4. Two of our forthcoming working papers deal with “the evidence underlying policy change” and “strategies for effective longtermist advocacy”. A common conclusion that could deserve more scrutiny is the relative effectiveness of insider vs outsider strategies (insiders directly work within policy networks and outsiders publicly advocate for policy change). Insider strategies seem more promising. What is well-validated, especially in the US, is that the budget size of advocacy campaigns does not correlate with their success. However, an advocate’s number of network connections and their knowledge of institutions do correlate with their performance. These findings are also consistent with this systematic review on policy engagement for academics.
As it’s not our top priority, we’re happy to share what we’ve got with somebody who has the capacity to pick this up. To do so, get in touch with Max (max@simoninstitute.ch).
Oh, nice—good to see that you’ve already looked into empirical evidence (beyond just anecdotal evidence and expert opinion) relevant to that part of your theory of change!
I also find this an interesting small update in favour of insider as opposed to outsider strategies more generally. (I already leaned a bit towards insider strategies, but don’t think I’d seen what systematic analyses of empirical evidence on the question said. Though the update is only small given that I still haven’t checked out those links and you imply they’re not conclusive.)
4. Two of our forthcoming working papers deal with “the evidence underlying policy change” and “strategies for effective longtermist advocacy”. A common conclusion that could deserve more scrutiny is the relative effectiveness of insider vs outsider strategies (insiders directly work within policy networks and outsiders publicly advocate for policy change). Insider strategies seem more promising. What is well-validated, especially in the US, is that the budget size of advocacy campaigns does not correlate with their success. However, an advocate’s number of network connections and their knowledge of institutions do correlate with their performance. These findings are also consistent with this systematic review on policy engagement for academics.
As it’s not our top priority, we’re happy to share what we’ve got with somebody who has the capacity to pick this up. To do so, get in touch with Max (max@simoninstitute.ch).
Oh, nice—good to see that you’ve already looked into empirical evidence (beyond just anecdotal evidence and expert opinion) relevant to that part of your theory of change!
I also find this an interesting small update in favour of insider as opposed to outsider strategies more generally. (I already leaned a bit towards insider strategies, but don’t think I’d seen what systematic analyses of empirical evidence on the question said. Though the update is only small given that I still haven’t checked out those links and you imply they’re not conclusive.)