Daniel Shephard recently co-authored a cross-national study of policy influencing titled, “Kingdon's multiple streams approach in new political contexts: Consolidation, configuration, and new findings” (Shephard et al., 2020). The study contributes to the literature on Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Analysis (MSA) and how third sector organizations function as policy entrepreneurs as they attempt to (a) expand spaces for political participation and (b) change policies.

Kingdon’s (1984) Multiple Streams Approach has generated an expansive body of literature on policy influencing (Cairney & Jones, 2016). However, it has often been limited to single cases in the United States, Europe, and Commonwealth countries (Jones et al., 2016), despite an increased interest in synthesizing knowledge across cases (Engler & Herweg, 2019; Herweg, Zahariadis, & Zohlnhöfer, 2018; Rawat & Morris, 2016). This article addresses these shortcomings by applying Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to a dataset of 24 cases that analyzed the effectiveness of policy influencing by Oxfam and its local partners across 20 countries. This unique dataset enabled an exploration of key aspects of MSA across diverse cases and the differential role of global and local organizations as policy entrepreneurs.

The study identifies four pathways to successfully expanding spaces for civic engagement and two pathways for successfully changing policies.  A comparison of the pathways indicates that configurations for successfully expanding spaces for civic engagement are distinct from those for changing policies and that the use of a window of opportunity is neither necessary nor sufficient. They also find that cases are more successful when local policy entrepreneurs play a more prominent role when seeking to change policies, with the global organization playing a less visible supporting role.  Meanwhile, global policy entrepreneurs may play a more prominent role in expanding spaces for civic engagement in certain contexts that are more civically restricted. Furthermore, some pathways to successful policy influencing are more widespread across multiple contexts while some may have a more restricted applicability. For example, influencing activities are broadly more effective when using insider strategies but when they are focused on topics related to marginalized communities, a combination of more collaborative insider strategies with more confrontational outsider strategies may be more effective. Finally, the study demonstrates the opportunities and limitations of using QCA to consolidate insights for MSA across multiple cases.

Additional details on the four pathways to expanding civic space and two pathways to changing policies can be found in the full article published in Governance.  

References

Cairney, P., & Jones, M. D. (2016). Kingdon's Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the Empirical Impact of this Universal Theory? Policy Studies Journal, 44(1), 37-58.

Engler, F., & Herweg, N. (2019). Of Barriers to Entry for Medium and Large n Multiple Streams Applications: Methodological and Conceptual Considerations. Policy Studies Journal, 47(4), 905-926. doi:10.1111/psj.12235

Herweg, N., Zahariadis, N., & Zohlnhöfer, R. (2018). The multiple streams framework: Foundations, refinements, and empirical applications. In C. M. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (Fourth ed.). New York: Routledge.

Jones, M. D., Peterson, H. L., Pierce, J. J., Herweg, N., Bernal, A., Lamberta Raney, H., & Zahariadis, N. (2016). A river runs through it: A multiple streams meta‐review. Policy Studies Journal, 44(1), 13-36.

Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.

Rawat, P., & Morris, J. C. (2016). Kingdon's “Streams” Model at Thirty: Still Relevant in the 21st Century? Politics & Policy, 44(4), 608-638.

Shephard, D. D., Ellersiek, A., Meuer, J., Rupietta, C., Mayne, R., & Cairney, P. (2020). Kingdon's multiple streams approach in new political contexts: Consolidation, configuration, and new findings. Governance, 2020, 1-21. doi:10.1111/gove.12521