ABSTRACT A core assumption of the Multiple Streams Framework proposes that agenda and policy change is more probable when a policy proposal worked out as a viable alternative in the policy stream is coupled with the political and/or problem stream in an open policy window. In this article, we argue that this perspective hinges on a too narrow understanding of the concept of ambiguity, which ignores situations of high epistemic uncertainty in which worked‐out solutions are not readily available in the policy streams, but policy action still occurs. For instance, when a policy window has been opened in the problem stream due to the presence of a focusing event. Building on the literature on how decisions under uncertainty are taken, we propose that policy‐makers will utilize “ad‐hoc solutions” as satisficing strategies, such as the precautionary principle, which will then guide political decisions. Which heuristics are available may depend on different factors, such as the basic normative values of a decision‐maker herself, national cultures of a country, or situation‐specific characteristics.