Using Multiple Streams Framework to Analyze the Political Feasibility of Universal Basic Income

The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF), theorized by John Kingdon in the 1980s, has for decades been the object of theoretical refinements and critics, extended empirical use and is now the beating heart of a global scientific community. Initially designed to analyze agenda-setting processes concerning health and transport sectors in the United States, the MSF has since been applied across increasingly diverse contexts, be they supra-national, national or subnational, as well as to diverse policy sectors, widely expanding its initial scope. However, applications of the framework dealing with non-agenda setting processes or failures to adopt decisions remain rare. Even less common is the use of the MSF to examine policy proposals – such as the Universal Basic Income (UBI) – rather than existing policies. Over the past few decades, the UBI proposal has garnered attention from academic, political and activist cenacles. Experiments worldwide have attempted to explore the potential effects of such a measure, while scientific research has shifted from mainly normative and theoretical debates to increasingly focus on feasibility and implementation questions, making UBI scholarship taking a “pragmatic turn”. Aligning with this orientation, the author studies UBI’s political feasibility in Belgium through the MSF lens. Specifically, the aim of the study is to understand, employing MSF’s theoretical tools, whether and how is the UBI progressing onto the Belgian policy agenda. The study aims at establishing a fruitful dialogue between UBI and the MSF scholarships. On the one hand, applying the MSF to the UBI proposal lends credibility to the vision of UBI as a potential welfare reform, moving beyond its presumed utopian nature. It allows for a pragmatic and structured investigation of whether UBI could advance toward policy decision-making. On the other hand, the research adds to the MSF literature by considering a proposal that is not a public policy stricto sensu. It thus broadens the range of policy stasis and change under consideration and adds a layer of complexity to the application of MSF. The paper is structured as follows. First, it presents the theoretical and methodological perspectives of the study which integrates UBI and the MSF within the specific context of Belgium. Second, it explores both the advantages and the challenges of applying the MSF analytical frame to analyze a potential welfare reform such as UBI. The paper concludes by reflecting on the value of initiating dialogues between research objects and theoretical approaches that are rarely combined, offering new insights for both fields.