By creating maps that show what you expect to happen under each candidate strategy and what would happen if you did nothing, you can compare outcomes and create a spatial analysis of the impact of your proposed strategy. These maps can be powerful tools for informing the selection of which strategies to implement, and for showing where each strategy can most effectively be implemented.
For each strategy, there are assumptions about what changes the strategy will make, and these need to be specified. For example, you might have a strategy that aims to increase adoption of agricultural best management practices. To map the potential area where that strategy could work, you may need to further specify which kinds of agricultural lands you think the strategy will affect (e.g. row crops, specialty crops, ranchlands). Or you may have identified a minimum goal related to improving conditions for vulnerable communities. You may now need to specify how you are defining vulnerable communities (e.g. those classified by the US Census as below the poverty line, a specific First Nations group or indigenous tribe, people living within 5 km of the coast). Many of these assumptions will already be in the result chains (especially if you did them well!), but, often, additional assumptions are required to turn the results chain into a strategy map.
The Nature Conservancy in California conducted a thorough strategy analysis for environmental freshwater flows. This is a good example of strategy and opportunity mapping and it can be useful as a reference throughout this section. Follow this link, Water for Nature, for the full publication documenting the process used and products generated, including full size versions of these maps.