SECTION 5: E NERGY introduction Purpose : Gather with others to discuss what has changed and what needs to happen next. How to use this section: Read this before you evaluate your campaign. Whether you have reached a big milestone or faced a setback, reflection and re-evaluation are essential in any systems-based strategic communications journey. A milestone can be an ending, a new beginning, a change in direction, or just a pause. For thousands of years humans have gathered around the fire to celebrate milestones, share stories and connect. Fire transforms the energy that we put into life and work, into stories and change. But like all other natural resources, this energy is not infinite. How we spend that energy is critical to understanding what is working and what we should do next. In this Section we use a fire chart as a tool to guide us in how we use our energy, through evaluation, reflection, death and renewal. Please read through this section and the tools provided chronologically, so that you consider in the correct order the big questions about your next steps. These include: The “What?” of reflection Like tending a fire, we need to watch over our efforts from all angles, not just focus on one part. This means building regular and honest reflection into our work. Reflection is an action and is as important as any decision we make. The “So what?” of reflection When a group watches a fire together, it is easier to know where and when to add wood and what kind of wood to add. Every opinion is important because everyone sees and believes different truths. This collective undertaking of risk and understanding helps us see what is working. The “What now?” of reflection We also need to think ahead and decide how long we want the fire to burn, which tells us how much and what kind of wood to add and when to add it. What do we need to do today to benefit future generations? Burning wood releases stored energy, just as our efforts release energy into the world. Endings are as natural as beginnings. We should embrace them as part of the cycle of life. It is important to ask if we are still the right ones to continue the work. We must be ready to face hard truths. This is the "What, me?" of reflection.*** Footnote Sources: *Pedagogy of the Oppressed ***Adapted from Four Quadrant Partners work on Emergent Learning Tables, http://www.pointk.org/resources/files/Introduction_to_Emergent_Learning_Tables.pdf section summary Key Takeaway Make reflection a regular practice, plant seeds for the future and be prepared to let others take up your mission. Key Questions How do you, your opponents and neutrals believe the system has changed? What can you do today for those alive in seven generations’ time? How will you know when you are no longer the best placed to do what you do? Do you need to go back to the start of the S.E.N.S.E. process to review the System or Equilibrium of your own organization, or of the problem you are trying to address? Key Tool(s) Fire chart

SECTION 1: S YSTEM CHAPTER 3 - LEVELS ARE LEVERS The deepest levels of a system have the greatest influence on its functions. Look outside your window at a tree or a plant. Its leaves reach up to the sky, but below the surface its roots reach deep through layers of soil for nutrients and support. For many trees, their roots grow out two to four times wider than the visible crown above. These layers of soil through which these roots extend represent a system. Every system has five “levels”, with each deeper level having more influence than the one above it: What, How, Where, Who, and Why. Understanding System Levels Think of the problem you want to fix as a system: What are the outputs of the system and the parameters set to constrain it? How do interactions, feedback loops and delays function? Where and when does information flow in the system in order for it to operate? Who holds power to set the rules and structures of the system? Why does the system exist, what values and goals does it seek to uphold? Each level of soil can also be narrow or wide. A tree with narrow roots or weak foundations at its Why level could be easy to change. A campaign, program, or project can be more effective by targeting multiple levels, and most effective by targeting the deepest level. However, it is okay to focus on a shallower level if that is what your resources allow Addressing Oppressions upheld by Systems Many systems have oppressions that interconnect across different levels. As you explore the system, you may find that some stakeholders experience multiple and overlapping oppressions. Investigate these connections to discover useful places for collaboration and focus your campaigning efforts. You can read more about how to do this in Chapter 7: Solidarity is a verb. Sources: 1 Archimedes quote - Source via Wikipedia: This variant derives from an earlier source than Pappus: The Library of History of Diodorus Siculus, Fragments of Book XXVI, as translated by F. R. Walton, in Loeb Classical Library (1957) Vol. XI. In Doric Greek this may have originally been Πᾷ βῶ, καὶ χαριστίωνι τὰν γᾶν κινήσω πᾶσαν [Pā bō, kai kharistiōni tan gān kinēsō [variant kinasō] pāsan]. Chipko, a grassroots movement in the 1970s and 1980s in Uttarakhand, India, began as a local struggle against deforestation by outside contractors. It was initiated by local villagers, primarily led by Chandi Prasad Bhatt and Sunderlal Bahuguna. The movement aimed to address local economic needs and environmental degradation by stopping tree felling and advocating for local control over forest resources. The key tasks of Chipko were to: Prevent Deforestation: Stop commercial logging by outside contractors. Empower Local Communities: Advocate for local control over forest resources and promote local economic development. Raise Awareness: Highlight the environmental and social impacts of deforestation on both national and international stages. The movement did this through: Local Mobilization: Villagers, led by Bhatt and Bahuguna, engaged in direct action by physically hugging trees to prevent them from being cut down. This method first gained prominence in Mandal in 1973 and continued across the region. Political Advocacy: Chipko sought policy changes through local protests and direct appeals to the government, which led to temporary bans on commercial logging and the formation of the Van Nigam to manage forests. Connecting local needs and struggles: The movement generated a new and sustained dialogue between the Chipko workers (originally', men) and the victims of the environmental disasters in the hill areas of Garhwal (mainly women). The message of the Chipko workers connected with their own struggles in managing food and safety needs in the face of recurring floods. Women’s support for the movement strengthened it exponentially, and leveraged their engagement and leadership in public spaces. International and National Impact: The movement gained global attention, contributing to the enactment of the Forest Conservation Act of 1980 and the establishment of India’s Ministry of Environment. It also inspired global environmental and eco-feminist movements. The movement had local impact: Short-Term Successes: Chipko effectively halted deforestation in some areas and led to temporary bans on logging. It achieved significant local mobilization and demonstrated the power of grassroots activism. Economic and Social Discontent: Despite its successes, the movement did not fully address the economic needs of local communities. The creation of the Van Nigam and conservation areas restricted local access to forest resources, leading to dissatisfaction. Villagers felt their subsistence needs were ignored, and their traditional rights to forest resources were not fully restored. The movement also had national and international impact: Legislative Changes: Chipko played a role in shaping national policy, including the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. It raised environmental issues on a global scale. Global Recognition: The movement was celebrated internationally and influenced global environmentalism and eco-feminism. It challenged the notion that the poor are indifferent to environmental issues. We can see that the Chipko movement helped to make changes at the five levels of the system, however it faced several challenges leading to mixed local and political impact: What level: Chipko’s direct actions, such as tree-hugging protests, were significant events that attracted immediate attention and had short-term effects on deforestation. How level (infrastructure, loops and delays): The movement highlighted recurring conflicts between local needs and external economic interests, emphasizing the tension between conservation and economic development. The movement slowed down the company’s deforestation. Where level: Critical Influence: Media coverage significantly shaped the perception of Chipko. It amplified the movement’s global profile but often misrepresented the local realities and conflicts. One Chipko activist noted that media reports relied on hearsay and did not engage with villagers directly, contributing to the movement’s eventual shortcomings. Rift Between Leaders: According to Pratap Shikhar, media reports exacerbated tensions between Bhatt and Bahuguna, creating a rift that hindered the movement's cohesion and effectiveness. Who level: Exposure: Chipko exposed structural issues in forest management, including the preference for outside contractors and the inadequacies of local control mechanisms. Rules: Although policies like the Forest Conservation Act were implemented, they did not fully address local community needs. Political party disinterest: The national CPI and other political parties did not fully support the movement, leading to a situation where Chipko’s radical potential for self-governance and resource management was undermined. Within the movement itself: Factions split off within the movement, one leaning towards grassroots organizing and the other leaning towards media and PR-led approach. Arguably the movement missed opportunities for political organizing and electoral engagement, which could have strengthened its influence. Why level: The movement shifted perceptions of forests from mere resources to essential elements of local livelihoods and environmental health. However, as Chipko gained international recognition, the focus shifted towards global environmental concerns, overshadowing local economic and social goals. Chipko achieved significant milestones in raising awareness and influencing policy but faced limitations in meeting its local objectives. The movement’s transformation into a global environmental cause overshadowed its original focus on local economic needs and resource management. The media’s role in amplifying the movement internationally, while crucial, also contributed to misunderstandings and internal conflicts. Politically, Chipko failed to harness its full potential for systemic change, leading to missed opportunities for broader influence. While Chipko inspired global environmental movements and highlighted the intersection of poverty and environmental issues, its local impact has been mixed. Many original activists and villagers feel disillusioned, as the movement’s promises of local empowerment and economic benefit were not fully realized. The contrast between Chipko’s initial goals and its outcomes illustrates the complex dynamics of grassroots activism, media influence, and political engagement. Read more: https://www.downtoearth.org.in/environment/chipko-an-unfinished-mission-30883 Numbers People focus a lot on the numbers that track or limit systems. These numbers include tax rates, interest rates, employment rates, minimum wage rates, GDP growth rates, deforestation rates, population rates, air pollution rates, and the rates of fossil versus renewable energy. Media and political debates often center around these numbers. Many campaigns aim to change these numbers, like ending fossil fuel subsidies or raising the minimum wage. These parameters are easy to understand and change, and people tend to care about them. However, changing these numbers often has the weakest effect on systems. They don't usually change individual or system behavior unless they reach a limit that affects a deeper level of the system. In the short term, changing these numbers can be important. But in the long term, systems tend to return to their original state, keeping the same inequalities. Campaigns focused on these numbers can be valuable if they are the most realistic option given available resources, relationships, and time. They can also help organizing*, build power and increase movement participation through collective action. But as a long-term goal, changing numbers alone rarely leads to lasting, fair systems change. Hardware The physical parts of a system—stocks, flows, and buffers—are more impactful. These include the infrastructure, elements, and connections within a system. They can greatly affect what a system looks like and does, but are harder to change quickly. A "What-level" campaign to improve air pollution and reduce traffic might call for stock-and-flow infrastructure to improve, like road and rail locations, electrical grids, and building designs. A "What-level" campaign to tackle drought might focus on the buffers that stabilize the system, by demanding that drinking water set aside for businesses be redistributed, or by calling for state emergency funds to be reallocated. Changing the physical infrastructure of systems is easier before they are built. Proactive efforts to influence planning and zoning are challenging but more feasible than trying to change systems once they are established. Campaigns that target the What level, via the Numbers or Hardware of a system, can be effective, but will create the shortest-lasting changes and will not change the wider system in the long-term. Sources: For more analysis on leverage points and the basis from which these five levels are drawn, see ‘Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System” by Donella Meadows. *Organizing for Social Change: Midwest Academy : Manual for Activists: A Manual for Activists In 2018, Kadoma municipality authorities in Zimbabwe had been neglecting their responsibility to repair local roads filled with potholes. Anyone moving around or transporting goods through Kadoma had to risk injury to do so. A youth organization called Vision Africa organized an intervention at the What level to get the local authorities’ attention and force them to act. The youth planted banana trees in potholes all around the streets of Kadoma: Stocks and Flows: Banana trees grow quickly, are tough and notoriously hard to pull out once they have grown a certain height. Once the trees were noticed, the authorities had to act quickly or they would become a bigger problem for transport routes. Buffer System: The local authorities had to increase the funds available as a buffer to fix the roads so the system improved. Locals began to share images via Twitter of the banana trees popping up over Kadoma and this became a source of national embarrassment for the local authorities, who acted quickly to fix the roads. The Zimbabwe Republic Police’s Internal Security Intelligence arrested and questioned Vision Africa leaders but then released them. Read more: https://www.tactics4change.org/case-studies/potholes-to-garden-beds/ https://www.news24.com/news24/africa/zimbabwe/photos-zim-activist-plant-trees-in-potholes-govt-not-pleased-20180330 If our raft breaks as we traverse a river, it’s no good if we have new materials but don’t know how to fix the raft. Changing how a system works is more effective than trying to change what it is made of. Delays We need to camp for the night and fix the raft, but there are signs of a storm coming. How do we make the best use of the time we have? Should we camp close to the river and risk a flood? Or should we camp farther away and make ourselves return for water? Delays happen everywhere and are hard to control but important to consider. For example, a water shortage for farms now may impact food availability and prices in a few months time. A sudden increase or decrease in birth rates now will impact the need for local teachers and schools in the years ahead. A treehouse designed for young children might not be stable for their grandchildren looking up at a much larger tree. Using email instead of a fax machine is great until the internet goes down during an emergency. Delays add complexity to systems. A “How-level” campaign must prepare for various scenarios and delays across the short-, medium- and long-term. Feedback loops A system survives through the strength of its correcting (negative) and reinforcing (positive) feedback loops. These loops usually involve some length of delay between an event occurring and the associated response. Reinforcing (positive) loops are more powerful than balancing (negative) loops. Balancing (negative) loop: Counteracts changes to keep a system stable. When it works: A thermostat (complicated system) that keeps a room at the right temperature, or a safety process in a nuclear power plant (complex system). When it does not work: It’s all too easy to underappreciate the value of a feedback loop. Governments and corporations often strip away these mechanisms in order to save money, leading to problems. For instance, when governments weaken regulations it can allow rights violations, market price distortions, erosion of democracy or the spread of misinformation. How to target it in a campaign: A “How-level” campaign could look at introducing or strengthening these safety mechanisms. Reinforcing (positive) loop: Amplifies changes quickly to keep a system growing. When it works: A snowball gets bigger as it rolls. When it is too strong: It can lead to collapse if unchecked, like species extinction or investment bubbles. The more resources someone has, the more they can gain, leading to power imbalances. The powerful can more easily gain money, better education, access to government, influence over policies to support themselves. How to target it in a campaign: A “How-level” campaign to introduce higher taxes for high earners (reducing the positive loop) is more powerful than just giving support payments to the unemployed (increasing negative loops). Campaigns that target the How level of a system’s inbuilt Delays and Loops can appear effective, and can make a difference in the short and medium-term to how citizens and the environment live. But they will not change the system or lives for the long-term. Every year more than 8 million tonnes of plastic end up in the ocean, killing an estimated 100,000 marine mammals. Just 60 companies are responsible for more than half the world’s plastic pollution. As public awareness of plastic pollution has increased, companies have faced growing pressure to address their environmental impact. These corporations know they need to respond to environmental concerns and maintain their profitability while managing public perception and the regulatory pressures upon them regarding plastic pollution. It is more expensive for these companies to change their systems and processes by using fewer plastics or investing in plastic reuse. It is cheaper to increase marketing campaigns to promote existing processes and increase sales and brand awareness. These companies use delays and feedback loops at the How level of global systems: Create delay: They promote or expand existing recycling initiatives. This is less costly than shifting to reusable alternatives. Strengthen a negative loop: They establish new partnerships to promote existing recycling initiatives through traditional and digital media marketing campaigns. Customers believe the companies are committed to sustainability and buy more of their products. Create delay: They advocate for recycling initiatives rather than more sustainable practices at international forums like the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution. This causes delays for the Committee to agree to and implement more environmentally-friendly alternatives. Strengthen negative loop across systems: Governments, influenced by these narratives, also prioritize recycling over reduction, reinforcing this approach. By prioritizing recycling, these companies can continue their high levels of plastic production under the guise of sustainability, thereby increasing their profits and market share without making substantial changes to their practices. This approach locks in the problem of plastic pollution, rather than addressing its root causes. Read more: https://earth.org/inc-4-provides-limited-progress-towards-a-global-plastics-treaty What we do not know can hurt us. If no one shares a map of the river we are traversing, how do we know which are the areas to avoid? Access & Distribution Even when a country has independent media, not everyone can access it. Digital media needs an internet connection. Newspapers do not reach remote areas quickly. Social media can be monitored or banned. Even if information is available, it needs to reach the right people through the most available channels . Some people avoid phone calls or emails but cannot avoid advertising. Winning a campaign does not mean the message will reach everyone. Those in power can control where and when information flows, keeping the public in the dark. They can distract people, use loopholes, or introduce new laws to counter the original change. If there is no way to verify or measure changes, like an increased tax on the rich, we will not know if it really happened. If we cannot communicate policy changes, they might be delayed until after elections. A "Where-level" campaign could partner with local media and investigative journalists to expose crimes by elites, informing remote populations so they can take action. Transparency & Accountability Creating infrastructure to highlight important information - for transparency and accountability - builds trust and encourages collective action. Transparency International’s Corruption Index and Amnesty International’s human rights rankings are powerful because governments care about their image. Big companies like Coca-Cola and Nestle wanted to rank well in Oxfam’s Behind the Brands campaign (2012-2017) to maintain a good reputation. Greenpeace’s campaigns against brands on social media, outside shops, and by pressuring partners, do impact companies’ reputations and hence popularity. All societies benefit from strong accountability mechanisms. For example, being able to vote out a local politician can push those with greater power to change. However, this is often not the case. A team in India built the website ipaidabribe.com which was used over a thousand times to highlight corruption, but this did not lead to a general crackdown on corruption. Community education done by the same team, however, did result in an increase of students willing to refuse to pay a bribe, from 23% to 47% being more opposed to paying bribes.** A “Where-level” campaign to get a government to publish its budgets allows the public and other institutions worldwide to hold it to account. Campaigns that change Where information is Distributed, Accessed and even better, increase Transparency and Accountability, can have long-term positive impacts on the systems that govern our lives. However, people at an even deeper level of the system decide the conditions for information processes to work within. ** Source: I paid a bribe: Participatory website to combat corruption in India, https://participedia.net/case/5579 During the Tunisian revolution of 2010-2011, mass protests spread across the country, prompting the government to tighten its control over information. In late December 2010, the towns of Thala and Kasserine, located near the Algerian border, faced severe repression as protests erupted. Tunisian authorities knew the power of media. The police blocked roads, isolated the towns, and violently suppressed the demonstrations to prevent any information from leaking out. Despite the government’s efforts to suppress information, local residents and activists needed to find a way to document and share evidence of police brutality. With poor internet access and few smartphones available, they faced the challenge of getting their footage to the outside world. The activists took four steps: Access: Residents used mobile phones and pocket cameras to capture footage of the violence. Distribution: Activists then transferred this footage to memory cards and ingeniously concealed the cards inside sneakers. These sneakers were thrown over the border into Algeria, where the memory cards were transported to Tunis. Transparency: In Tunis, activists uploaded the videos online, which eventually reached Al Jazeera’s news desks. Accountability: The shocking footage turned what could have been a local tragedy into national news, startling Tunisians across the country and setting the stage for a widespread uprising. This case illustrates how residents and activists effectively created hybrid networks of information, combining human and non-human elements to bypass government control and make critical information accessible. Read more: Lim, M. (2013). Framing Bouazizi:‘White lies’, hybrid network, and collective/connective action in the 2010–11 Tunisian uprising. Journalism, 14(7), 921-941. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1464884913478359 In 1992 the Nigerian government established the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) to address theft, unrest, and other serious crimes in Nigeria. However, members of this unit were accused of abusing their power and committing crimes such as rape, unjust murders, extortion, and oppression of citizens. Due to these accusations, an #ENDSARS movement began in 2017, demanding change. The SARS faced multiple bans, being officially banned four times between 2017 and 2020. Despite these bans, SARS continued its operations. Activists knew that new tactics were required, so used social media to escalate: Access, Distribution & Transparency : In 2020, a video surfaced online showing a SARS officer shooting a young man at a hotel in Lagos, taking his car, and driving away. Demands for Accountability: This video ignited outrage among Nigerians, who demanded the permanent disbandment of SARS and an end to police brutality and human rights violations by law enforcement agencies. #ENDSARS movement resurgence: A series of online / physical nationwide protests. Huge awareness: The hashtag #ENDSARS trended with over 28 million tweets and received international solidarity. Movement crowdfunding: The feminist group, Feminist Coalition (FemCo) used apps like twitter (X) and WhatsApp to crowdfund for the movement to organize more protests and continue its work. Nigerians at home and abroad donated to the cause. Activists shared protest locations quickly Where they could have the most influence on the system. They began protests on the 8 of October 2020 in two major ways: Spontaneous Gatherings: Non-typical activists led protests by meeting at locations and calling others to join through WhatsApp or Twitter to make them aware of their location, which with a fast turnaround, resulted in protest marches or the shutdown of major roads (the How level of the system). Pre-Planned Protests: Activists identified and shared specific locations via Twitter (X) for planned protests. An example is the Lekki Toll Gate protest, which garnered the attention of the Lagos State Governor, who addressed the protesters. Despite being largely decentralized, Nigerian youths united around five key demands: Immediate release of all arrested protesters; Psychological evaluation and retraining of disbanded SARS officers before redeployment; Compensation for all victims of police brutality; Investigation and prosecution of errant police officers; and Increased police salaries. The #ENDSARS movement achieved partial success: The Lagos State government compensated some victims of police brutality. The government disbanded the SARS unit on 11 October 2020, a few days after the protests started. However, a lot of Nigerians were skeptical, and rightfully so, as similar disbandments were done in the past which seemed just like empty promises. On the 5th of June, 2021, the Nigerian government banned the use of Twitter in the country due to claims that the platform was used for “subversive purposes and criminal activities.” The government then lifted the ban on January 13, 2022. Although achieving minimal to little success, the #ENDSARS movement highlighted the power of social media as a tool for solidarity, strength, and planning . It also highlighted the importance of every human's right to access information and connect with others in the fight for justice and human rights. The 20th of October still serves as a reminder to all Nigerians of all who died unjustly fighting for their rights to freedom and against all forms of oppression. Read more: https://qz.com/africa/1916319/how-nigerians-use-social-media-to-organize-endsars-protests https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/12/13/endsars-a-evaluation-of-successes-and-failures-one-year-later/ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-54531449 https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2021/02/nigeria-end-impunity-for-police-violence-by-sars-endsars/ https://businessday.ng/features/article/nigerians-insist-on-disbandment-of-sars-as-igp-bans-killer-police-unit-for-third-time/ Who decides we need to rebuild a raft to go down the river, when there’s a store selling dinghies just a mile away? Rules and Rulemakers The people or groups who set rules have a lot of power. This can include governments, company directors, religious leaders, or even natural forces. Rules can be boundaries, laws, contracts, or social expectations. For example, the rules that allow corporations to fund election campaigns let those corporations influence political decisions. A “Who-level” campaign could focus on changing the rules that are made by governments and corporations, but it can be expensive to access those spaces. At the UN climate conference COP28, there were 2,400 corporate lobbyists, more than the delegates from the ten countries most vulnerable to climate change combined. The ability to self-organize It is not enough just to influence “the rules” to change a system. A successful system can adapt and change any part of itself at the Where, How or What levels in order to survive. This uses raw materials (like DNA components in nature), variety (flexible approaches) and a selection process (prioritization). A "Who-level" campaign needs to understand which rule-setters can adapt and what they need to make changes. This includes knowing what evidence (raw materials) they need, how flexible they are (adaptability and vision) and what they value (like votes, reputation or profit). Then, we can plan how to activate them to support our goals. Campaigns that focus on the Who level by targeting the Rules , the Rulemakers and their A bility to self-organize can create long-term systemic change. But there is one layer deeper that campaigns can go to have truly lasting change. In 1972, the Cree community in northern Quebec discovered that their land was threatened by a massive hydroelectric project planned by the Quebec government, which would submerge their villages and disrupt their way of life. The Cree community set out to prevent the construction of the dams and protect the Cree lands and way of life. Targeting the rules of the system: Legal Campaign: The Cree organized a legal campaign and won an initial injunction against the project. Although this was overturned, it highlighted their legal rights. Negotiations and Agreements: After legal setbacks, the Cree negotiated the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA), which promised health, education, and protection of their resources in exchange for allowing the first dam's construction. Changing leadership and targeting new rulemakers: Formation of the Grand Council: Eight Cree communities formed the Grand Council to lead the campaign, shifting leadership to younger, dynamic members. Making the dangers mainstream: High-profile activities to raise awareness Nonviolent direct action: The Grand Council used protests and built a symbolic boat that they then paddled to New York City, gaining significant media coverage and political support. Partnerships: The Cree partnered with environmental groups and ran educational campaigns. Educational and media campaigns: were used to raise awareness in Canada and the U.S., highlighting the environmental and social impacts of the dams. Leveraging powerful relationships: Cities and Hydro-Quebec After paddling to New York City, the Cree successfully negotiated with its Mayor to reject the electricity from the Hydro-Quebec project. Once New York agreed, the Cree were able to persuade others too, forcing the company to stop the second phase of the project. By applying pressure through legal means and direct action, the Cree changed the rules of the system and used their power to protect their land and influence future projects on their terms: The Cree's innovative campaign and strategic use of legal and direct action methods led to the indefinite postponement of the second phase of the James Bay project in 1994. The Cree were able to negotiate better terms for any future projects, ensuring their land and rights were protected and that they had a say in development decisions. Note: For more insight into how the Cree allowed their movement to evolve, leadership to transition and find campaign success, see Chapter 25: Endings are Beginnings. Read more: The Cree Nation of Waskaganish: The James Bay Project https://waskaganish.ca/the-james-bay-project/ Non Violent Direct Action database: https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/cree-first-nations-stop-second-phase-james-bay-hydroelectric-project-1989-1994 The Link Newspaper: The Hydroelectric Crises - The Fight to Live in the North, https://thelinknewspaper.ca/article/the-hydroelectric-crises-the-fight-to-live-in-the-north “Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world.” - Archimedes concept: systems, levels & levers story: the chipko movement, india what how where who why What are the outputs of the system and the parameters constraining it? WHAT story: planting banana trees to shame authorities into action, zimbabwe How does the system function through interactions, feedback loops and delays? HOW “A system just can’t respond to short-term changes when it has long-term delays.” - Donella Meadows story: greenwash allows global plastic pollution to increase worldwide Where and when is information flowing, and to whom? WHERE “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” - Malcolm X story: violence during the tunisian revolution 2010-2011 story: #endsars movement & the fight to end police brutality, nigeria Who holds power to set the rules and structures of the system? WHO “If you want to understand the deepest malfunctions of systems, pay attention to the rules, and to who has power over them. That’s why my system intuition was sending off alarm bells while the new world trade system was explained to me. It is a system with rules designed by corporations, run by corporations, for the benefit of corporations. Its rules exclude almost any feedback from any other sector of society. Most of its meetings are closed even to the press (no information flow, no feedback). It forces nations into positive loops “racing to the bottom,” competing with each other to weaken environmental and social safeguards in order to attract investment and trade. It is a recipe for unleashing “success to the successful” loops, until they generate enormous accumulations of power and huge centralized planning systems that will destroy themselves, just as the Soviet Union destroyed itself, and for similar systemic reasons.” - Meadows, Leverage Points, 1999 story: cree campaign against hydro electric project, usa Concept: systems, levels, and levers Story: the chipko movement, india WHAT Story: planting banana trees to shame authorities into action, zimbabwe HOW Story: greenwash allows global plastic pollution to increase worldwide WHERE Story: violence during the tunisian revolution, 2010-2011 Story: the endsars movement & the fight to end police brutality, nigeria WHO Story: cree campaign against hydro electric project, usa WHY Why does the system exist, what values and goals does it seek to uphold? WHY Why do we cross the river? If it is for fun, we might want to overcome challenges. If it is necessary, it might be to get supplies our community needs. These reasons come from mindsets or ways of thinking that have conditioned us - like the need to “conquer” our environment. These mindsets shape the reality that we live in. We have created this reality ourselves. Goals The goals of a system are fundamental. We can understand them by looking at what a system or person does, not just what they say they do. Goals can include survival, living in harmony, or growth. American environmental educator and activist, Donella Meadows cites John Kenneth Galbraith’s view that the corporate goal is to engulf and dominate everything. A “Why-level” campaign understands the reason for a system’s actions. Unfortunately there are certain instances where the ‘why’ is fixed and non negotiable - for example, you cannot negotiate with the fungus on the International Space Station. Its only goal is to grow. Mindsets and Paradigms Mikhail Gorbachev wanted to evolve the Soviet Union. He was the Who that opened information flows (glasnost) and changed the economic rules (perestroika). Change happened but not in the way he hoped, because previous Soviet leaders had fractious relationships with others whose support his country needed to make his vision work. This led to chaos rather than complexity. He could not stop the collapse of the Soviet Union. We live in systems grown from myths and stories. Societies have an idea of what’s “fair,” that growth is good, that money has value, that nature is there for us to use. While individuals can change their minds quickly, it takes longer for powerful people to act on those changes. A “Why-level” campaign exposes failures, places changemakers into public and private spaces who speak loudly and frequently, and works with the middle masses to shift public opinion. It takes courage to recognise that we live in a series of paradigms and step out of those limiting beliefs. Doing so has led people to shake off addiction and even start religions. A “Why-level” campaign believes in the potential and capacity of others to act and believes, as Arundhati Roy put it, that “Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.” Campaigns that target the Why level by seeking to change system Goals , Mindsets and Paradigms have a chance to secure real lasting change for everyone in that system. Populist politicians use crises to shape their own narratives and attract the public. If we can shift narratives at times of crisis, we can create sustained impact. It may take decades or hundreds of years to win - but this is the point of most leverage. By 2016, Colombia had been ravaged by 60 years of a brutal and massive civil armed conflict that included more than 500,000 homicides, 100,000 disappearances, and 8 million people that were forced to leave their homes and territories. But the Colombian government believed in the potential of its people to coexist peacefully. It needed to cultivate a new mindset to enable this. As part of a larger legal, political and judicial framework agreed in the Peace Accord signed in 2016 with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the government established an independent Truth Commission specifically to: Clarify what happened during the decades of conflict and its impacts on all citizens Promote the recognition of: All those affected as citizens. All those individually and collectively, directly and indirectly, responsible. The legacy of violence to be rejected and never repeated. Promote coexistence , in creating an environment for peaceful resolution of conflicts as well as tolerance and democracy. To do this, the Truth Commission set out to change the mindset or paradigm that had taken hold of Colombia: a culture of silence built on a deep-rooted association between truth and fear, punishment and pain. Based on the four pillars of the transitional justice framework that guided the Peace Accord — truth, justice, reparations and no repetition — the Commission understood that in order to change Colombians’ mindset, Colombians themselves needed to tell the story in its full complexity —not the “official” story, but a multidimensional, nuanced narrative that listened to and integrated multiple voices. The Truth Commission created a detailed three-year work plan, which included a National Communication Strategy to help all Colombians understand and publicly discuss the complexity of the conflict, allowing them to contribute and lay the foundations to avoid any repetition of what happened. The Strategy supported the Commission's work as well as the public, educational and outreach activities related to publication of the Commission final report, “There is Future if There is Truth”, including a legacy transmedia platform . The strategy was informed by research commissioned regarding the Colombian cultural mindsets around the truth and the social archetypes associated with it, as well as key insights from the role of communication in Transitional Justice : “the process of humanizing those who have been systematically dehumanized can only happen in the arena in which the dehumanization took place: the public discourse shaped by the media and politics”.* The Commission took the following steps to reach the Colombian people and build a new paradigm: Narrative shift: Amplify the voices and resilience of survivors and victims to: Show a deeper, more complex picture of the conflict, its scale, and impacts. Show how they were creating a better future in which the conflict would not be repeated. “Propose analytical positions to the country that went beyond the ideological places to which we are accustomed ” Emphasize truth, memory, social, and cultural justice, and reparations to help the population move forward. Key stakeholders and communities: Target all Colombians but in particular those communities in heavily affected regions, including those who were previously overlooked and were critical to rebuilding relationships such as: Indigenous peoples. Black, Afro-Colombian, Raizal, Palenquero and Rom communities. Campesinos and other rural communities. The Commission also worked specifically with the most trusted people in those communities. Trusted messengers and channels: The Commission created cultural partnerships and collaborated with: Artists, art and cultural organizations. Authors and comic book writers. Large-, medium- and small-scale media. Community radio. Digital media and social media channels. Values: The Commission upheld the values underpinning its own goals, which it understood were in line with what the Colombian people wanted: Transparency : The Commission maintained a transparent approach, providing extensive information on its website, including legal frameworks, contracts, and open data, which built public trust. This can be seen for example in the work that the Human Rights Data Analysis Group did for the Commission. Recognition: As mentioned above, the Commission worked hard to reach out to all those affected and encourage dialogue. It also included an open dialogue with the public (people could send questions about the conflict, the Truth Commission, and the Peace Accord), and a regular open system to track the implementation of it activities ("rendición de cuentas" ) Coexistence: Messaging centered around the idea of “never again” (that these events never be repeated) and collective memory, using the resistance and survival experiences of those affected as the foundation for those demands. Empowering spaces for participation, interaction and learning: Public events including artistic and cultural activations, exhibitions. Book series, and comic books for children, used in activities across the country. Digital engagement strategy targeted at younger audiences. Outreach via large, medium and small-scale media. Offline dialogues. Concise messaging: The Commission centered its work, collaborations, partnerships and messaging around the idea of No Repetition. This came through via: “Evergreen” (atemporal) media products that could be used again and again. Outreach to communities. Local media networks, including community radio. Art and cultural activations. Editorial and media products. Content tailored to different demographics, particularly children and the elderly. A whole editorial collection that explored keywords related to conflict, future, memory, and truth (there is one about Communication ), exhibitions, podcasts, comics, plays, and much more . Digital strategy targeting younger audiences. The Truth Commission was arguably successful in meeting its first two objectives. It provided a deeper and public understanding of the nature and complexity of the conflict, allowing citizens and society at large to recognize and reconcile with their roles and shared responsibilities, and ultimately, contribute to setting the basis for a progressive and long-term cultural and social shift around memory, social justice, and recognition. Source: *p2, Changing the Narrative - the Role of Communications in Transitional Justice, https://ifit-transitions.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Changing-the-Narrative-The-Role-of-Communications-in-Transitional-Justice.pdf Read more: Colombia Truth Commission National Communication Strategy: https://archivo.comisiondelaverdad.co/estrategia-nacional-de-comunicaciones Colombia Truth Commission Legacy Media Platform: https://www.comisiondelaverdad.co/ Institute for Integrated Transitions, Changing the Narrative: The role of Communications in Transitional Justice https://ifit-transitions.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Changing-the-Narrative-The-Role-of-Communications-in-Transitional-Justice.pdf Before the Peace Accord negotiations ended in 2016, President Juan Manuel Santos’ government decided (without any legal obligation to do so) to call a referendum so that the Colombian people could effectively “approve” the process and its final outcome. The government’s hope was the referendum would show that a majority of the public and political system supported the process. It assumed that a good result would continue to cultivate a change in mindsets and a change in the paradigm because of that. However this was already a highly divisive process and decision at the time. The question of the referendum was: “ Do you support the final agreement to end the conflict and build a stable and lasting peace?” The government ran a “Yes” campaign. The Yes vote received 49.8% of votes, but the No received 50.2%. The government made the following mistakes: Underplayed the risks of doing something that wasn’t necessary: The government did not need to hold a popular referendum, since the Peace Accord was due to become part of the Constitution. This risked the objective of achieving social and public support. Misunderstanding the narrative: The government engaged with the political narratives of the negotiations, not with a narrative around the benefits of the peace accords. This allowed misinformation to take hold and fuel public mistrust and opposition. The government argued that the objective of the peace process (of which the referendum was a key part) was to "end the conflict”. The FARC was not the only actor in the larger civil/violent conflict, and so the Peace Process would not stop other illegal activities related to land grabs and the drug trade. Misunderstanding key audiences and over reliance on polls: There was very little public support for anything related to FARC. Being the oldest guerilla group, the one that had more military/territorial power and that committed some of the "worst" heinous crimes, their public perception was, largely, extremely negative. The campaign relied too heavily on opinion polls, which initially showed strong support but failed to accurately track changing public opinion, resulting in a narrow 51-50% split in the final vote. More conservative and right-leaning citizens weren't talking openly in public spaces about voting NO, so there was less visibility of the oppositional perspective. Neglect of key communities and their social networks: The government tried to build a cohesive and large campaign, both digital and offline, but it failed to address the importance of local and community networks, especially how they communicate. The government disregarded or underplayed: The way media was consumed and circulated socially The incentives that different people/actors had to promote mis/disinformation The importance of digital networks and messaging apps like WhatsApp for family/friends/community communication The influence of legacy media (print media, TV, radio and advertising) and its digital circulation. Using the wrong messengers: The government and its Yes campaign did manage to use relevant cultural figures (singers, footballers, artists), but took other steps that countered this, for example: The campaign failed to find trusted spokespeople who could bridge the divide from different regions. It relied on polarizing figures, in particular the Colombian President at the time, Juan Manuel Santos, to share their message widely: Santos had served as Defense Minister under the previous President Alvaro Uribe, the Peace process’ highest profile opponent. But when Santos was elected as President (mainly because of his work in government), he decided to make the Peace Accords happen. Many Colombians felt angry and betrayed by this. Uribe’s Democratic Center ran the No campaign, which emphasized this sense of betrayal by Santos, and indignation to Santos' government and anything related to the Peace process (“salir a votar verracos ”). Lack of sensitivity to cultural values: The referendum campaign did not sufficiently address the deep-seated attitudes and behaviors shaped by 60 years of war, overlooking the importance of psychosocial research, systemic change, deep narrative work, and building strategies that would trigger different responses according to the values of diverse audiences. Bad timing and message management: The government focused the discussion mostly on the political dimension, when it should have explored many others (as the Truth Commission did). The government booked the referendum to take place before the Peace Accord negotiations ended. This meant that all the disagreements during the negotiations affected the Referendum campaign, fuelling the opposition’s arguments. “We live in a time when all elites, whether on the left or the right, believe in rigid rules that say there is no alternative to the present political and economic system.” - Adam Curtis story: the successes of the colombia truth commission, colombia “What the war left behind was silence, that is why our initial communication attempt was to say that we were not indifferent, that we were putting an end to that stage of silence, honoring the dignity of the victims: their voices and their stories.” - Colombia Truth Commission National Communications Strategy story: the challenges of the colombian national referendum of the peace accord between the colombian government and farc, 2016, colombia tool: excavating system levels Story: the successes of the colombia truth commission, colombia Story: the challengdes of the colombian national referendum of the peace accord between the colombian government and farc, 2016, colombia Tool: Excavating system levels Draw out the soil chart shown here. Write out and place sticky notes on the diagram, the different tangible (people, products, things) and intangible (values, beliefs) parts of the system you’re looking at. If there are elements that aren’t key to the system, place them outside the soil sample. They may be above even the top layer. Tip: Life grows from the root. You will find that the best way to shift a system is to go to the root. Make time for mistakes. You may realize in this process that you are analyzing the wrong system and need to look deeper at another aspect as a system itself!

SECTION 1: N AVIGATION CHAPTER 11 - NEEDS ARE MOTIVES Needs help us prioritize who to target. We have identified the (counter-)narrative we want to spread. Now we need to know who needs to act, what barriers are in our way, and how to reduce those barriers. Remember, everyone is a decision-maker, making about 35,000 decisions each day. At this point, we could base our approach on one key tactic designed to reach a specific target audience with one or a few key messages . But without a more nuanced understanding of the audiences we need to reach and activate, we will likely fail to achieve the systems-level change we seek. Every decision maker, community or institution we need to reach or activate is an audience. Since everyone makes decisions, we need to navigate many streams of decision-makers to reach our ultimate target. A typical campaign might focus on one decision-maker or their supporters and assume what drives them. That campaign might also assume that the morality of their argument will win over the decision maker. But power doesn’t always care about our truth. Instead, we should look at the psychographics of each target audience and the key stakeholders that are able to influence them: their needs, motivations, their ability to influence, their lifestyle and personality. This helps us to prioritize who is most likely to act or share information. Next, we must understand the barriers preventing stakeholders and messengers from acting or sharing the new narrative. Look at the tangible and intangible factors in the strongest relationships, and the deep loops that are blocking the new narrative. Consider visible, invisible, and hidden power. Some elements might not support the current system or narrative but may still block a new narrative . tool: obstacles as targets Scope : Draw a Venn diagram with components of key relationships from Section 2. Include decision-makers and parts of the media ecosystem. Identify anyone or anything visible, invisible, or hidden that prevents your new narrative from taking hold. Place these stakeholders on the diagram. Profile the stakeholders: Who or what is at the center that you need to focus on? Who or what matters more than others (e.g., loose regulations or public apathy)? Draw a matrix with persuadability on the x-axis and influence on the y-axis. What does this tell you? Consider : How are these stakeholders affected by the issue? What do they need to survive or thrive in the system? What is their lifestyle: time-rich or time-poor? Do they like to be seen in public? What is their personality? How do they behave in public? How do they like to be seen? Why might these stakeholders be motivated to act? Why might they start, stop, or continue some action or information sharing? How can they influence the outcome we want? How many people can they influence? Is their ability easy to restrict or stop? What risk or reward is there for them taking the action we want? How do we need to influence them? Explore : Could more than one theory be true? How might you test these theories? Which stakeholders should be the main targets of your campaign? Is it best for others to target other parts of the system? Tool: Obstacles as targets

SECTION 1: N AVIGATION CHAPTER 13 - THE MESSENGER IS THE MESSAGE A messenger who truly believes their message is powerful. Climate Outreach carried out audience research in the UK during the lead up to the UNFCCC climate conference in Glasgow in 2021. Their findings showed that the UK public trusted well known figures outside of government far more than those responsible within government regarding climate change and climate related policies. Indeed the Prime Minister and Climate Minister were trusted the least in a list of public figures. How can we work with messengers to drive change? A simple communications plan might focus on one message, a few media outlets, and one tactic. An uncommon sense approach maps the various actors that can help spread and reinforce our message across the system. For example: Issue experts/Scientists - Share facts that influence beliefs Artists/Musicians/Performers - Create hope, change attitudes and behaviors Journalists - Expose scandals or uncover the truth Fiction writers - Inspire hope and imagination Sector leaders - Speak for their peers Organizers - Bring together different actors and messengers Grass tops - Represent the grassroots voice We should think about our organization’s role in this ecosystem and who we can partner with to increase pressure and share communications widely. Replication of graph - Information and source: Climate Outreach, pre-UNFCCC COP26, 2021 https://climateoutreach.org/reports/britain-talks-cop26/# Messengers are like swells in the ocean: repeating currents that carry narrative through the system. Ignoring them can be a big mistake. Communicating our story through a “messenger” that our target trusts is as important as the message itself. It must be clear why the messenger is sharing, and believes in, this message. The one who tells the stories rules the world. – Hopi proverb concept: story: story: tool: messenger ecosystem The Meatless Monday campaign in Brazil was an unsuccessful campaign showing how not to work with online influencers. Agribusiness is a national industry in Brazil. Its focus on mass production of beef, often via cutting down forests, contributes to climate change. A Brazilian bank called Bradesco, with significant investments in agribusiness, wanted to run a PR campaign to say it had a sustainable approach to the environment. It launched the Meatless Monday campaign, paying two online influencers to promote the idea of not eating meat on Mondays, in order to help the planet. There was a huge public backlash including waves of sexist comments directed at the two influencers. Mistakes by Bradesco bank: Lack of Audience Understanding: Brazil has high levels of food insecurity. The two influencers were white women from upper levels of society who had the privilege and luxury of making different food choices, unlike the 33 million people in Brazil who were struggling to get enough to eat. Promoting meatless days without considering this context showed a disconnect from the realities faced by many Brazilians. Inconsistent Messaging: The bank’s involvement in agribusiness, often linked to environmental and ethical concerns, contradicted the message of Meatless Monday. This undermined the campaign’s credibility. Poor Stakeholder Support: The bank did not provide much support to the influencers to handle the backlash. When criticisms arose, the influencers bore the brunt of it, while the bank issued a statement to protect its own reputation, which doubled down on its interests by including claims that agribusiness was good for Brazil. Ignoring Systemic Impacts: The campaign did not address the broader systemic issues such as the negative impacts of agribusiness practices on indigenous and local communities, biodiversity and resilience, or offer sustainable, long-term solutions to reduce meat consumption. It focused narrowly on one day a week without addressing the deeper values, rules, and structures that sustain meat consumption. Insufficient Strategic Communication : There was a lack of strategic communications planning. The campaign did not consider potential risks or prepare a comprehensive response strategy for negative reactions. This led to a PR disaster when backlash occurred. Understanding an audience also means understanding who they trust, and who they trust with which messages. If a trusted messenger gives an insincere, out of touch, message - this will not be received well by their audience. The Pulitzer Center's initiative focuses on addressing pressing rainforest issues through a comprehensive strategy that integrates journalism, education, and strategic communications. The project spans various regions, including South America, Central Africa, and Southeast Asia. The approach emphasizes adapting strategies to diverse local contexts rather than applying a uniform solution. The strategy is co-developed with local experts and community members, ensuring its resonance and impact. The primary goal was to effectively communicate and mobilize action around rainforest conservation in diverse regions with distinct cultural, political, and social landscapes. The project develops region-specific, resonant, strategies to do this. Their approach included: Regional Analysis and Customization: South America (Amazon Basin): Brazilian youth were targeted with campaigns reflecting their national narrative about the Amazon as a critical national asset. Conversely, Colombian youth, who did not identify as closely with the Amazon, required a different messaging approach to foster a sense of connection and urgency. Central Africa (DRC and Congo Basin) : In the Democratic Republic of Congo, community-based radio initiatives were used to reach local populations, combined with educational outreach in schools to engage younger audiences. Southeast Asia (Mekong Region and Indonesia/Malaysia): The campaign in the Mekong region focused on influencer-driven initiatives, adapting methods to varying levels of communications freedom and regional differences in influencer culture. Methodological Diversity: Community Radio: In Central Africa, community radio was used to engage local populations in discussions about rainforest conservation, leveraging the widespread reach and accessibility of radio in these regions. Educational Programs: Schools were targeted in the DRC through partnerships with teachers to incorporate rainforest issues into the curriculum, promoting awareness and action from a young age. Influencer Collaborations: In Southeast Asia, influencers were engaged to reach younger audiences, with strategies customized according to local media landscapes and influencer dynamics. Youth Engagement: The project adapted its approach based on regional differences in youth engagement. In the Amazon Basin, strategies addressed varying levels of concern and national narratives, while in Colombia and Peru, efforts were made to cultivate a stronger connection to the rainforest. Challenges and Solutions Diverse Needs: The challenge of addressing rainforest issues across diverse regions required nuanced understanding and tailored solutions. The project overcame this by using a system thinking approach to analyze each region’s unique needs and developing customized strategies accordingly. Avoiding Uniformity: The initiative intentionally avoided a one-size-fits-all strategy. Instead, it focused on co-creating solutions with local audiences, ensuring that communications were relevant and impactful within each specific context. Empathy and Local Collaboration : The project emphasized empathy and collaboration with local communities to ensure that strategies were not imposed but rather developed in partnership with those directly affected by rainforest issues. Results The integration of system thinking and strategic communication led to several key outcomes: Increased Engagement: Tailoring strategies to local contexts resulted in more effective engagement with diverse audiences, enhancing awareness and mobilization efforts. Localized Impact: By customizing approaches, the project was able to address specific regional challenges and opportunities, leading to more meaningful interactions and outcomes. Enhanced Understanding: The emphasis on co-creating solutions with local communities fostered a deeper understanding of the complex dynamics influencing rainforest conservation efforts. By avoiding a uniform approach and instead developing region-specific strategies, the Pulitzer Center’s initiative successfully engaged diverse audiences with trusted messengers and supported rainforest conservation efforts across multiple regions. The project exemplifies how tailored, empathetic communication strategies can address complex challenges in varied cultural and social contexts. it's not always what you think meatless monday campaign, brazil targeting communities through specific media & messengers, south america, central africa and south east asia Concept: It's not always what you think Story: meatless monday campaign, brazil Story: targeting communities through specific media and messengers, south america, central africa, and south east asia Tool: messenger ecosystem 1. Identify messengers: Who do you need to reach and persuade your target networks or key relationships? 2. Define roles: What role will your organization play? 3. Plot them on the chart: Place them on the ripple chart. 4. Collaborate: Set up meetings with others who have similar goals. Find common ground to work together.

### Home ### Chapters ### Contributors Uncommon Sense A Systems-Based Strategic Communications Handbook For Changing The World How to use this resource: This resource is designed for people working for social, environmental, or economic justice at local, national, or international levels. If you are someone who is seeking fresh insights to understand obstacles to change and find better solutions to accelerate change-making, then you have come to the right place. Use this resource however you want. We recommend that you work through it in chronological order. We recommend reading the introduction here, to get your bearings. Then dive into your chapters as you wish! For those wanting to dive into the chapters: We have organized this handbook into five steps - spelling out the word S.E.N.S.E. - to help you approach your challenge: ### SYSTEM Chapter 1: We live in systems Chapter 2: The simplicity of complexity Chapter 3: Levels are levers Chapter 4: Autonomy is a myth ### EQUILIBRIUM Chapter 5: Systems do not die Chapter 6: Relationships are power Chapter 7: Solidarity is a verb Chapter 8: Force begets resistance Chapter 9: Loops can be unlocked Chapter 10: Narrative is water ### NAVIGATION Introduction to Section 3 - Navigation Chapter 11: Needs are motives Chapter 12: Communities are currents Chapter 13: The messenger is the messag Chapter 14: Values are bedrock Chapter 15: Decisions are learned Chapter 16: Emotion is oxygen ### STORMS Chapter 17: Storm are stories Chapter 18: Flexibility is preseverance Chapter 19: Foresight is 20:20 Chapter 20: Wrestling with trolls Chapter 21: Change is constant ### ENERGY Introduction to Section 5 - Energy Chapter 22: Reflection is action Chapter 23: Truth is human-shaped Chapter 24: Seeds are fruit Chapter 25: Endings are beginnings ### Conclusion CONCEPTS STORIES TOOLS chapters The Multicultural Leadership Initiative is a non-profit organisation, dedicated to building a climate-safe future for all by cultivating climate leadership that reflects the diversity of humanity. The Multicultural Leadership Initiative would like to acknowledge and appreciate the over 120 climate communications experts and practitioners, across over 20 countries, who have actively shared their wisdom, experiences, and advice to inform the S.E.N.S.E. methodology in this digital book. This resource, though useful to everyone, has been designed with those already familiar with the basics of Systems Thinking theory and practice in mind. If you are new to Systems Thinking applied to campaigning and advocacy we highly recommend you attend a Campaigner Accelerator training run by our friends at the Mobilisation Lab . The Uncommon Sense project was produced with financial and collaborative support from the Climate and Land Use Alliance, including identifying interviewees, proposing case studies, and developing, synthesizing, and reviewing content. We are grateful to the team at Rathana.org as the genesis partners and to the following writers, contributors and reviewers who lent their time and expertise to shaping this handbook: Hugh Mouser, Matt Daggett, Rathana Chea, Dr. Amiera Sawas, Bec Sanderson, David Roth, Diya Deb, Enggar Paramita, Jude Lee, Dr. Lori Regattieri, Dr. Merlyna Lim, Nana Darkoah Sekyiamah, Natalia Vidalon, Dr Nicolas Llano Linares, Renata Senlle, Rika Novayanti, Dr. Thelma Raman, Von Hernandez, Yemi Agbeniyi. Click here for their bios . Like all things Systems Thinking related, Uncommon Sense will be an on-going, evolving and iterative initiative. More tools and downloadable resources will continually be added. We are here to support you in building your strategic communications skills for a climate safe future. Yours in uncommon sense, The Multicultural Leadership Initiative Purpose Statement Privacy Policy & Terms and Conditions uncommonsense@multiculturalleadership.org Sign Up Thanks for submitting! We acknowledge all the First Nations and First Nations Peoples. We pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging. We look forward to the day where we, once more, can live in harmony with our planet as your custodianship has taught us for many thousands of years. Multicultural Leadership Initiative LTD is an Australian ACNC registered charity ABN: 68661886808. Multicultural Leadership Initiative Inc. is a registered US not-for-profit registered in the state of New York. Copyright 2023. Privacy Policy & Terms and Conditions

SECTION 1: N AVIGATION CHAPTER 16 - EMOTION IS OXYGEN A concise, clear and emotive message can spread quickly and inspire action. But human emotion gives us hope for our counter-narratives. Systems do not die; they evolve. Human-centered stories are real, memorable, and exciting. Citizen journalism and media focused NGOs in countries from Brazil to Indonesia have filled in the gaps. Artificial Intelligence based on the values, mental shortcuts and biases of San Francisco based programmers cannot tell stories that resonate with all of humanity. Strategic communications are key. Aboriginal Australians use songs to teach young people paths through the outback. We need to use one counter narrative across the right channels to the right people at the right time. This is the oxygen that we need for our counter narrative to travel. These messages and counter narratives can be delivered subliminally too. Flip the Script is a campaign that has succeeded in getting Hollywood producers to normalize the use of reusable bottles rather than plastics, to help drive behavior change to switch away from plastics. There are three key ways to make the most of any moment*: Time : Identify the type of crisis or opportunity. Do you need to respond to this story? Be fast and first to respond. Use your pre-prepared and pre-rehearsed strategy. Message : Tailor the values frame for each media channel’s audience. Keep your media release short, urgent, with one clear and memorable message. Tell your story to deliver your counter narrative. Show what you’re for and in contrast, what your opponent is for, e.g. “This is racist.” Space : Train spokespeople from the affected community, in advance, as authentic voices. Center these authentic voices throughout your counter narrative, story, messaging and quote them in your media release. Put new spokespeople forward to more supportive media. Keep up momentum by involving the community in online and other actions. A strong message needs to be memorable, beyond just a slogan. Match the tone for the audience, and practice it for specific moments. We recommend creating: An elevator pitch - a 3-sentence summary to engage someone in a brief encounter. It should show the audience how they can help make a change. A memorable idea - a metaphor, symbol, hashtag, or slogan that is easily recognized and reminds people of your campaign’s goals and desires. If it’s very memorable, it could become a meme, traveling far and wide across media and among the public. At the start of the Covid-19 Delta outbreak, several people in south-western Sydney tested positive. The New South Wales regional government in Australia increased policing and blamed local communities for not following public health orders. The majority of these communities were racially and culturally diverse, as well as working class, and so the government’s response perpetuated racist and classist undertones and stereotypes. Campaigners working on social, economic and racial justice sought to rapidly disrupt and change the narrative from blaming the affected communities to highlighting the unfair and racist response by the regional government. Their efforts focused on: 1. Timeliness: Immediate Response: Quickly organized and reacted to the initial negative media coverage, and this was supported by a strategic, responsive, messaging framework that was developed in case of such a need arising. Media Release: Sending out a quick and clear media release within 30-45 minutes of the news breaking 2. Space : Community Engagement: Worked within the affected communities to gather their perspectives. Media Platforms: Utilized different media platforms, including community radio and social media, to spread the message. 3. Message : Clear and Emotive: Changed the framing from "police activity in problematic regions" to "racist Covid crackdown." For example: The regional government influenced initial coverage like the headline: "Police activity bolstered across problematic Sydney regions in desperate bid to shut down Delta transmission." The core message of this blamed communities for the outbreak. Community leaders and activists quickly organized and contacted media outlets, leading to the headline: "Covid crackdown in Sydney’s southwest labeled racist amid major police operation." The core message here highlighted the unfair and racist targeting of communities. Conflict: Used strong rhetoric to appeal to the media, labeling the response as racist. Community Voices: Ensured spokespeople from the affected communities spoke out, adding legitimacy. Campaigners were successful in increasing awareness, shifting the narrative and local public opinion. The public debate changed from blaming communities to criticizing the racist crackdown. More people understood and supported the affected communities' situation. By using time effectively, engaging the right spaces, and crafting a concise and emotive message, the narrative was quickly changed to inspire action and support for the affected communities. Read more: https://commonslibrary.org/fast-and-first-shifting-narratives-through-rapid-response-media-campaigning/#Tips In 2007, after a harsh crackdown on democratic protests in Myanmar, public protests became impossible. Despite this, dissent continued through creative and lower-risk actions. In this case - now known as the ‘Panties for Peace’ campaign or Sarong Revolution - where women turned harmful gendered norms against their bodies on their heads, using their bodies as tools of protest and revolution. Women activists mobilized against both state militarized control in an imaginative and transgressive way, using a gendered artifact - their underwear. The campaign, coordinated by a Burmese activist group in Thailand, asked women to send their underwear to the generals in the Myanmar military Junta via international embassies and fly their htamein (women’s skirts) ahead of the 2008 referendum. This was a way of mocking the military and its gendered rules and superstitions - in particular that any kind of contact with female underwear will sap them of their power. Campaigners found a way to protest against Myanmar's military junta that was safer, widely spreadable, and inspired action despite the dangers of public gatherings: Time : Prompt and Timely Action: The protest utilized the generals' superstitions by asking supporters to mail panties quickly to maintain momentum and leverage the cultural belief that female underwear could sap their power. Space : Distributed Protests: The action allowed individuals to participate from their own homes by mailing panties, making it possible to protest without gathering in public spaces, which were heavily controlled. Message : Clear and Emotive Message: The protest message was simple and provocative: "Send panties to the generals." This used humor and cultural taboos to ridicule the military leaders and highlight their fear, making it easy to understand and spread. Spreading the Message: Utilizing Humor: The action used humor to mock the generals, breaking their image of power and making it easy for people to join in and support the cause. Leveraging Symbols: Using women's underwear as a symbol made the protest visually striking and memorable, helping the message spread quickly both locally and internationally. This activity was successful in inspiring widespread participation. Many people, both within Myanmar and globally, participated by sending panties, making the protest effective while managing risks to their safety by maintaining anonymity. The use of humor and superstition weakened the junta's power in the public sphere, showing that they could be mocked and ridiculed. It inspired others by showing that resistance was possible even under severe repression. Read more: This Bra Protects Me Better Than The Military: Bodies and Protests in the Myanmar Spring Revolution, Mra, Khin Khin and Hedström, Jenny: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00472336.2024.2344117#abstract The news cycle moves faster than it ever has before. Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence have advanced so much that data can be gathered, repurposed and shared instantly. This brings overwhelm for individuals and is killing traditional media in many countries. “In so many ways, the internet serves more as an affirmation superhighway, a way to affirm political beliefs and identities.” - An Xiao Mina story: tool: idea & metaphor “Politics is where some of the people are some of the time. Culture is where most of the people are most of the time. “ - The Culture Group, Making Waves story: Ripples: Write out on Post-Its and stick on the wall, a maximum 2-3 sentences for each narrative ripple across the water. Choose separate Post-Its for different key stakeholders, networks, messengers. How does your narrative spread out? Does it all connect? Idea or metaphor Consider the dominant narrative, and your counter narrative and messages. Can you think of an idea, metaphor, symbol or slogan that taps into the values of your counter-narrative and your demands? Source : *With thanks to Aliya Ahmad and Neha Madhok and their interview highlights at https://commonslibrary.org/fast-and-first-shifting-narratives-through-rapid-response-media-campaigning/#Tips Structure of a winning message: NEON On attention economy definition: https://acroll.substack.com/p/what-comes-after-the-attention-economy#:~:text=Economies%20are%20driven%20by%20what,live%20in%20an%20attention%20economy . With thanks to https://commonslibrary.org/fast-and-first-shifting-narratives-through-rapid-response-media-campaigning/#Tips panties for peace campaign, myanmar highlighting racist public health response, australia Story: highlighting racist public health response, australia Story: panties for peace campaign, myanmar Tool: idea and metaphor

CONCEPTS for those who want to starts with the concepts and ideas SYSTEMS THINKING EMBRACES INTERCONNECTEDNESS SYSTEMS, LEVELS, AND LEVERS CYCLE OF OPPRESSION Vicious, Virtuous, Stagnating, and Stabilizing loops HOW POPULISTS USE NARRATIVE THE FEATURES OF NARRATIVE IT'S NOT ALWAYS WHAT YOU THINK IT IS TEN BASIC PERSONAL VALUES THINKING STYLES, RATIONAL CHECKS, MENTAL SHORTCUTS, BIASES WARNING SIGNS BUILDING RESILIENCE SOCIAL THREATS AND REWARDS THREE HORIZONS MOVEMENT COMPASS

SECTION 1: S YSTEM CHAPTER 2 - THE SIMPLICITY OF COMPLEXITY A system’s complexity reveals how far we can shift it. Systems exist within other systems. If we look closely at an organ inside the human body, we see complex systems. If we zoom in, we see cells and atoms. If we zoom out, we see millions of humans living among various structures, organisms and interconnected systems inside communities, towns, cities and countries. Understanding a system’s complexity is essential before we tackle it. There are three degrees of complexity: Complicated: Predictable and driven by cause-and-effect relationships. Although they have many interconnected parts, their behavior can be predicted if all parts and interactions are understood. For example, a car engine. Complex: Mostly unpredictable and driven by many variables, interactions, and feedback loops. These systems are adaptive and can sometimes be understood in retrospect. For example, the adaptive and self-organizing fungi on the International Space Station. Chaotic: Almost completely unpredictable, driven by numerous variables, dynamic interactions, and loops. These systems are adaptive and inherently uncertain. For example, weather patterns. Exploring Systems At any scale, interconnected systems can be ordered / complicated, complex, or chaotic. Consider crossing a river: Complicated System: In a simple ordered system, gravity pulls us into the water, a simple cause and effect. In a Complicated Ordered System, multiple factors like water currents and obstacles affect our steps. Complex System: The river's vibrant life, including fungi, ferns, and fish, adapts and self-organizes. Chaotic System: Including the weather and extended time adds many variables, making predictions difficult. “… mess is the material from which life and creativity are built …” ― Ralph Stacey ** Steps for SWOT Analysis: Draw a 2 x 2 table on an A4 sheet or larger. List the strengths and weaknesses of the system you are targeting. Identify opportunities and threats to your success. Alternatively, analyze the strengths and weaknesses of your campaign and the opportunities and threats for the system or your opponent. story: the bentley blockade, australia tool: sensemaking A common mistake is trying to fix chaotic or complex problems as if they are simple or complicated. This often results in little or no progress. By analyzing and understanding the type of system, we can design a strategy more likely to succeed. For example, when crossing a river, we need to consider gravity, the canoe’s parts, slippery fungi on rocks, and emerging weather conditions. Ignoring these elements can lead to trouble. Use the complexity tool in this chapter to deepen your understanding of the system you are targeting. We have adapted it from the Stacey Matrix for decision-making and Cynefin framework . By identifying a problem as one of these types, we can start to reveal the kinds of systems, or system interactions, that drive that problem and then identify how to solve the problem. Once you have used this tool, you could run a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis.** In 2014, the coal and gas industry planned to expand operations in New South Wales, Australia, but various local communities were opposed to this expansion. The Gasfield Free Northern Rivers (GFNR) alliance had formed and needed to coordinate a movement that consisted of different autonomous groups working together: farmers, Indigenous people, townsfolk, environmentalists, professionals, and businesspeople. They faced multiple types of challenges: chaotic, complex, complicated and obvious. The GFNR alliance used the Cynefin framework to assess the best ways to handle these problems, adapting their strategies and leadership styles. The alliance organized nonviolent direct actions, conducted house-to-house surveys, held public meetings, and used social media to spread their message. They also provided training in nonviolent protest and civil disobedience. GFNR used the Cynefin framework to experiment with approaches in the following ways: 1. Identified and Adapted to Different Situations: By nudging the system out of chaos into more structured situations through network building and sense-making narratives. Chaotic Situations: GFNR reduced the chaos of the ongoing situation to complexity by supporting new groups to form, new individuals to join existing groups, and by sharing a unifying narrative to make sense of the battle. Complex Situations: The gas industry’s next steps created many unknowns for campaigners. GFNR told the movement there were minimal rules other than “non-violent; non-negotiable.” This allowed people to organize and adapt quickly through decentralized networks and come up with new ideas. Ordered (Complicated) Situations: When problems were tricky but understandable, GFNR combined centralized and localized efforts. For example, GFNR sent resident and farmer groups together to advocate to the government. Ordered (Obvious) Situations: When problems were clear and predictable, GFNR knew it could increase pressure quickly via the movement. It used a central database and mobilized all supporters to call the Minister for Resources en-masse. 2. Balanced structure: GFNR used different leadership styles, rotating roles and styles to respond efficiently and effectively at the right times: Distributed Leadership: Different people took on leadership roles as needed. Sometimes, leaders took charge, and other times, they let others lead. Contextual Flexibility: They changed their leadership and organizational styles depending on the situation, allowing for both centralized and decentralized decision-making. 3. Kept Experimenting to support rapid response and Foster Self-Organization: Enabled creative and adaptive solutions to emerge by applying minimal constraints in complex situations. GFNR continuously tested different approaches to see what worked best. They kept what worked and quickly dropped what did not. Jeff Loy, Assistant Police Commissioner for New South Wales, called the Bentley Blockade, “the largest public order challenge in New South Wales police history.” It took years to build its extensive community support and sophisticated blockade tactics. In the end, the New South Wales government suspended the drilling operation and police operation, and by 2015, the government bought back all gas licenses in the region. The movement successfully protected the Northern Rivers from gas field development. Read more: https://commonslibrary.org/enabling-emergence-the-bentley-blockade-and-the-struggle-for-a-gasfield-free-northern-rivers/ Story: The bentley blockade Tool: Sensemaking Steps: This tool will help you unpack the problem and the relationships behind it, helping you understand their complexity individually and together. On an A3 sheet, draw out the Sensemaking chart shown here and write a sentence explaining the Problem you wish to change above it . Relationships : Write out and place a Post-It onto the chart for each key relationship that is maintaining or could help address this problem, according to its level of complexity. These could be tangible or intangible relationships - from the Head of a bank to a local community leader. Connections : Draw lines across the chart between each relationship. Use thick lines for strong relationships and thin lines for weak ones. Note: You may wish to separate individuals onto different Post-Its. Complexity : How many influential relationships and competing tensions are there? Might there be other connections among them? Certainty : How predictable are the interactions between these actors and their relationships? Do you need to move the Post-Its around? Sensemaking: Consider the most significant relationships here. Is your problem what you thought it was? Is it Simple, Complicated, Complex, or Chaotic?

SECTION 4: S TORMS introduction Purpose : Prepare how to flex, to be ready when crises or opportunities arise. How to use this section: Read this before you set an activity timeline or plan for risks. We have learned that we live in systems, that we need to change their equilibrium to shift them, and that we need to navigate narratives, needs, communities, messengers and values to activate people. But change does not happen in a vacuum. Crises and opportunities come and go like storms in the natural world - and they can be prepared for. Aboriginal Australian and Torres Strait Islander peoples follow their own seasonal cycles, different from the Western four-season system. They observe natural signs to predict weather changes* and plan activities like crop rotation or resource gathering accordingly. Preparing for Every Storm Storms can affect any and every level of a system. Storms come in three types: Developmental (an identity challenge or opportunity), Situational (operational challenge or opportunity) and Existential (survival or evolution challenge or opportunity). Storms also have a beginning, middle and an end like any story. Here we use a storm chart to help plan for or create an event affecting your campaign and the system. Interpreting storms Watching a storm approach, we feel changes in air pressure. Similarly, events can start positively or negatively and shift unexpectedly. We should not underestimate storms or our ability to handle them. In Chapter 16 we sit in the eye of the storm, able to diagnose every kind of crisis or opportunity under one of three types. Signs from Nature Nature offers signs of approaching storms or seasons. Dolphins notice changes in water salinity, birds detect shifts in air pressure, and Aboriginal peoples observe insect arrivals. We explain what to watch for. Prevention through Simulation Prevention is better than cure. Simulation helps prevent crises by preparing us to adapt in real time. Testing our responses helps us turn situations to our advantage and reshape the system. Working with Storms When a storm hits, it is better to work with it than to confront it directly. Animals use four strategies: sidestep, adapt, shelter, or charge. They communicate and organize effectively. We show you how to apply these strategies in various situations. Dealing with sustained challenges During monsoon season or prolonged storms, we may need to adjust our goals or strategies to influence stakeholders effectively. This section guides you through managing sustained crises, system shifts, or ongoing challenges. Sources: *https://australiancurriculum.edu.au/TeacherBackgroundInfo?id=56843 **https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Australian_seasons section summary Key Takeaway Every threat and opportunity can be prepared for, simulated, and turned to your advantage. Key Questions Is this a developmental, situational or existential moment? How could it impact not just you but the wider system and key relationships? How could it undermine your counter-narrative or your legitimacy? What might you need to do? Do you need to change your Near Star or Guiding Star? Will you sidestep, adapt, shelter or charge? Is this being driven by an opponent? How could you use their weight against them? Could you work with your supporter base or allies to counter them? How can you monitor, simulate, build resilience to and be ready for the storm when the time comes and when the storm changes course? Key Tool(s) Storm chart.

SECTION 1: S TORMS CHAPTER 20 - WRESTLING WITH TROLLS Use an opponent’s strength against them to minimize harm. When opponents attack or push back, this can feel like the most dangerous challenge of all. Every action has a counteraction. Anticipate your opponent’s moves to stay ahead. Understanding your opponent’s perspective and likely strategies helps you plan better and avoid surprises, making your campaign more effective. We have adapted approaches from the Commons Library for this chapter. Prepare for disinformation and misinformation Disinformation (deliberate sharing of lies) and misinformation (the sharing of rumors) tend to be types of developmental storm, but can turn into situational and existential threats. The best ways to prepare for this are: Risk management Build resilience in advance. Use the other tools in this Section to predict and rehearse what you would do Assess the risks for severity and impact of any possible disinformation and misinformation campaign Prepare approaches and messages to “prebunk” and mitigate disinformation and test them out using the Red Team tool in this Section Monitoring and Reporting Monitor social media daily e.g. by gathering links to ads being run by certain types of accounts Flag content on social media channels as disinformation Responding Seed alternative narratives (see Chapter 10): Use this as an opportunity to frame the (counter) narrative you want to take hold Frame your facts well (see Section 3: Navigation). Facts alone will not stop the storm Act swiftly and carefully. A hasty reaction could make the situation worse Act efficiently. One briefing that shows how and why the disinformation or misinformation is being spread can be referred back to. Respond directly and calmly to the source (unless you suspect this to be a fake social media account) to clarify Use multiple channels where the disinformation originated and which your audiences frequent. Troubleshooting Consider audience needs (see Chapter 11) and values (Chapter 14). Facts are not always enough. Many internet users are unwilling to engage with fact checkers Reach out via trusted messengers (see Chapter 13) and communities (Chapter 12). Personal preferences and social media algorithms that serve up content to reinforce certain views can prevent your message reaching an audience Show compassion: False and misleading information causes stress and pain for people, particularly at times of crisis. Showing intersectional compassion through your work and communications is a universal way to sidestep divisive rhetoric, show genuine support for people, and build trust. “The weakness of the enemy makes our strength” - Cherokee proverb story: story: tool: simulation & prevention Review your Storm Chart. In a group, discuss the most likely crises or opportunities that might arise because of your opponents’ actions against you or others. Stick these most likely scenarios on the storm chart. Which of the “D” strategies is it similar to? Consider the four strategy types and the example responses from the storm chart. Which could you take? What might the consequences, new challenges or opportunities that could arise in the system as a result? Agree and write up your proactive plan to diffuse opponents’ pressure in advance, and reactive plan to respond to opponents’ pressure. Charge through developmental storms In a developmental storm, an opponent might plant the seeds of a counter narrative to yours and: Discredit : Undermine your credibility through the media or public hearings, painting your group as unreasonable or radical Discount : Minimize the problem's importance or question your legitimacy. For example, they might call your group extremist or downplay the issue's severity Deflect : Shift attention to side issues or pass responsibility to another group. For example, if you demand a hazardous waste cleanup, they might talk about an unrelated environmental bill Deceive : Spread disinformation (deliberately), or misinformation (unintentionally) Mislead you into thinking meaningful action is happening when it is not. This includes offering fake solutions or setting up misleading meetings These may hinder your progress towards your goals and Near Star. The best way to deal with these is generally to charge: Frame the debate on your terms Publicize the tactics your opponent is taking Maintain your narrative Use trusted messengers to spread your narrative Avoid engaging directly with trolls ; instead, leverage supporters to use their weight against them and expose their inconsistencies Sidestep situational storms In a situational storm, an opponent might: Delay : Pretend to address the issue without actually doing anything, hoping to wear you out and make you lose momentum Divide : Create division within your group or between your group and the community. They might try to dox (publish private information about you), attack (to disable a website or other systems or infrastructure) separate moderate members from more militant ones Dulcify : Soothe or pacify by offering small concessions or benefits, diverting attention from the long-term issues Deny : Refuse to acknowledge the problem or your proposed solution. They might claim there's no problem or it is not significant enough - or launch a lawsuit against you Deal : Offer to work with you to find a mutually acceptable solution. However, be cautious of compromises that do not provide real value This kind of storm threatens your Near Star. The best way to deal with these is to sidestep and look at how you can use the situation to your advantage. You could: Consider your opponent’s psychology : You may do better by seeking a solution or partnership with them rather opposition Create illusion : Vary your tactics to keep them guessing. Trick your opponents into misjudging your plans, e.g. by making them think you have more resources or planned actions. This spreads their focus and weakens their response Seek support or solidarity Respond through allies or messengers that your audiences trust Raise funds for legal defense Know when to negotiate: Negotiation means settling a dispute through compromise, not surrender. Probing with certain tactics can reveal if negotiation is possible. Be careful not to propose talks too soon, as this might be seen as weakness. Compromise carefully. Giving up too quickly can cost you, while being too rigid can end talks. Understanding the political, economic, and social context helps in making wise decisions Use their weight against them: Nonviolence exposes your opponents’ harsh responses and can sway public sympathy. This works by affecting three groups: Uncommitted third parties: Witnessing repression of peaceful activists moves uninvolved people to support Opponent’s supporters: Violence against peaceful protestors can create dissent within the opponent’s group General grievance group: Enduring repression strengthens the resolve of activists Adjust your immediate goals or Near Star (in some situations) Adapt to existential storms In an existential storm, an opponent might try to: Destroy : Use legal or economic means to destabilize, bankrupt or eliminate your group through legal actions or law changes to restrict civil society space. This might include threats of lawsuits or actual legal action to intimidate you In such critical situations it is crucial to adapt. Consider alternative strategies to advance to your overarching goal or Guiding Star including: Change your Near Star Concentrate your strength against the opponent’s weakness: Use indirect approaches. Create the appearance of dispersed forces to cause the opponent to spread out, making your concentrated efforts more effective. Avoid giving your opponent time to concentrate their forces against you or build belief that they are winning Redirect or share resources with other activists or organizations Adjust your focus or explore new approaches By using these strategies it is possible to “downgrade” a storm from an existential threat to a situational or developmental obstacle. Read more: Dealing with the Opposition paper https://commonslibrary.org/disinformation-101/ More detail and case studies: https://commonslibrary.org/how-to-dealing-with-disinformation/ Civil society organization vs attacks cheatsheet: https://www.metgroup.com.mx/civilstory/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/SCO-attacks-cheatsheet.pdf An existential storm hit an environmental organization (names withheld for protection) in India - a series of coordinated direct attacks on their choice to campaign against massive fossil fuel companies, who were in regular communications with government authorities. The storm included a long list of hostile tactics: Discredit : An organized raid on the organization’s offices one regular working Monday by government officials who accused the organization of financial money laundering Destroy : Locked organization bank accounts so that salaries, rents and even electricity bills were not allowed to be paid Deceive : Fake media stories (disinformation) circulated among different local and national media to crackdown on the organization and question their legitimacy and credibility Destroy : Threats of jail sentences without bail issued to the organization leadership Discredit and Destroy: Private raids of the houses of elderly parents of campaigners and board members Although this storm disrupted the work of the organization, its campaigners were able to take very slow, strategic, steps to emerge from the crisis. This enabled them to revert to doing their work, but in different forms. First the crisis management team focused on a few things: Framed the debate internally on their terms: They maintained transparency within the team to avoid creating any internal divisions, so they could remain united. Considered their opponents’ psychology: A delay tactic was employed to give time to the authorities to tire out and eventually shift their focus to other things. Avoided engaging directly: They maintained their narratives but did not get caught up in a media battle. Instead they focused on a legal strategy that would prove them to be legitimate in their work and the allegations leveled against them to be false. Changed their Near Star and Adjusted their focus: of winning the ongoing campaigns was shifted to keeping the organization functioning and having the resources to fight the legal battle. Redirected resources: Due to the bank account blockades bankruptcy was unavoidable so the teams had to be dismantled but with application of foresight, maintaining transparency, it was done smoothly avoiding all possible disruptions. A small team of less than 10 people was maintained along with lawyers to continue the legal cases. Shared intelligence with others : Meanwhile the original campaigns were led by partners and allies so that they didn’t lose momentum while this organization dealt with the crisis in hand. Created illusion: As a tactic, the offices were closed down or shrunk to give an illusion of success to their detractors, and to remove the risks of further raids and direct attacks. The delay tactic allowed the campaign narrative to persist, while also helping the organization to win the legal case and finally rebuild itself back to its full capacity. While many organizations were devastated in face of similar attacks, foresight, resilience and smart strategic methods to wrestle with the trolls helped this organization to survive, thrive and reinvest itself. State and corporate actors including large-scale mining operations had been encroaching on ancestral lands in the Philippines. The Indigenous Land Rights Movement in the Philippines, particularly among the Lumad people in Mindanao, had three objectives: Resist displacement by both state and corporate actors Protect Indigenous lands from exploitation Secure legal recognition of Indigenous land rights The movement negotiated all three types of storm caused by these opponents: Developmental Storm: Discredit : Opponents, including some government officials and corporate interests, sought to undermine the credibility of the indigenous groups by portraying them as obstructive or radical The movement framed the debate on their terms, and used their narrative around human rights and environmental justice The movement used trusted messengers among media and international support to highlight their legitimate claims Discount : Opponents tried to minimize the importance of the land rights issue, with claims that the land was of little economic value or that Indigenous claims were exaggerated. The movement maintained its narrative by consistently presenting evidence of the cultural, ecological, and legal significance of their land Deflect : To divert attention, opponents sometimes focused on unrelated issues, such as alleged corruption or infighting within the movement The activists avoided engaging directly, and maintained a clear focus on their core issues and publicizing any attempts to shift the narrative away from the land rights at stake Deceive : Opponents proposed false solutions or misleading meetings to pacify the activists without addressing their core concerns The movement publicized the tactics that the opponent was taking , stayed vigilant, fact-checked the offers, and demanded genuine engagement rather than token gestures Situational Storm: Delay : Government agencies and corporations sometimes made symbolic promises of consultations or negotiations while continuing with their projects The movement adapted by using these delays to build broader alliances and secure additional support from both national and international bodies Divide : Opponents tried to create divisions within the indigenous groups or between them and local communities The movement worked to foster unity and solidarity through grassroots organizing and outreach to other affected communities Dulcify : Opponents occasionally offered small concessions to appease the activists while continuing harmful activities The movement avoided being pacified by focusing on long-term goals and maintaining pressure on policymakers Deny : Opponents often tried to deny the existence or significance of indigenous land rights. The movement used the weight of opponents against them - it used legal frameworks and international human rights standards to affirm its claims and mobilize support Existential Storm: Destroy : Opponents used severe repression on the movement, including violent attacks and legal actions against activists. The movement prioritized resilience as its Near Star, which helped it to: Concentrate its strength on the opponents’ weakness through high-impact legal cases Share resources with international human rights organizations who also took action Create the appearance of dispersed forces : Highlight the severity of the repression, thus galvanizing global support The Indigenous Land Rights Movement in the Philippines achieved several successes including: Increased recognition of indigenous land rights in some areas. Heightened international awareness of the issues faced by the Lumad people. Despite ongoing challenges and repression, the movement's strategic responses helped mitigate some of the impacts of the various storms they encountered, demonstrating resilience and adaptability in the face of multifaceted opposition. Further reading: https://populationandsecurity.com/lumads-in-the-philippians-an-enduring-fight-for-indigenous-rights/ ; see also https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/us-land-life ; and https://youtu.be/LwQpFmcR2eY dealing with a government crackdown, india the indigenous land rights movement, the philippines Story: dealing with government crackdown, india Story: the indigenous land rights movement, the philippines Tool: simulation and prevention

TOOLS for those who prefer a practical learning style, guided by tools and frameworks SECTION 1: SYSTEM SECTION 2: EQUILIBRIUM PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SYSTEMS CIRCLES SENSEMAKING EXCAVATING SYSTEMS LEVELS SYSTEMS TRIGGER AND CONSEQUENCES STAR SETTING RELATIONSHIP CONSTELLATIONS SOCIAL IDENTITY WHEEL PRIVILEGE WALK ANTI-OPPRESSION CHECKLIST SHOOTING STAR DEEP LOOP SECTION 3: NAVIGATION WATER CHART NARRATIVE RIPPLES OBSTACLES AS TARGETS NETWORKS MATRIX MESSENGER ECOSYSTEM FINDING BEDROCK NAVIGATION AND PERSUASION IDEA AND METAPHOR NETWORKS AND RIPPLES SECTION 4: STORMS SECTION 5: ENERGY STORM DIAGNOSIS STORM STRATEGIES EARLY WARNING SIGNS SIMULATION AND PREVENTION ATTENTION ECONOMICS CAMPFIRE DASHBOARD BURNING THROUGH BIAS HUMAN LAYERS CHANGING SPECTACLES FUTURE RIPPLES INTEGRITY CHECKLIST TRENDING DOWN THE FIRE

SECTION 1: N AVIGATION CHAPTER 10 - NARRATIVE IS WATER Communications travel when they resonate with the narratives in a system. Tool: Water chart “While the statement ‘Black Lives Matter’ on the surface holds a very clear and straightforward meaning, when tied to stories of police murders of unarmed Black people, these stories create a larger narrative of systematic and violent oppression of Black people in the U.S.” - ReFrame report. If we think of the system as layers of soil, then narrative (the lens through which we see the world) is the water that flows through it. We need to reach a person or institution before we can create messages that get them to help shift the system. We also need to understand that person or institution before we navigate toward them. Surprisingly, the first step to knowing an audience is to understand the narratives and deep narratives that shape and feed the system that they live within. “Narratives explain how society should work. Narratives use values to establish norms and compel people to either enforce these norms or to change these norms. Narratives shape reasoning and response, common sense and consensus. They shape and reshape the boundaries of what is possible.” - Jen Soriano, Joseph Phelan, Kimberly Freeman Brown, Hermelinda Cortés, Jung Hee Choi, Creating an Ecosystem for Narrative Power. Do not confuse the system narrative (what we all experience) with the values of those in power or those who can influence the powerful. We will focus on values in Chapter 14. To explain how narratives work, we have used a water chart: concept: how populists use narratives concept: the features of narrative story: Example: Narrative power analysis - Story Told Worldviews and narratives shift during a crisis. It is not one single story but multiple stories told by different people, the media, the social media, the government, the civil society, your family members, that confirm narratives or counter-narratives and shape our worldview. Narratives define how people believe and act. We can provide a lot of facts and information, but the narratives will ultimately shape how this information is understood and the path of change. For example, if you grew up with the narrative that hard work leads to success (like ‘the American Dream’) then this becomes common sense and you are going to work hard. It becomes difficult for you to step back from or dismantle that narrative, even with lots of facts and information that might disprove this belief. Framing : The choices we make in how to present ideas (consciously or unconsciously) that shape how people think, feel and act, usually geared towards long term shifts.’ We frame ideas using the following building blocks: Deep Narrative: The dominant mindset in a system that helps people and institutions within the system to understand the world. Like the 12 notes on a musical stave, it defines the limits of our understanding. Similar to the “Why” level of a system. Narrative: A big idea defined by people in power, to help us understand the world - like the bootstraps narrative of making your own success through hard work. A narrative shapes what we think, believe and do. Like music, it can be felt deeply. A narrative contains types of characters, plots, places - like the Hero’s Journey. Narratives are made up of stories. Similar to the “Who” level of a system. Stories: The widespread major access points for understanding - a specific account of events or ideas that we see, hear or experience together, reinforcing a narrative. A story contains particular characters, plots and places - like Luke Skywalker in Star Wars or a particular piece of music. Similar to the “Where” level of a system. Interactions: The exchanges and feedbacks of information which enables a narrative to flow and a system to function. Like when musicians interact with each other in “call and response.” Similar to the “How” level of a system. Message / Messaging: A piece of information, talking point, phrase or hashtag that suits the political moment, usually geared towards a short term attitude/behavior change. Like individual musical notes. Similar to the “What” level of a system. Now that we have identified the system (Section 1) and the relationships and deep loop that power it (Section 2), in this chapter we look at the narratives that maintain the system’s health. Learn how to reach and activate key audiences before thinking about tactics. The steps to take are these: Identify and deconstruct the main narratives and possible counter narratives in the system according to: Our own assumptions and possible biases: We are all a product of our cultures and upbringings. White supremacy is one example but there are many -isms that can influence our unconscious thinking and our very ability to spot bias. Story world: What is the setting, central plot and who are the key characters? This is the environment in which the narrative plays out. Employment by a multinational company to extract and export natural resources could be presented as a way out of poverty for young people. Every story has a villain. Who is it here? Story told: Who is telling the story? Why are we expected to trust this story or person? The identity of the storyteller influences how the narrative is received and understood. We might trust a community leader more than a President. Story heard: What are we led to believe? Who is winning, losing or being blamed? How can we intervene? There may be a story underneath the one we are being told. Might others understand this story differently from us, depending on their situation? What is the purpose of that story in this context? Map these narratives and the media that can support or block them using an ocean chart. Consider what role you need to play to support the new/counter narrative: create, counter, amplify, reframe or attach. For a narrative to become popular we must ensure different people retell the narrative in their own words and stories. Populists use crises to shift narratives. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, it was reported that the oil industry quickly moved to activate different people to tell stories that this would create a scarcity of resources which meant oil and petrol prices had to increase. Civil society organizations in general need to improve their narrative skills during crises although there are some examples of good work. See Chapter 19: Foresight is 20:20 for tips on how to plan in advance for crises and opportunities. In the figure below, Mindworks Lab in India shows how harmful narratives against religious minorities are constructed and amplified by different stories and messages across different institutions, and levels of the system. For every narrative there is a possible counter-narrative. See the example below of the dominant narratives and counter-narratives concerning the death penalty, immigration, and economic inequality. While these will vary depending on the country and society, there are common themes which appear. It is important to understand how these show up in our country in order to cultivate the right counter-narrative. The second diagram here shows the different aspects we need to consider when cultivating a counter-narrative. Source (both tables and adapted table) FrameWorks Institute. (2021). The Features of Narratives: A Model of Narrative Form for Social Change Efforts. FrameWorks Institute. Read more: Frameworks Institute MetGroup Mindworks Lab Narrative Initiative In 1958, the women farmers of the Kom and Kedjom areas in the Western Grassfields of Cameroon faced several threats that they perceived as systematically undermining their power. These included the encroachment of Fulani cattle on their farmlands, the imposition of a new farming method (contour cultivation), and rumors that their land might be sold to Nigerian control by the Kamerun National Congress (KNC), a political party aligned with Nigeria. The women needed to counter these threats by challenging the existing power structures and narratives that sought to diminish their influence. They aimed to protect their land, assert their authority, and influence the political direction of their region in favor of the Kamerun National Democratic Party (KNDP), which opposed the KNC. Local women tapped into a traditional women's practise and network called anlu to organize a large-scale nonviolent resistance campaign to counter this narrative. The network was traditionally used to punish those who broke social norms - creating leverage at the Why and Who levels of the system. This network had leverage that Cameroonian men could not oppose. Campaign activities The anlu campaign took the following approach: Actions: 40 mile-march by thousands of women to converge on Njinikom, where they held weekly demonstrations, disrupted colonial meetings, and mocked colonial officials and local men in power. Symbolism : Women protesters dressed in symbolic clothing, such as rags, greenery, and men’s clothes, and carried branches to imitate guns, challenging traditional gender roles and claiming power typically reserved for men. Alliance : They aligned themselves with the KNDP political party, which were in opposition to the KNC. Nonviolent resistance : Protest disrobing, singing, taunting officials, and social disobedience. Challenges to system infrastructure (How level) and inputs and outputs (What level) : lowering school attendance by 50-70% by pulling their children out of schools associated with the KNC party. Powerful new narrative: They created a parallel government, with their leaders taking on titles that mocked the British colonial system. To create this powerful new narrative, the women farmers built a popular and irresistible narrative to shift the power back to them: Narrative change approach Challenging Assumptions and Possible Bias:Y Women farmers recognized that the colonial authorities and local male leaders tended to operate under the biases of colonialism and patriarchy, seeing the women as lacking the authority or capability to challenge political and agricultural decisions. The women used their cultural knowledge, such as the power of anlu as a social enforcement mechanism, to counteract these assumptions. The women farmers’ actions also challenged the internalized biases within their community, asserting that women could not only participate in but lead political resistance. This campaign forced both the local men and the colonial powers to confront their own biases about gender and power. Story World: Setting : The rural Western Grassfields of Cameroon, under the control of colonial powers and influenced by local patriarchal structures. The villains’ narrative promoted new agricultural practices and political control, while the women fought to maintain their way of life and power within their community. Central plot: The women farmers’ struggle to protect their land, autonomy, and traditional practices against external threats. Key characters: The women farmers of Kom and Kedjom (protagonists); The colonial authorities and local male leaders (antagonists); The KNDP political party was in a supporting role, in opposition to the colonial-aligned KNC. Story Told: Storytellers : Mainly the women of the anlu movement. They are the narrators of their resistance, using actions, symbols, and traditions to communicate their story to both their community and the colonial powers. Frame : Empowerment, justice, and resistance against oppression. Trust: Is created because the story is rooted in the lived experiences and cultural knowledge of these women farmers, making it authentic and resonant with their community. Position : The anlu women use their position as community members and the guardians of social norms to lend credibility to their actions and their cause. Story Heard: At first the colonial authorities and local male leaders may have seen the women’s resistance as a disruptive, irrational challenge to established order. But the underlying story that resonated with the public and increasingly understood by authorities was a story of righteous resistance to oppression, a call for justice, and a demand for respect and recognition of their rights. Within the women farmer community the story was heard as a powerful assertion of their agency and a challenge to both colonial and patriarchal authority. Success The women farmers’ anlu campaign was highly successful because it: Made the traditional government powerless to deal with the campaign. Sabotaged the efforts of non-supporters. Significantly disrupted the colonial administration. Their efforts also contributed to an electoral victory for the KNDP in 1959. Over the next few years, the government gradually met the movement’s demands. The anlu movement became an immense political force in the region, influencing Cameroon’s independence movement. Read more: https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/cameroonian-women-use-anlu-social-and-political-change-1958-1961 women use anlu for social and political change, cameroon Concept: how popullists use narratives Concept: the features of narrative Story: women use anlu for social and political change, cameroon Story: miniskirt march, zimbabwe story: miniskirt march, zimbabwe In Zimbabwe, one traditional view claims that women should not wear revealing clothes, or risk public harassment. But in December 2014, a video showed a woman in Harare being publicly harassed and stripped naked, causing public outrage. Women activists came together to challenge and change the cultural ideology that allowed public harassment of women and to create safe spaces for women. They did this by: Understanding the Power of Narrative: Seizing the Moment: Activists knew the video of the men harassing and shaming the woman went viral nationally and globally, drawing attention and outrage. Creating a Counter Narrative : Activists decided to use this moment of “shame” to cultivate a counter-narrative that women have pride and power, pushing back against the cultural norms that claimed to justify harassment. Organizing Protests: Miniskirt March : Katswe Sistahood, a women's rights group working on sexual and reproductive rights, organized a street march where 200 women wore miniskirts and tight-fitting clothes, shouting “We can dress as we please.” The march was publicized through grassroots organizations and word-of-mouth. Shocking the Establishment: Mass Street Action: Scores of women marched through Harare, openly defying the cultural norms and protesting against street harassment. Men among the elites were shamed into action. Gaining Attention: The march received mixed reactions from the public but was significant in raising awareness about women's rights and the need for safe spaces. The government and police took action in response: Justice: The men who harassed the woman in the video were arrested and faced charges. Influential support: The march gained the support of political leaders who advocated for women's freedom to dress as they please. Narrative Shift: The protest helped grow a counter narrative of pride and empowerment among women in society, countering the shaming fed by the more traditional view it opposed. Momentum: Women had transformed their collective strength and demanded their right to safety and freedom of expression. That said, the women’s movement did not always agree on the approaches taken to this challenge, which arguably may have reduced its impact. Gender inequality and the women’s movement continue their fight in Zimbabwe as they do around the world. Read more: https://beautifultrouble.org/toolbox/tool/miniskirt-march Tool: Narrative ripples tool: narrative ripples In a group, examine your Soil Chart (Section 1), and Relationship Constellations and Deep Loop (Section 2). Individually, take 15 minutes to: Consider your own bias: We are all a product of our circumstances and upbringings. White supremacy is one example but there are many -isms that can influence our unconscious thinking and our very ability to spot bias. Write down the accepted, counter- and emergent narratives that are unfolding in the system. Write these down on Post-Its and place them on the chart to show how they are unfolding across the system. In a group, take 10 minutes to: Place on the chart the most used media platforms/channels where the main narrative is told; and those that might back your counter-narrative. Discuss how you can help the new/counter narrative, through these media channels using the five tactics mentioned earlier in the chapter: Create: Do you need to seed a new deep narrative, narrative or story? Counter: Do you need to deal with another harmful narrative before or at the same time as communicating your own? Amplify: Do others in the system need to be heard more widely? Reframe: Do you need to shift how people understand an existing story? Attach: Can you use a crisis or opportunity to promote your alternative narrative? For more on how to deal with a crisis or opportunity, see Section 4: Storms.