Forum Section: Theoretically Refining the Multiple Streams Framework Streams and stages: Reconciling Kingdon and policy process theory MICHAEL HOWLETT, 1 ALLAN MCCONNELL 2 & ANTHONY PERL 3 1 Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, Canada and Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore; 2 Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney and School of Government and Public Policy, University of Strathclyde; 3 Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, Canada Abstract. Use of metaphors is a staple feature of how we understand policy processes – none more so than the use of ‘policy stages’/’cycles’ and ‘multiple streams’. Yet even allowing for the necessary parsimony of metaphors, the former is often criticised for its lack of ‘real world’ engagement with agency, power, ideology, turbulence and complexity, while the latter focuses only on agenda-setting but at times has been utilised, with limited results, to understand later stages of the policy process. This article seeks to explore and advance the opportunities for combining both and applying them to the policy-formation and decision- making stages of policy making. In doing so it examines possible three, four and five stream models. It argues that a five stream confluence model provides the highest analytical value because it retains the simplicity of metaphors (combining elements of two of the most prominent models in policy studies) while also helping capture some of the more complex and subtle aspects of policy processes, including policy styles and nested systems of governance. Keywords: Kingdon, John W.; policy cycle; multiple streams; policy formation; decision making Introduction The study of public policy has relied substantially on the use of metaphors to help simplify the complexities and dynamics of policy processes (Pump 2011). Several authors have raised the importance of metaphors and stories to capture how policy is formed, studied and presented (Bardach 2011; Black 1962; Edelman 1988; Klein 1999; Schlesinger & Lau 2000; Stone 1989, 2012). Public policy as a discipline has gained much momentum from two eminent metaphors with strong analytical appeal – ‘stages/cycles’ and ‘multiple’ streams – yet both have been criticised for lacking political realism and one in particular (multiple streams) has been applied only to the agenda phase of the policy process. Certainly, the parsimony of metaphors (Rayner 1984) brings with it a lack of specificity and so our intention here is not to criticise either of these prominent metaphors. Rather, it is to suggest that there is value in the policy sciences prising open a window (to use John W. Kingdon’s terminology) and combining aspects of both. The confines of one short article limit our capacity to explore all stages of the policy process, but we do examine in depth the policy-formation and decision-making stages.The policy sciences often develop incremen- tally and pragmatically (DeLeon 1989) and so our approach here is an incremental step in European Journal of Political Research 54: 419–434, 2015 419 doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12064 © 2014 European Consortium for Political Research Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd