Enhancing Green Work:
A
Behavioral Systems Analysis
* This analysis was conducted independently during my Behavioral Science Internship at Evidn and does not represent an official client deliverable.
THE QUESTION: How might we support ongoing efforts to distribute environmental resources while simultaneously tackling economic inequality?
PROJECT RUNDOWN:
During my internship as a Behavioral Scientist, I was asked to create a mock pitch about company I felt would align well with the our services. I chose the stakeholder to be a NYC-based nonprofit that works to advance climate justice through paid service. They tackle two challenges at once: environmental decay + economic exclusion.
This project’s goal was to understand why engagement varies and to identify opportunities to strengthen recruitment, retention, and long-term program impact.
Photo credits: https://brooklyn.org/green-city-force/
- Conducted an independent behavioral analysis during my internship at Evidn
- Synthesized contextual and stakeholder factors
- Applied Lewin’s Force Field analysis to identify drivers and barriers
- Translated insights into strategy-facing recommendations
-
Behavioral literature review
-
Context and stakeholder synthesis
-
Force Field analysis
-
Driver–barrier mapping
-
Impact vs. feasibility prioritization
-
Systems-level interpretation of engagement dynamics
- Highlighted legitimacy, pathway clarity, and alumni visibility as high-impact challenges
- Surfaced that participation is shaped by economic context and identity alignment
- Identified high-leverage opportunities to strengthen engagement
- Reframed participation as a systems challenge rather than a motivation problem
What the research says:
When economic pressure is high, green work can be seen as frivilous compared to other life challenges. As a result, such jobs are deemed to have low social value, and participation becomes difficult to sustain.
These forces create a self-reinforcing cycle in which the people most likely to benefit from workforce programs face the greatest barriers to entry.
However, when programs provide paid opportunities, visible community impact, and social recognition, participation begins to build its own momentum.
Takeaway: Efforts to increase participation must focus on shifting the surrounding incentive and status environment, not just increasing awareness or motivation.
So...what do we do with that information?
If we’re looking to utilize the positive feedback loop, we have to first understand what the drivers (motivators) and barriers (friction) are.
Takeaways from the research: Sustained engagement requires aligning economic support, social signaling, and long-term opportunity pathways rather than relying on any single lever.
What’s the next step?
Given limited resources, we identify the projects that are the perfect balance of feasibility and impactfulness.
Several high-impact barriers—like unclear post-program pathways and underutilized alumni network—appear tractable within the current program ecosystem.
While barriers such as societal structural instability hold much importance, they are outside the scope of the project.
Takeaway: The most strategic near-term focus is strengthening legitimacy signals, clarifying pathways, and activating existing social infrastructure.
With this research in mind, there are 4 client deliverables for their consideration:
Amplify uniforms, media visibility, and institutional endorsements to raise perceived status of green work.
2. Tailor environmental messaging:
Connect sustainability efforts to immediate community benefits (e.g., cleaner air, cooling shade,
local food).
Use alumni as readily available peer mentors, recruiters, and role models to reinforce credibility and social proof.
4. Clarify post-program pathways:
Visualize job outcomes and education options through storytelling, alumni panels, or “next steps” guides.
PROJECT WRAP-UP:
This analysis suggests that engagement in green workforce programs is shaped not by environmental attitudes alone and more by the interaction of economic pressure, social signaling, and perceived opportunity. The literature review suggests that participants will be more likely to sustain involvement when programs provide immediate material support, clear pathways forward, and visible signals of legitimacy.
At the same time, several high-impact barriers remain structural in nature. Factors such as housing instability, caregiving demands, and broader economic precarity limit participation in ways that program design alone cannot fully resolve. As such, solutions should contextualize workforce interventions as part of a broader support ecosystem rather than standalone solutions.