John Kingdon’s Three Streams Model: Policy Development

Introduction

John Kingdon’s Three Streams Model best describes the policy development/path dependency of prison reform as described in The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. John Kingdon developed this model to describe policymaking dynamics, focusing on how policy ideas, problems, and solutions interact and influence decisions in a policymaking process. John Kingdon’s policymaking model is a theoretical framework that proposes that three distinct streams—the problem stream, the policy stream, and the political stream—all work together to create the policymaking process (Mena, 2020). These streams are constantly at work, and the interaction between them is what drives the policymaking process. The problem stream describes the difficulties and troubles that come before decision-makers. These can range from economic downturns to heightened levels of aggression in specific locations. It is the responsibility of policymakers to identify and tackle these issues. They must understand the consequences of the case by conducting research, evaluating, and consulting with professionals (Mbah et al., 2022). The problem stream aims to identify the problem and assess its impact. The policy stream is concerned with developing solutions to the issues identified. It entails making strategies and plans that counter the pinpointed concerns. Policymakers must consider the interests, resources necessary to implement the procedure, and potential for success (Mbah et al., 2022). Policymakers need to consider the different points of view of those affected by the policy and work out a fair solution.

The political stream is the diplomatic arena of public policy where the public’s interests and preferences are expressed through the political process. This stream comprises political actors, such as elected officials and other public figures, who are influenced by the public’s opinions and ideas. According to Ribeiro (2020), within this stream, the public’s interests and concerns are expressed through public discourse, advocacy, and debate. The political stream is also the arena where political actors craft and amend public policies. These public policies are then implemented by the government and evaluated by the public. The political stream is dynamic, as the public’s preferences and interests can change quickly (Mena, 2020). This requires the political actors to stay informed and responsive to the public’s interests. The political stream also plays a crucial role in ensuring that the public’s interests and concerns are considered when the policy is being crafted. Thus, political actors must stay informed about the public’s interests and preferences.

For example, the 2008 financial crisis was a major political event that significantly impacted the global economy. Political streams, including the Bush administration in the United States, the European Union, and other international organizations, became involved in attempting to resolve the crisis Ribeiro (2020). Governments worldwide took steps to reduce the financial instability of the markets and increase liquidity. These measures included bailouts for banks, new regulations for financial institutions, and stimulus packages for businesses and individuals Ribeiro (2020). The crisis demonstrated the interconnectedness of the global economy and the need for international cooperation to address economic problems.

Illustration of Model in Case Factors

The New Jim Crow demonstrates how policy ideas stemming from the policy stream, the political context in the political stream, and the problem of mass incarceration in the problem stream interact to inform policy development. The prison reform movement has generated various ideas from activists, scholars, and decision-makers that form the policy stream. These ideas included the call to end the drug war, more extraordinary rehabilitation efforts, and better reentry services (Ribeiro, 2020). These ideas were proposed by people from both within and outside of government, with individuals like Michelle Alexander and Bryan Stevenson advocating for reform and policymakers like President Obama introducing clemency initiatives.

The political stream of the model is evident in the different policies that were ultimately implemented. The political context included the players’ interests and the resources available. This resulted in divisions in the prison reform movement, with some favoring a more gradual approach while others called for more drastic change (Alexander, 2020). Additionally, it was shaped by the available resources, with activists and organizations relying on private donations and grants to fund their initiatives. Moreover, the political stream can also be seen in the election of Donald Trump in 2016. His campaign centered on a tough-on-crime stance and the promise of building a wall along the US-Mexico border (Alexander, 2020). This rhetoric, coupled with his appointment of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, signaled a further shift from civil rights towards criminal justice, leading to a rollback of criminal justice reform initiatives.

In the problem stream, changes in public opinion, perceptions, and other factors contribute to the salience of an issue, increasing its visibility and importance to the public. In The New Jim Crow, the problem stream is highlighted by the criminalization of African Americans, the racial disparities in the prison system, and the over-policing of black communities (Alexander, 2020). This helped to bring attention to the issue of mass incarceration and prison reform and eventually led to a greater focus on the subject. Moreover, the issue of criminal justice reform was further highlighted by the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other individuals at the hands of law enforcement, as well as the protests that followed in the wake of these incidents (Nguyen et al., 2021). Further evidence of the problem stream was seen in the media coverage, as news outlets focused on the systemic issues that lead to mass incarceration and pervasive racism in the U.S. justice system. The problem stream also included the advocacy efforts of civil rights organizations, criminal justice reform activists, and community organizations that sought to bring attention to the issue and push for change (Nguyen et al., 2021). The Black Lives Matter movement heightened public awareness of the problem and created a more significant push for reform.

Finally, Kingdon’s model also accounts for “windows of opportunity,” when the three streams create an opportunity for policy change. In The New Jim Crow, this is seen in the election of Barack Obama, who ran on a criminal justice reform platform. Obama’s election provided an opening for reformers to push for change. His administration passed several reforms, including the Fair Sentencing Act, which reduced the sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine offenses.

Paul Sabatier’s Advocacy Coalitions Model

Paul Sabatier’s Advocacy Coalitions Model (ACM) is a framework that suggests that policymaking is based on the conflict of different coalitions of policy advocates working together to create and shape policy. Advocacy coalitions are actors, such as interest groups, media, and policymakers, who share common values and policy beliefs and work together to influence policymaking (Pierce et al., 2020). According to this model, policymaking is a continuous process of negotiation and compromise between these coalitions.

In the context of mass incarceration in the United States, the advocacy coalition model can be used to explain how different groups of actors are attempting to influence policymaking. For example, advocacy coalitions focus on reforming the criminal justice system and reducing mass incarceration. These coalitions often include civil rights organizations, faith-based organizations, and other change advocates. They work together to lobby for reforms, such as reducing mandatory minimum sentences and increasing access to alternatives to incarceration (Pierce et al., 2020). At the same time, advocacy coalitions oppose reforms, such as law enforcement organizations, prosecutors, and politicians. These coalitions are working together to maintain the current system and oppose reforms.

The ACM suggests that policymaking is an ongoing process of negotiation and compromise between these coalitions. This is evident in the current debate surrounding mass incarceration in the United States. Different alliances are attempting to influence the policymaking process, and there is a lot of discussion and negotiation over what reforms should be implemented. As a result, there has been some progress in reforming the criminal justice system, but there is still a long way to go. The advocacy coalition model provides a valuable framework for understanding how different actors attempt to shape policy in this area.

Conclusion

In summary, John Kingdon’s Three Streams Model and Paul Sabatier’s Advocacy Coalitions Model are practical tools for analyzing the policymaking process. They are also valid in understanding how policy ideas, problems, and solutions interact to propel the policymaking process. These models can be used to gain insight into how various stakeholders strive to shape mass incarceration and prison reform policies. The models demonstrate how the political environment, public sentiment, and interests intersect with policy ideas and the issue of mass incarceration to shape the policymaking process. Additionally, they demonstrate how public dialogue and advocacy can create opportunities for policy change. This is essential for comprehending how reform in this domain can be achieved.

References

Nguyen, T. T., Criss, S., Michaels, E. K., Cross, R. I., Michaels, J. S., Dwivedi, P., Huang, D., Hsu, E., Mukhija, K., Nguyen, L. H., Yardi, I., Allen, A. M., Nguyen, Q. C., & Gee, G. C. (2021). Progress and push-back: How the killings of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd impacted public discourse on Race and racism on Twitter. SSM – Population Health, 15, 100922. Web.

Pierce, J. J., Giordono, L. S., Peterson, H. L., & Hicks, K. C. (2020). Common approaches for studying advocacy: Review of methods and model practices of the advocacy coalition framework. The Social Science Journal, 59(1), 139–158. Web.

Mbah, R. E., Hultquist, L., & Repp, R. (2022). Understanding the passage of the Emmitt till antilynching act from the Kingdon’s multiple streams or three stream policy window model perspective. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(10), 154–162. Web.

Mena, F. M. (2020). Actors and incentives in cannabis policy change: An interdisciplinary approach to legalization processes in the United States and in Uruguay. Web.

Ribeiro, C. T. (2020). Agenda-setting in public policies: The strategy for financial education in Brazil through the lens of the multiple streams model. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 18(3), 486–497. Web.

Alexander, M. (2020). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New Press, New York. Web.