This article applies a modified Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) to an in-depth case study of the contentious issue of integrating ethics into the Norwegian oil fund strategy. By exploring how ethical investment guidelines evolved from a discredited and allegedly unrealistic idea into policy consensus and, ultimately, a global exemplar, the study contributes to the literature in two ways. First, it contributes to the ongoing theoretical refinement of the MSF perspective by illustrating how the framework proves valuable in examining both agenda-setting and decision-making processes. Specifically, it confirms the relevance of a two-phase model for a more rigorous analysis of the decision-making process. Second, while prior literature defines the output of agenda-setting as a ready proposal, it is demonstrated that this outcome may not necessarily signify a fully developed policy proposal. To account for a broader range of scenarios, this article suggests redefining the output of the agenda-setting process as a policy commitment, rather than a worked-out proposal ready for negotiations in the political stream. Acknowledging the uncertainty and ambiguity in the decision-making process highlights the significance of developments in the problem and policy streams that past literature has not given due attention. Consequently, the article proposes a revised two-phase model to enhance the conceptualisation of decision-making within the MSF.

本文应用修改后的多流框架 (MSF) 对将道德纳入挪威石油基金战略这一有争议的问题进行深入案例研究。通过探索道德投资指南如何从一个不可信且据称不切实际的想法演变为政策共识并最终成为全球典范，该研究以两种方式对文献做出了贡献。首先，它通过说明该框架如何在审查议程设置和决策过程方面发挥价值，有助于无国界医生组织观点的持续理论完善。具体来说，它证实了两阶段模型对于对决策过程进行更严格分析的相关性。其次，虽然先前的文献将议程设置的输出定义为现成的提案，但事实证明，这一结果可能并不一定意味着一个成熟的政策提案。为了考虑到更广泛的情况，本文建议将议程设定过程的输出重新定义为政策承诺，而不是准备在政治流程中进行谈判的拟定提案。承认决策过程中的不确定性和模糊性凸显了过去文献没有给予应有关注的问题和政策流发展的重要性。因此，本文提出了一个修订后的两阶段模型，以增强无国界医生组织内部决策的概念化。