How can we increase the impact and uptake of research?

A demand-driven framework for scaling-up research findings is making inroads into poverty and improving livelihoods. It identifies the key strategies that must be put in place - forging strong networks and partnerships, building institutional capacity and ear-marking appropriate funding - and points out that research must be genuinely demand-led, and that researchers must be made more accountable for research impacts. The framework was used in the development of the DFID-NRSP's strategy for communication and scaling-up, and adopted by the World Bank, CIAT, ILRI, FAO, and the Kenya Forestry Research Institute. It is used by USAID projects in the Andes, South-East Asia and West Africa, and by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) in Nepal.

Project Ref: NRSP05:
Topic: 7. Spreading the Word: Knowledge Management & Dissemination
Lead Organisation: Gundel, S. (Independent), UK
Source: Natural Resources Systems Programme

Contents:		Description
		Validation
		Current Situation
		Lessons Learned
		Environmental Impact

Description

Research Programmes:

NRSP

Relevant Research Projects:

R7865

Project leader: Sabine Guendel (former NRI) in cooperation with Jim Hancock (FAO) and Simon Anderson (DFID)

Research Outputs, Problems and Solutions:

This review was commissioned by DFID's NRSP to identify strategies to accelerate the uptake of pro-poor research innovations in order to make a significant contribution to poverty reduction and the improvement of livelihoods. It addressed a key criticism of conventional approaches to technology dissemination which is the failure to reach and impact upon the poor.

The main output of this project was an innovative and demand-driven framework for scaling-up. The framework includes key strategies as prerequisites for scaling-up that need addressed systematically in the pre-project and implementation phases.

These key strategies include:

• Engaging in existing policy dialogue on pro-poor development agendas; building strong networks and partnerships; building capacity and institutional systems to sustain the scaling-up process; and identify and/or developing appropriate funding mechanisms to finance these and other scaling-up activities.
• Identifying target groups and local constraints to scaling-up; and raising awareness of the merits, including pro-poor impact, of the approaches taken among a range of stakeholders.

The project also identified some major implications for research orientation and practice, including that research should be genuinely demand-led, and researchers should be more accountable for research impacts. To achieve this:

• NRM research should be located more directly in the context of local and national development processes, this involves directing project calls to target-region institutions, developing stronger partnerships and regional capacity in sustainable livelihoods approaches, and producing outputs suitable for local dissemination.
• Monitoring and evaluation indicators are needed to measure successful pro-poor targeting (livelihood impact) and cost-effectiveness. Indicators should be regionally adapted and agreed with regional partners.

The scaling-up framework is available as a publication in English and Spanish (hardcopies and electronic format). 

Types of Research Output:

Major Commodities Involved:

Relevant across all commodities.

Production Systems:

Farming Systems:

Potential for Added Value:

Value could be added to a cluster of up-scaling process outputs by aggregating findings contrasting and comparing recommendations and generating a synthesis of best methods. Candidate members of this cluster are suggested below. Scaling-up processes are central to the activities of RIUP. Pulling together what has been learned through RNRRS projects and elsewhere into a solid base from which to test the most effective scaling-up methods could significantly contribute to the success of RIUP. The framework developed in the R7865 project could provide a way of assessing the findings and methods developed by other projects in the cluster. The framework could also provide a means of ex-ante and ex-post assessment of the up-scaling process to be implemented through RIUP.

Crop Protection Programme:

• Communication Strategy for East African Semi-arid systems. R8428, R8349,  A Sutherland.
• Accelerated uptake and impact of CPP research outputs. R8299, R8219, R8296, R8041, R7813, R7472, R7403, R6764, CABI-ARC Dr Sarah Simons CAB International Nairobi s.simons@cabi.org Tel: 254 2 524450/62
• Linking demand for agricultural information with its supply. R8281 (first phase), R8429 (extension phase) Barry Pound, b.pond@nri.org
• Increasing effectiveness of research system. R8410, University of Reading, Dr Savitri Abeyasekera, s.abeyasekera@reading.ac.uk 0118 378 8459

NRSP:

• Scaling-up through uptake promotion. R8381, Nuhu Hatibu, ASARECA, n.hatibu@cgiar.org
• Scaling-up through communication. R8363, Graham Haylor NACA STREAM, Thailand. ghaylor@loxinfo.co.th

Animal Health Programme:

• Influencing animal health policy in Africa (through dissemination of research findings). R7596, R8318, Sue Welburn sue.welburn@ed.ac.uk

Validation

How the outputs were validated:

The scope of the project did not include a post-project validation process as it was a short-term conceptual assignment. However, at an early phase of the review an electronic discussion platform was established with 38 participants from different institutional backgrounds (NARS, CGIAR, NGO's and universities) with the aim to share findings and ideas from an early stage.

A 3-day mid-term workshop was held with participants from relevant projects in Nepal, Uganda, Bolivia, Colombia, UK and the Philippines. During this workshop the draft framework was discussed and important elements of such a framework were identified.

Additionally, in parallel with the R7865 review, scaling-up strategies were directly investigated in a multi-country study, R7866.  Through a case study approach on seven projects in Bolivia, Nepal and Uganda, the factors important to the facilitation of scaling-up of promising land management practices were identified and analysed. 'Best option strategies' were developed and then tested with development projects in Bolivia. In an initial stage of R7866 the scaling-up framework was presented and discussed at an in-country workshop with a range of national stakeholders (NGO's GO's, etc.).

R7866: Project Title:  Up-scaling field level pilot research experiences. Author(s):  Middleton, Tabitha and Ellis Jones, Jim. Start and Finish Dates:  Nov 2000 - Mar 2003.

The framework also contributed to the conceptual preparation of R7820, Analysis and implementation of pro-poor uptake pathways: concerted action on livestock and livelihoods - CALL project (Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Peru).

R7820: Project Title:  Analysis and implementation of pro-poor uptake pathways: concerted action on livestock and livelihoods - CALL project (Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, ). Author(s):  Rushton, J (Dr) - CEVEP. Start and Finish Dates:  Oct 2000 - Dec 2005

Where the Outputs were Validated:

Both projects mentioned above focused on marginalised communities in small-scale production systems, which were mainly classified as hillside agriculture. However, lessons learned from these projects have not been fed back into the R7865 project framework.

Current Situation

Who are the Users?

The output of R 7865 has been classified in Section A as a process or a conceptual framework which is less clearly traceable in terms of its use than a technology. Most outputs listed under RIUP can be classified as product-oriented. Knowledge-based or conceptual outputs on the other hand are not as visible and clear-cut in terms of their uses.

The aim of the framework was to inform and feed into ongoing discussion processes on research impact and uptake for poor and marginalised communities. In this respect the scaling-up framework has informed the further development of NRSP's strategy for communication and scaling-up (see DFID-Natural Resources Systems Progamme (DFID -NRSP) 2002, Scaling-up and communication: Guidelines for enhancing the developmental impact of natural resources systems research,8 pp.

http://www.nrsp.org.uk/database/documents/1435.pdf).

The framework was the main output of the Bolivia Suite 2 of NRSP. This Suite investigated the process of scaling-up, raised awareness of the concept and encouraged the development of a scaling-up requirement in other DFID/Renewable Natural Resources Research Strategy (RNRRS) programmes.  The raising of awareness in DFID can be seen in the requirements made mandatory from 2003 for developing impact pathways for most research projects.

The diagram below visualises the uptake pathways of R7865:

Project links within Bolivia Suite 2: 1996-2005

Other organisations that have been in contact about the framework include the World Bank, CIAT, ILRI, and FAO-SARD as all of them are faced with the same challenge to scale-up impact and to better address the poor. However, it is difficult to say to what extend the R7865 framework has been used in their strategy development.

Where the outputs have been used:

International organisations that interacted with NRSP and adopted 'scaling-up' procedures and terminology included:

• Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI).
• Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA): scaling-up is built into its Sub-Saharan Africa Challenge Programme.
• Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Collaborative Research Support Program (SANREM-CRSP): funded by USAID with research in the Andes, South-east Asia and West Africa with a global decision support office in the US.
• The Sustainable Soil Management Programme (SSMP), Nepal: funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).
• Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern, Switzerland.

NRSP research in this Bolivia Suite 2 on scaling-up strategies also contributed to international efforts to better measure the development impact of projects (e.g. the numbers of people affected and how livelihoods have been improved). (Source: NRSP Node: Suite Summary, Bolivia: Strategies for scaling-up (http://www.nrsp.org.uk/6_2_2.aspx)).

Scale of Current Use:

This is not possible to quantify at this point as it is a long-term process of institutional change and no M&E mechanism has been designed to collect information on this issue.

Policy and Institutional Structures, and Key Components for Success:

Promotion has mainly taken place through a range of publications, which either referred to the framework (1), or through other publications which published extracts of the R7865 findings (2).  The multitude of different organisations and individuals engaged in the scaling-up discussion has strongly contributed to the promotion of the R7865 framework. For details see below:

(1)

• World Bank (2003) Scaling-Up the Impact of Good Practices in Rural Development-A working paper to support implementation of the World Bank's Rural Development Strategy; Report Number: 26031, June 2003, Agriculture & Rural Development Department, World Bank
• Simon E. Cater and Bruce Currie-Alder (2006) Scaling-up natural resource management: insights from research in Latin America. Development in Practice, Volume 16, Number 2, April 2006
• P. C. Sanginga; R. Best; C. Chitsike; R. Delve; S. Kaaria, and R. Kirkby (2004) Enabling rural innovation in Africa: An approach for integrating farmer participatory research and market orientation for building the assets of rural poor; Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2004, 9:942-957; 2004 National Agricultural Research Organisation
• Rees D J, Imairit-Oumo, F, Nangoti N, Okwadi J & Okurut-Akol H, 2004. Design & implementation of a communication strategy for agricultural research in Uganda - Experiences & Lessons Learnt. Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences 9(1), 132-136, http://www.asareca.org/swmnet/publication/discussion_papers/DiscussionPaper3.pdf
• Nuhu Hatibu (Ed) (2005) Scaling-Up and uptake Promotion of Soil and Water Management Research Outputs in East and Central Africa, Constraints & Barriers; SWMnet Discussion Paper 4, October 2005; ICRISAT Regional Office for East and Southern Africa
• Nuhu Hatibu and Anthony M. Kilewe (eds) (200) Institutionalized Scaling-up and Uptake Promotion of Outputs from Soil and Water Management Research in East and Central Africa, Literature Review, SWMnet Discussion Paper 3; July 2004; ICRISAT Regional Office for East and Southern Africa

(2)

• Gündel, S.; Hancock, J. and Anderson, S. (2001) Scaling-up strategies for research in natural resources management - a comparative review - Chatham, UK, Natural Resources Institute (English and Spanish)
• Sabine Gündel, Jim Hancock and Simon Anderson (2001) A project design framework for scaling up NRM research; LEISA India September 2001 Vol. 3 No.3 http://www.amefound.org/Leisa%20india-pdf/Vol.3%20No.3.pdf
• Sabine Gündel, Jim Hancock and Simon Anderson (2001) A Framework for Scaling Up Research on Natural Resource Management, Paper 46, in Participatory Research and Development for sustainable agriculture and natural resource management: A sourcebook; Volume 2: Enabling Participatory Research and Development; Edited by Gonsalves et. al, CIP-UPWARD/IDRC 2005; http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-85091-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
• DFID Livelihoods Connect; Scaling-up and communication strategies; http://www.livelihoods.org/static/sgundelNN_211.htm

Lessons Learned and Uptake Pathways

Promotion of Outputs:

Research commissioning emphasises the need for increased pro-poor impact and research efficiency. This shift in commissioning can be seen as indirect promotion pathway. It would be impossible to single out the source of information and knowledge of scaling-up processes contributing to this recent change in perspective, however, as mentioned in Section C 12 the scaling-up framework has influenced NRSP's strategy for communication and scaling-up and one could argue that in general DFID's research commissioning process has been influenced by existing knowledge and information on scaling-up, including the R7865 framework. 

The design of RIUP could be seen as a further indication of this change in research commissioning, as a great proportion of its emphasis is on scaling-up strategies and institutional learning.

Potential Barriers Preventing Adoption of Outputs:

As identified and described by Hatibu (2005) the main barriers can be summarised as:

1. Policy and strategy documents of government ministries, departments and relevant organizations, recognize and put a lot of emphasis on ensuring that results from agricultural research reach the farmer. However, this emphasis has not been turned into action.
2. The role of research systems in uptake promotion is not recognized due to mind set on uni-directional dissemination of results from research to extension to farmers. Therefore, only a limited amount of time and budgets are allocated to project activities concerning communication, uptake promotion and scaling-up of research results.
3. The majority of researchers are not adequately trained for communication and uptake promotion. They consider this to be the main reason for the little communication and uptake promotion currently being implemented by researchers.
4. Monitoring and evaluation of projects do not include assessment of uptake, utilization and impact of research results. Therefore, rewards and incentives such as salary increments, promotion and prizes do not demand evidence of utilization and impact of research activities.

How to Overcome Barriers to Adoption of Outputs:

Adapted from Hatibu (2005) the main changes required are outlined below:

1. Development and implementation of effective scaling-up strategies: Research organizations should design and implement strategies and provide adequate funding for knowledge management, uptake promotion and scaling-up.
2. Strengthening communication between researcher and target groups: Researchers should fully participate in uptake promotion and scaling-up activities as part and parcel of research projects and should package their results into products that target the different needs and circumstances of their stakeholders.
3. Institutional learning and capacity building on scaling-up issues: Relevant organizations should implement a massive and intensive professional development programme on knowledge management, including prospecting and brokering. In addition, the training curricula of graduate programmes should be reviewed to include skills in communication, uptake promotion, and scaling-up.
4. Establishment of effective M&E systems: Researchers should be required to produce proof of uptake and effective scaling-up of research results as part of the criteria for promotion, salary increments and other incentives. This would contribute greatly to an institutional learning process on how the up-scaling of research outputs can contribute to poverty reduction.

Environmental Impact

Direct and Indirect Environmental Benefits:

This depends on the research aims and objectives. The framework offers a vehicle for scaling-up independently of the type of research outputs.

Adverse Environmental Impacts:

This depends again on the research aims and objectives. The framework offers a vehicle for scaling-up independently of the type of research outputs.

Coping with the Effects of Climate Change, or Risk from Natural Disasters:

Applied successfully the poor will have an increased capability to adapt to the changing conditions caused by climate change as they will have better access to knowledge and technologies. Some examples of how the poor could better cope with extreme events through better access to existing knowledge include:

• Food production techniques are improved, with the implementation of adaptive agricultural strategies, such as: Improved crop reliability through genetic diversification (more tolerant, high yielding, drought-resistant, early maturing, and disease - and pest-tolerant grains); more effective/resilient pest and weed control; preservation of productive assets (seed banks, breeding livestock, tools and land)
• Resilience of the local environmental is improved through: ecosystem-based management and conservation, such as soil conservation practices, desalinization techniques, reforestation and grassland management.
• Reduced vulnerability to drought and climate-induced water shortages through: rainwater harvesting, greywater use, water conservation and other innovative water-use strategies; flood control management: coastal defence facilities and use of local vegetation as buffer (e.g. mangrove protection belts)
• Community linkages improved: increased support for local adaptation initiatives through decentralised structures: Added support for new and traditional means of enhancing livelihood resilience; strengthened community- and ecosystem-based management and networks, coordinated with a wide range of actors to achieve effective

Relevant Research Projects, with links to the
Research for Development (R4D) web site
and Technical Reports:

R4D	Project Title	Technical Report
R7865	Scaling-up strategies for pilot research experiences - a comparative review
R8428	Communication and research promotional strategies East Africa
R8349	Developing crop protection research promotion strategies for semi-arid East Africa (Kenya and Tanzania)
R8299	Accelerated uptake and impact of CPP research outputs in Kenya
R8219	Improved access to appropriate farm inputs for integrated maize crop management by small-scale farmers in Embu and Kirinyaga Districts, Kenya
R8296	Promotion of sustainable approaches for the management of root-knot nematodes on vegetables in Kenya. Main Report. Annex 1, Annex 2, Annex 4, Annex 5, Annex 6, Annex 7a, Annex 7c.
R8041	Sustainable Integrated Management of Whiteflies as Pests and Vectors of Plant Viruses in the Tropics: Phase 2 - Network Strengthening, Pest and Disease Dynamics and IPM Component Research Africa. Andes. Central America. Coordination. Annex 1. Annex 2. Annex 3. Annex 4. Annex 5.
R7813	Sustainable control of the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera, in small-scale cotton production systems
R7472	Integrated management of root-knot nematodes on vegetables in Kenya
R7403	Pest management in horticultural crops; an integrated approach to vegetable pest management with the aim of reducing reliance on pesticides in Kenya
R6764	Environmentally acceptable crop protection strategies based on the improved use of pesticides and adoption of integrated pest management strategies by small-holder farmers in Zimbabwe.
R8281	Linking the demand for, and supply of, agricultural production and post-harvest information in Uganda. Main Report. Annex.
R8429	Linking supply and demand in Uganda phase 2. Main Report. Annex.
R8410	Increasing the Effectiveness of Research within NARO, Uganda
R8381	Institutionalised scaling-up and uptake promotion of outputs from soil and water management research in East and Central Africa
R8363	Enhancing development impact of process tools piloted in Eastern India. Main Report. Annex 1, Annex 2.
R7596	Decision support system for the control of trypanosomosis in South-East Uganda; improving public health and livestock productivity through the cost-effective control of trypanosomosis in livestock
R8318	Decision support for endemic disease control in sub-Saharan Africa - private sector drivers for technology adoption by resource-poor farmers

For relevant research projects, with links to further information

Geographical regions included:

Bolivia, Kenya, Nepal,

Target Audiences for this content:

Crop farmers, Livestock farmers, Fishers, Forest-dependent poor, Processors, Traders, Consumers,