Intervention Level Framework

In 2014, my research group adapted Donella Meadows’ seminal work on systems change by organizing her original twelve “places to intervene” into five intervention levels. The intervention levels are arranged according to their difficulty (how challenging they are to influence) and effectiveness (the potential to create transformative, lasting change). The ILF suggests that while most policy actions focus on easier, visible changes (structural elements), more meaningful and enduring impact arises from addressing higher-leverage levels—particularly paradigms and goals. Effectively changing systems involves working across all five levels and remaining aware of their interplay and cumulative potential.

Structural Elements:  These are the physical and visible parts of a system: programs, facilities, equipment, actors, and operational rules. Interventions at this level are the easiest to address and are usually tangible—for example, building clinics, launching education campaigns, or funding new services. However, they rarely shift the overall behavior of the system unless aligned with deeper changes. Structural Elements groups Meadows’ original Levels 10 to 12. 

Feedback Loops & Delays: This level involves the dynamics that regulate system behavior, including mechanisms of self-correction or reinforcement. These loops determine how the system responds to change, often with time lags (delays) that obscure cause and effect. Strengthening positive feedback (e.g., incentives for desired behaviors) or introducing balancing feedback (e.g., taxes to curb harmful practices) can help shift system trajectories.  This level includes Meadows’ Levels 7 to 9.

System Structure: This level encompasses the patterns of connection and communication within and between subsystems—how information flows, how decisions are made, and who collaborates. This level is about enhancing trust, connectivity, and coordination. Interventions here can improve system resilience and responsiveness by redesigning how the parts interact.  This includes Meadows’ Levels 4 to 6.

Goals of the System: The goals are what the system is trying to achieve, not the goals that individuals hope the system will achieve. Identifying and addressing the systems goals and their connection to the other levels can help to shift system behavior more than just structural tweaks. Clear, process-oriented goals (e.g., creating inclusive walkable communities, GOAL 2, GOAL 3) can direct system energy in new ways.  This includes Meadow’s Level 3. 

Paradigm: Paradigms are the highest intervention level and the hardest to shift. They are the shared mental models and deeply held beliefs that shape what is seen as normal, acceptable, or possible. They shape the system’s goals, structures, and behaviors. Paradigm-level change is rare but highly effective—changing paradigms is about changing the story people tell about the system itself.  This includes Meadows’ Levels 1 and 2. 

The lever image is common when describing Meadows’ levels, but we realized recently that the physics of the analogy don’t work.  When one goes farther out on a lever, it makes it easier to move the thing on the other side.  For this reason, we’ve modified the image to fit with the physics!

The Intervention Level Framework is structured as a pyramid where Difficulty and Effectiveness increase from the base to the top. The wide base consists of Structural Elements (subsystems, actors), while the highest leverage point at the peak is the Paradigm (deeply held beliefs).
The Intervention Level Framework depicted by a lever with the system being moved on the short end and the levels of intervention along the arm of the lever with one to many people working to pull the arm down.
French version of the Intervention Level Framework pyramid.
French version of the Intervention level framework lever.

Deeper Dive

Related Frameworks