Policy instability and asymmetric decoupling: A multiple streams analysis of Australia's JobSeeker Payment reform
Yutong ChenAbstract
This article asks why the successful coupling of the problem, policy, and political streams during the COVID‐19 reform of Australia's JobSeeker Payment failed to produce durable institutional change. It adopts a longitudinal single‐case design covering 2014–2025 and applies the Multiple Streams Framework to trace the movement of the three streams from pre‐crisis separation to pandemic coupling and post‐crisis divergence. The article develops the concept of asymmetric decoupling, whereby political authorisation is withdrawn before the underlying problem has been resolved or viable policy alternatives have disappeared, causing the problem to recede from the agenda and policy proposals to lose access to authoritative decision‐making. By distinguishing short‐term policy breakthroughs from durable institutionalisation, asymmetric decoupling extends the Multiple Streams Framework from the opening of policy windows to the destabilisation of stream relationships and institutional reversion after those windows begin to close.
Points for practitioners
Crisis‐driven policy breakthroughs should not be assumed to have secured durable institutional support. Reform durability depends not only on persistent social need or feasible policy design but also on continuing political authorisation and access to authoritative decision‐making. Major temporary welfare reforms should include formal review points, social impact assessment, parliamentary scrutiny, and institutionalised participation by welfare and poverty experts before support is reduced or terminated.