Multiple streams approach: a flexible metaphor presents an opportunity to operationalize agenda setting processes
Multiple streams approach: a flexible metaphor presents an opportunity to operationalize agenda setting processes
复制标题
多流方法：灵活的比喻提供了实施议程设置流程的机会
DOI：
10.4337/9781784715922.00014
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
N. Zahariadis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Cairney;N. Zahariadis
约翰·金登（John Kingdon）的多流方法（MSA）提醒我们，短期、不稳定、高调议程设置的令人兴奋的世界会受到幕后进行的长期、持续流程的影响。公众、媒体和政策制定者对新问题的注意力转移可能是戏剧性的，但只有当政策制定者有意愿和能力解决问题时，政策才可能发生戏剧性的变化。Kingdon用三个独立的“流”来描述政策制定者对问题的关注和他们采取有意义的解决方案之间的差距。他反对线性过程的观点，在这个过程中，按照这个顺序，决策者确定一个需要解决的问题，官僚机构提出一系列可能的解决方案，决策者选择最佳选择。相反，这三个行为应该被视为能够以任何顺序发生的单独的流。特别是，可能需要在预期决策者关注某个问题的情况下提出解决方案，因为在有机会从头开始考虑备选方案之前，注意力往往会转向另一个问题。Kingdon认为，在“机会之窗”期间，这三股潮流必须同时汇集在一起，在这个窗口中，人们高度关注一个问题，存在一个可行的解决方案，政策制定者有动机和机会选择它。相反，在任何人有机会解决第一个问题之前，注意力可能会急剧转移到另一个问题上。许多重大政策变化的“机会之窗”都打开了，但大多数都在任何人有机会利用它们之前关闭了。在Kingdon（1984）的原始分析中，这一过程描述了美国联邦层面的议程设置和政策制定。这些“流”被分析性地分开，部分是为了描述美国政治体系中的责任分离，例如，总统提出问题，官僚机构提出一系列解决方案。溪流的比喻也抓住了这样一个想法，特别是在美国，快速的议程设置与缓慢的解决方案生产过程形成对比，其中想法在“政策原始汤”中旋转，经历一个过程
John Kingdon’s multiple streams approach (MSA) reminds us that the exciting world of shortterm, unstable, highprofile agenda setting is tempered by longterm, continuous processes going on behind the scenes. Shifts of public, media, and policymaker attention to a new problem can be dramatic, but policy may only change dramatically when policymakers have the willingness and ability to solve it. Kingdon uses the metaphor of three separate ‘streams’ to describe this gap between a policymaker’s attention to a problem and their adoption of a meaningful solution. He rejects the idea of a linear process in which, in this order, a policymaker identifies a problem to solve, the bureaucracy produces a range of possible solutions, and the policymaker selects the best choice. Rather, these three acts should be treated as separate streams that are able to occur in any order. In particular, solutions may need to be produced in anticipation of policymaker attention to a problem, since attention often lurches to another problem before there is a chance to consider options from scratch. Kingdon suggests that the three streams must come together at the same time during a ‘window of opportunity’, in which people pay high attention to a problem, a viable solution exists, and policymakers have the motive and opportunity to select it. This outcome is not inevitable. Rather, attention may shift dramatically to a different problem before anyone has had the chance to solve the first one. Many ‘windows of opportunity’ for major policy change open, but most close before anyone has the chance to exploit them. In Kingdon’s (1984) original analysis, this process described agenda setting and policymaking at the US federal level. The ‘streams’ were separated analytically, in part to describe a separation of responsibilities in the US political system in which, for example, the President raised problems and the bureaucracy produced a range of solutions. The streams metaphor also captured the idea that, in the US in particular, fast agenda setting contrasts with the slow process of solution production, in which ideas whirl around in the ‘policy primeval soup’, going through a process