DoAssignment study guide

D1.2 · Evaluate climate initiatives and propose improvements

Learn to evaluate climate initiatives and propose improvements through clear examples and targeted practice.

Ontario Grade 10 Science

Earth and Space Science: Climate Change

Use evidence to judge an action and make it work better

A school plans to replace some car trips with walking, cycling, and bus travel. Is this a useful climate initiative? It may reduce emissions, but the answer depends on how many trips change, whether students can use the alternatives safely, and how the school checks the results. In this lesson, you will use evidence to evaluate initiatives and propose improvements. An initiative is an organized action intended to address a problem. A climate initiative aims to reduce the causes of climate change, prepare for its effects, or do both. The focus here is on judging the initiative, not simply agreeing or disagreeing with its goal.

What you will learn

Explain how human activities can strengthen the natural greenhouse effect.
Compare climate initiatives using clear evidence and criteria.
Identify limits in evidence and suggest practical improvements.
Distinguish a climate action’s goal from evidence that it is working.

1. From the greenhouse effect to climate action

In Grade 9, you learned that evidence can include observations and measurements, and that a model can help explain a pattern. These ideas are useful when judging climate initiatives. A claim is a statement that can be checked against evidence. For example, “the program reduced the school’s emissions” is a claim; describing the program alone does not prove it.

The natural greenhouse effect helps keep Earth warm enough for life. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere hold on to some heat. Human activities, including burning fossil fuels, add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. This strengthens the natural greenhouse effect and contributes to climate change. The natural effect is not the same as the human-driven enhancement.

A climate initiative can aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is called mitigation: action that limits the causes of climate change. An initiative can also help people or natural systems cope with climate effects. This is adaptation: action that prepares for or reduces harm from those effects. Some initiatives may do both. These goals should not be confused; planting shade trees in a schoolyard may help people cope with heat, while replacing fossil-fuel electricity with renewable electricity may reduce emissions.

The natural greenhouse effect is necessary; human activities strengthen it by adding greenhouse gases.
Mitigation addresses causes. Adaptation addresses effects and risks.
A goal is not evidence that an initiative achieved that goal.

2. A fair way to evaluate an initiative

To evaluate means to judge how well something works, using stated criteria and evidence. Start by naming the initiative’s goal. Then ask what evidence could show progress toward that goal. For an emissions-reduction program, useful evidence might include energy use or travel patterns before and after the program. A before-and-after comparison is more useful when the same kind of information is collected in the same way.

Check the size and limits of the evidence. A small change in one building may not represent a whole town. A change observed after an initiative began may have other causes, such as a warmer winter or a change in how many people used the building. This does not make the evidence useless. It means the conclusion should match what was actually checked.

Use more than one criterion. Consider climate impact, cost, fairness, feasibility, and how results will be monitored. Fairness means considering who benefits, who pays, and who may have difficulty taking part. Feasibility means whether the plan can realistically be carried out with available time, money, skills, and facilities. Monitoring means collecting information over time to see whether the initiative is being carried out and whether it is helping.

A simple model can organize your judgment: compare the intended result with the evidence, then identify a limit and propose a change. Do not claim certainty when the evidence is incomplete. A useful improvement is specific and connected to the weakness you found. For example, if an initiative excludes people who cannot use its main option, add an accessible alternative and check whether participation becomes more inclusive.

\text{Percent reduction} = \frac{\text{starting amount} - \text{new amount}}{\text{starting amount}} × 100%

Name the goal before choosing evidence.
Consider impact, cost, fairness, feasibility, and monitoring.
State what the evidence supports and what it cannot show.
Connect each proposed improvement to a real limitation.

3. Use evidence carefully and act safely

Climate evidence can come from records, surveys, observations, and measurements. A school might record electricity use, count the number of students arriving by different travel methods, or survey whether students can access a bus route. Each source answers a different question. A travel count can show a change in travel choices; it does not by itself show the exact amount of emissions avoided.

For a fair comparison, use information that matches the question. If the question concerns electricity savings, compare electricity use over similar periods and explain any important difference, such as a building being open for fewer days. If the question concerns participation, count or survey participants using the same method before and after a change. Keep records of the method so that another person can understand the comparison.

Do not invent results or treat a prediction as a measurement. Hypothetical data can help practise a method, but it must be labelled as hypothetical. In real investigations, follow teacher instructions and school safety rules. Do not burn fuels, heat chemicals, or release gases to test climate ideas at home. Use approved records, observations, or supervised classroom activities instead.

When presenting a recommendation, be clear about uncertainty. You might say, “The records suggest lower electricity use during the period checked, but they do not establish that the initiative caused all of the change.” Then propose a way to improve the check, such as collecting comparable records for a longer period and noting changes in building use.

Choose evidence that matches the question.
A prediction is not a measurement, and a change after an initiative is not automatically caused by it.
Use safe, approved information sources and state uncertainty honestly.

4. Make recommendations that can be checked

A strong evaluation gives a reasoned judgment, not just a list of advantages and disadvantages. State the initiative’s goal, summarize relevant evidence, identify a limitation, and suggest a practical improvement. Explain how the improvement could address the limitation and what information should be collected to check it.

For example, a school may find that a travel program is popular among students who live nearby, while students who live farther away cannot safely walk or cycle. Calling the program successful without mentioning that difference would leave out an important fairness concern. A better recommendation might combine safe walking and cycling support with improved access to shared or public transport, where available. The school could then track travel choices and participation without assuming that every student has the same options.

An initiative can be worthwhile even if it needs improvement. A balanced judgment recognizes its likely benefits, costs, limits, and who can take part. The best proposal is one that addresses a specific weakness and includes a realistic way to find out whether the change helped.

A recommendation should follow from the evidence and its limits.
Consider who can participate and who may be left out.
Plan how to check whether an improvement worked.

Questions for evaluating a climate initiative

Criterion	Question to ask
Climate impact	What goal is the action meant to achieve, and what evidence checks it?
Cost and feasibility	Can the plan be carried out with available resources?
Fairness	Who benefits, who pays, and who may be unable to take part?
Monitoring	What information will be checked again, and when?

Worked example

Compare an energy initiative

Hypothetical data: a school used 12,000 units of electricity in a comparable period before a lighting change and 10,200 units after it. Calculate the percent reduction. Then name one limitation and one improvement to the evaluation.

Find the change
Subtract the new use from the starting use. The difference is 1,800 units. This tells us the amount of electricity use that fell in the comparison.
$12{,}000 - 10{,}200 = 1{,}800$
Compare with the starting amount
Divide the decrease by the starting amount, then multiply by 100. This gives a reduction of 15%. The calculation describes the hypothetical comparison; it does not prove that the lighting change caused the whole reduction.
$\frac{1{,}800}{12{,}000} × 100% = 15%$
Improve the evaluation
One limitation is that the school may have been open for fewer hours after the change. Compare records from periods with similar building use, and note unusual closures. This makes the comparison more informative.

Answer: The hypothetical electricity use fell by 15%. A fair evaluation should check whether the periods had similar building use and should avoid claiming that the lighting change alone caused the decrease.

Check: The percentage is based on the starting amount, not the new amount.

Worked example

Judge a travel program

A school encourages students to walk or cycle. A survey reports that more students used those options in October than in September. What can the school reasonably conclude, and how could it improve the evidence?

State what was observed
The survey suggests that more students reported walking or cycling in October. This is evidence about reported travel choices, assuming the surveys were carried out in a comparable way.
Set a limit on the claim
The survey alone does not show how much greenhouse gas was avoided. It also cannot prove the program caused the change; weather, survey participation, or other changes may have mattered.
Propose a better check
Use the same survey method over several comparable periods, report how many students responded, and ask whether students had safe routes available. This improves the evidence and checks whether the program is accessible.

Answer: The school can report a change in survey responses, but it should not claim a measured emissions reduction or prove cause from this information alone. Repeated, comparable surveys and an access check would improve the evaluation.

Check: A travel survey measures reported travel choices, not emissions directly.

Worked example

Improve a heat-preparation plan

A town plants shade trees near one busy outdoor area to help people cope with hot days. The area becomes more shaded, but residents from another neighbourhood say they have no nearby shaded public space. Evaluate the initiative and propose an improvement.

Identify the goal and evidence
The plan is an adaptation initiative because it aims to help people cope with heat. The reported increase in shade is relevant evidence about the site, but it does not show that all neighbourhoods benefit.
Consider fairness and limits
The initiative may help people using the selected area, while access remains uneven. The town should check which public spaces lack shade and who uses them before deciding where to act next.
Make a checkable improvement
Use the same shade observations at public spaces across neighbourhoods, then plan additional shade where the need is greatest and suitable space is available. Recheck the sites after the change. This makes the proposal more inclusive and gives the town a way to monitor progress.

Answer: The initiative may help people cope with heat at one location, but its benefits are not evenly available. Compare shade and access across public spaces, then extend the plan to underserved areas where feasible and monitor the result.

Check: This is adaptation because the action helps people cope with a climate-related effect.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

Treating the natural greenhouse effect as harmful human pollution.

Correction: The natural greenhouse effect helps keep Earth warm. Human activities strengthen it by adding greenhouse gases.

Assuming that a climate initiative worked because it has a good goal.

Correction: Judge the results using evidence that matches the goal.

Claiming that an initiative caused every change seen afterward.

Correction: Other factors may contribute. State what the evidence shows and what it cannot establish.

Calling an initiative fair because it is available to everyone in theory.

Correction: Check whether people can realistically access it and whether benefits and costs are shared fairly.

Lesson summary

The natural greenhouse effect differs from its human-driven enhancement.
Mitigation limits causes of climate change; adaptation helps people or systems cope with effects.
Evaluate an initiative by its goal, evidence, impact, cost, feasibility, fairness, and monitoring.
State evidence limits, then propose a specific, practical improvement that can be checked.

Check your understanding

Question 1

A city plants shade trees to reduce heat exposure in a public square. Is this mainly mitigation or adaptation?

Mitigation, because every tree automatically removes all local greenhouse gases.
Adaptation, because the action helps people cope with heat.
Neither, because climate initiatives must change individual behaviour.
Mitigation, because shade directly proves that emissions have fallen.

Show answer and explanation

Adaptation, because the action helps people cope with heat.

The stated goal is to help people cope with heat, so this is adaptation. The description does not show a reduction in emissions.

Question 2

A school’s electricity records are lower after an energy initiative. What is the most careful conclusion?

The initiative definitely caused the entire decrease.
The school can report lower recorded use, then check whether the comparison periods were similar.
The initiative failed because one comparison cannot prove its cause.
The school should ignore the records and rely only on opinions.

Show answer and explanation

The school can report lower recorded use, then check whether the comparison periods were similar.

The records are relevant evidence of a change. Comparable periods and other possible causes should be considered before judging the initiative.

Question 3

A travel program is difficult for students without safe routes to use. Which improvement best responds to this limitation?

Keep the program unchanged and count only students who already participate.
Claim that all students have equal access because the invitation went to everyone.
Consider safe, accessible travel options and monitor participation across student groups.
Stop collecting evidence because access is difficult to measure.

Show answer and explanation

Consider safe, accessible travel options and monitor participation across student groups.

This recommendation addresses the access problem and includes a way to check whether participation becomes more inclusive.

Key terms

Climate initiative: An organized action intended to reduce climate change causes, prepare for climate effects, or both.
Evidence: Information used to support or question a claim.
Mitigation: Action that limits the causes of climate change.
Adaptation: Action that prepares for or reduces harm from climate effects.
Feasibility: Whether a plan can realistically be carried out with available resources and conditions.
Monitoring: Collecting information over time to check progress or results.

Continue through SNC2D

View the complete SNC2D Ontario Grade 10 Science curriculum and lessons

About this lesson and its review

Published by DoAssignment. This reviewed lesson follows Ontario Grade 10 Science (SNC2D), expectation D1.2. It is a study resource, not an official curriculum publication.

Before publication, content is checked for structure, mathematical or chemical notation, calculations, course boundaries, and readability. Errors can still occur, so corrections are welcomed.

Official curriculum reference

Report a correction or ask a question