One insight I've gained from many years of being involved in governance discussions...

If someone responds to governance advice with some variation on "prove to me that it works", rather than an interest to non-judgmentally understand its mechanics or effects in depth... then they are exceedingly unlikely to ever take your advice no matter how much proof you provide. It's probably not worth having the conversation at all.

When people are genuinely interested in your advice, they do not demand proof - they ask to learn from you. They open a space in their heart or mind where the new ideas can go.

If someone demands proof, chances are good that they're just trying to strike down your idea without making it look like they are to others - in a way that lets them claim that they've considered the idea, when they really never had any genuine intention of doing so and were just looking for the nearest way to make you 'wrong'. They're setting you an impossible-to-meet challenge.