Seven years ago a group of foundations created the European Climate Foundation (ECF). The goal was to mitigate climate change in Europe by using a collaborative and strategic approach. Because the ECF falls squarely within Paul Brest’s definition of strategic philanthropy, it is useful to reflect on three lessons that we have learned from our efforts.

1. Strategic philanthropy needs to embrace adaptive leadership.

The first phase of the ECF’s development was characterized by initiatives that focused largely on what needed to be changed. The priorities were driven by the marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) and an analysis of political agendas and opportunities in critical political venues (Brussels, Berlin, Paris, London, and Warsaw). Our advocacy efforts focused on single sectoral policies addressing, for example, fuel efficiency, building codes, and appliance standards. We started our work during the run-up to the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, a time when we were optimistic that a higher price for carbon would effectively address the challenges of scaling up alternative sources of clean energy.

Over the years, however, we became increasingly aware of the specific challenges of how to transition to a low-carbon future, which led to a second phase in the development of the ECF. Because strategic change turned out to happen in rather oblique and non-linear ways, we began to recognize the need to pay more attention to politics and even to the polity. This called for new tools for strategy definition and adaptive leadership. We tried to expand our theories of change beyond working with NGOs and think tanks, to working with industry leaders, union representatives, and consumer groups. In the course of this evolution our role changed from a super-NGO to a supra-NGO. Because climate change ignores national, sectoral, and stakeholder boundaries, effective climate protection strategies need to build bridges across those divides, a process that usually comes with many uncertainties.

2. Transformative change is mostly related to complex problems.

As the ECF worked with partners to develop scenarios for transitioning Europe to a decarbonized electricity system, it became increasingly clear that there is not one path, but rather a multitude of interdependent paths. The frequency of unforeseen changes and the interdependency of subsystems makes the task a non-linear, non-deterministic, complex problem, as opposed to a simple or complicated problem. Tackling a complex problem requires one to pursue a multitude of paths and to embrace reflexivity. We have become more wary of “silver bullets,” or more generally of those who claim that they know “the one truth.”

This insight does not, however, invalidate the core elements of strategic philanthropy that the ECF adheres to, which are:

• Clearly identifying the problem to be tackled and formulating measureable goals.
• Drawing on state-of-the-art research and best practices.
• Basing action on solid political context analysis.
• Developing testable hypothesis for how best to approach the problem.
• Monitoring initiatives and overarching strategy implementation.
• Evaluating results and learning from experience.

These core elements of strategic philanthropy simply increase the odds of success. This approach can be applied to simple, complicated, and complex problems - the goals and methods may be of a different nature depending on the type of problem. Thus, instead of advocating particular solutions, the ECF in some instances will work towards establishing a new field that is capable of creating solutions over time. This may well be an innovative endeavor involving creativity and patience with iterative prototyping, testing, and learning. Along the way, we support the development of fact bases, engage in gap analysis, and build capacity. Our work in Germany with the Agora Energiewende is a prominent example of this approach.

3. Appropriate time horizons and organizational capability matter if systemic impact is to be achieved.

The ECF pursues emergent strategies over multi-year horizons. We continuously assess social challenges and examine the role we can play in tackling them. This includes systematically exchanging ideas with various organizations and representatives from diverse sectors, as well as launching forums for debate so that we can effectively transcend sectoral and national divides. Our initiatives are characterized by interdependencies that must be taken into account if our work is to have the greatest impact. Therefore, we have started to cluster initiatives according to overarching themes: governance, externalities, industrial innovation, finance, and the European energy union.

This approach requires senior leadership experienced at balancing openness of enquiry with good execution, and addressing the fundamental dilemma between compromises for implementation and integrity of aspiration. On one hand, effective solutions to climate change in complex stakeholder ecologies calls for compromises, transition periods, and coalition building across diverse interests. On the other hand, the integrity of the aspiration or the moral clarity can be undermined by bad compromises, which leads to the difficult question of what makes a compromise good or bad.

To summarize, strategic philanthropy needs to be anchored in an intense and ongoing dialogue about an organization’s driving values, its assumptions on system dynamics, and the fundamentals of theories of change.

Read the rest of the responses.