Brilliant to raise this topic, and I like what you wrote but both diagrams are weak. For me a good diagram shows very specifically how a single change will be achieved, and shows if there is too long a chain for success to be likely.
Regardless of diagrams, we all have conscious or unconscious theories of change, and many (especially in climate change) have been useless.
The classic unconscious theory of change is:
brainy guy does research > publishes > civil servants write a policy > wise politicians decide > funds are allocated > policy is implemented well
The main weakness here is that it’s a very long chain, with many obstacles in each link.
Compare to coal industry’s ToC, which they learned from Big Tobacco:
“create confusion about climate science” + “capture Congress” > block all carbon tax proposals nationally and internationally
Good ToC for EAs involves:
selecting good and astute targets of change (whether in real world, movement or metta)
smart routes to achieving the change
updating appropriately (at a Goldilocks frequently, not too rarely to stay current, not too often to frustrate the teams doing the work)
For “natural conservatives”, this may sometimes involve finding ways of opposing harmful change, and proving that some policies are a bad idea, or need fine tuning.
Brilliant to raise this topic, and I like what you wrote but both diagrams are weak. For me a good diagram shows very specifically how a single change will be achieved, and shows if there is too long a chain for success to be likely.
Regardless of diagrams, we all have conscious or unconscious theories of change, and many (especially in climate change) have been useless.
The classic unconscious theory of change is:
The main weakness here is that it’s a very long chain, with many obstacles in each link.
Compare to coal industry’s ToC, which they learned from Big Tobacco:
Good ToC for EAs involves:
selecting good and astute targets of change (whether in real world, movement or metta)
smart routes to achieving the change
updating appropriately (at a Goldilocks frequently, not too rarely to stay current, not too often to frustrate the teams doing the work)
For “natural conservatives”, this may sometimes involve finding ways of opposing harmful change, and proving that some policies are a bad idea, or need fine tuning.