In such settings, itās also possible to become policy-entrepreneurs who can create windows of opportunity, instead of needing to wait for them.
This is an interesting point.
It also calls to mind a possible counterpoint to your overall views here (though I think I agree with the views):
Maybe instead of (a) waiting for windows of opportunity (while building capacity) or (b) creating windows of opportunity through insider approaches, itās sometimes best to (c) create windows of opportunity through outsider approaches like public advocacy?
E.g., Iād guess that public advocacy about climate change has played a substantial role in creating windows for acting on that issue, e.g. because now voters will vote partly based on that issue and politicians are aware of that. And my impression is that public advocacy or similar things like marches and protests have played a key role in creating policy windows in the past, e.g. in the case of the civil rights movement. (I havenāt looked into this stuff closely, though.)
Iād be interested in your thoughts on that. (Though again, I do think I lean in favour of your approach. And in fact I tentatively think some existing longtermism-related public advocacy is sufficiently likely to be counterproductive that it was a mistake for it to be started without further analysis up front, partly because that better preserves option value.)
Yeah, public attention can also be a carrot, not just a stick. But itās a carrot that grows legs and will run its own way, possibly making it harder when you want to change course upon new learnings.
Our current take here is something like āpublic advocacy doesnāt create windows of opportunity, it creates windows of implementationā. When public pressure mounts, policymakers want to do something to signal they are trying. And they will often do whatever looks best in that moment. It would only be good to pressure once proposals are worked out and just need to be āpushed throughā.
To influence agendas, it seems better, at least mid-term, to pursue insider strategies. However, if all you have is one shot, then you might as well try public advocacy for reprioritization and hope it vaguely goes into the right direction. But if you think thereās time for more targeted and incremental progress, then the best option probably is to become a trusted policy actor in your network of choice.
This is an interesting point.
It also calls to mind a possible counterpoint to your overall views here (though I think I agree with the views):
Maybe instead of (a) waiting for windows of opportunity (while building capacity) or (b) creating windows of opportunity through insider approaches, itās sometimes best to (c) create windows of opportunity through outsider approaches like public advocacy?
E.g., Iād guess that public advocacy about climate change has played a substantial role in creating windows for acting on that issue, e.g. because now voters will vote partly based on that issue and politicians are aware of that. And my impression is that public advocacy or similar things like marches and protests have played a key role in creating policy windows in the past, e.g. in the case of the civil rights movement. (I havenāt looked into this stuff closely, though.)
Iād be interested in your thoughts on that. (Though again, I do think I lean in favour of your approach. And in fact I tentatively think some existing longtermism-related public advocacy is sufficiently likely to be counterproductive that it was a mistake for it to be started without further analysis up front, partly because that better preserves option value.)
Yeah, public attention can also be a carrot, not just a stick. But itās a carrot that grows legs and will run its own way, possibly making it harder when you want to change course upon new learnings.
Our current take here is something like āpublic advocacy doesnāt create windows of opportunity, it creates windows of implementationā. When public pressure mounts, policymakers want to do something to signal they are trying. And they will often do whatever looks best in that moment. It would only be good to pressure once proposals are worked out and just need to be āpushed throughā.
To influence agendas, it seems better, at least mid-term, to pursue insider strategies. However, if all you have is one shot, then you might as well try public advocacy for reprioritization and hope it vaguely goes into the right direction. But if you think thereās time for more targeted and incremental progress, then the best option probably is to become a trusted policy actor in your network of choice.