Any risks to vulnerable people identified through a results chain should be addressed.

Many poten­tial risks can be elim­i­nat­ed or reduced by adding or alter­ing a strat­e­gy ele­ment. For exam­ple, you may be con­sid­er­ing ‘hir­ing park guards’ to increase pro­tec­tion of an exist­ing nation­al park that hous­es endan­gered species. Through cre­ation of a results chain, the team real­izes that hir­ing guards from only one local com­mu­ni­ty presents the risk of cre­at­ing inequal­i­ty and con­flict among com­mu­ni­ties. You could avoid this prob­lem by chang­ing the strat­e­gy to ‘hir­ing park guards with equal rep­re­sen­ta­tion from local com­mu­ni­ties’, which mit­i­gates the risk of cre­at­ing inequal­i­ty. In cas­es where risks to vul­ner­a­ble peo­ple can­not be mit­i­gat­ed, the strat­e­gy should not be pur­sued. When a risk emerges that is poten­tial, but accept­able to stake­hold­ers, it should become the focus of inten­sive mon­i­tor­ing and adap­tive management.