This document discusses research on scaling up agricultural innovations. It argues that scaling up is a complex process involving many mechanisms and effects beyond just increasing the scope or coverage of a given innovation. The document presents conceptual frameworks to help understand scaling processes across different levels and dimensions. It also discusses interpretive frameworks to analyze factors that support or hinder scaling up. The research aims to integrate scaling perspectives into agricultural systems research from the beginning to better account for how innovations may change when spreading more widely. The document highlights a case study on scaling up "green rubber" cultivation in China to demonstrate these analytical approaches.

1. Enhancing dynamic systems research by activating
integrative perspectives on processes of scaling up in
agricultural development and innovation
Humidtropics
Presented by Seerp Wigboldus and Katharina Schiller, Wageningen University and Research centre, the
Netherlands - 5 March 2015

2. Success/failure,
mechanisms/consequences of scaling (up):
a study focus on its own
• “Find out what works and do more of the same” is a common, but
often too limited perspective on what is involved in scaling (up)
• Tentative conclusion from a review study:
– We need to improve conceptual (and shared) understanding about scaling
processes
– We need to take scaling processes more seriously in terms of understanding
what mechanisms are involved and what are wider effects (beyond narrow
success)
– We need to become more creative in devising options for engaging strategically
with scaling processes
• Are often considered to be a ‘next stage’ and not part of systems
research itself
• Need to integrate these elements into systems research/R4D
• From the beginning, design of research and innovation projects
needs to have future scaling-up in mind (Ghiron et al. 2014).

3. Related models for scaling up
• If the ones who find out what
works are not the same as
the ones supposed to be
doing more of the same
Find out
what works
Do more of
the same
Crossing the divide:
Adoption
Transfer
Dissemination
Etc.
• If scaling up is integrated in
innovation design: co-
innovation, co-scaling
RESEARCH
DECISION
MAKING
R4D as
E.g.
potential
E.g.
Risk
perception,
mind-sets
Analysis Sense-making
FOR
Need to connect
Need to
connect

4. Widening perspectives on scaling up
From responsible innovation to responsible scaling
• If innovations are considered to be ‘responsible’ (relating to e.g.
inclusiveness, sustainability), will they also remain being
‘responsible’ when they go to scale?
• Scaling up often means entering new scale levels, new domains,
new geographical areas, etc. – how will we know innovations are
still ‘responsible’ when they cross those boundaries?
From successful scaling up to responsible scaling
• Are scaling processes successful when something effectively goes
to scale?
• Or can something effectively go to scale and still be considered
unsuccessful because of negative outcomes (incl. side effects)?
• Starting to scale something up often has a snow-ball effect of
scaling processes – e.g. scaling up of (monoculture) crop attracts a
scaling up of pests/diseases, and/or requires scaling up use of
agrochemicals, it may lead to scaling down other crops, etc., etc.
See study “late lessons from early warnings” (EEA, 2013)

5. The need to complement systems research
• Systems research focuses on system
dimensions and dynamics
• Scaling processes often escape
system boundaries used
• Scaling process studies can bridge
systems research and foresight
studies
Systems
research
Foresight
studies
Systems
research
Foresight
studies
Scaling studies

6. PROMIS:a PRactice-Oriented Multi-level
perspective on Innovation and Scaling
• An approach to facilitate research on scaling processes
• Complementing existing research methodologies and processes
– Conceptual frameworks (to help to more easily create integrative perspective on
relevant dimensions and dynamics of envisaged scaling processes)
– Interpretive frameworks (to help to more easily detect mechanisms involved in
supporting or hindering envisaged scaling processes)
– Methodological application options (to help apply the above in working with
stakeholders)
– Strategic translation frameworks (to help consider a variety of options for
engaging with the envisaged scaling processes) So what? Now what?
• Connects to wide range of dimensions, e.g. from technical to social,
from natural resources to mind-sets and motivations, and from
institutions to decision-making processes

7. Simplified example of conceptual frameworks used
• Developing integrative perspectives on change dimensions related to
scaling processes – connecting across domains and systems
Dimensions include the technical,
technology, knowledge, social
capital, culture, human capital,
natural capital, financial capital,
etc.
Practices
Focus systems
Wider systems
Futures
Generalised
dimensions
involved in
configurations,
which are
operative
throughout scale
levels

8. Illustrations from quick-scan study on “scaling
up ‘green’ rubber in Xishuangbanna, China”
• Rubber cultivation once promoted as a way out of poverty and even a
way to ‘green’ the landscape
• Then its monoculture manifestation becoming criticized as being
environmentally unfriendly (25%+ of the land taken over by rubber)
• Extensive research efforts to assess (environmental) impact and to find
out alternative that can help ‘green’ rubber cultivation
• Market price of natural rubber plummeted over past few years
• More details in presentation by Jianchu Xu

9. Research activities
• Literature study – many studies available, looking at rubber in
Xishuangbanna from different angles
• Activating previously done survey among farmers (not specific for this
purpose, but left unused so far)
• Interviews with representatives from key stakeholder groups
• Interactive sense-making workshop
• Development of report, platform brief, research paper and concept note

10. Use of system(at)ic insights
and imagination/intuition
• Hybrid knowledge – hybrid
processes
• Facilitated sense-making
• Soft systems methodologies,
e.g. rich picture
• Relationship-building among
stakeholders (actually building
on momentum which R4D
platform may help create)
• Empirical and imaginative
(what if...)

11. Applying conceptual frameworks:
What needs to scale up exactly on what scale?
Unpacking “green rubber”:
• Plot/farm level: e.g. ground cover, inter/mixed cropping, use of
pesticides/herbicides, chemical fertiliser
• Village level: e.g. zoning crops
• Watershed level: e.g. no rubber near water courses
• Landscape level: zoning of land use, rubber not above 800 masl
Different “shades” of green possible

12. Applying interpretive frameworks:
Ready to scale up ‘green’ rubber? Lock-in factors.
• Lock-in of monoculture rubber
– Economic benefits fresh in memories of producers
– Unwillingness to go for something which has lower income potential
or requires harder work
– Environmental awareness not strong
– Rubber brought the pride of being part of modernity
– Lack of knowledge/expertise about alternatives
– Smallholders want “proven” alternative options
– No real interest in benefits on longer term
– Etc.

13. Applying interpretive frameworks:
Ready to scale up ‘green’ rubber? Lock-in factors (2)
• Disconnect between massive research capacity and smallholders
• Hesitance of policy implementers to enforce environmental regulations
• History of top-down policy making/implementation and smallholders
who became passive recipients
• Narrow scientific perspectives on ‘green rubber’: Agronomist look for
agronomic ‘solutions’, ecologists for ecological ‘solutions’, foresters for
‘forestry’ solutions, etc. Need for inter- and transdisciplinary
perspectives

14. Applying interpretive frameworks:
Ready to scale up ‘green’ rubber? Space for change
• In-principle readiness to do something
• In-principle agreement that current rubber cultivation causes harm
• Interest to meet as stakeholders and to seek ways forward (e.g.
through recent workshops and interviews)
• Successful PTD example in nearby parts of the province
• Massive research capacity
• Green policies by government
• Potentially available government subsidies
• Etc.

15. Creating integrative perspective on variety
interacting factors and dynamics

16. Application of conceptual perspectives on
scaling up: compound dynamics (1)
Scaling up
green rubber
↑
Level of
(bio)diversity
Time →
2015
Subsistence
Specialisation/
intensification
Diversification?
↑
Commodi
tizaton
2015
Cultural
identity
Market
orientation
Eco
products?
Time →
↑
Influence
on
decision-
making Farmers
Government
Scientists
Time →
2015
↑
Importance
environmental
values in
comparison
with economic
values
Farmers
Government
Scientists
Time →
2015

17. Application of conceptual perspectives on
scaling up: compound dynamics (2)
↑
Scale level
Green
policy
making
Green mentality
Eco-friendly
farm
practices
The age
of mono
culture
The age
of light
green
The age of
medium
green
The age
of dark
green
Diversified
land use
Alternative
crops
introduction
Green policy
implementation

18. Exploring connections between integrative
perspective and strategy options
Wider context in
Xishuangbanna and China
Monoculture rubber
dominance
Green rubber
niche
Pressure to change
factors
Support status quo
factors
Promoting
alternative options
Green rubber
cradles
Providing new
ideas, options
Green
rubber
Monoculture rubberDifferent strategic
options possible in
helping green
rubber go to scale
Different strategic
options possible in
helping green
rubber go to scale

19. From integrative/interpretive
perspectives to strategy options (2)
What may tip the balance and help ‘green’ rubber scale up?
Breaking the stalemate
• Use momentum created by R4D platform (relationships!): ICRAF,
government
• Stop hobby-horsing: science and policy
• Engage smallholders actively in R&D: science
• Get organised: smallholders (supported by NGO?)
• Set examples: (former) state companies
• Look beyond rubber; adopt a ‘green’ landscape perspective: all
stakeholders
• Facilitate collaboration and convergence between and strengthen
capacities of stakeholders for collective action: new project

20. Some quick conclusions from quick-scan study
• Even though a lot of research has been and is being done, good
policies are in place, rubber prices are low, still the situation appears to
be locked in
• Need to look beyond scaling up (technical) solutions (intercropping,
understory ground cover, new crops, etc.) to scaling up processes
(most notably communication and collaboration between stakeholders
• Need to start involving smallholder meaningfully and intensively
This means that technical/technological “solutions” NOT expected to
‘unlock’ the dominance of monoculture rubber in the Xishuangbanna
landscape
A concept note was developed for a project which focuses on facilitating
convergence of visions and action between stakeholders

21. • What about the measure of convergence as an indicator of capacity to
innovate?
• Helps to look at it beyond technical/technological innovation
• Would require unpacking ‘convergence’ toward e.g. stages, etc.

22. Some initial experiences with research
approach so far
• Not so suitable if just a matter of research on scaling – more suitable if
also connected to positioning interventions and as part of a multi-
stakeholder process
• Need for distinguishing between two types of scaling:
– Scaling up “something” defined (e.g. a particular cropping system)
– Scaling up toward the existence of a desired outcome/impact at scale (e.g. food
security) which actually involves a range of interactive scaling processes
• A quick-scan study set-up can be useful in
project/programme proposal development
• Good connection options to other
presentations in conference, e.g. on
participatory modelling (!), transdisciplinary
research, intuitive approaches,
and foresight analysis
• Integrative research easily becomes overwhelming

23. Reflections on case study on scaling up
agroecology in Nicaragua
• Takes into account smallholders’ livelihood systems
• Helpful to connect perspectives between eg socio-economic and bio-
physical realm; individual – systemic levels
• Keeping focus on one aspect without losing birds-eye perspective
• Toolkit of quantitative and qualitative methods, including checklist

24. Tentative (selected) learning about what contributes
to creating conditions for responsible scaling
• From the beginning, design of research and innovation projects needs to have
future scaling-up in mind
• Be aware that scaling-up is not a neutral process. Consider trade-offs and net
benefit/value for society from an inclusive and cross-scale perspective (e.g. how
scaling works out for disadvantaged groups, such as women and children)
• Approach the scaling initiative as a co-creative effort, working toward a
collaborative scaling initiative; facilitate co-creative design of scaling strategies
with stakeholders – scientist can play key role in this, but often need to learn how
• Negotiate (with funders and managers) room for manoeuvre in terms of required
flexibility for adaptively treading on pathways to scale (preventing ‘monorail
scaling’ and ‘one-gear scaling’)
• Facilitate convergence of perspectives and preferences of stakeholders,
enhancing opportunities for shared effort through common (communicative and
discursive) spaces in support of scaling processes, such as innovation/R4D
platforms/labs and farmer field schools

25. This presentation is based on research which is
partly conducted in collaboration with CIAT-
Nicaragua and ICRAF-East and Central Asia
• Co-authors of research products related to this presentation are
– Marc Schut (International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Bujumbura,
Burundi, and Wageningen UR, Knowledge, Technology and Innovation
group),
– Cees Leeuwis, Laurens Klerkx, Katharina Schiller and Onno Giller
(Wageningen UR, Knowledge, Technology and Innovation group)
– Marijn Poortvliet and Anne Marike Lokhorst (Wageningen UR, Strategic
Communication group)
• Special thanks for their active participation in the research to Rein
van der Hoek, Falguni Guharay, Nelson Castellon, and Eduardo
Herrera (CIAT-Nicaragua), and Jim Hammond (ICRAF East and
Central Asia)
Contact: Laurens Klerkx, Knowledge, Technology and Innovation group, Wageningen
University – laurens.klerkx@wur.nl or Seerp Wigboldus, Centre for Development
Innovation, Wageningen UR, the Netherlands – seerp.wigboldus@wur.nl

26. Thank you