4 Framework for analysis
4.1 The policy streams
4.1.1 Agendas
In the context of this study a number of agendas are likely to be observed. The broad environmental agenda has been gaining in prominence in South Africa. This is evident in the large number of environmentally focussed pieces of legislation that have been passed recently. The prime example is the National Environmental Management Act No 107 Of 1998, which is intended to be framework legislation within which a whole suite of environmental legislation would be enacted. Within the arena of environmental legislation waste management has been one item on the agenda. It moved from being on the
"governmental agenda" to the "decision agenda" (Kingdon, 1995: 4) and became an issue that was being actively considered and debated. The reasons for this movement will be important.
4.1.2 Problems
According to Kingdon problems are identified as such because of one or more of the following factors. The first of these are indicators that can arise from the monitoring activities of both governmental and non-governmental agencies (Kingdon, 1995: 90).
Kingdon suggests that decision makers "use the indicators in two major ways: to assess the magnitude of a problem and to become aware of changes in the problem" (Kingdon, 1995:
91). Problems sometimes become identified as the result of a focusing event, crisis or symbol. "An issue becomes a burning issue when it reaches crisis proportions" (Kingdon, 1995: 95). A third mechanism by which problems are identified is that of feedback.
Feedback can take the form of monitoring and evaluation, complaints received from the public, or the administrative experience of bureaucrats they themselves.
In this study the way in which the problem became a burning issue and moved onto the decision agenda will be identified.
4.1.3 Policies
Kingdon refers to the policy stream as the "policy primeval soup" (Kingdon, 1995: 116) to which various policy communities contribute. 'These policy communities are "composed of specialists in a given policy area" (Kingdon, 1995: 117). These policy communities are largely located within government and while independent of each other they have in common that "they are concerned witho~e area of policy problems" (Kingdon, 1995: 117).
Kingdon suggests that the more loosely-knit the community is, the freer the agenda is to shift "from one time to another in a more volatile fashion" (Kingdon, 1995: 121).
A particular policy is likely to attract the attention of a policy entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs are advocates for an idea and their defining characteristic is "their willingness to invest resources - time, energy, reputation and sometimes money - in the hope of a future return"
(Kingdon, 1995: 122). The process of developing a policy is "evolutionary, a selection process in which some ... ideas survive and flourish" (Kingdon, 1995: 124), hence the term 'primeval soup'.
In order to have their ideas gain wider acceptance policy entrepreneurs have to engage in a softening up process which involves floating their idea in every forum possible, both within government and in the public arena. The policy ideas that survive are those that meet the criteria of "technical feasibility, value acceptability within the policy community, tolerable cost, anticipated public acquiescence, and a reasonable chance for receptivity among elected decision makers" (Kingdon, 1995: 131). It is both the content of the ideas themselves and political pressure resulting from the softening up process that succeeds in moving some subjects higher up on the governmental agenda.
For the purposes of this study, technical feasibility, acceptability within the policy community, costs, anticipated public acquiescence, and the chances for receptivity amongf
elected decision makers of the policy proposals are going to be important criteria.
4.1.4 Political
Kingdon defines the political stream rather narrowly, for example describing political motivations as "politicians' attention to voter reactions, their skewering of members of the opposition political party, and their efforts to obtain the support of important interest group leaders" (Kingdon, 1995: 145). He identifies the political stream as an "important promoter
or inhibitor of high agenda status" (Kingdon, 1995: 163). The political stream is influenced, "in particular, [by] the complex of national mood and elections" (Kingdon, 1995: 164). His analysis suggests that the national mood on its own is important, but when election imperatives are added to the mix, items on the agenda, which coincide with the national mood, are likely to be promoted. This factor is particularly strengthened hy consensus huilding in the political arena, which Kingdon defines as taking place "through a bargaining process rather than by persuasion" (Kingdon, 1995: 163).
For this study it will be important to identify the ways in which the political stream and the national mood influenced the outcome of the policy process.
4.1.5 Windows
Kingdon identifies a po licy window as "an opportunity for advocates of proposals to push their pet solutions, or to push attention to their special problems" (Kingdon, 1995: 165). A policy window is therefore an opportunity for action on a particular initiative. The importance of the policy window lies in the fact that it provides the policy entrepreneur an opportunity to bring together the separate streams, previously discussed, and couple them appropriately. Windows may open for the policy entrepreneur as a result of a change in administration, a turnover in political actors, or the problem becoming pressing (Kingdon, 1995: 168). However the window does not stay open long, as the problem may be addressed by other means, participants may fail to get action, or the events, which caused the issue to becoming pressing, may pass. The personnel involved in the creation of the policy may also change causing the policy proposal to be reviewed, or looked at in a new light.
The coupling of the policy streams isa crucial part of the process. "None of the streams are sufficient by themselves to place an item firmly on the decision agenda" (Kingdon, 1995:
178). In short, it is the unique coupling of all these elements (or the mix in the garbage can) that pushes an item from the governmental agenda onto the decision agenda.
In this study I will attempt to identify the window that opened and the reasons for its opening.