John W. Kingdon

John W. Kingdon has written several books on agenda-setting and the policy process, and is the author of the multiple streams model (1984). Kingdon’s model, which focuses more on the flow and timing of policy action than on its component steps, is extremely useful in understanding the complexities and realities of policy-making. In this model, attention is focused on three streams: the problem stream, the policy stream, and the political stream, which move independently through the policy system.

As stressed by Porter and Hicks, this model aims to explain why some issues and problems become prominent in the policy agenda and are eventually translated into concrete policies while others never do so. Kingdon’s starting point is the "garbage can model" of policy-making developed in 1972 by Cohen, March, and Olsen. This model contradicts the rational approach to decision-making, claiming that policies are not the product of rational actions, because policy actors rarely evaluate many alternatives for action and because they do not compare them systematically.

Kingdon’s model underlines the existence of three distinct, but complementary, processes, or streams, in policy-making. It is the coupling of these streams that allows, at a given time and in a given context, for a particular issue to be turned into a policy. These three streams are [1]:

  • The stream of problems. The rationale behind this stream is that a given situation has to be identified and explicitly formulated as a problem for it to bear the slightest chance of being transformed into a policy. Indeed, a situation that is not defined as a problem, and for which alternatives are never envisaged or proposed, will never be converted into a policy issue.

  • The stream of policies. The second stream used to explain how an issue rises or falls on an agenda has to do with the stream of policies. This stream is concerned with the formulation of policy alternatives and proposals. An extremely important aspect of this model is the belief that such proposals and solutions are not initially built to resolve given problems, but rather they float in search of problems to which they can be tied.

  • The stream of politics. Although they take place independently from the other two streams, political events, such as an impending election or a change in government, can lead a given topic and policy to be included or excluded from the agenda. Indeed, the dynamic and special needs created by a political event may move the agenda around.

As such, no stream is decisive to the overall policy process, though all streams are important. It is precisely when all streams meet and coincide that an issue is transformed from a mere topic and/or problem into a concrete policy. What happens then is a compelling problem is linked to a plausible solution that meets the test of political feasibility [2]. It is not always necessary, however, for all three streams to meet simultaneously for a policy to develop. Indeed, in some cases, partial couplings, the meeting of two of the streams, are sufficient, though the whole policy-making process is made more uncertain. Kingdon argues that policy entrepreneurs play a key role in connecting the streams, and that there are different types of couplings. Indeed, couplings can be more or less “tight” or “loose,” depending on the degree to which streams depend on each other for an issue to develop into a concrete policy [3].

Contrary to the stages model, the multiple streams model does not picture the policy-making process as one that involves steps and stages. Rather, it views the policy process as being the result of the intersection of at least two independent streams. In this model, there is no chronological sequence or priority among the streams. On the contrary, streams act and react according to their own logic, until a window of opportunity is opened and two or more streams coincide and coalesce into a policy.

The major strength of this model is that it recognises that the policy process is fluid and non-linear, and that it involves a vast number of actors and forces.

1. For more information, see Boussaguet, L., Jacquot, S., et Ravinet, P., Dictionnaire des politiques publiques, Presses de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques, 2004, p.217-225.

2. Op. cit., p.19.

3. For further information, see Lemieux, V., L’étude des politiques publiques : les acteurs et leur pouvoir, 2e édition, Les Presses de l’Université Laval, Canada, 2002.