Abstract
Although the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) has abundant research, the mechanism of partial couplings to complete coupling remains to be investigated. The study extends the MSF using the perspective of generating effective alternatives in the policy stream to explain the dynamic of the policy process. This article is an empirical study that compares two cases under the same holistic policy issues. We propose the multiple streams framework based on goal-oriented “policy solutions” to explain the process of Chinese rural governance policy output. The results show that: First, the partial coupling (politics and problems) opens the policy window for policy formulation, which drives the policy stream forming. Second, the periodic stability windows are a realistic path to accelerate the policy stream process. Third, policy experimentation constitutes an essential tool for formulating effective options. Further comparing the policy stream in the MSF with the policy stream in this study found clear differences.
Plain Language Summary
This article aims to explore the evolutionary mechanism of partial coupling (problems and politics) to complete coupling in the MSF. We propose a theoretical framework based on goal-oriented “policy options” elaborating on the dynamics of the policy process. This study is an empirical study by using the method of comparing two cases under the same holistic policy theme. We conclude the conclusion: First, partial coupling (politics and problems) opens the policy window for policy formulation, which drives the policy stream forming. Second, the periodic stability windows are a realistic path to accelerate the policy stream process. Third, policy experimentation constitutes an essential tool for formulating effective options. According to the different results of the two comparative cases, further comparing the MSF's policy stream with this study’s policy stream in this study found clear differences. The implication of this study enriches the research of the causal mechanism of the policy process, which facilitates corrections and adjustments for better application to dynamic policy environments. However, it needs to further explore the specific role of policy windows in the policy stream and the specific path of policy experimentation optimization.
Keywords
Introduction
Within the study of public policy, Kingdon (1995) has presented the theory with the greatest development and impact for the analysis of policy incorporation in the public agenda process—the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF). Kingdon identifies five structural elements: problems, politics, policies stream independently, policy entrepreneurs, and policy windows (Kingdon, 1984). It is conditional for a question to be included in the policy research perspective. In other words, some specific conditions are needed in a series of questions to attract the attention of decision-makers. According to Kingdon, focusing on events, changes in indicators, or feedback brings the perception to the minds of the policymakers that the problem stream is growing “ripe.” The political stream consisted of the national mood, interest groups, and the government. Otherwise, a change of government provides an opportunity to turn a solution into policy for policymakers in the policy stream is available as viable solutions to the problem, during which is a long process with the potential solutions generating, assessing, and refining (Kingdon, 1995; Zahariadis, 2014). Until policy entrepreneurs seize the opportunity in the short window of opportunity, promote the formation of a complete coupling of the three streams, and further put it on the decision-making agenda (Kingdon, 1995).
Although Kingdon focused on one country and the period and two policy areas, the concepts and metaphors are “universal” in the sense that they are flexible enough to apply to nearly any place, time, or policy. This is due to the obvious characteristics of the MSF: Ambiguity (there are many ways to frame any policy problem); decision-making processes are neither “comprehensively rational” nor linear; a random running process and an imperfect selection process. The MSF literature has obvious progress in theory and empirical. The MSF, by combining with other theories (Howlett et al., 2017), explains the policy process of complex issues; it is applied to different stages of the policy process (Howlett et al., 2016) enriching policy process theory. Although, there is a wealth of research on MSF. However, few studies have focused on internal factor correlations and causal mechanisms. Meanwhile, internal research concentrates on the analysis and introduction of internal elements (Dolan, 2021; Moeck et al., 2023; Wenzelburger & Hartmann, 2021), extending and fixing the MSF. In the MSF, the complete coupling of all three streams puts policy issues on the decision-making agenda, but there is partial coupling before complete coupling. In the existing research of MSF, partial couplings are gradually defined and analyzed, attempting to clarify other important elements on the policy agenda under limited conditions. However, the study of how partial coupling leads to complete coupling and the causal mechanisms driving the policy agenda is very limited. Moreover, there is no research about the development mechanism of partial coupling (politics and problems) to completing coupling, based on the goal of improving the policy stream in the MSF.
That is why we analyze in detail the generating process with effective alternatives in the policy stream, to explore the internal mechanism and effecting factors of the partial coupling (politics and problems) to complete coupling in the MSF. The evolutionary process of the policy stream is to formulate solutions to the problem, refining an effective solution. After complete coupling with the other two streams, policy entrepreneurs seize the window of opportunity, promoting the policy agenda. The invention of policy design or policy advice is a key part of the public decision-making process (Pluchinotta et al., 2019) and can lead to effective policy alternatives (Nair & Howlett, 2016) to achieve policy goals. In this process, it is necessary to input new knowledge under the understanding the nature of the problem and to formulate innovation policy through learning. Policy experimentation is a special learning method. Existing research suggests that policy experimentation plays an important role in testing the effectiveness of alternatives and improving policy design. In conclusion, policy experimentation is a tool for policy design. Therefore, in the analytical framework of this paper, to make the policy stream ripe for complete coupling, policy experimentation and effective policy solutions are important components.
This article contributes to the MSF by proposing a theoretical framework for emphasizing the process of generating effective alternatives in the policy stream, which is based on goal-oriented “policy solution.” We explore the evolutionary mechanisms of the rural governance policy process amid the “three rural issues” in China, which inform policy actions to achieve the overall development of rural society.
Overall, this study explores the mechanism of partial coupling (politics and problems) to complete coupling by proposing the multi-stream framework based on goal-oriented “policy solutions,” which focus on generating effective solutions in the policy stream, to further explain the dynamics of the policy process. In addition, in the evolutionary process of the effective solution, we illustrate the internal interaction and influencing factors between core elements and policy experimentation within the MSF. Meanwhile, do a comparison of the policy stream in this study with the policy stream in the MSF.
The paper is structured as follows. The second section presents a review of existing studies aiming to analyze the related literature. The third section proposes the theoretical framework to explain this study. The fourth section illustrates the method and data for this study. The fifth section shows the results. The sixth section concludes the study.
Literature Review
The Multi-Stream Framework
To form an effective policy plan, continuously improve policy design capabilities, and further promote the application of policy experimentation, it is necessary to apply its practice to specific policy processes for verification. The policy process theory, a more universally applicable and influential multi-stream model, has widespread applicability. In the 1980s, the theory of MSF put forward by Kingdon gave rise to an upsurge of theoretical research on policy processes. Although originating in the US federal system, it has become an indispensable part of policy agenda research. The widespread use of the MSF has also received criticism. Kingdon made a second revision based on social development. The policy agenda set according to the background of the US system has been gradually applied from developed countries to developing countries in the process of continuous revision and improvement, becoming recognized as being used to formulate national and international policy agendas (Ridde, 2009).
The Overall Construction of a Policy Agenda Based on the MSF
The MSF is combined with theories of advocacy alliances, policy cycles/phases, and so on. So that it applies to all stages of the entire policy process (Howlett et al., 2015). To achieve the applicability of different national institutional backgrounds, institutionalism and institutions have begun to be incorporated into the MSF (Zohlnhoefer et al., 2016). The combination with policy discourse theory emphasizes the process of combining analysis theory with practice, and the inclusion of network theory explores its impact. Moreover, MSF focuses on the interpretation of the pre-decision stage, it uses causal mechanisms to expand policy process analysis.
Expanded Application of the MSF at All Stages of the Policy Agenda
The complexity of the international environment and the challenging nature of the issues require in-depth analysis of key elements of the multiple streams to deal with policy issues. Among them, the occurrence of extreme weather events has promoted multiple local coupling policy frameworks, emphasizing the part that Kingdon ignores: applying three-stream elements to decision-making and policy implementation stages to unlock the black box of policy agenda setting and policy formulation (Howlett, 2019); elaborating the role of all three streams in the policy process construct a two-stage coupling model (Herweg et al., 2015); using multiple streams to explain the two stages of formation and abolition on automatic admission policy in French universities (Wenzelburger & Hartmann, 2021); Population flows are introduced and incorporated into the MSF to explain the policy dynamics of planned relocations in Austria (Thaler et al., 2020). In addition, local coupling policy frameworks focus on the modern science and technology situation and increase the technology flow in the MSF to explore the synergy between technology flow and decision-making.
Exploring the Key Elements of the MSF
In the process of promoting policy reforms, policy entrepreneurs play multiple roles, which further construct subcomponents of three streams to explore the relationship between strategic choices with them, among which the coupling process and windows have become the focus of discussion (Blum, 2018, 2019). In addition to the coupling interaction process of all three streams, there is also partial coupling within the MSF, which is elaborating the different logics of argumentative in partial coupling with all conditions (Dolan, 2021); under the condition of partial coupling of politics-policies, the multiple coupling strategy formed by the problem connection, and finally achieves a specific explanation of complete coupling (Howlett et al., 2015). For windows, persistently opening the policy window is the motion of policy change (Rose et al., 2020). Different policy entrepreneurs seize the opportunity to play different roles at two different coupling windows, driving policy reform. Two overlapping winds in different streams and policy entrepreneurs’ roles successfully promoted the relaunch of Europe policy reforms (Copeland & James, 2014), which helps analyze the factors of the policy change and the mechanism of agenda-setting in the institutional background. Meanwhile, the interaction between institutional factors and internal key variables got explained (Koebele, 2021).
The purpose of setting policy agenda is to solve public problems and form effective policy programs. The MSF is an analysis process that puts on the policy agenda for specific issues and clarifies alternatives. This is in line with the agenda-setting goal, and it explains why the MSF has been produced for a long time and is still the mainstream tool for policy research.
Policy Experimentation
Taking the form of feasible alternatives as a foothold conforms to the original intention of the agenda and is also the key to solving practical problems. Especially in today’s dynamically changing social reform situation, it is a big challenge for the country to achieve simultaneously effective policies implementation and low risks of reform in a short time. The experimental governance method originated from neoliberal governance—partial experimental governance (policy experimentation) to reduce resource costs and reduce social risks provides a feasible path for it (Fyfe, 2005).
Policy experimentation plays a significant role in the process of public policy research and policy agenda promotion. The fundamental purpose of policy experimentation is to find effective solutions to public problems. That is, before comprehensive implementation of the nationwide policy, needs to be tested by regional experimentation. Britain took the lead in experimenting with the development of experimentalist governance (Sabel & Zeitlin, 2012) and gradually expanded to developing countries (Heilmann, 2008a). When facing the dilemma of national governance, exploratory experiments are needed. From a micro perspective, personal incentives, technocratic attention, and symbolic political maintenance are conducive to policy experimentation (Teets & Hasmath, 2020); from a meso perspective, vertical central-local interaction of bottom-up and top-down (Wang, 2019; Zhu & Zhao, 2021), horizontal policy learning between local governments and the combination of horizontal and vertical, these policies models make up for information differences (Zhu & Bai, 2020). From a macro perspective, establishing labs within the controllable deviation range provides a practical path for problem-solving in a certain region, a certain country, or even worldwide (Lee & Ma, 2020). Providing effective policy options generated on a small scale is conducive to mutual learning between regions (Zhou, 2021), reducing overall risks based on testing the feasibility of policy experimentation (Samii, 2020). Meanwhile, this process deepens exchanges between policy subjects (Han, 2020) and expands scope (Heilmann, 2008b), finally prompting the resolution of public issues (Leutert, 2021).
Policy experimentation is to achieve the goal of obtaining effective policy solutions, meanwhile, it is a practical method of knowledge production and learning in agenda setting (McFadgen, 2019). In the progress of the experimental governance model, it has been continuously applied to policy innovation, policy diffusion (Breznitz & Ornston, 2018), and policy evaluation (McFadgen & Huitema, 2018). The existing literature deepens the study of policy processes. China’s transportation reform policy agenda incorporates policy experimental governance into the MSF and explains the formation mechanism of policy experimentation (Ge et al., 2020), but the key factors of policy experiment governance and its policy results have not yet been explained.
In conclusion, despite the widespread application of the MSF in different counties and fields, there exist some critics (Cairney & Jones, 2016; Jones et al., 2016; Weible & Schlager, 2016; Zohlnhoefer et al., 2015). For instance, the lack of concern for the political institutions (Koebele, 2021; March & Olsen, 1989) and the identification of causal mechanisms that lead to certain outcomes should be concerned (van der Heijden et al., 2021). While the MSF literature recognizes that internal elements emphasized in the policy process, the framework fails to clearly illustrate the connection and influence mechanism between elements. Policy experimentation plays a prominent role in the generating of effective alternatives and achieving the feasibility of implementation. It fits to producing effective alternatives in the policy stream and ultimately drives the process of decision-making agenda in MSF. This study explores the mechanism of placing policy experimentation in the MSF that generates policy solutions, to analyze the internal dynamics of the policy process.
Theoretical Framework to Explain This Study
The MSF is one of the important theories to describe the policy process. This theory focuses on the analysis of the decision-making stage of the policy process and illustrates the key elements of policy formulation. However, the ambiguity of the theory makes the specific practical paths in the policy process have not been explored in depth. Policy experimentation is to solve public problems and form scientific experience in the practice of seeking effective solutions, which is a specific practical path. The use of policy experimentation in the policy process can reduce risks and form a scientific and effective plan, refining a series of specific measures. Policy experimentation is highlighted here. Policy experimentation is an approach to verifying the effectiveness of policy design. It is no fixed model, which is equivalent to the expansion of the policy process. For that, we use these structures to complement each other, the MSF and policy experimentation, providing innovative models for understanding the policy process.
First: On the whole, the policy agenda that is based on the background of driving the process of the policy stream, toward a goal to formulate effective solutions, constitutes the basis of the framework in Figure 1. This shows that problems and politics have been formed while there is no solution to advocate in the policy stream within the MSF. In this framework, under the partial coupling with problems and politics, attempts to illustrate the process that the effective solution evolves and ripens in the policy stream. The possibility of bringing policy issues to the policy-making agenda is achieved by promoting three streams coupling after viable options have been generated.
Multi-stream framework based on goal-oriented “policy solutions.”
Second: the theoretical framework mainly has two formal policy windows. The first is the window of opportunity after complete coupling, which is random, accidental, and fleeting, in line with Kingdon’s theory. The other is a policy window opened to promote the policy stream within the MSF. It is dominated by political factors, which are characteristics of being politically stable and oriented. In the policy process, when the partial coupling (problems and politics) forms, opens the policy window, which drives viable solutions generating. Ultimately there will form effective alternatives promoting the complete coupling of three streams, and then waiting for the window of opportunity to come.
Third: a political environment where policy entrepreneurs select and actively identify issues is formed, which aims to realize a partial coupling of issues and politics in the real situation. The policy window is opened and dominated by the political authority, which places the generation process of effective solutions in the policy stream into the dominant position of the policy agenda. In addition, based on the policy window opened to facilitate the policy stream, the cyclical policy agenda formed provides a fast path for the development of the policy stream and is a prerequisite path for the softening of the ideological plan.
Fourth: in the policy stream of generating and refining alternatives, the process is to achieve effectiveness in solving public problems in policy implementation. Starting from the policy orientation of policy capabilities and policy design, policy experimentation is the source of ideological programs and the basis for development (testing); the stable organizational structure formed by the construction of political network consensus provides strong policy capabilities for the cyclical policy agenda, which they constitute essential parts of the policy stream. Under the premise that policy objectives and policy directions are led and designed by the central government, local governments set about innovative trials. The practical experience produced through local experimentations is the basic source of ideological programs. According to policy experimentation from point to surface, the central government needs to obtain the source of policy plans through the successful experience of local innovation practices and give support to the legitimacy of successful local policy innovations. Consequently, it is necessary to promote it nationwide to verify the feasibility of the alternatives. Experimental promotion is a way of testing the effectiveness of policy alternatives. The ideological solutions derived from the first and successful local practical experience float in policy soup. These float in and out of the policy stream after a large-scale practical test. Finally, only the policy option meeting the standards of the effectiveness of policy implementation in nationwide can be deemed a viable solution. That means an effective solution has formed in the policy stream.
Method and Data Resource
We develop an empirical analysis of the Chinese Rural Governance Policy Output—a qualitative research approach, which is using two comparative cases under the same holistic theme to illustrate the policy process that produces effective policy options. Qualitative research can conduct process tracing, attempt to identify relevant causal mechanisms, and form explanatory case studies to facilitate analysis of process dynamics (George & Bennett, 2005; Wenzelburger & Hartmann, 2021). This method is also used by much research (Dolan, 2021; Koebele, 2021; Wenzelburger & Hartmann, 2021), which attempts to analyze the entire policy process to construct an analytical framework from a multi-stream perspective. We try to reproduce the case situation and explore the creative process of policy alternatives, further illustrating the process of judgment criteria for forming alternatives in the policy stream,
Since the research topic involves the hierarchical connection and the interaction process between the central government and the local government. That is, local independent innovation under the top-level design of the central government requires both official policy text analysis and data analysis of specific cases at the local level. Like many policy text analyses, we conducted content analysis and tabulated data by research topic. At the same time, the key elements in the process of formulating the policy plan are summarized based on the case. In a further discussion, based on the secondary indicators in the policy stream within the MSF, a comparison is made with real-life cases in the Chinese context.
It mainly includes primary data and secondary data. It comes from the policy document issued at the national level—the No. 1 Central Document, which is taken from the website of the No. 1 Central Document by the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, the State Council, and other central departments so that the alternatives in the relevant policy stream will be easy analysis. Furthermore, these policy documents issued by the central government represent the political ideology, the resulting preferences, and the tools needed in the policy process through policy pilot terms. Policy pilots that are considered at the central government level must be original, and policy innovations that take the lead at the local level according to specific issues will be valued in the policy stream. The policy pilot in the Chinese context is to obtain and implement effective policy solutions. In this process, there will be not only correct trials but also incorrect trials. The ultimate goal is the correct trial. The policy source formed in the policy pilot comes from the innovative practice of the local government, and the specific development process comes from the local government’s policy documents. Therefore, it is necessary to collect official documents at the local government level to make the data authoritative and reliable. Then, gather relevant news and media reports and case-related information and data around a policy issue where the initiative is formed.
Results and Discussion
We analyzed and summarized the policy evolutionary process of rural governance in China. In this comprehensive policy context, we further explored two comparative cases and analyzed the reason leading to different results.
Promoting the Formation of Policy Stream: A Policy Window Opened by the Partial Coupling of Politics and Problems
The construction and development of rural society have always been a major part of China’s overall construction. In the context of reform and opening up, rural society has also carried out development measures. However, since the beginning of the 20th century, historical legacy and social contradictions have highlighted the deep-seated problems of rural society. In addition, the urban-rural gap and structural deficiencies presented by the rapid development of urban areas further illustrate these rural social problems are no longer purely economic problems and gradually extend to all levels. Moreover, the long-term accumulation of various problems in rural society and the incomplete resolution implies that it will take a long time for rural social problems to become resolved. Second, the overall problems of rural society no longer emerge and disappear quickly like focal points or emergencies. The hollowing of rural structure and indifference to human relations caused by such deep-seated problems emphasize the urgent need to resolve rural social problems. The phenomenon observed by the central government in the real situation realized the complex problems behind the overall situation of rural society. In addition, the rural society in China’s modern context differs from the past. The market-oriented reforms at the economic level and the transformation of service-oriented functions at the political level since the reform and opening up illustrate China’s changes and development in all aspects. This shows that the construction of rural society in China’s modern context faces a complicated and unknown exploration. To promote social governance in rural areas, we will quickly realize the construction of a national system.
In addition, since the beginning of the new century, China’s development and construction entered a new stage to effectively advance the 11th Five-Year Plan and the goal of building a well-off society in an all-around way. The central government realized that to achieve the above two goals, it is necessary to deepen the reform of rural society and realize the overall construction of rural society. For this reason, a strong political atmosphere has formed in the construction of rural society throughout the country. The long-standing internal contradictions have deepened the seriousness of the problem, and the active attention of the political elites to this issue has jointly pushed this public issue on the agenda. Because of the central government’s attention to this issue, rather than a passive response, has given the institutional legitimacy to using policy windows to find solutions. Regarding this public issue, the central government took the initiative to pay attention to and it placed it at the height of the national strategy, taking advantage of the high concentration of political authority, which became a key condition for partial coupling to open the policy window. In October 2005, the Fifth Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee of the Party was held, and the top leaders formally raised the issue of “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers.” The “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues refer to the three major issues of rural areas, agriculture, and farmers. It is a three-in-one issue of industry, residential area, and subject identity, and the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues have existed since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, but the current “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues to be particularly prominent. They are mainly reflected in the following: First, the large number of farmers in China has been resolved on a large scale; second is China’s unique industrialization process. In the future, the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues have been accumulated for a long time, making them difficult to solve; third, the negative effects and comparative benefits brought by the design of Chinese urban policies have been highlighted in a short period, and the solution is more complicated.
At the meeting, the senior political leadership summarized the rural social issues as the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues and said that the core issue of the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmer” is the farmers. The work on agriculture, rural areas, and farmers is the primary task of the whole party and the country, making it the top priority. It also stipulates the development goals and construction directions of the work on agriculture, rural areas, and farmers and encourages local governments to actively explore specific and effective plans. At the same time, according to the overall construction of rural society, the central government specifically named rural social issues as the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues and formulated a special policy document, the Central No. 1 Document, to focus on solving the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” issues.
Periodic Stabilization Policy Window Led by Political Factors-No. 1 Central Document
Under the political atmosphere of exploring alternative solutions to problems formed by the coupling of politics and problems, the two major institutions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China) and the State Council have promoted a cyclical policy agenda for the “three rural” issues. Progress, that is, the continuous release of the No. 1 Central Document with legal regulations.
The No. 1 Central Document refers to the first document issued by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council each year. This document has a programmatic and guiding status in the country’s work throughout the year. It is a proper term for the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China to attach importance to rural issues. This document is a key issue that needs to be resolved nationwide, and it is also an issue that the country needs to resolve urgently. The No. 1 document of the Central Committee studied in this article refers to the policy documents with the theme of “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers” since the new century.
The policy content of the No. 1 document, issued annually by the Central Government of the People’s Republic of China, contains solutions to farmers’ core problems. Of course, these ideological plans are subject to change at any time, appearing in the policy documents of a certain year and perhaps disappearing in the No. 1 document in the next few years. Through the No. 1 document issued every year, the central government presents this ideological content in the form of policy expressions. The policy norms have a legal effect on national authority. Given the core content of the “three rural” issues, starting from the peasant issue, the corresponding rural governance ideas have been floating in the “three rural” policy plans, specifically presented in the first document, as shown in Table 1. Due to the long-term existence and deep accumulation of the “three rural” issues, it is necessary to comprehensively analyze the current reality. As the core issue, the construction of farmers should lay a solid foundation for the construction of rural society and provide a solid guarantee for the stable development of agriculture and rural areas. Therefore, under the continuous advancement of the settlement of farmers’ problems, the rural governance ideas have continuously improved and perfected. After the central government has emphasized the important status of the “three rural” work, it first conducts top-level design at the national level for specific issues, that is, it stipulates the goal and development direction of the governance of the “three rural” issues. This can ensure that the “three rural” work is carried out in an orderly manner within the specified policy boundaries, maintain the stability of the policy environment, and avoid unnecessary political risks.
No. 1 Central Document Timeline.
In addition, the central government only clarified the policy objectives and policy tools for rural social construction on the issue of “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers,” but did not specify certain and effective policy content. According to the historical experience of China’s construction and development, because of the complexity and arduousness of the “three rural” issues, it is necessary to give full play to the policy innovation capabilities of local governments. Specifically, it needs to fill in specific policy content through a top-down policy pilot method and continue to modify and improve in practice. Therefore, the cyclical policy agenda of the “three rural” issues presented as the Central Government’s No. 1 document shows that the formation of policy plans is the leading factor, coupled with the degree of importance of the issues, and the cyclical policy agenda promoted under the leadership of the political authority. In response to the problem of farmers, the rural governance ideological plan proposed in Document No. 1 has been continuously improved, which has made good progress in the construction of village democracy.
Origin and Development Process of the Policy Plan: The Central Top-Level Design-The Policy Experimentation Process of Local Innovative Practices
According to the top-level design promoted by the central government, the policy pilot method of local experimentations has promoted the development of effective policy programs to solve the problem of farmers’ construction. First, the problem of farmers is a problem of villagers, which is aimed at the construction of village democracy. The foundation of rural social development lies in the construction of village democracies. Only by giving full play to the initiative of the main body can it be possible to realize the sustainability of the modernization of the rural social field. Therefore, rural society must be reformed. Then, with the villager issue as the core issue and the villager construction as the key factor, starting from the perspective of the behavior subject conforms to the actual situation. In addition, to promote rural social reforms, the central government first proposed to innovate the construction of rural governance mechanisms, and in the 2006 No. 1 Document, it proposed to encourage local governments to actively practice innovation and explore effective forms of village democratic construction. Due to the fundamental nature of the villager problem, the self-governing construction of endogenous forces alone cannot achieve the goal of constructing the rural governance system. On the other hand, the construction of rural society requires the support and management of national resources. Therefore, the main body construction of grass-roots cadres with national authority representatives is an important leading force for the development of endogenous villagers’ self-government. Overall, both internal development and external support of farmers are indispensable. These experiences are based on the successful practice of local policy innovation (Table 2).
Origin and Development Process of Policy Plans Based on Policy Experimentation.
In general, policy options are local experimentations with all policy innovation which is an initial and successful practice, by the regional test, on solving a problem utterly in this study. That is called the “first trial, the first trial” in this study. Whether the success or the failure of the policy option after big-scale promotion determines whether it has a chance of becoming an effective solution. It will eventually be elevated to the decision-making agenda if the policy alternative passed the practical test nationwide, which is illustrated by Zhangjiakou’s case. Otherwise, it will be excluded from the policy options, as the result of the Qingyuan case we analyzed, the next local experimentation about the problem without an effective solution is forthcoming. It also will become the policy option after the problem is solved. The process is illustrated following two comparative cases.
A Successful Policy Plan That Passes the Inspection Standard of the Policy Stream
First of all, it is the construction of the basic-level party organization of the external management body. Based on the direction of the central government in 2006, the promotion of the development and construction of the grass-roots cadre incentive mechanism in the first document promotes the active innovation and experimentation of the framework designed at the top level in various regions. In 2007, Zhangjiakou City, Hebei Province, was the first to achieve a successful policy in policy innovation (Su, 2009). The “Definite Three Haves” policy plan for the grassroots party organization construction was formed, attracting the attention of the central government. In 2008, political elites from the Central Organization Department conducted an on-site inspection (Y. G. Liu & Wang, 2008). After absorbing an effective experience, they incorporated it into the No. 1 document, specifically reflected in the 2009 No. 1 document. Of course, to test the overall applicability of the alternatives that locals should practice, the central government has begun to promote a large-scale promotion test across the country (Gao, 2009). After a comprehensive test, it has obtained feasible feedback from various localities and is also in the “definite three-have” policy program. Based on the continuous improvement of the development of grassroots party organizations, the final policy plan for the construction of external entities on farmers’ issues was retained in the No. 1 Document and constituted the basic component of the rural governance policy plan.
Cases That Failed to Pass the Inspection Standard of Policy Stream
Based on the leadership role of the grassroots party organizations in rural social governance, the central government began to promote the construction of village democratic autonomy. In 2010, the No. 1 document issued by the central government provided a basic positioning for the innovation of the form of village self-government organizations, proposing to develop and improve the democratic self-government mechanism of villagers as leaders to improve the rural governance mechanism and emphasizing the promotion of active local pilot projects. In November 2012, Qingyuan City of Guangdong succeeded in exploring the form of villagers’ self-government organization, which was first formed in the grass-roots policy innovation (B. X. Liu & Yang, 2013). That is, the villagers’ self-government pilot program with village groups or natural villages as the basic unit was proposed, which formed a policy program for the construction of the main body of villagers’ self-government (Qingyuan Municipal People’s Government Portal [QMPGP], 2013a). The township reform of Qingyuan City’s “first trial, the first trial” has become a typical demonstration, which has attracted the attention and recognition of the central government (QMPGP, 2013b). The 2014 No. 1 Document proposed to “Improve and innovate the villager self-government mechanism and carry out villagers’ self-government pilot projects with communities and villagers’ groups as the basic unit.” After the approval and acceptance of the central government, the NO 1 document adopted feasible alternatives (QMPGP, 2017). This also shows that the experiment in this place is included in the scope of the alternative plan. In the following years, the alternative plan in the No. 1 document has been retained, speeding up the softening process. Based on the typical effect of Qingyuan City, local government policy innovation provided the content of the plan for central policy improvement and thus began a nationwide experiment.
Based on the evaluation and feedback of the promotion test results, it was found that the alternatives were difficult to implement effectively across the country and could not meet the technical feasibility standards. For this reason, the alternative plan for the construction of villagers’ self-government faded out of the No. 1 Document. Therefore, this plan did not have the opportunity to be put on the decision-making agenda for selection, and there were no relevant policy recommendations in the No. 1 Document presented in 2018. In 2019, the plan for the construction of villager autonomy in the document faded out, and the practice of villager autonomy is still being explored.
Basic Reformation of Alternatives for Rural Governance Policies
Although the Qingyuan City of Guangdong province tested the effectiveness of the policy implementation level, the partial regional success of the policy ultimately failed to form a viable alternative, and it also faded out in the first document, drifting out of the policy source of the rural governance policy program. However, after the central government’s summary and the summary of the experience of local policy innovation, this established the basic principle of village democratic autonomy construction to explore the upward, downward, or combined management of villagers’ self-governing organizations based on retaining the villagers’ organization committees.
The Window of Opportunity After Complete Coupling
The alternative options formed in the policy stream are fully coupled with the problem stream and the political stream, which fully prepares policy entrepreneurs to put the rural governance policy program on the decision-making agenda when the window of opportunity opens.
In the 13th National People’s Congress in 2019, the important speech made by the state leaders on rural social construction opened a window of opportunity for important construction policy plans on the “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers issues” and promoted the selection of rural governance options and the decision-making agenda. On June 23, 2019, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council jointly issued the “Guiding Opinions on Strengthening and Improving Rural Governance Construction,” formally introducing the rural governance policy.
Comparison of the Policy Stream Based on Policy Experimentation and Kingdon’s Policy Stream
Overall, the process of China’s rural governance policy conforms to the multi-stream framework, but there are significant differences in the evolutionary process that focuses on internal key elements in the policy stream. In the process of seeking effective alternatives based on the goal orientation of “policy solutions,” policy experimentation dominates the generation and development of problem-solving solutions. The policy stream based on the tool of policy experimentation significantly differs from the policy stream in Kingdon. Of course, this closely relates to the background of the national system. Then, according to the important components of the policy stream in Kingdon’s theory, compare the similarities and differences in the two processes (Table 3).
Comparison of Policy Stream.
Findings and Policy Implications
We get several findings through the above analysis. Theoretically, this study explores the policy process based on the MSF and analyzes in detail the evolutionary mechanism of formulating effective policy solutions, which is conducive to enriching the study of the MSF. This study analyzes the linkages between internal elements, which is consistent with the orientation that policy process theory needs to explore causal mechanisms (van der Heijden et al., 2021).
Empirically, rural governance is an issue of the times and requires progressive adjustment of policy solutions according to social changes; therefore, it is realistic and feasible to formulate policy planning from the development of rural society, which can reduce the risk of full-scale policy implementation. At the same time, policy experiments play an inaccessible role in rural governance issues. The central government leads the development direction and gives localities appropriate autonomy space, and localities actively innovate according to local conditions to achieve precise governance, which is conducive to advancing the rural governance process. Complex topics can appropriately draw on this practical experience.
From the policy framework, the existence of multiple windows in the MSF study indicates that there is a theoretical basis for the analysis of windows in this study (Copeland & James, 2014; Rose et al., 2020). However, research on the linkages that exist between multiple windows is lacking. This study provides an in-depth analysis of the dynamics process from partial coupling opening the policy window of generating policy solutions to complete coupling seizing the opportunity window. Policy experimentation is a tool for developing policy options in policy formulation and helps to reduce implementation risks (Zhu & Bai, 2020). Experimentalist governance with interactive central-local relations is typical of the Chinese policy agenda (Zhu & Bai, 2020; Zhu & Zhao, 2021). The introduction of policy experimentation in this study fits the Chinese context and provides direction for policy experimentation analysis in the policy stream. The cyclical policy window is a peculiarity of Chinese rural governance policy issues, where the importance of an issue being placed at the height of national strategy is fully demonstrated, and the stability window dominated and controlled by political authority accelerates the policy process. This also fully illustrates the importance of political factors in the analytical framework (Koebele, 2021). Periodic policy windows require a high level of policy attention while simple policy issues are not necessarily applicable. According to Kingdon, it is reasonable to compare this study’s evolutionary process of policy options with the main factors in the policy stream. The policy stream explored from the policy instrument perspective is distinctly different from Kingdon’s policy stream, that is, this study is valuable. However, the conceptualization of elements in the policy stream provides an analytical perspective on key components of the policy process, which is somewhat difficult to analyze quantitatively.
The policy implication of this study for enriching the research of causal mechanisms of policy processes by preliminarily elucidating the internal mechanism of how partial coupling leads to complete coupling in the MSF. About policy formulation, taking forming effective options as the goal, in the process which policy experimentation and cyclical stabilization windows play a fundamental role. In addition, policy experiment is placed as a tool in the MSF and compared with Kingdon's view for theoretical dialogue. This facilitates corrections and adjustments for better application to dynamic policy environments.
Conclusions
The study aims to explore the evolutionary mechanism of partial coupling (problems and politics) to complete coupling in the MSF. In this article, we construct the theoretical framework illustrating the evolutionary mechanism of the policy process based on the MSF theory. Therefore, we focus on the process of an effective alternative generating in the policy stream, which proposes the framework based on goal-oriented “policy solutions.” To do so, we analyzed, the process of rural governance policy output in China, through two comparative cases, to further explored the judging standard of the effective alternative to a problem.
The agenda-setting of China’s rural governance policy is based on the development of a multi-stream framework with “policy solutions” as the goal. In other words, the study of cases strengthens the essence of setting the agenda to find effective solutions and then solving problems, which is in line with the policy development orientation of important and complex issues that need to be solved urgently. Due to the persistence and comprehensive complexity of the “three rural” issues, there is no alternative policy solution background that urges the Chinese government to start with core issues and couple politics and problems to drive the evolution of the policy stream. Through political elites open the policy window and adopt experimental means to promote the generation and improvement of alternative plans, obtain effective policy plans and form a complete policy stream. Therefore, policy entrepreneurs will seize the window of opportunity to incorporate effective policy solutions into the decision-making agenda and formulate policies. Regarding the development of the policy stream on the core issues of “agriculture, rural areas, and farmers,” the Chinese government has strong political power and stable operation of the policy system. In turn, it can actively identify and raise the “three rural” issues to strengthen the political atmosphere and open a policy window driven by political factors. That is, the advantage of a highly centralized political system has the sufficient capacity to open the policy window before the complete coupling. In the process, the central government has established a legal channel for softening policy plans to obtain effective alternatives. It will display innovative policy plans in the form of legal norms and authority and accelerate the softening process. On the other hand, the central government has no specific policy options to choose from, which is indispensable for taking policy experimentation. Under the premise of the central government’s top-level design, local governments are encouraged to innovate in policy experimentation. The successful solution formed by the local experimentation is absorbed and recognized by the central government, and pilots are carried out to test the feasibility of the policy solution; do a decision on whether or not to leave the options based on feedback and evaluation of policy implementation.
The multiple streams framework based on goal-oriented “policy solutions” unpacked the black box of coupling, further understanding the policy process regarding comprehensive and long-time governance issues. Specifically, this is helpful to provide a design basis for effective policy solutions and further illustrates the dynamics that partial coupling that without an available alternative to advocate in the policy stream forms complete coupling. The framework enriches the expansion possibilities of the MSF. Based on the requirements of policy effectiveness targets in the context of China’s system, to achieve effective implementation and efficiency improvement, it must be explored the influence of the internal composition of the policy agenda. Future studies that it is necessary to take root in the core of the problem, political leadership, and the essence of policy effectiveness to explore the internal connections of each key variable and then achieve the purpose of agenda setting. This research needs to further explore the specific role of policy windows in the policy stream and then elaborate on the specific path of policy experimentation optimization.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We appreciate the support of School of Changping Zhang, Yafei He.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The Humanities and Social Science Middle-Aged and Young Teachers’ Basic Ability Promotion Project of Guangxi “The Role of Township Rules and Regulations in Rural Governance in Southwest Ethnic Areas” (2020QGRW020).
Ethical Statement
This study belongs to the field of social science and social policy, so the ethical statement is not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
The data mainly comes from three aspects: the first is the policy document issued at the national level - the No. 1 Central Document, which is taken from the website of the No. 1 Central Document by the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, the State Council and other central departments. The second is the innovative practice of the local government and the local government's policy documents for the policy source formed in the policy pilot. the third is relevant news and media reports and case-related information and data around a policy issue where the initiative is formed. The data is authoritative and reliable.