, we are proud to feature articles written by authors residing in New Zealand, the United States, Israel, and the Netherlands. We offer three articles on salient public policy issues. The lead article is a thought provoking piece contributed by Douglas Besharov and Douglas Call entitled, “Income Transfers Alone Won't Eradicate Poverty.” This article provides a controversial perspective on the effect of government transfer programs and whether what is commonly treated as “poverty” (and addressed with government transfer programs) is better conceptualized as “income inequality.” The argument is that income inequality is best remedied by raising income and human capital. Readers must not miss the empirical and logical rebuttal by Robert Plotnick and a reply by Besharov and Call. This exchange initiates what the Editors see as an occasional point/counterpoint exchange over especially provocative arguments. Next we explore what explains support for the rights of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Guided by attrition theory, Greg Lewis responds to this question by showing that growing support for rights of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals is largely explained by beliefs in the biological basis of homosexuality. We are also proud to present an analysis of the social welfare systems in the United States. Ae-Sook Kim and Edward T. Jennings Jr. present their work entitled, “Effects of U.S. States' Social Welfare Systems on Population Health.” Their paper addresses the consequences of the social welfare system on the population's health. Offering a rare sub-national analysis of social welfare and population health, the authors find that improved social welfare programs enhance a population's heath condition. Innovations in policy process research can be found in five articles. The first is another contribution to PSJ's ongoing synthetic review series. We are gratified to present PSJ readers a review and synthesis of the policy entrepreneur literature by Michael Mintrom in “Policy Entrepreneurship and Policy Change.” Mintrom's piece demonstrates that the policy entrepreneur is central to a number of distinct policy approaches, in particular when considering policy change. Mintrom will likely serve as a must read for any scholar seeking to contribute to our shared understanding about the role of policy entrepreneurs in policy processes. In “The Puzzle of the Diffusion of Central Bank Independence Reforms: Insights from an Agent-Based Simulation,” Orit Rapport, David Levi-Faur, and Dan Miodownik offer probably the first agent-based model inspired by Kingdon's multiple streams framework on the diffusion across governments of central bank independence. They place special emphasis on three aspects of the diffusion process: the likelihood of reform; the rate of adoption; and the time to the outbreak. Chris Ansell, Sarah Reckhow, and Andrew Kelly integrate the civic capacity literature and the advocacy coalition framework in “How to Reform a Reform Coalition: Outreach, Agenda Expansion, and Brokerage in Urban School Reform.” Ansell, Reckhow, and Kelly compare advocacy coalitions to relatively broad civic coalitions using social network analysis in an Oakland school district. Inspired by policy network analysis, Joop Koppejan, Mirjam Kars, and Haiko van der Voort describe a framework for dealing with legislative representation and executive power in terms of the content, evolution, and outcomes of the policy process. Drawing upon the politics in a Dutch province, they argue the merits of horizontal networks and vertical politics. Finally, Peter May explores how policy disruptions affect agendas across policy subsystems post the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. May's important findings—that only limited system disruptions occur during a time of crisis—suggests that stressed bureaucratic systems deployed particularly stable subsystems as a means to buffer and minimize the threatening disruptions. As co-editors, we are doubly appreciative to the authors and reviewers for the quality of the submissions in this current issue. Once again, we encourage authors in the public policy community to continue to support PSJ bysubmitting your best manuscripts; to our referees, please note that your always thoughtful and constructive reviewsbenefit both the authors and the PSJ readership. Thank you.

This article analyzes three cultural entities in Beijing, China: National Centre for the Performing Arts, 798 Arts District, and Today Art Museum using two lenses: Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework (MS) and concepts of arts entrepreneurship, in order to examine these entities' development and current condition. The performing arts center has become a source of national pride, the arts district now is one of the world's largest, and the museum paved the way for a new kind of “private” institution in China. Concepts including policy streams, policy windows, and policy entrepreneurs ground the analysis. In order to enrich the perspective, we explore theories in the growing field of arts entrepreneurship and their applicability to the changing economic environment of China. We point to the realities of policy formation as well as the innovative economic growth fostered through arts entrepreneurship in China, grounding the analysis in a positivist perspective due to the opacity of the process in that country. While Multiple Streams Framework is a powerful tool with which to understand and interpret policy formation, change, and adaptation, it is the arts entrepreneurship principles that provide important ways to look at creative commerce, both from the perepective of the individual and the organization. We find that, while each arts entity was formed under very different circumstances, they all now incorporate facets of arts entrepreneurship including brand building, market development, and audience growth. Frameworks and theories must be flexible and resilient in order to be adapted to more diverse contexts. By reframing cultural policy and arts entrepreneurship theory to incorporate culturally relevant data, they each can provide valuable tools for scholars, policymakers, and municipal leaders. This allows the understanding of key theoretical components to expand, reflecting political and social realities while ensuring the relevance and viability of these analytical tools in multi-cultural contexts.

This study provides an academic analysis of the development of the Lifelong Education Voucher policy, employing Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework(MSF). Problems include indicators of lifelong learning participation rates and adult competencies, and the limitations of lifelong learning policies to address existing gaps in lifelong learning participation. Additionally, the political stream scrutinized the influence of the social environment, regime transitions, and the initiatives of lifelong learning organizations in revising lifelong learning legislation and enhancing the overall system. Lastly, the policy stream delved into the proposals put forth by the Ministry of Education(MOE) and lifelong learning organizations aimed at bolstering the Lifelong Education Voucher. The analysis underscores that the political stream emerges as the primary driving force for the emergence of the policy window, in conjunction with issue-driven dynamics. Within the policy stream, lifelong learning organizations initially advocate for broader support for marginalized groups, later the MOE suggested alternatives. The finalization of this policy is closely aligned with the budget allocation determined by the National Assembly. The MOE assumes a pivotal role as a policy leader, while lifelong learning organizations also exhibit leadership in policy advocacy. This highlights the incongruities within the policy-making process, as envisioned in the MSF, emphasizing the necessity for collaboration between formal and informal stakeholders in the realm of policy-making.

The EU is often characterized as an economic giant but a political dwarf. In recognition of the need to develop its diplomatic persona, it is increasingly deploying soft power. Since the adoption of the sports competence in the Lisbon Treaty, the EU has considered the potential of sport to assist with the amplification of foreign policy messages. However, unlike many nation‐states, it has not yet developed a sport diplomacy strategy, although the adoption of one is being discussed at ministerial level. Employing Kingdon's multiple streams framework, this article explains how solutions have become joined to problems and that increasingly favourable political forces have opened a policy window through which the first ever EU sport diplomacy strategy should pass. However, the article also urges caution on policy entrepreneurs by advising on the circumstances in which Kingdon's three streams will couple and a strategy emerge.