Alan’s Notes: Mainstreaming a systematic approach to scaling in funding organizations, 11th March 2024

Scaling depends on incentives

Nature and possibility of scaling depends on the type of challenge and potential solution (how contextual and complex)

Transformational is not the same as transactional.

Transformational is sustainable/enduring impact at large scale.

Asks for more unpacking about what “transformational means”, because, for instance, things can be done/achieved at large scale without them being sustainable.

So, then focused on government roles – responsibility, longevity and potentially the interest – to mainstream and scale initiatives, so that they can be transformational.

So, institutionalization and how funders can align behind governments’ intentions to serve their people better?

A bit of a change in paradigm, a shift in how we view the world more towards the question of what needs to change in a system so that that system can achieve long-term sustainable outcomes?

So what would it look like if funders approached things from this starting point?

Funders de-centring themselves, not being wedded to own strategies, visions etc.

Need to be careful about prioritizing measurement of things that funders value.

Funders claiming attribution can hinder scaling

Asks for more nuance/complicating of the idea that things should simply be handed over to domestic doers and payers.

Empowering national level actors so that they can take up key roles.

See also Varja’s March 2024 trust/impact paper.

1. Increased interest by bilateral funders in scaling. OECD work on scaling principles (I32, led by Ben).

2. Let’s not conflate scaling and localization. There’s no consensus on what constitutes good locally-led development. OECD thinking is re shifting decision-making power to local levels. Also need to be clear that localization, and local environments, are political. Need to be cognizant of the power that funders hold in selecting who gets to decide about priorities, and of that fact that not all development interventions need to or can following a scaling logic. Scaling tends to be thought of [but in reality isn’t?] as a technical process. Localization is a political process.

3. That said, increased acknowledgement that scaling is a political process as much as/more than a technical one. Complexity is the condition [aka reality] and so the challenge is about how to navigate that condition/reality, which is a political condition/reality. Shouldn’t be dismissed. Should be explicit and honest that funding is a political thing.