same that prevent scaling, such as institutional weaknesses, policy constraints, and excessive costs in relation to financial resources or to consumers’ or recipients’ willingness to pay. The good news is that typically by focusing on these factors as part of the scaling-up challenge, constraints to sustainability are also addressed.
• Risk taking. Scaling up generally involves taking risks. Aside from exogenous risks (such as natural disasters, conflict, and poor weather) the risks involved are most likely related to the loss of key drivers and the inability to create sufficient spaces to allow the initiative to grow. Many of these risks can be mitigated by explicitly considering the scaling-up pathways, identifying the risks, and deploying measures to address them as far and as early as possible. This was the approach followed in the case of the Loess Plateau project, for example. However, not all risks can be mitigated, and what risks remain must be managed and responded to as they materialize. It is important to recognize, however, that scaling up does not necessarily involve higher risks than continuing the proliferation of disconnected small projects. The scaling-up approach may, in fact, be less risky, since it allows one to learn more systematically and build institutional capacity and stakeholder support, and thus mitigate important sources of risk.
• Fragile states. There is no doubt that many of the factors that support scaling up are more constrained in fragile and conflict- affected states than in stable environments. But, as noted in Brief 19, a fragile state should not avoid scaling up successful interventions. Indeed, the evidence shows that scaling up is possible in fragile states, and a good case can be made that while it will likely take longer and require perhaps different modalities, a scaling-up perspective will help address the huge challenges that people in these countries face.
Role of external donors
Ultimately, the scaling-up task is one that must be addressed by stakeholders within developing countries: government, business, civil society, rural communities, and individual farmers. External donors can help or hinder this process. They hinder when they intervene with fragmented and short-sighted initiatives. They can help by focusing on the task of scaling up. Long-term engagement
and sticking with it is an essential prerequisite, since scaling up by necessity is generally a long-term process, especially in fragile states. A systematic focus on scaling up in donor strategies, operational processes, and internal incentives is needed. The experience of vertical funds reviewed in Brief 18 shows that this is possible, and IFAD's scaling-up agenda, described in Brief 17, demonstrates a way to systematically increase effectiveness in supporting smallholder development. The Gates Foundation has made scaling up a clear objective for its operations. Based on an explicit stock-taking of its experience to date, the Foundation recently recalibrated its strategy of support for agriculture and rural development with a view to effective impact at scale. Donors should avoid what the authors of Brief 18 call “a narrow
view of scaling up, in which each donor goes from its own pilot project to scaling up particular (sets of) interventions.” All scaling- up interventions, whether specific interventions, area-based or sectorwide country programs, or global initiatives like the Global Fund and SUN, should adhere to the principles of aid effectiveness from the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness—ownership, alignment, harmonization, results, and mutual accountability—and, where applicable, consider broader sectoral and cross-sectoral linkages. Concerted donor support for “mainstreaming” the right policies and institutional mechanisms for agriculture, rural development, and nutrition; community empowerment; and supportive gender policies is a key aspect of effective scaling up.
Conclusion
Scaling up is “mission critical”—to use IFAD’s term—if developing countries and their external donor partners wish to tackle effectively the multiple challenges of agricultural development and the reduction of rural poverty, hunger, and malnutrition. As the briefs in this series show, we have many good examples of successful scaling up. We also have some very helpful cross-cutting insights into the institutional, policy, and process requirements that make scaling up possible in addition to a simple framework with which to assess the challenge and tailor a suitable response. The main issue now is whether, collectively, we have the will to work systematically—and together—toward meeting this opportunity.
Johannes F. Linn (
jlinn@brookings.edu) is a senior resident scholar, Emerging Markets Forum, and nonresident senior fellow, The Brookings Institution, in Washington, DC.
www.ifpri.org
Copyright © 2012 International Food Policy Research Institute. All rights reserved. Contact
ifpri-copyright@cgiar.org for permission to republish.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47