Assumptions and Theories of Change

Often, project teams select and implement strategies without being explicit about how they believe these strategies will lead to their desired conservation outcomes. As shown in Figure 1, it is likely that they have many implicit assumptions about how their strategies will contribute to achieving conservation – these series of assumptions represent their “theory of change.” At the same time, it is not uncommon for members from the same team to hold different assumptions that they have not communicated with one another. Because the assumptions are not explicit, the project team cannot formally agree on their theory of change or collect the information needed to understand if their assumptions are valid.

For example, a team may decide to focus on building community capacity for forest resource management because they believe that this will decrease illegal logging in indigenous communities and help conserve primary forest in those communities. But, how will they know if their actions have been effective? They may assume that stronger community capacity will increase community knowledge about their rights, and with these rights, they will exert more control and vigilance over external actors, including those responsible for the illegal logging. The team may also assume this control will result in more illegal wood confiscated and less illegal logging. It is quite likely, however, that they have not made each of their assumptions explicit – as in Figure 2 below – and that they are not testing these assumptions. As such, it is difficult for them to know whether their actions are contributing to less illegal logging and the conservation of primary forest. There are many points at which their logic could break down – for example, if the community has greater knowledge about its rights, they still may not exert more control over illegal loggers. Perhaps there are security concerns that would prevent them from taking action. Or maybe they are able to reduce the amount of illegal selective logging that happens, but the government has just designated a block of forest for clear cutting. So, the primary forest still would not be conserved.

Defining a theory of change helps teams clarify their assumptions about how conservation strategies are believed to contribute to improving the situation within the project context. More specifically, it describes how the strategies will act on indirect threats and opportunities, reduce direct threats, and achieve goals for the conservation of targets.

Results chains, used to depict theories of change, are diagrams that map out a series of causal statements that link factors in an “if…then” fashion – for example, if an opportunity is taken or a threat is reduced, then a conservation target is enhanced. Some organizations use logic models, which are similar to results chains, but tend to include less detail and not explicitly depict the many-to-many relationships among results.

As shown in Figure 3 below, results chains are composed of a strategy, desired outcomes, and the ultimate impact that these results will have on the conservation target. They are also tied to your goals and objectives (see Box 1 for a definition of results and other terms). The basis for a results chain comes from your situation model, but you will build on that model to make it more specific and to change the boxes from neutral factors to results you want to see. As shown in Figure 4, a situation model shows the current and foreseeable context within the project scope without your interventions, whereas the results chain shows the desired future condition as a result of your interventions.

How To

The following outlines the basic steps for developing a theory of change and depicting it as a results chain. At this point, we assume that you have completed your situation analysis (Step 1) and selected your strategies.

Select one of the strategies you have already identified

In many cases, it is best to build the results chain on a wall, using sticky notes and flip-chart paper, as you did for your situation model. This will allow you to focus on the content and easily move results around as you discuss the relationships among them. Once you’ve reached an agreement on the chain, then you may decide to capture your work in Miradi (See Miradi box below) or another software program.

Start the process by referring to your set of strategies and selecting one (ideally, start with one that you think is straightforward). Then bring in all the factors that are related to the strategy in the situation analysis, including the indirect and direct threats and targets. You may decide to work on a wall by placing cards with each factor from your situation model that are related to that strategy in order (see Figure 5 and Figure 6).

Consider how the strategy will change related factors in your situation analysis and convert them to results

In theory, if you implement the strategy, the related factors identified in your situation analysis should be positively affected - i.e., direct and indirect threats should be mitigated and opportunities capitalized upon such that they are the desired future conditions that contribute to the achievement of your goals. Based on the available evidence, including your team’s experience, describe how you expect each factor to be influenced by implementing the strategy. As you develop your theory of change, be very clear about the impact you want to have – the conservation or restoration of specific targets (your goals) and the needed reduction of direct threats - and how the indirect threats will need to change to achieve that impact. During this process, you may discover that there are other important factors influencing the situation and your ability to influence change. You may even need to go back and add new factors to your situation analysis and model.

To develop an initial theory of change, you will need to change the wording of the factors from current conditions to results (i.e., desired future conditions). Factors are neutral (e.g., government fisheries policies) or may be negative (e.g., weak institutional capacity), whereas results are stated as the needed changes in these factors (e.g., strengthened capacity to enforce fisheries regulations) to ultimately achieve your goals. In our example results chain shown in Figure 6, the threat (“Legal but unsustainable fishing by local fishermen”) becomes a threat reduction result (“Less use of unsustainable fishing techniques”) and the factor (“Need for local sources of income”) becomes an intermediate result (“New techniques more profitable than old techniques”).

Complete the logic in your theory of change

The next – and potentially most difficult – step is to assure that the logic of your theory of change is complete and explicit, based on the available evidence. You can use the initial results chain to include additional intermediate results necessary to create clear, logical “if…then” linkages along the chain. There are several different ways to do this. One way is to work from left to right, asking what the immediate results or outcomes of the strategy should be, what intermediate outcomes those results will in turn produce, and what additional outcomes are necessary to reduce your threat. Another way is to work from right to left, asking what needs to happen to reduce the threat, what outcomes are needed to make that happen, etc. Yet another way is to brainstorm intermediate results and then organize them along the chain, ensuring that there are clear “if…then” linkages between each pair of results.

If you are developing a new strategy for a threat that you have not addressed in the past, we recommend building your logic from right to left, so that you are clear about what you need to accomplish to minimize the impact of this threat on your targets. Doing so will also help you refine the focus of your strategy. For example, if you are beginning to address tourism infrastructure development as a threat to a coastal marine system, then you will need to determine if tourism infrastructure is degrading coastal ecosystems because of its location (which could be addressed through better planning) or if the problem is that builders use coral, mangrove, and other raw materials extracted from coastal and marine ecosystems to build the hotels (which would require the identification and promotion of alternative building materials). If, however, you understand the threat well and have experience applying a specific strategy, then it may be easier to build the logic from left to right.

Be careful not to make your results chain overly complex. You want logical "if...then" relationships between results, but not too much detail such that the diagram is difficult for users to interpret. You can include more detail in a narrative description of your theory of change.

As shown in Figure 7, the marine project team determined that there were three different aspects of the promotion of sustainable fishing techniques: (1) increasing fishermen’s knowledge and ability to use the new techniques for the capture, management, and processing of fish so that they could produce high quality fisheries products; (2) getting fishermen to support the use of these techniques and see them as equally profitable as or more profitable than their current techniques; and (3) finding a market for high-value, high-quality pelagic fisheries products. The marine project team developed separate chains for each of these three parts, which come together and contribute to fishermen’s use of the new techniques and their profitability over old techniques.

Verify that your theory of change meets the criteria of a theory of change

A good theory of change should meet the criteria in Box 2. In particular, you want to make sure that your theory of change is results oriented. A common mistake with developing theories of change is to describe the activities that your team must undertake to implement your strategy (see Figure 8 for an example). When depicted, this produces an implementation chain, not a results chain. An implementation chain does not show the causal logic that connects a strategy to a desired conservation impact. As such, it does not provide you with an idea of the assumptions you need to test in order to know if your strategy is achieving your desired results.

Once you have completed your theory of change, you can check the causal linkages by reading the results chain out loud, from left to right, and linking each pair of results with an “if… then” statement. Reading your chain out loud is a good test of whether the results are “causally linked.” Start by saying, “If we implement X strategy, then we will achieve Result A. If we achieve Result A, then Result B will occur….” This will help you test your logic. If an “if…then” linkage seems like a “leap of faith,” you may need an additional intermediate result to make your assumptions more explicit.

Share and refine your theory of change

As stated above, theories of change, depicted as results chains, can help teams to discuss their assumptions openly and either reach agreement on shared assumptions or agree to disagree on certain parts of their theory of change. It is often helpful to share draft theories of change with individuals who are knowledgeable about your site, colleagues who have experience implementing similar strategies, or key stakeholders. They may challenge some of your assumptions, and their input will improve the quality of your chain.

In developing your theories of change for each strategy, you may find that there is not a strong evidence base for some of your assumptions regarding if and how the strategy will contribute to outcomes. It is important to make note of any implications of implementing the strategy without this information and how you intend to manage risk by addressing information needs.

Examples

The following are fictitious examples of a well-developed and a poorly-developed results chain, based on the Marine Reserve site. They are designed to help you learn how to develop good theories of change, shown as results chains, and critique assumptions described by others, by using the criteria described earlier. In this scenario, the project team focused on the opportunity that oil spill mitigation money had become available and decided to promote spill mitigation techniques. The initial results chain they developed for their theory of change is as follows:

Note that the results chain in Figure 11 combines results (spill mitigation funding increased, spill response implemented effectively) with implementation steps (research spill mitigation techniques, hold meetings with shipping industry, monitor number and effects of spills).

The following is an example of a results chain adapted from the Eastern Arcs region of Tanzania and Kenya. As this example and the marine example illustrate, results chains will sometimes branch into parallel chains that each help achieve the threat reduction result.

Exercise

1. Select a strategy for which to develop a theory of change.
2. Change the wording in the factors related to the strategy from their current state to their state as a result of implementing the strategy that is needed to achieve your goal. You may decide to use a results chain to depict your theory of change.
3. Complete the logic in the theory of change so that your assumptions are explicit.
4. Verify that your theory of change meets the criteria for a good theory of change. For example, ensure that your results chain is not an implementation chain. Read the logic aloud to see if the causal linkages sound logical.
5. Repeat the steps for each strategy.
6. If you are missing any information to develop your assumptions in the theories of change, discuss and describe the implications of implementing strategies without this information and how you intend to manage risk by addressing information needs.
7. Briefly describe your observations about developing theories of change. For example, in light of the work you have done on your results chain, do you feel the strategies you have chosen make sense from a strategic point of view? Why or why not? If you look at your situation model again, are there other strategies you could choose that might give you greater results?