Agriservices
|
|
|
Agriservices |
|
| |||
|
Topics  |
|
Home Alliance Areas of Work  Topics Concepts Definitions Tools Documents Case Studies
Themes GTZ
Home |
Scaling-up participatory approachesAll participatory approaches (PA) in community development, research and extension are designed to be used at a local level. The very idea of participation implies that the number of people involved is small. Participatory approaches thus provide the methodological foundation for more effective research and extension services, but do not provide a complete solution to overall development problems. Therefore, "scaling up" is a vital task in any development strategy. Issues of scaling-up participatory approaches Methods such as PTD, FSR or FFS work with local groups and villages. Virtually all examples of successful participatory projects address the community level. They present achievements in institutional development at a local level, but remain limited to the number of villages included. Moreover, participatory development schemes often depend on the availability of support or donor funds to function. However, in order to be used on a large scale, they need to be self-sustaining, i.e. maintained and funded after external support is withdrawn. Two questions need to be addressed:
1. The first question arises wherever participatory approaches are applied by research and extension agencies with external assistance. There are a number of problems in introducing PA into such organisations concerning organisational structures, incentives, funds, and staffing (see institutionalisation of FSR). These problems have to be addressed by a capacity development effort at the level of the entire research or extension organisation (see capacity development of NARIs). 2. The second question refers to the objective of actually applying PA on a large scale. Here, the problem is that the widespread replication of a single success not only costs money and requires trained personnel, but also takes a coordinated development effort at a provincial or national level. In fact, extending efforts beyond the local level involves additional institutional arrangements that are different from the local participatory approach. Farmer participation at the local level has to be complemented by ways of forming and communicating the collective demands of large groups of smallholders, and linking them to the sector-wide supply of technology services. Concepts of village participatory research and technology development tend to remain silent on such issues. Political and market processes at a higher level are obviously different from participatory innovation development in a community. Therefore, by leaving the local level, we enter new conceptual and methodological ground. Forms and approaches The basic distinction is between horizontal and vertical concepts of scale: Horizontal scaling out: quantitative expansion and increased geographic coverage of participatory approaches A rapid answer to the problem suggests doing 'more of the same', i.e. repeating a success case of participatory development in other places, so that the methodology attains regional or even national significance. This implies that public research and extension services adopt it as the general approach to be used. However, such a strategy is only feasible where funds are available and the institutional conditions permit widespread introduction - conditions that are not likely to be met in many places (see vertical scaling-up). Horizontal scaling-up uses the following strategies,
Vertical scaling-up: changes in institutional arrangements and policies in order to encourage the use of participatory approaches Horizontal replication of PA is hampered by the fact that public institutions still adhere to a supply-driven mode of service provision. Resource-poor farmers in difficult locations who would benefit most from participatory approaches are often marginalised and unable to actively request participatory services. In other words, mainstreaming PA requires changes in the organisation as well as the political economy of service provision. Vertical scaling-up refers to interventions at higher institutional levels, i.e. the promotion of organisational policy change. Strategies here include
Problems and limitations Unfortunately, there are hardly any examples where smallholders have gained sufficient self-organisation and influence to actively ask for participatory approaches. The reason behind this is probably that all institutional arrangements require farmers to become partners of equal rank and play an active role in the game, i.e. exert pressure in committees, contribute to decisions on research projects or raise money to pay for extension and other services. In any case, political decisions have to be made that lead to structural reforms of the public administration and a different allocation of financial resources. A successful introduction of new institutional arrangements beyond the local level presupposes that farmers are organised around shared technical, economic or social interests and that they are capable of voicing their demands to public decision makers. For further information on this topic, please see strategies for the empowerment of rural communities. Literature: IIRR: "Going to Scale: Can we bring more benefits to more people more quickly?" (Workshop Highlights) International Institute of Rural Reconstruction, Philippines, 2000.
|
Top