Resource Type: Evaluation & Measuring Progress

Being in the climate movement comes with a certain orientation around crisis – disruption is something we are familiar with. From IPCC reports declaring dire and urgent responses to disruptive tactics of resistance being in our movement’s DNA – we may feel endless urgency to fulfill our tactics, strategies, and missions. The Ayni Institute speaks of this as the “endless summer” and points to the inevitable burnout of attempting to sustain this high energy non-stop.
Reflecting on the last 10 years, it’s clear the climate movement has built many of the critical capacities* needed to win. This week’s newsletter focuses on strategic capacity in particular and how understanding and embracing the seasons of leadership and cycles of movements can strengthen it.

At the Lab, we are wrapping up field research projects with six great partner climate advocacy organizations. While I can’t wait to share what we’ve learned once they are complete, today I wanted to provide some of my reflections on best practices for field research I’ve learned from these tests and other projects. Think of these as extra dollops of advice on top of our core guidance on research and testing and Learning 101*.

You’ve probably heard a lot from us about evidence-based advocacy, but what are we talking about when we talk about “evidence?” Does it mean we privilege academic research that has withstood the rigor of peer review, or that we should raise up lessons learned through the hard work of organizing on the ground? Do we gather evidence from a bird’s-eye view of the public at large through polling, a detailed examination of a particular audience through interviewing, or an introspective analysis of how our own organizations and coalitions operate? The short answer is that we think all of it matters as long as the insights generated can help us be more effective, challenge our assumptions, and grow as a movement. This post examines how we think about evidence at the Lab and how we can break evidence down into the categories of Listening, Watching, Tinkering, and Reflecting*.

“Perceived fairness” and “effectiveness” are the most important determinants of public support for climate policies. “Self-enhancement values” and “knowledge about climate change” showed weak relationships to public opinion support, and demographic variables showed only weak or close to zero relationship to support for climate policies (or climate concern). “Fairness” refers to the extent that people or a process are treated or implemented equally, or according to criteria like need or merit. “Effectiveness” is people’s beliefs that a policy can fulfill a specific aim.

Does “evaluation” sound judgy, “research” feel like a luxury, “testing” pointless, or “data” too technical?
Then we welcome you to explore with us how developing a culture of testing, evaluation and learning is crucial to multiracial, cross-class organizing in the climate movement. Evaluation and learning allow you to get real-time feedback about what is working (or not), and the space to grow from your experience and make shifts to your work. So it’s crucial to understanding the areas we are successfully building power and where we need to experiment and iterate. If we can’t track and improve, how do we know if we are on the way to winning?