The logic

A single claim, stated plainly

If women gain access to education, resources and platforms, they will lead sustainability action that improves both livelihoods and environmental outcomes.

Everything USAW does is an attempt to make that sentence true and to test whether it is. The chain below sets out how, and the assumptions section names what has to hold for it to work - because a theory of change that cannot be wrong is not a theory of change.

The chain

From problem to impact

  1. Problem

    Women carry the burden and hold few of the decisions

    Women in underserved communities are most exposed to climate change, pollution and resource scarcity, have the least access to the means of adapting, and are structurally absent from environmental leadership.

  2. Inputs

    Education, resources and platforms

    Sustainability education, green skills training, access to finance and enterprise incubation, leadership development, community infrastructure, and independent research.

  3. Activities

    Four delivery vehicles across ten programme pillars

    Sustainability Education Workshops, Green Skills Training, the Women’s Leadership Program, and Community Action Projects - delivered through Community Chapters and institutional partnerships.

  4. Outputs

    Women trained, enterprises supported, chapters active

    Women and youth completing training; women-led green enterprises established and supported; Community Chapters constituted and operating; research published; policy submissions made.

  5. Outcomes

    Women lead sustainability action

    Women take decision-making roles in environmental governance, own and grow green enterprises, and lead sustained community action rather than participating in someone else’s programme.

  6. Impact

    Better livelihoods and better environmental outcomes, together

    Resilient, inclusive communities in which investing in women’s leadership and investing in environmental outcomes are the same investment.

What must hold

Assumptions

  1. Access is the binding constraint, not capability - women lack entry to education, capital, networks and platforms rather than the ability to use them.
  2. Locally designed interventions outperform externally designed ones, so programming is built with local institutions rather than around them.
  3. Leadership gains persist. Women who enter environmental governance stay in it and open the door behind them.
  4. Institutional partners will engage a new organization on the strength of its governance and evidence before it has a track record.

Next

See how the logic becomes programming