Early and Later Changes Rubrics

This set of rubrics looks at the early and later changes that need to happen to create the right conditions for the outcomes and impacts.

Partners and Laudes Foundation will define the relevant rubrics and evaluative criteria at the design stage. Partners will regularly rate each rubric and discuss with Laudes how the initiative has contributed to the change, lessons learned and implications for the future. The evidence used to rate each rubric will vary according to the industry, sector and region of focus for the initiative, as defined in the design stage.

B1 - Building the right processes to create strong, stakeholder-informed policy reforms

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, policymaker discussions and agendas are dominated by lobbyists and special interests seeking to maintain the status quo. There is still very little influence from broad networks of stakeholders seeking progressive change – the needed mechanisms are simply not there. As a result, policy reforms are either non-existent or weak, and may contain problematic loopholes that dramatically reduce policy effectiveness.

Unconducive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, there is some evidence of modest mindset shift among policymakers towards more inclusive policymaking, and there are early signs of stakeholders' recommendations finding their way into policymaker discussions and agendas. However, generally only the less impactful recommendations are being incorporated into new or reformed policies, not the more foundational changes.

In addition, the following are likely:

  • Participation mechanisms for involving stakeholders in policymaker discussions are generally weak in their inclusivity and/or scope.
  • Weak stakeholder participation has resulted in low levels of buy-in from policymakers and other stakeholders.

Partly conducive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, a variety of stakeholders are being included in policymakers’ discussions and have had some success in influencing important reforms that address climate and/or equity; however, some important changes are not being incorporated.

Partial incorporation of stakeholder expertise has enhanced the conceptualisation of reforms, most of which include substantial incentives, disincentives and proportionate sanctions to compel change. However, some sanctions may not be substantial enough to motivate change and policies are likely lacking in reparations/remedies for people and communities that have suffered harm.

In addition, both of the following are evident:

  • Participation mechanisms are in place to enable broad networks of stakeholders to participate in policymakers’ discussions and agendas, although there are likely significant opportunities for more inclusive participation mechanisms and/or scope.
  • Limited stakeholder participation in policymaking is starting to build some degree of buy-in, but there is a need for support from a much broader range of policymakers and stakeholders.

Conducive & Supportive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, broad networks of stakeholders are a regular part of policymakers’ discussions and have had considerable success in influencing important reforms that address climate and/or equity.

The incorporation of stakeholder expertise contributes to generally well-conceptualised reforms that include substantial incentives, disincentives and proportionate sanctions to compel change but may be somewhat lacking in reparations/remedies for people and communities that have suffered harm.

In addition, both of the following are evident:

  • Participation includes the voices of many who have historically been marginalised in influencing policy, although there may be opportunities for more inclusive participation mechanisms and/or scope.
  • Increasingly broad participation in policymaking is helping to build reasonably strong buy-in, with reformed policies supported by a broad range of policymakers and stakeholders.

Thrivable

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, broad networks of stakeholders are meaningfully involved in shaping policy and have been successful in influencing important reforms that address climate and/or equity.

The incorporation of stakeholder expertise contributes to well-conceptualised reforms that include substantial and proportionate incentives and disincentives to compel change, as well as reparations/ remedies for people and communities that have suffered harm.

In addition, both of the following are evident:

  • Strong and inclusive participation mechanisms enable and encourage meaningful stakeholder involvement that privileges the voices of those who have historically been adversely impacted and/or marginalised.
  • Broad participation in policymaking helps build strong buy-in, with reformed policies supported by a broad range of policymakers and stakeholders.

B2 - Investor and financial pressure to incentivise businesses to change

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

The financial actors that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives have not sufficiently changed their financial and monetary policies and practices to create any pressure for businesses and policymakers to adopt practices and policies that are climate-positive, and that lead to demonstrable improvements in equitable outcomes for historically marginalised group. The vast majority of the financial support provided by those institutions still go to businesses that engage in harmful climate-negative practices and/or that continue to perpetuate or aggravate social inequities and marginalisation.

Unconducive

The financial actors that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are starting to mobilise, but so far have taken only a few concrete steps with the potential to create pressure for businesses and policymakers to adopt practices and policies that are climate-positive, and that lead to demonstrable improvements in equitable outcomes for historically marginalised group. the perpetuation of inequities. So far, the pressure is still much too low to incentivise businesses and policymakers to adopt practices and policies that are climate-positive, and socially equitable.

Some or all of the following are likely to be evident:

  • Some bond holders (not the major players) may be challenging their holdings of fossil fuel debt, but few are beginning to divest from them and reinvest in climate-positive investments.
  • There may have been some limited movement from institutional investors toward moving their investments into climate-positive and equitable holdings, and away from high carbon debt holdings, as well as from investments in or from organisations with a record of exploiting workers, producers and/or communities; and/or whose policies and practices perpetuate inequities.
  • Central banks are considering how to better reflect climate and social risks into their monetary policy toolkits as well as in their prudential and supervisory frameworks, but may not yet have made meaningful changes.

Partly conducive

The financial actors that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, in alignment with monetary policy and taxation incentives, have created some financial pressure for businesses and policymakers to adopt practices and policies that are climate-positive and equitable. Monetary policy is reasonably well aligned with the financial sector to demonstrable improvements in equitable outcomes for historically marginalised group. Even though support to climate-negative practices has been noticeably reduced, it is not yet low enough to influence businesses that engage in climate-negative practices and/or that contribute to the perpetuation of inequities and marginalisation to make significant changes.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • Some bond holders (perhaps not the major players) are challenging their holdings of fossil fuel debt and some are beginning to divest from them and reinvest in climate-positive investments.
  • Some institutional investors (as yet, few or no major players) are well advanced in moving their investments into climate-positive and equitable holdings, and away from high carbon debt holdings, as well as from investments in or from organisations with a record of exploiting workers, producers and/or communities; and/or whose policies and practices perpetuate inequities.
  • Central banks may be starting to better reflect climate and social risks into their monetary policy toolkits as well as in their prudential and supervisory frameworks.

Conducive & Supportive

The financial actors that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, in alignment with monetary policy and taxation incentives, have created substantial financial pressure for businesses and policymakers to adopt practices and policies that are climate-positive and socially equitable. Monetary policy is well aligned with the financial sector to demonstrable improvements in equitable outcomes for historically marginalised group. Support for climate-negative practices is now low enough to influence businesses that engage in climate-negative practices and/or that contribute to the perpetuation of inequities and marginalisation to make significant changes.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • Many leading bond holders are challenging their holdings of fossil fuel debt and a good number is beginning to divest from them and reinvest in climate-positive investments.
  • Several major institutional investors are well advanced in moving their investments into climate-positive and equitable holdings, and away from high carbon debt holdings, as well as from investments in or from organisations with a record of exploiting workers, producers and/or communities; and/or whose policies and practices perpetuate inequities.
  • Central banks are increasingly reflecting climate and social risks into their monetary policy toolkits as well as in their prudential and supervisory frameworks.

Thrivable

The financial actors [1] that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, in alignment with monetary policy and taxation incentives, have created very high financial pressure on businesses and policymakers, strong enough to compel them to adopt practices and policies that are climate-positive, and that lead to demonstrable improvements in equitable outcomes for historically marginalised groups.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • Virtually all leading bond holders are challenging their holdings of fossil fuel debt and many have begun to divest from them and reinvest in climate-positive investments.
  • Most [2] major institutional investors are well advanced in moving their investments into climate-positive and equitable holdings, and away from high carbon debt holdings, as well as from investments in or from organisations with a record of exploiting workers, producers and/or communities; and/or whose policies and practices perpetuate inequities.
  • Central banks are now consistently incorporating climate and social risks into their monetary policy toolkits as well as in their prudential and supervisory frameworks.

    Footnotes

    1. ^ Financial actors may include central banks (regulators/supervisors), institutional investors, bank lenders, pension funds, asset owners, asset managers, etc.
    2. ^ A quick explainer of some prevalence terms, to use as a rough guide (not rigid cut points) when interpreting evidence using the rubrics. These are not purely numerical but should include consideration of what proportion of the most important actors are involved. “Virtually all” = all except a few less-important actors “The vast majority” = all except several less-important actors “A clear majority” = nearly all of the key players, plus most of the rest “Most” = most of the key players, plus several others “Several” = enough key players to be significant, plus some others “Some” = a number of key players, but not quite enough to be significant “A few” = a small proportion overall, with only a small number of key players “Very few” = small numbers overall - and none of the key players.

B3 - Progressive businesses lead the change, which encourages others to follow and lays the foundation for progressive change in policy, the financial sector and the real economy

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

The vast majority of the major businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, through their actions (or inaction), effectively prioritise maximising short-term profit for shareholders, often at the expense of the environment and other stakeholders.

In their quest to avoid additional costs, these businesses generally try to avoid adopting climate-positive practices or practices that would enhance equity for workers, producers and communities. Businesses have sought to avoid inclusive stakeholder engagement and may have actively supported policies that restrict civil society activity.

Most major businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are ignoring, navigating around or actively or covertly lobbying against any new requirements; many try to conceal harmful practices and avoid being held to account.

Unconducive

Only a few of the businesses trying to lead the change in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives have adopted climate-positive practices that enhance equity. Most businesses try to avoid doing so and do not have meaningful or inclusive consultation processes to engage affected stakeholders.

Stakeholder pressure and evidence has not been enough to persuade influential businesses to recognise that there is a compelling business case for changing their practices. Only a few less influential businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are trying to shift toward more climate-positive and equitable practices.

Most major businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are ignoring, navigating around or lobbying against any new requirements; some of them actively conceal harmful practices and successfully avoid being held to account.

Partly conducive

Several of the businesses leading the change (although not yet enough in size, importance and quantity to be a critical mass) in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives have made some progress in their adoption of climate-positive and equitable practices. Several of those frontrunners have adopted meaningful and inclusive consultation processes for such initiatives. Some of them are recognised as role models by major businesses and other key players within the focus sector(s) and/or area(s) of this cluster of initiatives.

Only a few other influential businesses have been persuaded by increasing stakeholder pressure and evidence to recognise that there is a compelling business case for changing their practices. Some major businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are now actively shifting toward more climate-positive and equitable practices.

However, several (including some quite influential) businesses may still attempt to ignore or navigate around the new requirements. More needs to be done by actors in the system to compel those businesses to finally start to change.

Conducive & Supportive

There is a [close to] a critical mass of the businesses leading the change in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives who are reasonably well advanced in their adoption of practices and advocacy for policies that are climate-positive, enhance equity, and are developed through inclusive processes. These frontrunners are recognised as role models by major businesses and other key players within the focus sector(s) and/or area(s) of this cluster of initiatives.

Several other influential businesses have been persuaded by increasing stakeholder pressure and evidence and now recognise that there is a compelling business case for changing their practices. Most major businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are now actively shifting toward more climate-positive and equitable practices.

Although some less influential businesses may still attempt to ignore or navigate around the new requirements, they are experiencing consequences for non-compliance, which is progressively compelling them to finally start to change.

Thrivable

A critical mass[1] of the businesses leading the change in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are now well advanced in their adoption of practices and advocacy for policies that are climate-positive, enhance equity, and are developed through inclusive processes [2]. These frontrunners are widely recognised as change leaders by major businesses and other key players within the focus sector(s) and/or area(s) of this cluster of initiatives.

Following their lead, most other influential businesses[3] have been persuaded by increasing stakeholder pressure and evidence, and now recognise that there is a compelling business case for changing their practices. The vast majority of major businesses in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are now actively shifting toward more climate-positive and equitable practices.

Although a few less influential businesses may still attempt to ignore or navigate around the new requirements, they are experiencing strong pressure and consequences for non-compliance, which is progressively compelling them to finally start to change.

Footnotes

  1. ^ Critical mass: In this context, there are enough business frontrunners in terms of size, importance, and numbers that other businesses are likely to pay attention.
  2. ^ Inclusive processes: Processes that help ensure that workers’, producers’ and communities’ voices are heard in policy, finance, business and industry decisions that affect them. Historically marginalised and adversely impacted groups are included via a process that honours their preferred ways of engaging and that works effectively for them.
  3. ^ “Businesses” means not just the legal entity and those employees internal to a company, but also their advisors, accountants, lawyers, etc.

B4 - Workers and producers voices are taken into account in decision-making

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, powerful forces in government and business are actively restricting the ability of civic movements and groups to engage and effectively silencing them, e.g., by imposing new restrictions, deploying divide-and-conquer tactics, perhaps even endangering their safety. 

As a result, decisions and actions that affect workers, producers and communities are taken with complete disregard for those affected and often exacerbate the status quo, e.g., continued exploitation of workers, producers and their communities and/or harming natural environments for the purpose of short-term profit maximisation. 

Unconducive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, Civil Society Organisations, movements and networks representing the workers, producers and/or communities lack power and influence over decisions that affect them. This may be due in part to laws and policies that restrict the ability of civil society groups and/or independent media to fully express their views and that policymakers and businesses are reluctant to reform. As a result, there has been little success so far in gaining support from policymakers and businesses to create mechanisms for people’s participation in policy discussions and other decisions that affect them, particularly for the more independent civil society groups that have been less willing to accommodate or be co-opted by other actors.

Some well-intentioned efforts may have been made to understand the needs and aspirations of workers, producers and/or communities. However, policymakers, trade negotiators, businesses, industry and/or finance actors are marginally or not at all incorporating the expertise and insights from workers, producers and communities in determining, enacting and/or monitoring changes in policies and practices.

Partly conducive

Civil Society Organisations, movements and networks representing the workers, producers and communities that are stakeholders in this cluster of initiatives are to some extent able to operate freely, develop a sustainable support base (i.e., through their own members) and develop the capacity to engage as full and equal partners with government and business. They have gained initial support from policymakers and businesses and have started influencing the creation of mechanisms to ensure people’s participation in policy discussions that affect them, although these still need to be more inclusive.

As a result, clear progress is evident in workers, producers and/or communities in the relevant sector(s) and region(s) are increasingly being heard by decision makers, particularly those groups who have had little voice historically. Policymakers, trade negotiators, businesses, industry and/or finance actors have recognised the importance of and are occasionally incorporating expertise and insights from these workers, producers and/or communities to determine, enact and/or monitor policy reforms, but there is substantial room for improvement.

Conducive & Supportive

Civil Society Organisations, movements and networks representing the workers, producers and/or communities that are stakeholders in this cluster of initiatives are mostly able to operate freely, develop a sustainable support base (i.e., through their own members) and develop the capacity to engage as partners with government and business. Supported by policymakers and businesses, they have been able to influence the creation of reasonably inclusive mechanisms that help ensure people’s participation in policy discussions that affect them.

As a result, the workers, producers and/or communities in the relevant sector(s) and region(s) that have historically had less power or voice are generally being heard. There are strong signs that some of their expertise is genuinely valued and (to some extent) used to influence the decisions and policies that affect them. Policymakers, trade negotiators, businesses, industry and/or finance actors are often incorporating expertise and insights from those most affected by social inequality or impacts on their natural environment, particularly those who have historically experienced the most marginalisation.

Thrivable

Civil Society Organisations, movements and networks representing the workers, producers and/or communities [1] that are stakeholders in this cluster of initiatives are able to operate freely, develop a sustainable support base (i.e., through their own members) and develop the capacity to engage as full and equal partners with government and business. Supported by policymakers and businesses, they have influenced the creation of strong and inclusive mechanisms that ensure people’s full and diverse participation in policy discussions that affect them. 

As a result, the workers, producers and/or communities in the relevant sector(s) and region(s) that have historically had less power or voice are having their expertise and insights genuinely valued and used to influence the decisions and policies that affect them. Policymakers, trade negotiators, businesses, industry and/or finance actors are extensively incorporating expertise and insights from those most affected by inequality or impacts on their natural environment, particularly those who have historically experienced the most marginalisation.

Footnotes

  1. ^ “Communities” refers to people who live and work in and around the area that is the focus of the cluster of initiatives, e.g. those where materials are being produced or harvested; those who live and work where buildings or infrastructure are being developed; those who are connected to the land, water and air that is affected.

B5 - Exposure of harmful practices and thwarting of counter-lobbying

Counter-lobbying refers here to lobbying efforts to block, dilute or backslide law and policy reforms that would require climate-positive practices, equity and inclusion, and/or that disincentivise or sanction practices that negatively impact climate, equity and/or inclusion.

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, CSOs and cross-sectoral movements are not yet well organised or sufficiently influential in exposing harmful practices or holding others to account. Even when policies are in place that require business practices that are climate-positive and contribute to equity, many businesses are able to conceal harmful practices and avoid being held to account.

Businesses, industry and other organisations with vested interests in maintaining the status quo (i.e., allowing practices that are climate-negative or that are inequitable or marginalising) are powerful influencers of policy, are usually successful in counter-lobbying to block, dilute or backslide progressive policy reforms. 

Unconducive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, CSOs and/or cross-sectoral movements have had some success in exposing problematic practices and holding others to account, but much more is still needed. To date they have had mixed but overall weak results in exposing, anticipating and thwarting counter-lobbying, corruption and other attempts to backslide progressive policy reforms. 

Businesses, industry and other organisations with vested interests in maintaining the status quo are still actively engaging in counter-lobbying and manage to block, dilute or backslide many progressive policy reforms. 

Partly conducive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, CSOs and/or cross sectoral movements have had reasonably good success in exposing harmful practices and helping hold others to account. They may have had mixed results (most positive) in exposing, anticipating and thwarting counter-lobbying, corruption and other attempts to backslide progressive policy reforms. 

Those efforts have succeeded in diminishing the power and influence of counter-lobbyists and other saboteurs seeking to maintain the status quo. Nonetheless, they are still able to win a few substantial concessions in their efforts to block, dilute or backslide progressive reforms, such as loopholes that dilute the policy intent. 

Conducive & Supportive

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, CSOs and/or cross sectoral movements have had good success so far in exposing harmful practices and helping hold others to account; and in exposing, anticipating and helping thwart counter-lobbying, corruption and other attempts to block or backslide progressive policy reforms. 

As a result, counter-lobbyists and other saboteurs seeking to block, derail or backslide the change/reform are able to get some concessions but nothing that seriously dilutes the policy intent. 

Thrivable

In the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives, Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and/or cross sectoral movements have been very successful so far in exposing harmful practices and helping hold others to account; and in exposing, anticipating and helping thwart counter-lobbying, corruption and other attempts to block or backslide progressive policy reforms. 

As a result, counter-lobbyists and other saboteurs seeking to block, derail or backslide the change/reform have little or no political influence and power over the policymaking process. 

B6 - Unstoppable multi-stakeholder movements creating pressure

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

The groups historically holding power in the financial sector, business and industry are preventing the establishment of multi-stakeholder movements representing workers, producers and communities in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives. 

Any existing Civil Society Organisations representing workers, producers and communities are very weak, disorganised, subject to restrictions and/or heavily controlled/ influenced by the groups that have historically held disproportionate power. 

As a result, policymakers, the financial sector, business and industry are not held to account for their harmful policies and practices and are able to maintain or exacerbate the status quo.

Unconducive

There are few weak multi-stakeholder movements representing (not always genuinely) only a few groups of workers, producers and communities in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives. A few Civil Society Organisations (perhaps not the most relevant ones) may be talking about aligning or collaborating towards common purposes, but nothing concrete has been done so far. 

These cross-sectoral movements have so far been unable to build awareness and support for change with their key audiences (e.g., the public, business and industry, policymakers and/or the finance sector). Limited and largely unsuccessful efforts have been made to use evidence to hold others to account for their harmful practices (e.g., counter-lobbying, counter-publicity and other attempts to block or backslide change). As a result, there is no real pressure for policymakers, the financial sector, business and industry to do the right thing with respect to climate and equity.
 

Partly conducive

Relatively strong multi-stakeholder movements in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are creating some pressure and political support for policymakers, the financial sector, business and industry to do the right thing with respect to climate and equity. These movements include at least some representation (although it may be insufficiently diverse) from those who have historically held less power, including workers, producers and communities and those advocating for protecting, restoring and regenerating the natural environment for current and future generations. 

Some of the most relevant Civil Society Organisations and other stakeholder groups are making some progress in identifying together what change is needed and how to advocate for it. There is evidence that this process will create coalitions or alliances with relatively strong organisational and network capacity to be able to do so effectively.

These cross-sectoral movements are making reasonable progress in using their networks and media to build awareness and support for change with their key audiences (e.g., the public, business and industry, policymakers and/or the finance sector). Even though they are achieving some success in holding others to account, there is still much to do in terms of identifying and exposing harmful practices (e.g., counter-lobbying, counter-publicity and other attempts to block or backslide change), building political influence and alliances, and using evidence to motivate accountability.
 

Conducive & Supportive

Strong multi-stakeholder movements in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are creating high pressure and political support for policymakers, the financial sector, business and industry to do the right thing with respect to climate, equity and inclusion. These movements include reasonably strong and diverse representation from those who have historically held less power, including workers, producers and communities and those advocating for protecting, restoring and regenerating the natural environment for current and future generations. 

A clear majority of the most relevant Civil Society Organisations and other stakeholder groups have discussed and are mostly aligned on what change is needed and how to advocate for it with business and government. 

These cross-sectoral movements are using their networks and media to build awareness and support for change with their key audiences (e.g., the public, business and industry, policymakers and/or the finance sector). They are using evidence to hold others to account, mostly successfully, by identifying and exposing harmful practices including counter-lobbying, counter-publicity and other attempts to block or backslide change. 

Thrivable

Unstoppable multi-stakeholder movements in the sector(s) and region(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives are highly influential, creating intense pressure and political support for policymakers, the financial sector, business and industry to do the right thing with respect to climate, equity and inclusion. These movements include strong, diverse, genuine representation from those who have historically held less power, including workers, producers and communities and those advocating for protecting, restoring and regenerating the natural environment for current and future generations. 

Virtually all [1] of the most relevant Civil Society Organisations, along with industry and other stakeholder groups, have agreed on what change is needed and aligned their strategies on how to advocate for it with business and government.

These cross-sectoral movements are working effectively and investing collectively, strategically using their networks and media to build strong awareness and support for change with their key audiences (e.g., the public, business and industry, policymakers and/or the finance sector) and successfully using evidence to hold others to account by identifying and exposing harmful practices including counter-lobbying, counter-publicity and other attempts to block or backslide change. 

Footnotes

  1. ^ A quick explainer of some prevalence terms, to use as a rough guide (not rigid cut points) when interpreting evidence using the rubrics. These are not purely numerical but should include consideration of what proportion of the most important actors are involved.“Virtually all” = all except a few less-important actors “The vast majority” = all except several less-important actors “A clear majority” = nearly all of the key players, plus most of the rest“Most” = most of the key players, plus several others “Several” = enough key players to be significant, plus some others “Some” = a number of key players, but not quite enough to be significant“A few” = a small proportion overall, with only a small number of key players “Very few” = small numbers overall - and none of the key players.  

B7 - Redefined value to refocus the system on what really matters

Measures of value and performance may, depending on the initiative cluster or programme in question, be applied to businesses, industries or economies as a whole, or to specific projects or practices.

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

Methodologies used for measuring risk, value and performance in the region(s) and sector(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives exclude or seriously underweight impacts on climate and equity. Businesses can still appear strong on the most widely used metrics of risk, value and performance despite using climate-negative practices, or employing practices that exacerbate inequities.

One or both of the following are likely to be evident:

  • There is active exclusion of diverse stakeholder voices and perspectives from decision making on metrics.
  • As yet, there are few signs of interest in the adoption of alternative methodologies that would help focus the system on what matters.

Unconducive

Methodologies that effectively measure risk, value and performance relating to climate and social equity have been adopted or are being seriously considered by a few in industry, finance and government. However, they do not yet have enough credibility to be adopted by the major players in the region(s) and sector(s) that are the focus of this cluster of initiatives. Outdated metrics are still being quite widely used instead of these new measures.

Some or all of the following are likely to be evident:

  • There is quite limited agreement in industry, finance and government that the right risk frameworks and metrics need to be in place and acted on to focus the system on what really matters about risk, value and performance.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance have been developed through a process with little inclusion and are rarely subject to feedback from affected communities.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance may be based on data that are not entirely accurate and/or not yet readily available.
  • These assessments are being tracked and required by only a few industry regulators, policymakers and watchdogs; those who fail to comply frequently escape being penalised.

Partly conducive

Methodologies that effectively measure risk, value and performance relating to climate and social equity have been adopted by several business, including a few influential players in industry, finance and government. They are gaining credibility but are not yet considered standard practice across the focus areas of this cluster of initiatives. Outdated metrics are being still used by some, sometimes instead of the new measures.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • There is a growing agreement in industry, finance and government that the right risk frameworks and metrics need to be in place and acted on to focus the system on what really matters about risk, value and performance.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance have been developed through a process that ensured reasonable inclusion and require some feedback from affected communities.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance are based on data that are reasonably accurate but may not yet be readily available.
  • These assessments are starting to be tracked and required by industry regulators, policymakers and watchdogs; although those who fail to comply may escape being penalised.

Conducive & Supportive

Methodologies that effectively measure risk, value and performance relating to climate, and social equity have been adopted by a critical mass, including several influential players, in industry, finance and government across the focus areas of this cluster of initiatives, and are increasingly considered standard practice. Although outdated metrics are being still used by some, this is alongside rather than instead of the better measures.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • There is a good agreement in industry, finance and government that the right risk frameworks and metrics need to be in place and acted on to focus the system on what really matters about risk, value and performance.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance have been developed through a mostly meaningful and inclusive process and are, most of the time, subject to feedback from affected communities.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance are based on data that are accurate and becoming more readily available.
  • These assessments are increasingly being tracked and required by industry regulators, policymakers and watchdogs; those who fail to comply are penalised.

Thrivable

Methodologies that effectively measure risk, value and performance [1] relating to climate, and social equity have been widely adopted by (and are now standard practice in) industry, finance and government across the focus areas of this cluster of initiatives.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • There is a high level of agreement in industry, finance and government that the right risk frameworks and metrics need to be in place and acted on to focus the system on what really matters about risk, value and performance.
  • Assessments of risk, value and performance have been developed through a meaningful and inclusive process and are subject to feedback from affected communities.
  • These assessments are based on accurate and readily available data.
  • These assessments are widely tracked and required by industry regulators, policymakers and watchdogs; those who fail to comply are penalised.

    Footnotes

    1. ^ Measures of value and performance may, depending on the initiative cluster or programme in question, be applied to businesses, industries or economies as a whole, or to specific projects or practices.

B8 - New economic thinking’s emergence as the leading paradigm of the future

“New economic thinking is used to describe innovative ways of thinking about the economy, ranging from those that represent complete breaks from the neoclassical approach to others seeking to undermine only some of its main ideas.” (Silim, A. (2016). What is New Economic Thinking? Three strands of heterodox economics that are leading the way. Evonomics: The Next Evolution of Economics.  August 19, 2016. https://evonomics.com/new-economic-thinking

  • Harmful
  • Unconducive
  • Partly conducive
  • Conducive & Supportive
  • Thrivable

Harmful

A traditional economic paradigm that prioritises maximising short-term profit for shareholders regardless of climate-negative impacts and inequities produced is dominant (the norm) across the area of influence of this cluster of initiatives.

Typically, we see the following:

  • The traditional economic paradigm is the dominant narrative in academia, with academic pipelines privileging those from traditional backgrounds and perspectives.
  • Attempts from within academia, civil society and/or think tanks to propose a new economic paradigm are actively and effectively sidelined.
  • Mainstream media intentionally and effectively perpetuate the narrative to maintain the traditional economic paradigm and, consequently, the status quo.

Unconducive

A new economic paradigm that includes a rising cadre of diverse, progressive economists and mainstreams climate-positive, equitable and inclusive policy ideas has only gained traction among the less influential actors within the area of influence of this cluster of initiatives.

Some or all of the following are likely to be evident:

  • Academia, civil society and think tanks working on new economic thinking are fragmented and not yet translating ideas from theory into practice.
  • Public and professional dialogue challenging the consensus on the growth paradigm is almost inexistent. Only a few less influential professional associations convene more serious discussions about the new economic thinking. The most influential media has demonstrated no serious interest in promoting well-informed debates about those issues.
  • This new economic thinking has only gained some space as a narrative in few less influential academic institutions and their recent graduates of relevant degree programmes (policy, finance, economics).

Partly conducive

A new economic paradigm that includes a rising cadre of diverse, progressive economists and mainstreams climate-positive, equitable and inclusive policy ideas has gained traction in some pockets of relatively influential actors within the area of influence of this cluster of initiatives.

Some or all of the following are likely to be evident:

  • Academia, civil society and think tanks working on new economic thinking are somewhat aligned and connected, although there is still significant fragmentation. There is some limited translation of ideas from theory into practice.
  • Limited public and professional dialogue, including a few diverse voices, has just taken preliminary steps towards starting to challenge the consensus on the growth paradigm; the key media and other channels have demonstrated interest to start debating about definitions of value.
  • This new economic thinking has gained some space as a narrative in academia and among recent graduates of relevant degree programmes (policy, finance, economics) and this has yet to be reflected in increasingly diverse demographics of those who are entering these fields.

Conducive & Supportive

A new economic paradigm that includes a rising cadre of diverse, progressive economists and mainstreams climate-positive, equitable policy ideas has gained traction among influential actors and is seen as important across the area of influence of this cluster of initiatives.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • Academia, civil society and think tanks working on new economic thinking are increasingly aligned and connected, collaborating reasonably effectively to bring ideas from theory into practice, including building capacity in government to understand and implement these ideas.
  • Public and professional dialogue, which includes reasonably strong representation from diverse voices, is starting to challenge the consensus on the growth paradigm and the mainstream media and other channels have created some space, not on a regular basis yet, to debate about definitions of value.
  • This new economic thinking is seen as an important narrative in academia and among recent graduates of relevant degree programmes (policy, finance, economics) and this is also reflected in increasingly diverse demographics of those who are entering these fields.

Thrivable

A new economic paradigm that includes a rising cadre of diverse, progressive economists and mainstreams a climate-positive, equity-enhancing approach to policy, finance and business is dominant (the norm) across the area of influence of this cluster of initiatives.

All or most of the following are evident:

  • Academia, civil society and think tanks working on new economic thinking are strongly aligned and connected, collaborating effectively to bring ideas from theory into practice, including building capacity in government to understand and implement these ideas.
  • Public and professional dialogue, which includes strong representation from diverse voices, challenges the consensus on the growth paradigm and there is regular debate in the mainstream media about definitions of value.
  • This new economic thinking is now the dominant narrative in academia and among recent graduates of relevant degree programmes (policy, finance, economics), and this is also reflected in the diverse demographics of those who are entering these fields.