Browse Chapters Close Home Contributors Content Filter Search Results Introduction Section 1: System Chapter 1: We live in systems Chapter 2: The simplicity of complexity Chapter 3: Levels are levers Chapter 4: Autonomy is myth Section 2: 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 Section 3: Navigation Chapter 10: Narrative is water Chapter 11: Needs are motives Chapter 12: Communities are currents Chapter 13: The messenger is the message Chapter 14: Values are bedrock Chapter 15: Decisions are learned Chapter 16: Emotion is oxygen Section 4: Storms Chapter 17: Storms are stories Chapter 18: Flexibility is perseverance Chapter 19: Foresight is 20:20 Chapter 20: Wrestling with trolls Chapter 21: Change is constant 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 Uncommon Sense A systems-based strategic communications handbook for changing the world. 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. There’s no one right way to use it. Choose your own path... Read in order Start with the introduction and move chapter by chapter Start Here Browse Sections Dive straight in by exploring the five S.E.N.S.E. sections Explore Sections Explore Themes Filter information by stories, concepts, and practical tools Content Filter Offline Reading Save the whole book as a PDF onto your device Download Explore the five sections of S.E.N.S.E. System Section 1 ◇ Chapter 1 We live in systems ◇ Chapter 2 The simplicity of complexity ◇ Chapter 3 Levels are levers ◇ Chapter 4 Autonomy is a myth Equilibrium Section 2 ◇ 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 Navigation Section 3 ◇ Chapter 10 Narrative is water ◇ Chapter 11 Needs are motives ◇ Chapter 12 Communities are currents ◇ Chapter 13 The messenger is the message ◇ Chapter 14 Values are bedrock ◇ Chapter 15 Decisions are learned ◇ Chapter 16 Emotion is oxygen Storms Section 4 ◇ Chapter 17 Storms are stories ◇ Chapter 18 Flexibility is perseverance ◇ Chapter 19 Foresight is 20:20 ◇ Chapter 20 Wrestling with trolls ◇ Chapter 21 Change is constant Energy Section 5 ◇ Chapter 22 Reflection is action ◇ Chapter 23 Truth is human-shaped ◇ Chapter 24 Seeds are fruit ◇ Chapter 25 Endings are beginnings About Uncommon Sense 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, View full contributor list Don’t miss new tools, updates and resources Get occasional updates from Uncommon Sense. Sign Up Acknowledgement 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.

Section 5 Energy Chapter 24 Seeds are fruit This section urges campaigners to adopt long-term and long-time thinking—looking beyond immediate goals to consider how today’s actions will shape the world for future generations. Drawing from Indigenous “seven generations” philosophy, it highlights the need for visions (Guiding Stars) and practical steps (Near Stars) that ensure sustained impact. Jump forward and backward in time to ensure you’re acting for the long term. Many Indigenous communities across North America use “seven generations thinking” to make decisions. They think about how their actions today will affect the next seven generations of people. “In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.” Iroquois Proverb Focusing only on the short term is a big problem not just in capitalist systems but also in the efficacy of campaigning. For example, the campaign to end the slave trade took decades, and some forms of slavery still exist today. The Chinese government has a 100 year plan. But many organizations, coalitions, and leaders only plan for three or four years, and some make long-term plans without clear steps to achieve them. “To use an agricultural metaphor, the current system [of movements attempting to build narrative power for justice] is focused on generating and cascading seeds of knowledge, but overlooking the soil where it is hoped that this will flourish.” Global Narrative Hiv e So, we come to the third question of reflection: “What now?” Once we understand how the system is changing (Chapter 20), and who and what is contributing to that change (Chapter 21), how do we plan our next steps to reach our Guiding Star and Near Star (Section 2)? We need to consider both: Long-termism: Predicting and planning for the future based on rapid and sustained developments Long-timism: Cultivating an attitude of care for the world beyond our lifetimes** It is important to consider what will be needed in seven generations from now. How many people, how much money, and how much effort will it take to change the system over this period? How can we keep the energy and commitment in our community to continue pushing for change? How can we inspire future activists and campaigners to keep the pressure on? “We can’t build what we can’t imagine, so it is imperative for us to create spaces that allow us to infinitely stretch our understanding of what’s possible.” Walidah Imarisha As with all the tools we propose, you will get better results by doing this in community with people you work with and for, and outside with the element of this chapter. There are three stages to this process: Immerse ourselves - Imagine the people we care about and how the world changes for them, in the past and future. See the forest for the trees - Consider the long-term and short-term impacts across the system. Draw out new paths - Put ourselves in the others’ shoes to find ways to a better world. Footnote: **We have borrowed the methods here from a Long Time Project practice created by Ella Saltmarshe and Hannah Smith. For more on long-time thinking see their toolkit here: https://www.thelongtimeproject.org/s/Long-Time-Project_Long-Time-Tools.pdf TOOL Human Layers Step 1: As a group, stand in a large circle 12 feet across, in a room or outside in a good amount of space. Close your eyes and feel your feet on the ground. Breathe deeply. Step 2: Think of someone you love or admire of your grandparents’ age. Focus on what it is in them that evokes warmth in you. It could be their smile, something that made them laugh, their hands, anything. Step 3: Take one step behind where you are and imagine being with that person 40 years in the past. How is that same quality that evoked warmth in you? Step 4: Take another step back and imagine being with that person another 30 years in the past, at their ninth birthday party. Where are you? Take a look out the window - what is it like? How are people behaving? Step 5: Now return to the spot you started in and imagine a small person (child, grandchild, niece) who you love or admire, and focus on what it is that evokes warmth in you. Step 6: Step forward one step and imagine being with that person 40 years in the future. Step 7: Step forward one step again and imagine you are at their 90th birthday party. The guests toast you. What are they choosing to toast you for? Step 8: Step back to the place you started in and take two deep breaths, opening your eyes again. You’ve just time traveled almost 200 years. Share with the group how you feel. What’s coming up for you? TOOL Changing Spectacles Step 1: Go back to your fire chart from Chapter 20. Take 2 sets of Post-Its, each in a different color. Ask the group to write down on the different colors, and place on the chart both positive and negative examples of: Long-termism in the system Norms, relationships, narratives, processes and outputs that are driving short term results Step 2: As a group, discuss how the most critical changes to the system are connected to long-termism and short-termism, and to different stakeholders and efforts that you and others you’ve consulted, have identified. Could you focus your efforts on strengthening or weakening those efforts with the greatest long-term effects? Step 3: Return to your overall plan. What changes might you make to your Guiding Star, Near Star, or to your targeting in order to have these greater long-term effects? TOOL Future Ripples Part 1: Go back to your fire chart. In your group, allocate to individuals in your group key stakeholder relationships (not individuals) in the system. These could be human or non-human, e.g. a river with connected ecosystems / a child and their mother in an affected community, the President and the World Bank. Part 2: Ask them to consider the implications of your updated plans in terms of: Time: What might their needs be in 5, 20, 50 years time? How might your campaign affect them? Assumptions: What assumptions about these stakeholders are we making in our plan? Why might these stakeholders question them? Practicalities: What constructs do the stakeholders need to know in order to do what we want them to do? How might this stakeholder themselves approach this differently? Part 3: What longtime changes in focus do you need to make to your plan to future proof it? Think of these areas: Guiding Star and Near Star Critical relationships and deep loop Target audiences, narrative and activities Prevention of and preparation for storms Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 4 Storms Chapter 21 Change is constant Change is constant — the question is how we respond. This chapter explores how to adapt when crises hit, whether sudden or prolonged. By learning when to ride a wave of attention and when to step back, you’ll develop strategies to test, learn, and act effectively. Drawing on natural metaphors and global insights, it offers practical principles to stay resilient and aligned with your vision. Surf the waves. Know when and how to adjust your goals and plans in unstable times. Nature responds to changes to maintain its own balance. El Niño and La Niña affect ocean temperatures, currents, fisheries, and weather. But trees bend during storms and plants protect soil and communicate danger to each other.* “Don’t let yesterday use up too much of today.” Cherokee Proverb A short-term surge in attention can be good or bad, depending on your actions: Media attention around a celebrity or political scandal can overshadow your work. Linking your message to current events can raise visibility, but it requires careful planning. When a storm hits, it can speed up and increase the complexity of an ordered, complex or chaotic system (see Chapter 2 for these definitions). The task of an effective systems thinking strategist is to decide effectively when to surf the wave and when to dive under it to avoid the crash. In order to be able to identify whether we charge, shelter, sidestep or adapt, we need to quickly test our assumptions, assess the potential outcomes and move on to new approaches. In general we recommend the same approach to deal with a complex system for when a storm hits: Test - Meet weekly as a team on the overall strategy. Using your existing campaign strategy and a storm chart, test one of the strategies appropriate to the storm, as suggested in this Section. Learn - Allocate responsibility for gathering data - media / social media stats, qualitative feedback from opponents or allies and more. Meet daily as a team to review results and decide whether to stop, continue or increase this activity. Act - Stop, continue or increase this activity. Learn - Continue this process. “The stakes are subtle, the timeframe longer. Risk tolerance edges down as people try to return to deliberative decision-making while resources draw thin. Human reactions also differ: Sudden crises spark fear and preoccupation with threat. People wonder: Are we going to be okay? In sustained crises, persistent challenges leave people wondering instead: Why bother?” Michaela J. Kerrissey and Amy C. Edmondso n A longer-term crisis or opportunity can have huge but also subtle effects, meaning the organization needs to sidestep or adapt: A challenge could evolve quickly: like a PR disaster (developmental storm) could damage an NGO’s reputation (existential storm), or a natural disaster (situational storm) could destroy or disrupt an organization’s operations (existential storm) A success could lead to a threat: A campaign win could lead to a large donation, leading to the need for careful decision-making on next steps. It could also lead to a counter campaign or a lawsuit A storm you create could turn against you: A poorly planned message or campaign could backfire and opponents could use it as a way to criticize you or put your organization at risk An ordered storm could become complex, or a complex storm could become chaotic: Revisiting the system complexity framework from Chapter 2, consider the best strategy to deal with the way the storm is changing In prolonged situations like this, resources and risk tolerance decrease, and people try to return to daily deliberative decision-making rather than continuing reflection and review. Change is the only constant. To prepare for change, use the steps in Chapter 19 to proactively build resilience, not just try to prevent immediate harm. This way organizations can stay on course for their vision or Guiding Star: Acting on key principles: Control: Accept what we can and cannot control. Delegate and decentralize: build a structure that supports diverse voices to gather, experiment and innovate. Commitment: Reaffirm your vision for change. Empower teams to experiment, innovate and collaborate. Challenge: Embrace uncertainty as a catalyst for transformation and improvement*. Stop rewarding short-term firefighting. Work flexibly and reflect regularly. Connection: Meet your team’s physical, emotional, social and informational needs. Collaborate with and amplify like-minded Shooting Stars (in the system). Review changes to the system and our campaign: Why (values and system structure), Who (Key relationships, Near star, Far star and Deep loop), Where (Information flows and navigation for influencing), How (Operations), What (Inputs and outputs) Considering moving among the four strategies (Chapter 18) Prepare and simulate more than one action / scenario where you can create suspense (Chapter 19) Plan activity at others’ events where they are seeking to gain attention (see 350.org for more information) More reading: Mindworks Lab: Different stages of a crisis https://mindworkslab.org/midwork/thedisruptedmind/the-crisis-timeline/ https://hbr.org/2023/06/leading-through-a-sustained-crisis-requires-a-different-approach?ab=hero-main-text Sources (formal sourcing): * https://earthsky.org/earth/plants-panic-when-wet-how-plants-communicate/ ** https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/challenges-leading-todays-sustained-crisis-patrick-flesner-m24ue/ TOOL Attention Economics Acting on key principles Control: Accept what we can and cannot control. Delegate and decentralize: Build a structure that supports diverse voices to gather, experiment and innovate Commitment: Reaffirm your vision for change. Empower teams to experiment, innovate and collaborate Challenge: Embrace uncertainty as a catalyst for growth and transformation*. Stop rewarding short term firefighting. Work in an agile way and keep reflecting for continuous learning Connection: Identify and share what you and your team need e.g. physical, emotional, social, instrumental or informational support - and work to meet those Review changes to the system and our campaign: Why (values and system structure), Who (Key relationships, Near star, Guiding Star and Deep loop), Where (Information flows and navigation for influencing), How (Operations), What (Inputs and outputs) Considering moving among the four strategies (Chapter 18) Simulating further scenarios (Chapter 19) Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 2 Equilibrium Chapter 6 Relationships are Power Systems are shaped less by individuals and more by the relationships that hold and distribute power. This chapter introduces Relationship Constellations to reveal visible, hidden, invisible, and systemic power across networks. Find the relationships not individuals that control how the system works. When we try to change someone's mindset, opinion, or behavior we must consider the power or powerlessness that person feels in themselves and the power expressed in the relationships they hold. Like the Guiding Star and Near Star represent your long-term vision and short-term objective, Relationship Constellations show us where power lies in a system. There are four forms of power: Visible Power: For example, a President has power over its citizens. Invisible Power: Traditional and religious leaders exert power over citizens and members of government. Hidden Power: Banks or corporations can exert power over a government if it is in debt or seeking approval. Social norms exert power over people, for example in some cultures the norm of taking one’s shoes off on entering a house. Systemic Power: Overarching systems and structures that underlie and enforce visible, invisible and hidden power.* “Power is the capacity of individuals or groups to determine who gets what, who does what, who decides what, and who sets the agenda.” Srilatha Batliwala, quoting and expanding on the definition of power by Aruna Rao and David Kelleher Powerlessness is not always expressed and so it is harder to spot than power. There are four expressions of power : Power over: Institutions hold control over individuals. The weather has power over us. Power to: The ability of someone or something to do something. Power with: Mutual support and collaboration with others. Power within: The capacity to imagine and have hope. It is important to acknowledge that many people feel powerless within themselves to effect change, and a responsibility of many campaigners is to find ways to support people to build their own power and agency. Our relationships with people and the wider world define us and give us power but also identity. The Tanganekald people of South Australia had more than twenty pronouns that were ungendered but that expressed people’s relationship with each other.* There are three types of system relationships which express power: Commensalist: One benefits, and the other is unaffected. This is the power to do something. For example, the golden jackal follows a tiger to scavenge off its discarded kills; barbed seeds travel on human clothing; gut bacteria living in our digestive system. Mutualist: Both benefit. This is power with others. For example, clownfish and anemones help each other. Clownfish consume parasites and provide nutrients to anemones, which in turn shield the fish from predators. Social norms can cultivate politeness among people. Parasitic: One benefits, and the other is harmed. This is an expression of power over others. For example, fleas or tapeworms on a host. These types of relationships can exist among both tangible (people, institutions) and intangible (values, norms) parts of a system. These relationships can also enable (strengthen) or inhibit (weaken) others across the system. Normally, to plan a campaign we might single out individual targets by using a Power Map** or Forcefield Analysis to identify key players in a system. However, to shift a system more effectively, we recommend using a Constellation Chart to plot the power, relationships and relationship types across the system levels. Sources: *For a more detailed explanation of power, see the Just Associates Guide to Power https://justassociates.org/big-ideas/power1/ ** https://aboriginallivinglanguages.sa.gov.au/lesson/lesson-twelve-pronouns-part-2/ ***Power mapping to design a winning campaign strategy: https://commonslibrary.org/power-mapping-to-design-a-winning-campaign-strategy/ ****Forcefield analysis https://www.mindtools.com/a23ewmr/force-field-analysis STORY The Beginning of the End of the Gulag, Russia In 1953, prisoners in the Norillag labor camp in Norilsk, Russia, had been enduring extremely harsh conditions. This was a parasitic relationship: the Russian state benefited from their hard labor. They worked 12-hour days in freezing temperatures by mining, making cement, and building roads and railway infrastructure. Many were political prisoners hoping for amnesty after Russian leader Joseph Stalin's death. However, the government only offered amnesty to criminal prisoners, leading to frustration and anger. The prisoners aimed to improve their living and working conditions and gain the attention of higher authorities in Moscow by finding a way to leverage the relationships that set the rules for their imprisonment; the relationship between the public, media and state, and the relationships through which information was communicated: 1. Organizing and Communicating across Camps: Mutualist relationships at the “What” level: Spreading the Word: After a guard killed two political prisoners, inmates in Camp No. 5 used a flag communication system to alert other camps. Starting the Strike: Yevgeny Griciak in Camp No. 4 initiated a strike by shutting down air compressors, halting work. “The rhythm of the work was set by the sound of the air hammers. As long as the hammers kept going, the inmates would work, so I shut the compressors off. The hammers stopped and everyone quit working.” Yevgeny Griciak, prisoner, Camp No. 4. 2. Gaining Support from the public outside - Commensalist relationships at the “Where” level: Demonstrating Unity: 5,000 prisoners refused to work, endured a three-day siege, and displayed a large sign saying “We Are Being Killed and Starved” to draw attention from the town’s people, who ultimately benefited from the work of the prisoners. Expanding the Strike: By 5 June, prisoners in six camps joined the strike, totaling 16,379 strikers. They organized committees, elected leaders, and united nationalities including Ukrainians, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians within the camps. 3. Reaching Power-Holders: Contacting rulemakers in Parasitic relationships via the “Where” and “Who” levels Using gender equality to provoke a reaction: Women prisoners dug graves outside in the ground and protested, knowing that guards would want to shoot them but could not. Reaching Out to Authorities: Prisoners demanded to negotiate with representatives from Moscow, inspired by similar tactics in other uprisings. Publicizing the Revolt: Prisoners used creative methods, like leaflets tied to kites, to inform the townspeople and authorities in Moscow about their situation. They set the cords of the kites on fire, so when these burnt out over the city, the messages fell down to the ground where they could be read. Griciak said that this action was partly responsible for getting the message out to Moscow. 4. Negotiating and Persisting: Shifting relationships from parasitic to mutualist (Moscow and the prison authority; and the prison and the prisoners) at the “Who” level Engaging with Moscow Representatives: A special commission from Moscow traveled to Norillag and met with prisoners on 6 June. Prisoners submitted their demands, including shorter workdays, the transfer of disabled prisoners and better communication with families. Continuing the Strike: Despite violent suppression and the banishment of some leaders among the rebels, the prison granted some concessions. Then prisoners resumed their strike when promises were not fully met. Despite initial resistance and violent suppression, the prisoners considered it a success due to the significant improvements and recognition they gained. Read more: https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/norillag-prisoners-strike-better-conditions-norilsk-uprising-1953 TOOL Relationship Constellations Steps: Levels: Draw 5 concentric circles on your page and label them according to the 5 system levels, starting with "Why" in the center and working outwards. Elements: Write on a Post-It note every key element that keeps the system in place and stops a better system from growing, including both tangible (institutions, products, people) and intangible (values, norms) elements. Reuse sticky notes from Section 1 exercises if needed. Relationship constellations: Draw lines with arrows between elements that have important relationships. More than one element can be connected, and connections can span different system levels. Determine if this power is visible, invisible, or hidden. Label them as commensalist (C), mutualist (M), or parasitic (P). Consider: Identify the critical relationships or transactions maintaining the system's health. Are they commensalist, parasitic, or mutualist? Who is winning and losing, and what is the impact on them and others? Stars: Review the guiding and near star you established for the system. Are they correct? Use this chart to better understand and influence the relationships that control the system. Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 5 Energy 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 Section summary Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 1 System Chapter 3 Levels are levers This chapter explores the five levels of systems — What, How, Where, Who, and Why — showing how campaigns can create lasting change by addressing root values, rules, and mindsets. 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. “Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world.” Archimedes 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]. CONCEPT Systems, Levels and Levers STORY The Chipko Movement, India 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 slo wed 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 What What are the outputs of the system and the parameters constraining it? 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 STORY Planting Banana Trees to Shame Authorities Into Action, Zimbabwe 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 How How does the system function through interactions, feedback loops and delays? 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. “A system just can’t respond to short-term changes when it has long-term delays.” Donella Meadows 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. STORY Greenwash Allows Global Plastic Pollution to Increase Worldwide 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 Where Where and when is information flowing, and to whom? 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. “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 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 STORY Violence During the Tunisian Revolution 2010-2011 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 STORY #EndSARS Movement & the Fight to End Police Brutality, Nigeria 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 s ome 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 Who holds power to set the rules and structures of the system? 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. “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 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 Ability to self-organize can create long-term systemic change. But there is one layer deeper that campaigns can go to have truly lasting change. STORY Cree Campaign Against Hydro Electric Project, USA 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 Why Why does the system exist, what values and goals does it seek to uphold? 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. “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 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. STORY The Successes of the Colombia Truth Commission, Colombia 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. “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 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 STORY The Challenges of the Colombian National Referendum of the Peace Accord Between the Colombian Government and Farc, 2016, Colombia 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. TOOL Excavating System Levels Steps: 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 grow s 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! Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 3 Navigation Chapter 15 Decisions are learned We make 35,000+ daily decisions using mental shortcuts and biases. To influence effectively, campaigns must trigger fast, emotional thinking rather than slow, rational thinking. Using familiar cues, emotional hooks, trusted messengers, and loss aversion can shift habits quickly. Triggering the right mental shortcuts and biases can make anyone take a decision. We are all decision-makers, but none of us are 100% rational. On average we make more than 35,000 decisions every day.* Our brains use thinking styles and develop mental shortcuts and biases to reduce the amount of deep thinking we do and to make our lives livable. These become habits that we live by: Thinking styles: Thinking fast (instinctive, emotional) and thinking slow (more deliberative and more logical).* Our aim in influencing is to trigger our target to take a fast decision, and minimize slow thinking including weighing up the cost-benefit or probabilities around decisions and actions.** Mental shortcuts: We develop mental shortcuts to reduce complexity and make decisions quickly. They are subject to internal factors (emotions, intuition, memory related to the decision), and external factors (type of choices available, competing objectives, culture around the decision). Bias: An illogical discrimination between two pieces of data. We also learn thinking styles, shortcuts and biases from family, friends, colleagues and even enemies. Polynesian navigators passed down the wisdom to track the rise, fall and location of the sun and stars. They also learned to take land-dwelling birds with them on ocean journeys. The navigator would release the birds if they believed they were near land. If the bird did not return, the navigator knew that land was close. “We do not see things as they are, we see them as we are.” Anaïs Nin From a systems perspective, it is most impactful to shift a narrative that will influence thousands of small decisions. However every action to shift that narrative requires us to trigger the mental shortcuts and biases already in place with those who have power over those narratives. It is far easier to trigger an audience’s existing mental shortcuts and biases in order to shift their habits, rather than overwhelm them with hard choices. We can influence someone to pass on a message the way we want by understanding their feeling, thinking and acting habits. This Chapter shares how people make decisions so we can identify how to get them to do the actions aligned with our theory of change. You may find yourself questioning which key stakeholders should really be the target of the campaign. Footnotes: *Daniel Kahnemann explains these two forms of thinking (Systems 1 and Systems 2). Kahneman, Daniel “Thinking Fast and Slow,” 2011. ** Weighing up cost-benefit and probabilities is called Bayesian decision-making. CONCEPT Thinking Styles, Rational Checks, Mental Shortcuts & Biases Humans tend to use two thinking styles: Fast (System 1): Instinctive, emotional. Our influencing should steer targets towards this Slow (System 2): Deliberative, logical. Our influencing should minimize this. Slow thinking requires rational checks. We weigh up cost-benefits (what do we have to give up, and what do we gain) and probabilities (how likely is something to happen). Skilled strategic communicators deliberately trigger mental shortcuts and biases in an audience to guide them toward fast or slow noticing, consideration and decision. In our modern lives most of us are flooded with information. As a first step, therefore, a communication must break through the noise and be noticed (repeatedly). Mental shortcuts that guide noticing Allocation of attention: Spread, volume, repetition by familiar channels, sense of surprise all increase the likelihood of attention. Urgency: Urgent rather than important threats, events, or opportunities. Proximity: Relevance to someone’s family, community, work, hobbies or life priorities. Mental shortcuts that guide consideration Angle: The framing - the context and perspective through which information is presented. Affect: Information that inspires strong positive or negative emotions. Availability: The information already in your memory or experience. Anchoring: The first information accessed on the subject. Authority: Communication from a trusted or authoritative channel and messenger. Aversion to loss: The perceived risk of loss (pain is twice as powerful as gain).* Average: Likelihood of an event or fact based on a preconceived notion or memory. Biases that guide consideration Similarity: The preference towards what is similar to that which you are used to. Expedience (confirmation bias): People prefer information that confirms their values and does not overly challenge their understanding of the world. Experience: Preferring what we have experienced in the past. Distance: Preferring what is close to them physically or recently. Safety: Preferring what seems safest to them or what has already been proven to be safe. Biases that guide decision-making Optimism: The overestimation of your abilities. Illusion of control: The overestimate of your control over events. When defining and delivering a communications strategy for influencing a decision maker or target audience, consider how to share the framing, stories, and messages to take advantage of these mental shortcuts. If you study great communicators and communication materials - be they emails, TikTok posts, elected officials speeches, or issue campaigns - you will see that these are clearly at use. For example, communications might be from an influential messenger (Authority) sharing an emotional powerful story (Affect) about a scary risk (Aversion to Loss) and a very accessible familiar solution (Familiarity) . How can you shape your communications strategy to do the same? Where possible you may consider how to reach your target audience in a position where they need fast thinking, and trigger the mental shortcuts and biases that will appeal to them and move them to do what we want. At the same time, it is however important that we check our own logic before we engage them, so we avoid triggering unconscious bias that is culturally insensitive. Further reading: For more on the five SEEDS of bias see the NeuroLeadership Institute: https://neuroleadership.com/your-brain-at-work/seeds-model-biases-affect-decision-making/ For a more complex take on influencing behaviors, see the Behavioural Insights Group report here . STORY Replacing Cops With Mimes, Colombia In the early 1990s, Bogotá was a city paralyzed by corruption, chaos, and dangerous traffic conditions. Antanas Mockus, the newly elected mayor, faced the challenge of transforming this dysfunctional system. Mockus could see that the city was stuck in a vicious loop of corruption, impunity and mistrust. Public trust in the corrupt traffic police force was low - when traffic police attempted to enforce the law, the public disobeyed, creating more chaos on the road. So the Mayor removed the existing traffic police from the system, and added a virtuous loop of collective accountability and civic engagement: Mockus disbanded the entire traffic police force. He offered to rehire the officers—but as mimes, who would use humor and social pressure rather than coercion to influence driver behavior. He empowered Bogota citizens by distributing 350,000 “thumbs-up/thumbs-down” cards, enabling them to express approval or disapproval of traffic behavior directly. The mimes, through their non-verbal communication, highlighted the absurdity of traffic violations, encouraging drivers and pedestrians to follow rules not out of fear, but out of a shared sense of responsibility. Mockus cleverly triggered fast thinking, leveraging mental shortcuts and biases to reshape behavior and reduce traffic problems: Affect (Emotion): Mockus used humor to engage the public emotionally. By replacing corrupt police officers with mimes who used playful gestures to enforce traffic rules, he tapped into the positive emotions of surprise and amusement, making people more receptive to following rules. Authority: Although unconventional, the mimes became perceived as figures of authority. Their presence and antics were a novel way of reinforcing traffic rules without traditional enforcement, which the public had lost trust in. Mockus also empowered citizens by giving them “thumbs-up/thumbs-down” cards, making them feel authoritative in judging traffic behavior. Availability and Familiarity: Mockus capitalized on what was familiar and memorable. Traffic violations, once ignored, became absurdly visible through the mimes' exaggerated reactions, making them unforgettable. The citizens’ cards, readily available in their hands, allowed immediate feedback, embedding the new behavior in daily routines. Aversion to Loss: Mockus understood that people are more motivated by the fear of loss than the prospect of gain. By removing the corrupt police force and replacing them with mimes, he reduced the perceived "loss" of being unfairly treated or fined, encouraging compliance. Anchoring: The first interaction with the mimes, who ridiculed violations in a light-hearted manner, became the anchor for future behavior. This initial experience set a new standard for how traffic rules were perceived and followed. Similarity and Safety: The mimes represented something non-threatening and relatable—people in the community enforcing rules in a safe and humorous way. Citizens felt safer complying with these figures rather than with corrupt police officers. By utilizing these mental shortcuts and biases, Mockus effectively bypassed the need for slow, deliberative thinking. Instead, he steered the public towards quick, instinctive decisions that led to safer, more cooperative behavior on Bogotá’s streets. His strategy was highly successful, reducing traffic fatalities by over 50% and transforming the culture of the city’s streets from one of lawlessness to one of mutual respect and shared responsibility. Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/opinion/the-art-of-changing-a-city.html TOOL Navigation & Persuasion Once you have read through the rest of this Navigation Section, you can bring your strategy for reach and communications together. Use the flowchart here as a guide. Route: One by one, select the most powerful decision-makers in the system and plot the route to reach them. It is likely that there will be more than one decision-maker and more than one route to reach them. It is also likely that some routes will need re-planning. Remember, each person on that route is also a decision-maker. For each decision-maker on that route, consider Outcome: Decide on what you want the decision-maker to do. Narrative: How might you appeal to the existing narrative in the system while cultivating your own counter-narrative? Focus on a consistent topline deep narrative, while allowing different people to tell stories in varied ways. This approach will help shift the narrative more effectively. Motives: What are the needs and motives of that decision-maker we need to appeal to? Network: What networks, groups or communities do they draw value and belonging from? How can your message resonate with them so that they are likely to adopt it? Messengers: Which media and other messengers does the decision-maker most trust? What does your message need to say in order for that messenger to pass it on? Values: Which of the four values frames will most likely get the decision-maker to act? Mental shortcuts and biases: Which mental shortcuts and biases will ensure the decision-maker acts quickly? Decision: Are we sure the decision-maker’s action will be the one we want? Emergence: How might our actions and those of the network, messengers and the final decision-maker play out in the system? What else might emerge that we need to consider? Could the decision create a new kind of bias that we need to consider? Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 4 Storms Chapter 18 Flexibility is perseverance Storms—crises or opportunities—can be navigated with four flexible strategies: Sidestep , Adapt , Shelter , Charge . Planning these responses in advance allows movements to not just survive but reshape outcomes in their favor. Four strategies to handle any crisis or opportunity. Animals respond to storms based on what they know and by working together. Humans do the same. In Bangladesh, villagers are creating floating vegetable gardens to protect their livelihoods from flooding; while in Vietnam, communities are helping to plant dense mangroves along the coast to diffuse tropical-storm waves.* “Falling might very well be flying – without the tyranny of coordinates.” Bayo Akomolafe When organizations encounter a crisis or opportunity, it is far better to work with the storm rather than confront it head-on. Organizations sometimes plan for a crisis, but rarely for opportunities. Disaster response mechanisms often center on prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. We propose here a flexibility tool with four strategies inspired by animal responses to storms. Sidestep: Work around the edges of the storm to find your own way to survive or benefit. Adapt: Change your location, focus or strategy. Shelter: Stay quiet until the storm passes. Charge: Increase your efforts to be heard above the noise. These strategies can help you: Respond and make the most of a storm. Overcome the possible impact of a storm. Create a storm that forces your opponent to respond in some of these ways. Plan out these strategies before starting your campaign (you can practice them with the Simulation is Prevention tool in Chapter 19 ): STORY Gezi Park Iftar, Turkey In 2013, Istanbul’s Gezi Park became the epicenter of protests against an urban development plan that sparked widespread demonstrations across Turkey. The movement united diverse groups, including secular and observant Muslim anti-capitalist protesters. During the holy month of Ramadan, Turkish authorities attempted to weaken this alliance by cracking down on the protesters, hoping to exploit the religious differences between them. The protesters faced a critical challenge: how to maintain their unity in the face of government efforts to divide them, particularly during Ramadan, when Muslim protesters were fasting. The task was to prevent the authorities from using religious observance as a tool to break the solidarity of the movement. Sidestep In response to this challenge, the anti-capitalist Muslim protesters decided to use the opportunity of Ramadan traditions to build more inclusion and unity across the groups: They invited all protesters to join them for Iftar, calling it an ‘earth table’, inviting everyone - from those from all perspectives and practices - to dine together at the ground in collective solidarity. The Iftar was held in the heart of the protest area, stretching from Istiklal Street to Taksim Square. People brought simple dishes, symbolizing their shared struggle against capitalism, and people came in their authentic selves, religious or non-religious, modest or secular. The gathering transformed into a powerful demonstration of solidarity, which not only defied the authorities’ attempts to divide them but also strengthened the unity of the movement. When the police ordered the protesters to disperse, the peaceful and united crowd remained steadfast, eventually causing the police to retreat. Results The public Iftar was a turning point in the Gezi Park protests. By sidestepping the authorities’ attempt to fracture the movement, the protesters reinforced their unity and expanded their resistance from Gezi Park to Taksim Square and beyond. The event became a symbol of solidarity and resilience against capitalism, demonstrating that people could overcome their differences and stand together for a common cause. The spirit of unity that emerged from this moment was transformative, inspiring continued resistance throughout Istanbul and across Turkey. Read more: https://www.dw.com/en/remembering-gezi-during-ramadan-ground-dining-brings-together-anti-war-activists/a-19329255 and https://psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2014/RETHINKING%20THE%20SECULAR-ISLAMIC%20DIVIDE%20AFTER%20GEZI.pdf STORY The Pinjra Tod Movement, India In 2015, Jamia Milia Islamia University imposed new restrictions on women hostellers, canceling night outs and enforcing curfews. In response, a student penned a powerful letter to the Vice Chancellor, sparking the formation of Pinjra Tod (“Break the Cage”, an autonomous women’s collective. Pinjra Tod faced the challenge of addressing deeply entrenched patriarchal norms that restricted the freedoms of women students, particularly in university hostels. Their task was to mobilize students across the country to challenge these norms and advocate for greater gender equality, focusing on issues such as curfew rules, moral policing, and discriminatory practices in educational institutions. They also sought to create a more inclusive and intersectional feminist movement that addressed the concerns of women from diverse backgrounds, including those from marginalized communities. Adapt Pinjra Tod adapted by evolving its location, focus, strategy, and tactics: Decentralized Organizing and Replicable Approach: Decentralized structure helped nimbleness and adaptability: Pinjra Tod adopted a non-hierarchical structure, allowing for collective decision-making. By avoiding a single leader, they ensured equal ownership among members. This helped spread their movement to campuses across India. They built cross-movement solidarity by connecting struggles against surveillance, moral policing, and discrimination. This approach allowed the movement to resonate with women students nationwide, driving collective action. The movement also engaged women from different social groups, recognizing the importance of intersectionality and the inclusion of marginalized voices. However, this approach also faced challenges, as some members from tribal, Muslim, and Bahujan communities later expressed concerns about exclusionary practices within the group. Strategies and Tactics: The movement took nimble actions that a few members could organize quickly: Blockade: “Chakka jam,” blocking traffic to symbolize the immobilization of hostel curfews. Roaming: Night marches, climbing and even breaking hostel gates. Symbolism: Locked admin offices to mirror their own confinement. Adapting Tactics for Safety: Recognizing the risks, Pinjra Tod carefully balanced visibility and anonymity: Guerrilla tactics: Postering at night, graffiti, and strategic use of social media to avoid identification and retaliation. Volunteering for roles: Plans were made via WhatsApp groups, and during high-risk protests like the chakka jam, they assigned roles based on students’ comfort levels. Staying within certain rules: They conducted actions after 6:30 PM to avoid police arrests. They also covered CCTV cameras to protect participants’ identities. Expanding Through Alliances: Pinjra Tod received positive feedback and broadened its scope: Built alliances with non-hostellers, other student movements, and queer groups. Pinjra Tod effectively leveraged support from allies, including other student movements, queer groups, and the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW). The DCW’s support, in particular, helped challenge media narratives that portrayed Jamia as a minority institution justifying regressive rules. This support from the DCW inspired women from other universities, especially Delhi University, to organize under the Pinjra Tod banner. Organized joint events like ‘Humara Mohalla’ to address the challenges faced by women in the informal rental market, linking these issues to the broader fight for affordable and non-discriminatory accommodation. Pushing against intersectional structural oppression: These alliances helped the movement push universities to recognize the structural barriers affecting women’s education. Focus on Intersectionality and Broader Issues: Beyond addressing curfew rules, Pinjra Tod expanded its focus to sexual harassment, discriminatory dress codes, and the exclusion of women from public spaces. Pinjra Tod engaged in activities like Jan Sunwais (public hearings) to bring women’s voices to the forefront, discussing their experiences with discrimination and the flawed notion of safety in hostels. The movement also highlighted issues related to class, caste, and religious discrimination, challenging the dominance of Savarna (upper-caste) feminism and right-wing ideologies. Result Pinjra Tod successfully transformed from a campus-based protest into a national movement challenging patriarchal norms in higher education. However, internal challenges regarding inclusivity and representation emerged, leading some members from marginalized communities to leave the organization, citing exclusionary practices by upper-caste members. Despite these challenges, Pinjra Tod remains a significant force in the fight against patriarchal oppression in Indian universities. The movement has been instrumental in reshaping the discourse on women’s rights, pushing for more inclusive and intersectional feminism, and inspiring other feminist movements across the country. Read more: https://haiyya.medium.com/pinjra-tod-4-important-movement-building-lessons-2e70902f0eb3 and https://armchairjournal.com/pinjra-tod-a-contemporary-feminist-movement/ and https://pinjratod.wordpress.com/ STORY Stamping A #metoo Story Onto Blockchain, China In 2018, Yue Xin, a final-year student at Peking University, sought to expose a decades-old rape-and-suicide case involving a former lecturer. Yue and seven other students filed a Freedom Of Information (FOI) request to the university, seeking transparency on the matter. However, the university and the Chinese government swiftly moved to suppress the story, pressuring Yue and censoring her message from the tightly controlled Chinese internet. Yue and her fellow activists faced a significant challenge: how to preserve and disseminate her story in the face of severe government censorship. The task was to ensure that the story could not be erased, even as authorities sought to silence it completely. TOOL Storm Strategies Shelter Recognizing the futility of direct confrontation with the censors, online activists employed the shelter principle by quietly shifting their strategy to blockchain technology: An anonymous user embedded Yue’s letter into the Ethereum blockchain, a decentralized and immutable ledger that cannot be altered or deleted. This approach ensured that the story remained accessible, beyond the reach of Chinese censorship. Additionally, activists shared the blockchain link via QR codes and encrypted messages, further disseminating the letter while avoiding direct confrontation with the authorities. Result The activists successfully preserved Yue Xin’s message on the blockchain, making it permanently available despite the ongoing censorship. By staying quiet and avoiding direct conflict until the story was securely encoded, they sidestepped the crackdown while ensuring the story could not be removed. This action not only protected Yue’s message but also demonstrated a new method of resisting censorship, inspiring other activists facing similar challenges. The use of blockchain became a symbol of resilience and innovation in the fight for free speech in China. Read more: https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/blockchain-04272018110005.html#:~:text=Online%20activists%20in%20China%20employed,from%20China%27s%20tightly%20controlled%20internet . Step 1 Profile the storm as a system (you may have already done this in the first Chapter in this Section). Again, profile the deep loops maintaining it: Why: What are the values underpinning the power of this storm? How is it changing the values of the wider system, or your organization? Who: Who is driving this storm, setting the rules for how it operates? How is this changing the relationships that drive the wider system, or your organization’s key relationships? Where: Where does information flow enabling the storm to thrive? How does this intersect, boost or interrupt the information flows within the wider system or your organization? How: How does the storm work in practice? How does this affect the wider system’s operations and your own? What: What are the basic inputs and outputs of the storm? What do we see publicly? How does this intersect with the wider system, and your own inputs and outputs? Deep loop: What is the deep loop maintaining the storm? Is it stabilizing, stagnating, vicious or virtuous? What effect does this loop have on the wider system and your own campaign? Step 2 Explore the different strategies you could take with the storm. Label your approaches alongside the relevant Strategies on the storm chart. Note: Sometimes you may need to use a different strategy from the one shown on the storm chart. Sidestep: What are the boundaries of the storm? Can we turn elements of the storm to our advantage? Who might we need to work with to sidestep successfully? Adapt: Do we need to change our approach or campaign target? Could we change our message, navigation, target relationships to destabilize the storm or its narrative? Should we change the channels we use to communicate, or collaborate and work through new allies who can impact where we no longer can ourselves? Shelter: Is it safe to wait out the storm? How long do we think we need to wait this out? What is the cost of not acting or responding, compared with the cost of doing so? Charge: What resources do we need to step up our efforts? With whom could we collaborate for greater impact? What interventions could turn stagnating to stabilizing? What interventions could turn vicious to virtuous? Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Browse Chapters Close Home Contributors Content Filter Search Results Introduction Section 1: System Chapter 1: We live in systems Chapter 2: The simplicity of complexity Chapter 3: Levels are levers Chapter 4: Autonomy is myth Section 2: 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 Section 3: Navigation Chapter 10: Narrative is water Chapter 11: Needs are motives Chapter 12: Communities are currents Chapter 13: The messenger is the message Chapter 14: Values are bedrock Chapter 15: Decisions are learned Chapter 16: Emotion is oxygen Section 4: Storms Chapter 17: Storms are stories Chapter 18: Flexibility is perseverance Chapter 19: Foresight is 20:20 Chapter 20: Wrestling with trolls Chapter 21: Change is constant 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 Content filter Browse by concept , story , t ool or section to quickly uncover the most relevant insights. Filter by Section Filter by Concept, Story or Tool Select Language CONCEPT Systems, Levels, and Levers Section 1: System STORY Buen Vivir, Bolivia and Ecuador Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Bell Bajao Campaign, India Section 5: Energy TOOL Changing Spectacles Section 5: Energy TOOL Deep Loop Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Excavating Systems Levels Section 1: System TOOL Future Ripples Section 5: Energy CONCEPT How Populists Use Narrative Section 3: Navigation TOOL Networks and Ripples Section 3: Navigation CONCEPT It's Not Always What You Think It is Section 3: Navigation TOOL Networks Matrix Section 3: Navigation TOOL Navigation and Persuasion Section 3: Navigation STORY Planting Banana Trees to Shame Authorities, Zimbabwe Section 1: System STORY Racist Public Health Response, Australia Section 3: Navigation TOOL Shooting Star Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Storm Strategies Section 4: Storms CONCEPT Ten Basic Personal Values Section 3: Navigation STORY The Chipko Movement, India Section 1: System STORY The Salt March, India Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Transgender Person Protection of Right Act, Pakistan Section 3: Navigation STORY Women Use Anlu for Change, Cameroon Section 3: Navigation STORY The Beginning of the End of the Gulag, Russia Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Ayuda a Delhi a respirar, India Section 1: System TOOL Bucle profundo Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Cambiando lentes Section 5: Energy TOOL Anti-oppression checklist Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Burning Through Bias Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Building Resilience Section 4: Storms STORY Cree Campaign Against Hydro Electric Project, USA Section 1: System CONCEPT Vicious Loop Section 2: Equilibrium CONCEPT Stagnating Loop Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Gezi Park Iftar, Turkey Section 4: Storms TOOL Human Layers Section 5: Energy STORY Idle No More, Canada Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Meatless Monday Campaign, Brazil Section 3: Navigation CONCEPT Movement Compass Section 5: Energy TOOL Obstacles As Targets Section 3: Navigation TOOL Privilege Walk Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Relationship Constellations Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Social Identity Wheel Section 2: Equilibrium CONCEPT Systems Thinking Embraces Interconnectedness Section 1: System CONCEPT Thinking Styles, Rational Checks, Mental Shortcuts, Biases Section 3: Navigation STORY The Endsars Movement and the Fight to End Police Brutality, Nigeria Section 1: System TOOL Star Setting Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Trending Down The Fire Section 5: Energy TOOL Steps for SWOT Analysis Section 1: System TOOL Simulation and Prevention Section 4: Storms CONCEPT Brújula de movimientos Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Bucle vicioso Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Caminata de privilegios Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Bolivia's Water War Section 1: System CONCEPT Social Threats and Rewards Section 5: Energy TOOL Campfire Dashboard Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Cycle of Oppression Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Doxing Abusive Police, Sudan Section 3: Navigation TOOL Finding Bedrock Section 3: Navigation STORY Greenwash Allows Global Plastic Pollution Increase Section 1: System TOOL Idea and Metaphor Section 3: Navigation STORY Indigenous Land Rights Movement, the Philippines Section 4: Storms TOOL Messenger Ecosystem Section 3: Navigation TOOL Simulation and Prevention Section 4: Storms STORY Panties for Peace Campaign, Myanmar Section 3: Navigation TOOL Problem Statement And Systems Circles Section 1: System STORY Religious Values and Climate Change, Indonesia Section 3: Navigation STORY Stamping #metoo on Blockchain, China Section 4: Storms TOOL Systems Trigger And Consequences Section 1: System STORY The Bentley Blockade, Australia Section 1: System CONCEPT The Features of Narrative Section 3: Navigation STORY The Successes of the Colombia Truth Commission Section 1: System STORY Violence During the Tunisian Revolution Section 1: System STORY Cree Campaign Against James Bay Hydroelectric Dam, Canada Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Amenazas y recompensas sociales Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Bucle estabilizador Section 2: Equilibrium CONCEPT Bucle virtuoso Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Campaña Bell Bajao, India Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Stablising Loop Section 2: Equilibrium TOOL Attention Economics Section 4: Storms STORY Challenges of the Colombian National Referendum Section 1: System STORY Dealing With Government Crackdown, India Section 4: Storms TOOL Early Warning Signs Section 4: Storms CONCEPT Virtuous Loop Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Help Delhi Breathe, India Section 1: System STORY Identifying Palm Oil Company Strategies, Indonesia Section 4: Storms TOOL Integrity Checklist Section 5: Energy STORY Miniskirt March, Zimbabwe Section 3: Navigation TOOL Narrative Ripples Section 3: Navigation TOOL Sensemaking Section 1: System STORY Protests and Uprising Lops in the Middle East Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Replacing Cops With Memes, Colombia Section 3: Navigation STORY Stopping Arms Transportation to Zimbabwe Section 4: Storms STORY Targeting Communities Through Media and Messengers Section 3: Navigation TOOL Storm Diagnosis Section 4: Storms STORY The Pinjra Tod Movement, India Section 4: Storms CONCEPT Three Horizons Section 5: Energy CONCEPT Warning Signs Section 4: Storms STORY Breaking Barriers: Feminist Levers & Loops in Urban Mobility Transformation. Bangalore, India, 2019-2023 Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Apuntando a comunidades a través de medios y mensajeros Section 3: Navigation CONCEPT Bucle estancado Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Buen Vivir, Bolivia y Ecuador Section 2: Equilibrium STORY Campaña Bragas por la Paz, Myanmar Section 3: Navigation

Section 3 Navigation Purpose Learn how to navigate narratives, reach and activate people within the system. How to use this section Read this before you choose a strategy. Polynesians crossed the ocean by using the relative positions of sun, moon, stars and waves, rather than just using strength or willpower. Similarly, to change a system we need to understand how to reach and activate people, rather than relying on fixed tactics. For that reason, plan your communications approach before deciding on tactics. This Section uses a water chart to help us plan how to influence others. The Chapters are: Narrative is water: To activate stakeholders, understand the narrative flows in the system, where counter-narratives exist, and how to use them. Needs are motives: Every creature on the water has a reason for its direction. Identify the needs and motivations of each stakeholder to plan how you will shift the system. Networks are currents: Communities and groups are currents that help people connect and belong. A strong network moving in a new direction will carry its members further. Values are bedrock: Our values define our worldview and rarely change unless we experience a life-altering event or as our life stage changes. To activate someone, frame your message to resonate with their values. The messenger is the message: Swells are recurring currents in the ocean. In a system, swells are the media or people we listen to most. A swell that consistently communicates a message aligned with someone's values is most likely to be heard. Decisions are learned: People develop mental shortcuts and biases that help them make decisions. Frame your message to trigger specific shortcuts and biases. Emotion is oxygen: Human emotion is essential for decision-making. Every counter-narrative needs a powerful idea or metaphor to activate others. Section summary Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 3 Navigation Chapter 13 The messenger is the message Messages only work if delivered by messengers the audience trusts.Messengers are like ocean swells — carrying narratives across systems. To succeed, campaigns must choose credible, authentic voices whose motivations are clear and aligned with their audience. A messenger who truly believes their message is powerful. 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 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 CONCEPT It's Not Always What You Think 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. Replication of graph - Information and source: Climate Outreach, pre-UNFCCC COP26, 2021 https://climateoutreach.org/reports/britain-talks-cop26/# STORY Meatless Monday Campaign, Brazil 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. STORY Targeting Communities Through Specific Media & Messengers, South America, Central Africa And South East Asia 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 analyse 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. TOOL Messenger Ecosystem Identify messengers: Who do you need to reach and persuade your target networks or key relationships? Define roles: What role will your organization play? Plot them on the chart: Place them on the ripple chart. Collaborate: Set up meetings with others who have similar goals. Find common ground to work together. Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 3 Navigation Chapter 11 Needs are motives To spread a counter-narrative effectively, we must understand who needs to act, what drives them, and what barriers block them. Every individual or institution is a decision-maker, influenced by needs, motivations, and relationships. Campaigns often fail by assuming truth alone will persuade; instead, analyzing psychographics, power dynamics, and barriers helps us prioritize the audiences most likely to create systemic change. 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? Previous Chapter Next Chapter