Lost in Translation: Reconceptualising the Multiple Streams Framework back to its Origin to Enhance its Analytical and Theoretical Leverage

I am a full professor and head of my department here at the University of Bergen. I and many of my colleagues have used the garbage can inspired multiple streams analytical framework for many years in our own research and in our capacity as thesis advisors to graduate students. This is due to the fact that professor Johan P. Olsen was a key pioneering and entrepreneurial professor in this department and my mentor both as a master and doctoral student. However, my colleagues and I have used a somewhat different version of the Multiple Streams approach than the one formulated by Kingdon in his seminal 1984 book and closer to that of its source of inspiration the famous Garbage Can model of organizational decision making. Kingdon has been richly and rightly praised for his contribution in demonstrating the relevance of the garbage can logic at the highest level of decision making in society where it is, no doubt, even more appropriate and useful. Nevertheless, I will also assert that Kingdon at the same time to some extent did this analytical framework a disservice by changing and simplifying some of the key concepts in a way that has impaired the analytical and theoretical leverage of the MS framework. Limiting the analytical focus to only the policy formulation stage is one example. Another is the omission of organizational and institutional factors in the model that is an essential part of the Garbage can model. On balance, however, he did also added something new - the role of the policy entrepreneur and their critical role relative to policy windows - that at the same time has improved its analytical leverage. Finally, I do not consider the MS as a theory but more an analytical framework that needs to be supplemented with other analytical and theoretical constructs. In my recent research I have done this by fusing my version of the MS framework with the policy cycle framework as well as a policy design and institutional theoretical framework. This is what I would like to write a conference paper about and present in your workshop. Finally let me just say how much I appreciate this initiative from you and professor Zohlnhoefer within the ECPR framework which is long overdue.