In a similar spirit to GoodHorse413, maybe the answer isn’t that we should have a single TOV, but rather that we should have a rough list of TOVs, know what the crucial considerations are, and incentivize orgs to help answer them. This is kinda like what Tiny Beam Fund does with their Burning Questions, but maybe with a wider scope and more movement buy-in. It also reminds me of the Sustainable Development Goals.
So the "plan" might look like a list of crucial questions, maybe with attached intermediate goals. Funders can decide their priority between different TOVs, direct impact, and different crucial questions.
Intermediate goals could be attached to a specific TOV (e.g. identify a target demographic that could push us beyond a tipping point if they were to adopt veg*ism), or things that we recognize as broadly useful for increasing the movement's power or conducting more "basic research" (e.g. I hear a lot of folks talking about getting all chickens out of cages, which sounds like a good exercise both to end what is likely one of the most intense instances of suffering and to force ourselves to grapple with the difficulties of change-making in currently neglected geographies).
It seems unlikely to me that the entire movement is going to get behind a unified system like what I am suggesting, but I still feel like if we all trend towards thinking in these terms (and maybe even making our own TOV and crucial considerations lists), then discourse around these concepts may organically develop.
Sidenote: Thought I would add a link to a mock-up picture I made imagining Sustainable Development Goals for ending factory farming. The idea was a little different from the above (here it was more about driving a sense of joint momentum than TOVs), but thought it relevant enough to share.
In a similar spirit to GoodHorse413, maybe the answer isn’t that we should have a single TOV, but rather that we should have a rough list of TOVs, know what the crucial considerations are, and incentivize orgs to help answer them. This is kinda like what Tiny Beam Fund does with their Burning Questions, but maybe with a wider scope and more movement buy-in. It also reminds me of the Sustainable Development Goals.
So the "plan" might look like a list of crucial questions, maybe with attached intermediate goals. Funders can decide their priority between different TOVs, direct impact, and different crucial questions.
Intermediate goals could be attached to a specific TOV (e.g. identify a target demographic that could push us beyond a tipping point if they were to adopt veg*ism), or things that we recognize as broadly useful for increasing the movement's power or conducting more "basic research" (e.g. I hear a lot of folks talking about getting all chickens out of cages, which sounds like a good exercise both to end what is likely one of the most intense instances of suffering and to force ourselves to grapple with the difficulties of change-making in currently neglected geographies).
It seems unlikely to me that the entire movement is going to get behind a unified system like what I am suggesting, but I still feel like if we all trend towards thinking in these terms (and maybe even making our own TOV and crucial considerations lists), then discourse around these concepts may organically develop.
Sidenote: Thought I would add a link to a mock-up picture I made imagining Sustainable Development Goals for ending factory farming. The idea was a little different from the above (here it was more about driving a sense of joint momentum than TOVs), but thought it relevant enough to share.