5 wb jonasova ifad scalingup event june 2012 final as of june 6

19,550 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
19,550
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
15
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

5 wb jonasova ifad scalingup event june 2012 final as of june 6

  1. 1. Application of IFAD Scaling up Framework on the DevelopmentMarketplace Projects and SelectedWorld Bank-supported Agricultureand Rural Development Operations Marketa Jonasova, John Mackedon and Sanjiva Cooke
  2. 2. Continuing commitment to scaling up• 2003 Reaching the Rural Poor: A Renewed Strategy for Rural Development (World Bank) • 2003 Scaling-up the Impact of Good Practices in Rural Development• 2008 World Development Report on Agriculture for Development (World Bank)• 2009 Agriculture Action Plan 2010-12 (World Bank)• Re-energized by 2010 Scaling Up the Fight Against Rural Poverty: an institutional Review of IFAD’s Approach (IFAD/Brookings)• 2011 Mapping the Roads from Development Marketplace Agriculture and Rural Development Projects to Sustainable Practice (World Bank/Brandeis University)• 2012 Thinking Systematically about Scaling up: Developing Upstream Guidance for Scaling up World Bank-supported Agriculture and Rural Development Operations (World Bank) 2
  3. 3. Continuing commitment to scaling up – cont.• Between 2005-2011,110 WB ARD projects (34% of the total new ARD project portfolio) were scaled up • By transfer or geographical expansion • Not clear whether scaling up is occuring systematically• A phased approach (series of investments) was the dominant scaling up instrument - 56% of new scaled up agricultural projects• Other instruments used for scaling up: Additional Financing, Repeater projects, and Adaptable Program Loans 3
  4. 4. ARD is focusing on both ends of the spectrum State of Practice Classification System Development Marketplace work with Brandeis University ARD work on scaling up good practices and beyond 4
  5. 5. At the innovation end of the spectrum …. Assessing Scalability: Lessons from PracticeMapping the Roads from Development Marketplace Agriculture and Rural Development Projects to Sustainable Practice (World Bank/Brandeis University, 2011) 5
  6. 6. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. DM About the Development Marketplace (DM) Started in 2000 to provide early stage grant funding for testing and developing innovative initiatives  Awarded more than $46 million in grants  From over 1,000 finalists, 220 winning projects over 10 years  22 agriculture projects in 2008 (2008 WDR on Agriculture)Past: Emphasis on projects that could achieve social scale, but lessemphasis on commercial scale or viabilityNew direction: More emphasis on scalability, financial sustainability andconnecting social enterprises with providers of growth finance 6
  7. 7. At the innovations end of the spectrum ….Applying scaling up framework to DM projects Objective: Develop a process to understand the “scalability” of innovations and critical elements needed to scaling-up a selected number of DM projects Methodology: Examine 22 winning ag. projects from the 2008 Development Market Place, using existing frameworks (IFAD, Kohl/Cooley, Linn) Output: A series of products with findings and recommendations that offer guidance on expansion/replication of innovations that can have large impacts on agriculture and rural livelihoods 7
  8. 8. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. Final Products Final report 4 ARD Notes 3 Videos 3 Case Studies Literature Review 8
  9. 9. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. Lessons from Practice: Findings Paradox: Need evidence of success before information is available Scaling-up should start with the design of DM projects  Simple  Perceived as credible  Endorsed by champions  Capacity to learn Scaling up is an ongoing process  Decisions made before information is available  Constant assessment of effectiveness and efficiency  Willingness to halt project if evidence exists that scaling-up is not working 9
  10. 10. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. Drivers and Spaces4 drivers and 5 spaces applicable for assessment of the scaling up potentialof projects at the innovation state-of-practice spectrum:Drivers:  Clarity about potential driving/implementing agencies for replication/expansion  Supporting organization is ready to support the transition to scaling up  Champions  Incentives for scaling upSpaces:  Management capacity of potential implementing organizations (institutional space)  Enabling policy and/or legal frameworks  Constituencies (political incentives and policy space)  Political and security issues  Prospects for financial sustainability and stability in flow of resources 10
  11. 11. At the innovations end of the spectrum ….Lessons from Practice: ConclusionsInnovations need to be:  Simple  Strategic  MonitorableScaling up needs:  Local legitimacy and ownership, leadership, and an implementing organization with capacity to learn and grow;  Time to prove the effectiveness of implementation  A champion  Financial viability  Incentives 11
  12. 12. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. DM Recommendations Keep it simple  Clarity on how the innovation can achieve the promised change  The innovation should not require complex behavioral changes  Recognize and plan for the number of decision-makers (internal and external) needed to carry out activities Ensure the credibility and legitimacy with stakeholders  Communities  Markets  Governments Create a foundation for credible capacity building at grassroots level Promote the role of champions Incorporate into thinking for new DM directions 12
  13. 13. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. Case Study: Nigeria Background: Introduction of drying rack to remove arsenic from cassava waste to feed goats Results  New market linking cassava growers to goat herders  Increases in income of up to $635  Elimination of carbon monoxide in 28 processing centers Lessons for Scaling up  Simple and dynamic Theory of Change (TOC)  Scaling up as iterative process (increases in # of locations and # of platforms  Change in behavior through the creation of a new and viable market 13
  14. 14. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. Case Study: India Background: Introduction of cold storage facilities to store goods onlocation at local markets Results  Introduction of facilities at five markets  Reduction of post-harvest loss (up to $200,000/year)  Increases in farmers income of 9-30% Lessons for Scaling up  Effective champions (farmers, government officials, rural youth entrepreneurs)  Strong incentives (farmers want to reduce losses and increase income; rural youth want employment; Government wants to increase food security and rural employment)  Simple and effective innovation with a simple Theory of Change 14
  15. 15. At the innovations end of the spectrum …. Case Study: Mongolia Background: Improving the value chain in textiles with the introduction of a localgrading laboratory, improved market information and capacity building along thevalue chain Results  Increased incomes and more secure, stable livelihoods for herders  Retention of more value added from the cashmere and wool industry  Increased incomes and a more stable market system  Manufacturers benefit from reduced transportation costs, increased supply of high quality fiber, lower transactions costs, better design and increased international sales Lessons for Scaling up  Learning took root among beneficiaries  Buy-in by locals ensures legitimacy and sustainability  Proven financial viability 15
  16. 16. At the good practice end of the spectrum ….Thinking Systematically about Scaling up: Developing Upstream Guidance for Scaling up World Bank- supported Agriculture and Rural Development Operations (World Bank, 2012) 16
  17. 17. Thinking Systematically about Scaling up: Developing Upstream Guidance for Scaling up World Bank-supported Agriculture and Rural Development Operations• Objective: Test prospects and usefulness of a guidance for scaling up good practices in core ARD business lines• Methodology: 1. Overview of scaling up concepts and approaches 2. Selection of one sub-area within a core ARD business line – Competitive Grant Schemes (CGS) for agricultural research and extension 3. Application of the IFAD/Brookings framing questions on scaling up to five Regional Bank projects addressing this business line - populated by Task Team Leaders or team members 4. Development of a sub-area specific guidance (living document) for a systematic discussion on scaling up based on findings from case studies 5. Validation of the scaling up guidance for CGSs for agricultural research and extension by World Bank practitioners• Steps 2 through 5 can be emulated in developing scaling up guidance for other business lines 17
  18. 18. IFAD/Brookings scaling up framework at-a-glancePathways – appropriate actions and steps that should be taken in order to ensure that a project is taken to an appropriate scale.They can follow different “dimensions”: • Expand services to more clients in a given geographical space • Involve “horizontal” replication, from one geographic area to another • “Functional” expansion, by adding additional areas of engagement, and • “Vertical” up-scaling, i.e., moving from a local or provincial engagement to a national-wide engagementDrivers – forces pushing the scaling up process forward • Ideas and models • Vision and leadership • External catalysts • Incentives and accountabilitySpaces – opportunities that can be created or obstacles that need to be removed to open up the space for interventions to grow • Fiscal/financial • Natural resource/environmental • Policy • Institutional/organizational/staff capacity • Political • Cultural • Partnership • Learning 18
  19. 19. Three scaling up PATHWAY typologies were identified • Deliberate efforts via phasing through Adaptable Program Loans (APLs) – Peru, Azerbaijan • Piloting, testing and replicating – China • Non-deliberate evolutionary approach by building on previous institutional reforms and lessons – India, Uganda 19
  20. 20. DRIVERS were relevant and useful – the right questions to ask• Ideas and models: Transfer of CGS models for ag. research and extension with successful outcomes from other countries• Vision and leadership: Government commitment and leadership in ag. research and extension institutions• External catalysts: Ag. technology generation and transfer formulated in government strategy• Incentives and accountability: Need for institutional change (CGSs „jumpstart‟ the reform), Adaptable Program Loan triggers, and ag. innovation as a prerequisite for donor funding 20
  21. 21. SPACES – useful application with one addition• Fiscal space: Projects embedded in CAS and MTEF (if significant fiscal impact )• NRM space: Value-added of the GEF component (competitive window for NRM)• Policy and institutional space: Legal framework established in Phase 1• Institutional/organizational/staff capacity space: Strong institutions (integrated PIU in a government agency and established regional offices) for managing CGSs• Political space: No obstacles for expansion of CGSs; in particular, competitive matching grants politically important 21
  22. 22. SPACES – useful application with one addition – cont.• Cultural space: CGS design adapted for prevailing cultural norms of the targeted areas• Partnership space: Collaboration with other in-country partners, value-added of partnership with IDA and GEF• Learning space: An effective, integrated M&E system; IT/communications platforms for documenting lessons; and a help desk• Social space (added by the WB – a critical base on which interventions can get scaled up is the social capital created and nurtured): All projects incorporated gender and marginalized groups in their design• Role of the World Bank: Value-added of Adaptable Program Loan instrument for scaling up; expertise and funding, Technical Assistance 22
  23. 23. Emerging findings• IFAD/Brookings scaling up framing questions: • Applicable to any ARD sub-sector • Constructive for bringing out tacit knowledge • First step towards general agreement on terms • To be complemented by relevant analytical tools (e.g. economic analysis, PER, PSIA) • Not all will be applicable or sufficient for the different institutions and typologies of projects (WB, Development Marketplace, GIZ) 23
  24. 24. Emerging findings – cont.• Consider applying “importance weights” to drivers, spaces, and pathways.• Develop a flowchart to ease the project designer‟s use of the scaling up guideline.• A focus on learning during scaling-up process is important as interventions evolve during implementation. The lessons learned through M&E, along with external knowledge should act as a feedback loop for the next design. 24
  25. 25. Thank You www.worldbank.org/ard 25

×