Part 1 – What is transformative scaling – Fundamentals

Larry Cooley (Scaling Community of Practice): “the most important issue or idea that I can tee up for you is the distinction between what we call transactional versus transformational scaling. Transactional means we scale by getting bigger and bigger projects, more and more donors crowding into projects, but there’s still project”

The main messages:

• Scaling Community is 5,000 members in 77 countries, 400 organizations, 10 active working groups on sectors and themes
• the preoccupation at the moment is what we’re calling mainstreaming, which is why doesn’t this issue of scale become the centerpiece of funders and implementers?
• how do you transition from that initial role where funders can play a very important role to an eventual role where they’re much more on the sidelines, trying to help… governments or markets in the countries… to really owning them?
• They’re in agreement, but they’re not necessarily in the driver’s seat on this activity. And so a big part of changing and transforming this agenda is moving from concurrence to ownership.
• the typical pathway is about 15 years
• thinking about the way the system changes and not just the way the direct beneficiaries are served is critical

Thank you very much. I must say thank you for welcoming us and thank you to everyone for being here. This issue of scaling is like a bell, which once it rings, you can’t stop hearing it. And it rang for me about 22 years ago, and now I’m afraid I see everything through this lens. And the thing that it preoccupies one with is when we do wonderful things and they never reach the number of people that need them or they don’t stay in place once we’ve put them there. And so the scaling community of practice was formed by many of us equally worried about this problem. We’re now up to about 5,000 members in 77 countries, 400 organizations, and it’s been a wonderful endeavor. We’ve been at this for about 11 years. Frankly, it’s a pleasure to watch scaling up, scale up. I’ll just say a little bit more for those of you who don’t know anything about the community of practice, but it’s by way of inviting you to join us in this journey. It’s made up of funders, implementers, number of people from host country governments, and think tanks. It’s open enrollment, it’s free, and it’s accessible on the website. We’ve got 10 active working groups on sectors and themes. There’s something for everybody in this, but the preoccupation at the moment is what we’re calling mainstreaming, which is why doesn’t this issue of scale become the centerpiece of funders and implementers? Why do we stay in this mode of project, project, project, project, project? and often without either a vision or a strategy for how to take things to scale. And so that mainstreaming, what we’ve called an initiative, and now we’re transforming into a campaign, is the preoccupation of the community of practice, and I hope it will be your preoccupation also. Let me just say a word about how we see scaling, at least in this context. And probably the most important issue or idea that I can tee up for you is the distinction between what we call transactional versus transformational scaling. Transactional means we scale by getting bigger and bigger projects, more and more donors crowding into projects, but there’s still project, project, project. And the issue that preoccupies us is what’s the denominator? What’s the size of the problem? And what’s it going to take to resolve that problem? And one thing it’s going to take is what we call doers and funders at scale. Someone who has the ability and the will to carry on delivering whatever this is for as long as that issue exists. And similarly, someone who’s able and willing to fund that. That’s almost never tech foreign assistance. So foreign assistance is playing some role in making this happen, but not ultimately in being the doer or the funder at scale. So for us, the issue is how do you transition from that initial role where funders can play a very important role to an eventual role where they’re much more on the sidelines trying to help in very targeted sorts of ways. That means that governments or markets in the countries where we operate need to go from simply concurring with programs to really owning them. And we say that all the time, but it’s been our experience that too often it’s not true. They’re in agreement, but they’re not necessarily in the driver’s seat on this activity. And so a big part of changing and transforming this agenda is moving from concurrence to ownership. We’ve also come to realize that the typical pathway is about 15 years. That means a one, three or five year project is somewhere along that pathway, but it’s not the entirety of the pathway. So how does the whole pathway, get walked. And finally, we think that if we’re serious about this, thinking about the way the system changes and not just the way the direct beneficiaries are served is critical to trying to make success happen. Now, this all sounds perhaps obvious, but I promise you it is not yet common practice. And that’s why we have the mainstreaming campaign that we do. Back to you, Jean-Michel.

 

Jean-Michel Sévérino (JMS): Now, thanks very much, Larry. And I’ve heard many key words like project ownership, alliances, etc. And let me turn then to Benjamin Kumpf. Benjamin, you are at OECD, you currently lead the innovation for development facility. And you have launched a network stream for development assistance committee on digital transformation. And you have produced a guidance for scaling, which may be intriguing to many. So why, Ben, has OECD, have you launched this guidance for scaling?

 

Benjamin Kumpf (OECD): “Governments in low and middle income countries, are just not satisfied with the, well, sustainability of development interventions. In other words, too few interventions scale”

The main messages:

• Most of our work is operationalized through programs and projects, with a relatively short timeframe for implementation and rather linear operational modes
• the Guidance of scaling has the objective to give a reference point and tool for change agents, partners and governments.
• Guidance encourage vevelop jointly with partners a vision for scale
• intimately linked with a business model
• We encourage funders to walk the talk of humility and not to assume that they can scale themselves most solutions
• invest in enabling environments, in local innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems

Thanks, Jean-Michel, and thanks AFD for convening us. Good afternoon from Paris. Well, it’s a spot on question because evidently we have the dark evaluation criteria where sustainability is a core element of how every development intervention should be evaluated. we have the development effectiveness principles, where again sustainability plays a key role. But what we saw across members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee, that’s a committee that brings together 32 countries and the EU, so some of the largest funders of official development assistance, is that a good number of colleagues within ministries and development agencies and colleagues from implementing partners, just as much as partners from governments in low and middle income countries are just not satisfied with the, well, sustainability of development interventions. In other words, too few interventions scale. So what we did was we, and that’s just a short background, formed a reference group of members of OECD eBalnet, of the OECD results community, bringing together heads of results-based management, and of our innovation network, bringing together heads of innovation. and developed a non-legally binding policy guidance to complement these existing principles very much with two objectives. One, to have a reference point for change agents within dark member institutions who already work on guidance or reforms to enable better scaling practices. And two, to have that as a, so to speak, conversation instrument and tool for partners from governments that are in OEA recipient countries, just as much as colleagues who work in implementing agencies. Let me stop here. I’m very happy to lay out some of the key principles that then really reinforce that complementarity. But back to you first.

 

JMS: Yes, this is exactly what I wanted to ask you, actually, Ben. Could you highlight for us what are the main messages in this guidance, OECD guidance, building on this framing of transformative scaling? Happy to.

 

Benjamin Kumpf: So first of all, it really addresses innovation. So development efforts, initiatives, programs with a nascent evidence base, just as much as what we call good development practices. So distinct solutions with a solid established evidence base that are further scaled or adapted in different contexts. It really applies to both. And some of the distinct features in this guidance are, first, we really encourage all development practitioners, well, I guess, to acknowledge that most of our work is operationalized through programs and projects, with a relatively short timeframe for implementation and rather linear operational modes. That’s the starting point. We acknowledge this and within the confines of this, we first encourage develop jointly with partners a vision for scale. Building on what Larry said, what’s the scale of the problem? What’s the vision for how well distinct intervention or effort could make a dent against the development challenge? How many percent of the population could we reach, for example? And then secondly, this vision is intimately linked with a business model, essentially asking the question, again, building on the evidence that scaling trajectories take 10 to 15 years. Who funds and who implements in 10 to 15 years? Thirdly, very much encouraging funders to walk the talk of humility and not to assume that they can scale themselves most solutions, but rather to think of them as a meaningful supporter along a scaling trajectory, but eventually having clarity of either scaling through the local public sector. Think of a non-technology innovation in Ghana, lively minds that has really solid evidence. of enhancing educational outcomes of families living below $5 a day, in addition to other positive spillover effects on their livelihoods, which is scaled for the public sector. Well, at least that’s the ambition. The story is complex, but it’s on a scaling pathway, right? Or through a commercial pathway, I think, and it’s a prominent example, the Wumal Money System and PESA. where the UK Department for International Development, while it still existed, now the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, played a small but really important role in getting this off the ground, but it wasn’t the scaling agent. So this third point in humility is really crucial. And the last one I want to mention, as it’s the context of CBI. We at the OECD Development Corporation Directorate are also working on blended finance and I could be updating, I’ve just updated our principles. And that went along with a real critical look on what happened to this discourse from trillions, from billions to trillions, and the lack of massive success. And without going into detail, one key insight that is also captured in a really worthwhile policy brief by UNDESA, co-written with Mariano Mazzucato, the policy brief 170, is the insufficient investment in enabling environments, in local innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems. And the scaling guidance very much makes the point that funders, if they’re well positioned to do so, really must invest in these enabling environments, because every solution requires a line of sight to unfold impact at optimum sustainable scale. So those are some of the highlights we briefly touched upon. Let me end here and say thank you and head back to you.

 

JMS: Well, thanks very much, Ben. And I recommend everybody to look at this guidance. You learn a lot, obviously. And as we are still continuing the discussion regarding advocating, I would like to now turn to Poonam Muthreja, who is the Executive Director of Population Foundation of India, PFI. with over 40 years of experience and a strong advocate for women’s health, reproductive rights and rural livelihoods. And I would like to, as a person who has been so engaged in this issue, I would like to Get your view, Poonam, on this advocacy work for scaling. Has it been useful? Is it useful? What is its place in your overall action?

 

Poonam Muttreja (Population Fundation of India- PFI): “I have seen India and a lot of pilots across the world as junkyards full of pilots, and very few went to scale”

The main messages:

• PFI has developed a management framework of scaling up with Larry and MSI support
• There is no better advocacy than training and perspective building
• We don’t treat scaling up as an afterthought. It’s embedded from the very start in all the program designs
• The cost effectiveness was amazing
• How do we convince donors as well as implementers to turn to understand the cost, the wastage in the development sector that this junkyard of pilots is a waste

Thank you very much, Jean-Michel and AFD and Larry for putting this together. So the development sector, which I belong to for four decades, has long struggled with, and my struggle has been watching the dilemma of small promising projects that fail to scale. In fact, this is true not just for India, but globally. So I have seen India and a lot of pilots across the world as junkyards full of pilots, and very few went to scale. And so the issue wasn’t just our work and where I’ve been associated with. The issue was to develop a framework of scaling up, which we thought was the best way to do advocacy. And guess who we went to? Larry, who rang the bell so strongly that that bell rings across India through us now. So I’ll tell you about what that is. And at the Population Foundation, we embraced the challenge head on for over two decades. We function as a scaling up intermediary, thanks to a thought that Larry had when we went to seek his support to develop a scaling up management framework, what we call a sum framework. And in partnership with Management International, we’ve trained 500 government officials There is no better advocacy than training and perspective building, as you will all agree. We train donors, NGO leaders in the scaling up framework, and this includes early engagement with India’s planning body, then called the Planning Commission and now called Niti Aayog, which were again introducing scaling up to them was the scale of advocacy really gets scaled up. We don’t treat scaling up as an afterthought. It’s embedded from the very start in all the program designs, which is grounded in gender equality, rights-based approach, cost effectiveness, and sustainability. So we scaled three programs in India. of which were done by Population Foundation of India, but with very little resources and the cost effectiveness was amazing. So we’re talking about reaching 150 million people through our program called I, A Woman Can Achieve Anything. It’s a transmedia. entertainment education program. We’ve reached 230 villages in India, collaborating with the government, being funded by the government for 18 years to bring public back into public health. We’ve also worked with USAID and Government of India on developing a health of the urban poor for the entire country. So we developed the pilots that could be scaled up. Now the question to ask for us in terms of the advocacy is how do we convince donors as well as implementers to turn to understand the cost, the wastage in the development sector that this junkyard of pilots is a waste. And that is the second approach we’ve used. And I’ll stop here.

 

Part 2 –  How transformative scaling works (or doesn’t work)

JMS: “We have to work on the systems that underpin this barrier for going to scaling. It’s not just about convincing people that this matters, it’s about making things really happen”

The main messages (why scale up is not at the core of the international community)

• The system of incentives for public institutions drives for volumes
• None of the public institutions are rewarded and strategically focused on impacts
• For political leaders, political masters, heads of institutions, etc., it’s always nice to have a beautiful, innovative project to show. And it’s much less glamorous, saying that you have brought to scale something that was fancy, sexy, and you could show.

OK, well, thank you very much, Poonam. It’s fascinating. And I’d like to share with you at this stage of the conversation that there’s a striking question about why this scaling philosophy has not been embedded so far in most, despite all the speeches in what especially donor agencies, large development banks do. The thing which seems so obvious to us in this discussion is drive for efficiency for making small things which are successful scale up is not at the core of the international community, whether it’s NGOs, public institutions, etc. There are probably many reasons, but I would like to highlight three of them. One is the system of incentives for public institutions, this drive for volumes. that they have, which lead them to put the emphasis on spending their own money and doing visible projects one by one with very strong conformity, compliance constraints. And this leads also with less concern for leverage. probably than we should. A second reason we might imagine is the fact that none of the public institutions are rewarded and strategically focused on impacts. They are focused upon volumes, pending, what they have in their mind, and scaling up is about impacts. basically, and saving as much money as possible to go as far as possible. And this philosophy is very much contrary to the public management systems we have implemented in agencies and development banks. But then finally, I won’t be too long on that. There might be also what we say a political economy issue in the sense that for political leaders, political masters, heads of institutions, etc., it’s always nice to have a beautiful, innovative project to show. And it’s much less glamorous, saying that you have brought to scale something that was fancy, sexy, and you could show. So the glory is not in favor of our agenda. But if all this is true, it also means that we have to work on the systems that underpin this barrier for going to scaling. It’s not just about convincing people that this matters, it’s about making things really happen and this has to go through the way agencies, development banks and probably NGOs are also run. But we wanted during this meeting in this conference to have an access to practice, to field. And I’m very happy that we have with us Amos Dembélé speaking from Côte d’Ivoire. And Amos, you’re the Bright Director of TARL, which means Teaching at the Right Level, TARL Africa. And this is typically a scaling up operation. So we are very much eager to listen to you explaining what TARL is and in which way it is a true scaling enterprise.

 

Amos Dembélé (TARL, scaling an education program in Côte d’Ivoire, with the support of FID): “ So this is the government-led program to scale up proven approach or program that have been implemented in Cote d’Ivoire in the last 10 years ”

The main messages:

• The scaling process starts with 50 schools in 2018, then 200 schools in 2020, 1000 scools in 2023 and now 18 000.

Thanks. Thanks, Jean-Michel, for giving me the floor. I want also to say thank you to AFD and also FID for giving us, as TARL Africa, the opportunity to share our experience in this forum. So yeah, TARL means teaching at the right level. So it’s an education approach that was developed to tackle the reading and mathematic crisis in the world, particularly in Africa. TARL as approach for the specific case of Cote d’Ivoire was called PEC, Programme d’Enseignement Cible, at the beginning, because TARL started in 2018 in Cote d’Ivoire. And since last year, the name has changed. Now the government is calling PEC, which is the TARL program, the government is calling it Remediation remediation as part of the overall government-led program, which is called PNAPAS. PNAPAS means Programme National d’Amélioration des Premiers Apprentissages Scolaires. So this is the government-led program to scale up proven approach or program that have been implemented in Cote d’Ivoire in the last 10 years. And TARL is part of those two proven programs that the government of Cote d’Ivoire decided to scale up. And TARL, in general, really to move from school to all to reading for all. If you look at the business as usually people were focused on the schooling for all approach, but we can ensure that all children have access to school, but it’s not easy to ensure that all of them are learning. So the TARL approach will, you know, ensure that those who are in school are also learning. So this is basically for the specific case of Cote d’Ivoire, but coming back on the TARL approach itself, it’s a very simple approach. Right, that’s when we enter in the classroom, it will start with a very simple one on one assessment. So this assessment is done by the school facilitator or teacher, and then the teacher will group the children in grade three. to six by level instead by grades. So this is also very particular for TARL. Then after this grouping, there is a specific activities and specific material focused on literacy and also on numeracy that the teacher have to use with the children, which is also very appropriate for the level of each group. Then, based on the activities implementation, children will learn, they will play in the whole group classroom, in the small group classroom, and also individually basis, and then the teacher will continue to progress them, to assess them, if he will realize that some children who are assessed and and grouped in beginner level, for example, when these children will acquire the competencies for the specific group, then the teacher will move him or move her to the next group, which is the word paragraph, for example. So, and so on, so forth. Accordingly, there is also some assessments, three-time assessment in the year. There is the baseline, there is a midline and endline. And after each assessment, there is a new grouping. And based on this new grouping, the teacher will adapt activity accordingly. So then now, how we really scale up the child approach in Cote d’Ivoire? We started in 2018 with 50 schools. After one year, the pilot, the government decided to add 100 50 new schools. So we, from 50, we moved to 200 schools on 2029, 2020. Then after the second phases of implementation, the government decided after, of course, an implementation evaluation, impact evaluation report, the government decided to scale up the TAL approach in 100, 1,000 schools. from 2021 to 2023. And then from 2024, now the government is deciding to scale up the TARL approach nationally in around 18,000 schools. And this will start from September 2025. I will pause here. If there is any specific question related to this, I will take them. Thanks.

 

JMS: Yes, we will come back to you later, Amos, if you wish, because this is a remarkable example of how things can operate and how we can as we said, really improve AIDS impact. And this is very much all what FEED is about. And hence, I’m very happy also to welcome my colleague, Anne Thibault, as I have to clarify conflict of interest as being a board member of FID, a happy board member of FID. And impact has been from day one at the core of the operating philosophy of FID, which, on the other hand, is an innovation fund. So this paradox is quite interesting, fascinating, and it would be very useful, Anne, that you could kindly explain to us first probably quickly what FID is. and how innovation and impact are all together embedded in what you do.

 

Anne Thibault (Fund on Innovation for Development -FID): “ Scaling is really at the core of our investment thesis ”  

The main messages:

• FID is through a model that is open (all sectors and regions), tiered (3 types of grants), and evidence-based
• All projects supported by FID need to develop a vision and a plan for their pathway to scale from the very beginning
• It’s very much about institutionalizing innovation into public systems for scale
• Scaling raises a whole new set of research questions for which we have few answers

Thank you, Jean-Michel, and very happy to be part of this important conversation and discuss with you how donors could not only support scaling, but as you said earlier, impact at scale. So just a quick word on FID, the Fund for Innovation and Development. We are an independent funding mechanism hosted by AFD. It was launched in 2020 by Esther Duflo, the Nobel Prize winner in economics. to help modernize France’s international solidarity policy. So our model, how we go about funding innovations that address major global development challenges, is through a model that is open, tiered, and evidence-based. So open because we support all projects from all sectors, all regions, all types of innovators. Tiered because we offer different funding levels depending on how advance how mature the innovation is, and evidence-based as we focus on solutions that have demonstrated impact or are working to build that evidence. So scaling is really at the core of our investment thesis. It’s one of our three selection criteria together with impact and cost-effectiveness. That means that, as Poonam said, all projects supported by FID need to develop a vision and a plan for their pathway to scale from the very beginning. And so we have three types of grants to support scaling at different moments of an innovation development. We have our stage two grants that are for testing promising ideas. And building the evidence needed for scale through rigorous impact evaluation. So we are strong believers that evidence may not be sufficient to take something that worked at small scale to larger scale, but it’s definitely necessary. And so we have 43 of those grants and it’s about 60% of our funding. Then we have our Stage 3 grants. that support the transition to scale. So for these grants, we focus on projects with existing evidence of impact, but that are at the beginning of their scaling journey when there’s still a learning agenda around effective delivery and impact at scale. And these grants are really meant to lay the groundwork for larger scale implementation and to kick off a broader policy adoption at a national level. And then we have our innovation and public policy grants, which are meant specifically to support governments to take the lead by adapting innovations often developed by others and building the systems and capacity they need to scale them up sustainably using the evidence. So it’s very much about institutionalizing innovation into public systems for scale. What do we fund at scale? We see ourselves not really as the main funder for large-scale implementation, our funding maybe is too limited, but instead we see ourselves as a learning partner on scaling impact, because even when innovation has shown strong results at a small scale, Scaling raises a whole new set of research questions for which we have few answers. For example, about implementation fidelity, are the mechanisms that drove impact at small scale still in place when the program is scaled up? Or can the intervention be delivered at a lower cost without compromising the effectiveness at scale? So these are the kinds of questions we help project teams explore. not only to help them strengthen their own work, but also to inform the broader field on how to scale innovations in an impactful and sustainable way. And I’ll stop here and maybe I can say a word later on what we’ve achieved after four years.

 

JMS: Yes, yes, yes. Please stay online and we’ll come back to you later. And I would like to take this opportunity to have, and the fact that we are very lucky to have Toon Driesen with us today. Thun, you are working at Enabel, a well-known Belgium development agency operating in a very visible way among others in Africa. And you personally are an innovation and sustainability expert with over a decade of experience driving impactful change across Europe and Africa. And I would like very much to take this opportunity after Anne to get your personal experience in scaling.

 

Toon Driesen (Enabel): “ Through the Enabel Innovation Hub, we finance and support the scaling of innovations that contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals ”

The main messages:

• Scaling, especially in what we call low resource environments, is just really hard, especially when it comes to making things financially sustainable
• A lot of those great initiatives, at some point, they hit a wall once the initial funding runs out, simply because there’s no clear plan or there is no business model to keep things going or growing
• Making solutions both affordable and accessible while figuring out the financial side remains a huge challenge
• We also guide our partners in exploring and testing the uncertainties around those innovations, and we help them gain evidence
• We try to foster partnerships between the innovators and research partners, private sector, institutions, potential funders
• Co-creation really means staying close to our partners, listening deeply to what they need
• We don’t have a real blueprint for our scaling support. So we try to be very flexible and adaptive

Thank you, Jean-Michel, and thank you also to all the participants for joining us in this interesting debate. Indeed, Enable, the Belgian agency for international cooperation, is very active mostly on the African continent. And as our name suggests, we do work really as an enabler. We are acting as a technical and financial partner for public, private and non-profit partners on the continent. And actually, just like the FID I’ve done and their full innovation for the development, a few years ago, we designed a dedicated innovation and scaling mechanism called the Enabel Innovation Hub. And through the Enabel Innovation Hub, we finance and support the scaling of innovations that contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals. by helping them transition from nice pilot projects to impacted scale. And some of the partners we have been supporting just to give you a taste of what we have been doing are, for example, Makerere University in Uganda, who’s using low cost sensors to monitor air quality in African cities. And through their work and data, they already managed to influence clean air policies in Uganda and in eight other African cities. Another organization that we have been supporting is Physicians for Human Rights, a US-based NGO who’s using mobile technology to document cases of sexual violence in the DRC, supporting survivors, medical staff, and law enforcement to build legal cases around those sexual violences. So what we did is actually we designed a support offer for these type of organizations, basically because we noticed that many promising Africa-based initiatives are not scaling. And as Benjamin already explained, this was generally an observation shared by many of the OECD DAC members. What we noticed over the years working with Enabel in different regions on the continent is that scaling, especially in what we call low resource environments, is just really hard, especially when it comes to making things financially sustainable. A lot of those great initiatives, at some point, they hit a wall once the initial funding runs out, simply because there’s no clear plan or there is no business model to keep things going or growing. And this is especially hard in sectors like education or health, where you often can’t rely on purely revenue-based models or where public funding is limited and donor funding is scattered. So making solutions both affordable and accessible while figuring out the financial side remains a huge challenge. And that’s exactly why we decided to design this innovation and scaling mechanism. with many of the ingredients that were already mentioned and that are quite similar to the FID. We have financial support, we have technical support, and just like the FID, we double down on learning to stimulate evidence-based scaling. So we also guide our partners in exploring and testing the uncertainties around those innovations, and we help them gain evidence. And there are two additional areas that we’re focusing on that I think are worth mentioning. First is partnerships. We try to foster partnerships between the innovators and research partners, private sector, institutions, potential funders, basically with scaling partners who can take over when our official collaboration ends. Building those partnerships typically entail quite high transaction costs for many of the local organizations that we’re working in. So bringing our networks and connections often means a lot to them. And next to this, we also invest a lot in peer learning between projects, both remotely and in person through our alumni community. And what we see is that even many of the organizations, they continue to show up and they continue to contribute to this community well after our official collaboration ended. Second thing is co-creation. And I know this is probably the most used buzzword in our sector these days, but for us co-creation really means staying close to our partners, listening deeply to what they need and designing our support offer together with them. We currently, we don’t have a real blueprint for our scaling support. So we try to be very flexible and adaptive. And we offer different things which can go from very tailored technical support to capacity building, networking, coaching on soft skills, or even participation to international conferences and events for our partners to get exposure. So basically, I think to conclude at Enabel, we are still very much in a learning mode as well, trying to figure out what really helps speeding up scaling why it works and why it doesn’t work in certain contexts. Back to you, Jean-Michel.

 

JMS: Now, thanks very much, Thun, for this very concrete dive into the reality of your operations. And I hope Poonam is still connected, because I wanted to ask her to continue this discussion on implementation, but I see that she is not there anymore. So then, in order not to lose time, I will move directly to Papa Madusa from AFD, whom I have the pleasure again to welcome in this session. Pap, you have had a long career and very successful career. in the private sector at UNDP, in the Senegalese government, leading what was a very successful and groundbreaking innovation, the Delegation à l’Emploi Rapide at the time, and you joined AFD. as an executive director in charge of partnership. And as we are continuing with this discussion of how we implement scaling up in agencies, I would like very much to know more from you What has been the reason and how has been evolving the innovation unit which you have created around two years ago? And what’s the way forward for you on this journey?

 

Papa Amadou Sarr (AFD): “ Scaling is something that is very, how can I say, creative way of making sure our work is done properly ”

The main messages:

• scaling has been tested for several projects here in the agency on the ground
• the ingredients for scaling to happen is very, very simple. Making sure that there is a political will, there is strong support from government and deep donor community, both multilateral and bilateral. The most important one is the will and the volunteer to do it.
• Instead of creating something new, let’s just move on and scale it up to have more impact
• Scaling has to be for me at the inception of the project level to be making sure it works
• Finance in Common plays an important role in scaling through public development banks
• the political dimension of scaling, It’s essential to work together
• my core message to you all is scaling must be done

Very well, thanks. There’s some noise because I am at a conference, people going around back and forth and it was difficult to find the spot. But I want to say thank you to you and the whole community of Scaling for organizing this event after the successful event we had in Paris a week ago. And, you know, I want to go straight forward, as you’ve mentioned, with the experience I’ve had and the work we’re doing at the AFD to say that at this level, for our experience in implementing scaling, that the agency is a financial institution that is present in 115 countries with a strong operational involvement. And you know all of this because no need to remind that Jean-Michel was our CEO and have done a great job in developing the agency, its programs, and also at his time, scaling was already an important target and we want to commend his work on that. So to say that scaling is, as I said, something that is important in our work. Second, scaling is something that is very, how can I say, creative way of making sure our work is done properly. And scaling has been tested for several projects here in the agency on the ground with concrete example, in the water sector in Turkey, in SME sector in Senegal, and the ingredients for scaling to happen is very, very simple. Making sure that there is a political will, there is strong support from government and deep donor community, both multilateral and bilateral. the operations will do the rest. And every year we finance around 1,000 projects, public and private, through loans, guarantees and grants, together with our subsidiary in charge of Propelco, inside the private sector, which is Proparco, and technical assistant, which is Expertise France. Our teams work hand in hand with partners to make sure that our projects are implemented. And as Jean-Michel said earlier on, I worked through a program called Youth and Women Entrepreneurship Programs as Minister in the Government of Senegal. And this work has been catalytic for me in order to implement projects not to do pilot projects, but to see how, together with other organizations, AFD, AFDB, World Bank, they can come and scale projects with government funding, to not just stay at the micro level and at the pilot level, but to scale it up. At that level, you realize that the commitment from the Prime Minister, the President, the Minister of Finance were incremental because they were pushing and making sure that this project was not just in one region, but in all the 14 regions of the country. And we always ask the partners that will come to us, be it bilateral, KFW, multilateral, World Bank, all the foundations, the MasterCard Foundation, tell them, Look at this project that’s been done with AFTA and African Rural Bank. Instead of creating something new, let’s just move on and scale it up to have more impact. This is a concrete example. I have to see this, how it works. Another example in Turkey, we financed an innovative water treatment facility in a large city in Turkey, but they were 34 cities in Turkey which cover a million people and we’re sure that those people in all those cities were interested and we commissioned the market study at a time and in the end 10 cities were interested and half were ready to commit. So we had to look for more resources in order to replicate those models that work in one city to all of the cities. And for that, we needed to mobilize more resources with multiple partners, Islamic Development Bank, World Bank, et cetera, et cetera. So in a nutshell, for me, the ingredients for scaling are quite simple. The most important one is the will and the volunteer to do it. And this message I want to share there is we need to have a strong support for our leaders at policy level, Minister of Finance, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and even sometimes at the presidency level to make it work. And we need to have one, two, three concrete examples and streamline it over. And it will become like what has been done today about the sustainability issues on climate finance, but also the work we’ve doing all together an MLE. So scaling has to be for me at the inception of the project level Jean-Michel to be making sure it works. Second quick comment is about what we do with the FICS, you know very well, Finance in Common which plays an important role in scaling through public development banks. FICS, as you know, is a coalition of 536 public development banks, representing around $23 trillion in assets. And I am their host, the secretariat, and chairs the network. Their role in financing in the global south is strategic and very important, and it is increasingly recognized worldwide. In Seville today, they presented recommendations of enabling the SDG financing, and the report is available online for some publicity. And Scaling shares the same ambition, unlocking public digital banks’ full potential to support sustainable development to make more impact. And last but not least, Jean-Michel, unlocking potential of financial institutions to attain sustainable development is something that has to be made effectively with SDG enablers, with partners, be it multilateral banks, bilateral banks, private sector, increasingly philanthropy, so that we meet the impact and the needs we are serving in the developing countries we work. And one last thing about technical aspects is, I said it earlier on, the political dimension of scaling, so Jean-Michel, It’s essential to work together. It is essential to make sure scaling is put up front in the beginning of the processes. Collective action is essential to create the right environment for life scale investment. and institutional acceptance is still a barrier, as you can imagine, but scaling is not. And finally, both an international representative must be convinced that scaling is a mission-aligned and institutionally valuable. So I commend the work of the scaling practice and all the work Larry doing, Richard, Jean-Michel, and Johannes who is not here with us today, and all the partners that we’re working together. And to conclude, I would just say that my core message to you all is scaling must be done. We have to do it. We have the means to do it. And we have to look for the resources and the necessary partners to make it happen at country level, locally, and internationally. Thank you, Jean-Michel.

 

JMS: Well, thank you, Pap, for having been able to make it with us today, as you were also trapped in this conference in Seville. I think this is where you are, if I’m not mistaken. So great that you can be talking from there as well. And that will now go back again to the African continent, if Koffi Djossou can hear me and is able to take the floor, because Koffi is a very important person to us. Koffi, you work at the West Africa Development Bank, BOAD. But you are the senior expert in charge of innovation in this bank, so a critical resource for our discussion today and a very practical and very important stakeholder as you are a key funder. as other development banks, but given your closeness to the field in Western Africa, a particularly important one. So we would like also to understand more from you about the role of national financing and the way you insert development innovation in your own practice at the BOAD. And floor is yours, Koffi, if you are OK.

 

Koffi Djossou (BOAD): “ We understand that public development banks have a pivotal role in the line of scaling ”

The main messages:

• the 3 important avenues ot the third strategic plan: building economic integration for our eight member states, creating value, provide the necessary resources to respond to climate mitigation
• The Green Farmer Project (transforming the original waste from cities into organic fertilizer) is tested on one city and we are trying to see how that project can be replicated or scaled up either at the national or regional level through innovation (carbon credit)
• Many of our project promoters do not have the necessary resources, we need to find an alternative mechanism to approach the ecosystem and then to actually respond to impact.

Thank you very much, Jean-Michel. I’ll see you later. Have a good evening tomorrow. First of all, allow me to tell you briefly, you know, BOAD already, West African Development Bank, and since 2021, we’ve embarked in our third strategic plan called Juliba with three important avenues. The first one is building economic integration for our eight member states, creating value either for the public and private sector, and then the third and the important one, we provide the necessary resources to respond to climate mitigation. So coming back to the role of innovation within your whole development scheme, it’s important that since they already have joined the IDFC, We’ve been working together with other public development bank in aligning our operations and an intervention to the Paris Agreement and indeed to a sustainable development goal. So we value innovation because recently, since September 2024, We have set up within the bank’s cultural innovation department, which is part of a sustainable development, showing that the importance of innovation for sustainability in our operation. What we are trying to do is that we understand that public development banks, even such as BYD and other banks, have a pivotal role in the line of scaling. And what we are trying to do is to identify projects and do our work within the global financing ecosystem. We are trying in the region, as we are close to our member states, to be an SDG implementer. So to act, as you said, I heard from your call, impact, collaboration, those are work we value. And recently, allow me to tell you concretely that we have identified one important project in a city called Aneho, close to the border of Benin. And what we are trying to do, looking at this project, is to see how that project can be replicated or scaled up either at the national or regional level. Let me give you quickly a brief information about that project. It’s a project called the Green Farmer, which consists of transforming the original waste from cities into organic fertilizer. Those fertilizer will be then used by producers from those communities and towns for sustainable agriculture and soil regeneration. And the financing innovative consists of measuring carbon sequestration and transforming this into a credit card. And this project is being piloted by the city of Anaheim, through the mayor, in partnership with a trusted funded party called So looking at those schemes, it’s important for us to look at how we are going to support that project and do the mapping of growers which will enable definitely carbon The city of Annaro in partnership with COFIDES have approached the bank to enable them to set up a carbon assessment tool effectively in generating carbon credit and then applying this for funding agricultural campaign. So this is a concrete example of innovative approach finding an innovative mechanism or innovative vehicle, because we have a region, eight francophone countries, but definitely many of our project promoters do not have the necessary resources to respond. to a bank’s need when we’re talking about financing traditionally. But definitely, we need to find an alternative mechanism to approach the ecosystem and then to actually respond to the world most of us or most of the speakers have used here, impact.

 

Part 3 – The obstacles to scaling

JMS: Koffi, this is a fascinating experience and example of what we’re talking all of us today, but why is it, coming back to the question, so why don’t we do that more often? Could you elaborate on the obstacles that you think your own institutions, for instance, is facing in the scaling up agenda?

 

Koffi Djossou

Main messages:

• very diverse area… the harmonization of the policy framework is not yet mature
• limited of capacity, technical capacity or expertise
• limited investment support
• a shortage of viable projects or other investment opportunity
• limited risk appetite among local banks
• Difficulty to offer a competitive lending term and even pricing

OK, well, let me tell you limited investment support, first of all, it’s important to understand, for example, for my region, African continent specifically, our region is a very diverse area. And the first important thing, it’s important to mention that the policy framework, the harmonization of the policy framework is not yet mature. Restrictive regulatory framework We lead of lack of policy. We have. issue for eight countries in the region, three are landlocked with what you may understand, or you may know already, the geopolitical agenda. So policy issue is definitely one of a barrier, limited of capacity, limited of technical capacity or expertise actually to work or to develop a project in line with SDGs and Paris Agreement. And indeed, As you may know, for most of the sub-Saharan African country, there’s limited investment support. Because in some region, my region have landlocked country, there may be a shortage of viable projects or other investment opportunity. And the other point, lack of continuity of post-intervention, limited risk appetite among local banks who are not willing to take risks, specifically with startups and entrepreneurs. So those are things I really want to mention and above all, there’s the lending aspect, the lending aspect. Difficulty to offer a competitive lending term and even pricing, and also, may I say, currency risk. So those are things we have to look at. One important thing to address all those critical issues called value proposition. I thank you for your time.

 

JMS: Well, thank you very much. And focusing on a value proposition, focusing on value created is a great challenge, which is addressed to all of us. And let me let me go back to Toon in about because you’re so enthusiastic and focused on the scaling up agenda. But I’ve I want also to put you the question of the obstacles of why we are not moving so fast enough if all the positives are what we say here.

 

Toon Driesen: “ We do notice this short-termism when it comes to donors ”

Main messages:

• scaling often is slow, can be very messy, can be unpredictable, and it’s not always a super sexy topic neither -> better communicate
• a general lack of understanding, of deep understanding about how scaling works
• risk aversion, which also results in high transaction costs and costs for due diligence

Yes, thank you, Jean-Michel. And I want to maybe continue what Koffi already said. Koffi mentioned already the funding parts when it comes to scaling, not only the volumes, but also I think the risk adversity or the rigidity that we often face. And I think that’s really something we need to look at. And when it comes to obstacles and challenges, I think we need to start looking inwards as well. look at how we as a community of donors and technical partners are working with social innovators in the global south and when I talk about Enabel I can refer mostly to Africa and how we work with many of those social innovators in Africa. If we look at those funding part I think We as a technical agency, we also work with donors and we do notice this short-termism when it comes to donors. So many of our donors, they prefer quick wins and outputs rather than investing in scaling. And I think, let’s face it, scaling often is slow, can be very messy, can be unpredictable, and it’s not always a super sexy topic neither. So I think there’s also, a part on our side is to better communicate about why we’re doing this and to really get our story out. And linked to this, I think there’s also maybe a general lack of understanding, of deep understanding about how scaling works. especially in an African context or in contexts where resources are limited. And these are often those systems of scaling or these approaches or pathways to scaling are often very different from the Silicon Valley models of scaling, which we might intuitively relate to. So I really think it’s up to us as a community to better communicate, to get our story out. And to really at some sometimes also really just resist this tendency of going for quick wins. So again, related to the financing infrastructure or the architecture, indeed, a lot of risk aversion, which also results in high transaction costs and costs for due diligence that can weigh heavily on especially local partners. So linking these funding questions maybe even to an obstacle or a challenge about power dynamics and a power dimension. And I think often the organizations who are closest to the problems, the local innovators, are also often the ones having the most difficulties of having access or getting access to funding networks and decision-making spaces. If we’re really serious about helping those local innovators, we need to be able to adapt our mechanisms, our funding mechanisms, our support mechanisms, and really start co-creating with them. So yes, I think it’s both financial obstacles, but very much linked to power dynamics. Back to you, Jean-Michel.

 

JMS: Well, thanks very much. That was very useful, and that was great to hear those lessons from Enabel and Beaudet. And I’d like to put the same ones to Larry. Larry, you see many donors, many agencies, institutions. You have a kind of cross-cutting vision from outside. What is your vision about those obstacles and how do you see the current status of the scaling up process?

 

Larry Cooley: “ because of the problems that the sector is going through, ironically, it is exactly the right time to push… it sounds odd to be optimistic at this moment, but I think indeed I am ”

The main messages:

• they start with the incentive structure
• disinclination to do things collectively
• short term v. long term: the typical time for something to scale is somewhere around 15 years
• recognizing the central role that governments and private markets play, involving them earlier in the process, often taking our lead from them in what we’re doing, rather than expecting them to pick up something late in the game
• How do we set the goals and the accountability standards?
• Scaling requires a longer term but also a more flexible type of funding often pooled funding
• Scaling Community is now finishing 25 case studies of funders, many of whom have really done important things

Thanks for the question, Jean-Michel. One thing I would say is that in listening to the presentations today, you’re really watching the World Cup superstars talk about the problem. If we had a more general cross section, we would see more clearly where the constraints are. And for me, the constraints are very close to the three that you laid out originally. And they start with the incentive structure. I hate to say it, but I really think a lot of this problem begins on the funder side. Particularly funders that are dealing with appropriated funds and where they have relationships with their own parliaments or in our case, Congress. and therefore feel the need to show what they did with their money on their terms and with their compliance criteria. I think it’s well-intentioned and the damage is inadvertent, but the damage is real on that because it’s lapsed us into a world where what’s relatively small money, maybe it’s two, three, 4% of a government or a sector’s budget ends up having a disproportionate influence on what happens vis-a-vis scale. If we took the view that you’re hearing expressed by people today, I think it would be a very different world. And what we’d see is there would be a limited number of priorities that governments would have. And we would line up behind those in a much more systematic way. And when we have something that works, we’d stick with it with some fidelity and over some substantial period of time. The good news on this is that the community of practice is now finishing 25 case studies of funders, many of whom have really done important things. And I think if we really took stock of our own experience, we might be able to lift ourselves out of a certain kind of inertia, a certain kind of path dependency into looking at this differently and even push those who are the funding sources for appropriated funds to look at some of these things differently. So we in the community of practice have moved from a model where we’re essentially doing peer learning among ourselves to one where we’re trying to influence the people who can really make a difference on this. And I really invite those on the call to join us in that endeavor. So I’ll mention just a couple of things that we found are really important in this and that we think can be changed albeit with some difficulty. One is the, disinclination to do things collectively. It seems that there’s a very strong incentive right now for organizations and funders to work individually, and it’s very difficult to make change happen that way. Second is time horizons. As a couple of people have mentioned, and we found in our own work, the typical time for something to scale is somewhere around 15 years. That’s way beyond the scope of a project. So seeing how the project fits into that trajectory is an important part of really having a scaling plan. A third is recognizing the central role that governments and private markets play in anything being successfully scaled and involving them earlier in the process, often taking our lead from them in what we’re doing, rather than expecting them to pick up something late in the game. A fourth, internal to the funders themselves, is how do we set the goals and the accountability standards? What do the evaluation systems evaluate? Do they evaluate whether the resources were efficiently dispensed? Or do they also look at the extent to which change has been catalyzed and sustained over time at scale? Some of that we think requires a longer term but also a more flexible type of funding often pooled funding often worked in concert with the organizations that will be a sensibly the implementers and the funders at scale. Now I would have said if you’d asked me 10 years ago was that possible. I would say, well, only if you’re a big optimist. But I think in the 25 case studies, we now see quite a number of examples where people are doing important work. So it feels to us like this may be, ironically, in part because of the problems that the sector is going through, ironically, exactly the right time to push. to push hard on trying to get those who are funding programs and those who are on the receiving end but should be in the driver’s seat to advocate much more forcefully around this concept of what it really takes to make change happen at scale and in a sustainable way. So it sounds odd to be optimistic at this moment, but I think indeed I am.

 

JMS: Well, it’s a very important message, this message of optimism. And Anne, you would be the final person to talk and to share with us if you share this optimism or not, based on what you are currently doing at FID.

 

Anne Thibault

The main messages:

• 10 years after the launch of Development Innovation Ventures (DIV), for each dollar invested, they had managed to generate $17 in benefits, in social and economic return

Yes, absolutely. So of course, we’re still at early stages of our own existence. We’ve been around for four years. But I think this, like adopting this, this open tiered evidence based approach allows us to, to take that risk to take some risk on to really support what works so going small with the things that we’re still learning about and we’re testing ideas, but for the things that we’re taking to scale being very intentional with with the evidence. And I think so far this model has been working quite well. We’ve learned also from what used to be, unfortunately, the development innovation ventures at DIV[1]. What we had learned from their early work is that 10 years after the launch of their fund, for each dollar invested, they had managed to generate $17 in benefits, in social and economic return. So this approach of risk-taking quite similar to what we see in the venture capital works. So far, as far as we’re concerned, we have 10 grants that support a scale and we’ve managed to reach 3.5 million people with evidence-based intervention in that short period of time. And we’re hoping that this number will easily triple or quadruple in the coming years as other partners step in and join us in that effort. So yes, this is what I can say at the moment and hoping to have more to show also based on the great results. that interventions like teaching at the right level that FID is supporting are achieving and probably they’re on their way to reach millions of children in Côte d’Ivoire, so really proud to be part of that effort.

 

Conclusion: final messages

• Toon Driesen: it takes a village to raise a child, while it takes an entire ecosystem to deliver a sustainable impact at scale. That means long-term and joint commitments, true collaboration, shifting power dynamics.
• Larry Cooley: organizations don’t usually change on their own. They change under pressure… we need to impose some pressure on ourselves. Windows for change open at only periodic times…those windows are open at this particular moment
• Koffi Djossou: call for action. Action to strengthen collaboration. Collaboration amongst partners in order to avoid sometimes duplication in action. And on the other hand, how do we build institutional capacity with our local partners, specifically from a public entity?
• Amos Dembele: Scale is about partnership. Scale is about evidence. Scale need advocacy and also need time and adaptation. And then scale is possible and need to be discussed since the beginning. What is the opportunity that this forum will give to the government to be engaged later on on these wonderful messages and communication?
• Poonam Muttreja: we must view the moment of crisis as an opportunity to reimagine how we make grants, funding and prioritize sustainability and scale which go hand in hand. One of the biggest mistakes is not scaling up pilots that have the potential to work. The biggest, the most important way to scale is through government programs. I want to say to donors that you have to have a long-term horizon. A short-term horizon will continue to create junkyards of violence.
• Papa Amadou Sarr: for my past experience of what I’ve seen over the last 20 years in the development sphere, I know that scaling is a necessity. We need to do it, we need to continue it, and we need the resources that need to be done to make it happen.
• Jean–Michel Severino: proving that we can be more efficient, that aid can reach high-level impacts, is a condition for having financing flowing back to the policy.

 

JMS: Well, the numbers that you have just quoted are very impressive and they are the expression of optimism that Larry was also sharing with us and they are providing numbers under the feeling of optimism that Larry also shared with us. Now it’s time that we move quietly to the conclusion of what has been a very exciting, very interesting debate. I would like to give the opportunity to each of our speakers to share one minute, one last sentence, one last message that you would like our viewers to remember from our discussion and if you agree I will end with Poonam who unfortunately had to move on in discussion and give her a little bit more time to elaborate if she agrees on the positives and the obstacles of our agenda. And then we’ll kindly ask Papa Amadou Sarr, who has been the kind host of our discussion, to make a final statement before we depart. Without any specific order, and having in mind that Ben had to leave us early, Toon, one final message for our viewers?

 

Toon Driesen: Yes, I’ll try to put it into one sentence. I think it takes a village to raise a child, while it takes an entire ecosystem to deliver a sustainable impact at scale. So all the things we’ve been saying about long-term and joint commitments, true collaboration, shifting power dynamics, I think it all fits into that one sentence.

 

JMS: even shorter than one minute to New York, quite impressive. Larry, you may have two minutes then.

 

Larry Cooley: Well, I think my issue is one of political mobilization on this, that somehow my experience has been that organizations don’t usually change on their own. They change under pressure. And some of the pressure that we’re facing right now is imposed upon us, but I think we need to impose some pressure on ourselves. And I’m not sure the range of people who are on this call, but I hope people will feel not only inspired by the conversation we’re having, but move to action by the conversation we’re having. In particular, whatever organization you happen to be in, if it’s a host country government, if it’s a funder, if it’s a researcher, think about what it’s going to try and what it’s going to take and what role that organization and you personally can play in trying to advance this thinking. Because having been at this now for a while, what I know is that it’s painfully slow. But windows for change open at only periodic times. And I happen to feel because of the difficulty we’re in right now, those windows are open at this particular moment. And so as a community of practice, I invite you to join us or to take your own action. to try to move these things forward, recognizing that this is a collective goods problem. And unless we have collective action to achieve a collective good, we’re going to be sitting here having a similar conversation 10 years from now.

 

JMS: Thanks very much. I hope that we’ll have this conversation again in 10 years time, but to celebrate success, Larry. That’s exactly what I hope. And Koffi, do you want to follow up and share with us your last comments, your last message for this meeting?

 

Koffi Djossou: Thanks. My last message, if you allow me, could be a call for action. Action to strengthen collaboration. Collaboration amongst partners in order to avoid sometimes duplication in action. And on the other hand, how do we build institutional capacity with our local partners, specifically from a public entity? So that’s what I may recommend as a final message. Thank you.

 

JMS: Thank you. Very clear, very sharp. And Amos?

 

Amos Dembele: Yeah, thanks, Shams. For me, there is five things, very quick. Scale is about partnership. Scale is about evidence. Scale need advocacy and also need time and adaptation. And then scale is possible and need to be discussed since the beginning of the activity, since the beginning of the project. I will end with a question. the stakeholders around the government, because for me, scale-up is, at the end of the day, a leadership of the government. So my question is, what is the opportunity that this forum will give to the government to be engaged later on on these wonderful messages and communication? Thank you.

 

JMS: Good question. And Poonam, maybe you’re not going to respond to this question because you are speaking from the NGO and NGO point of view, which is precious. But let me, as you are the last one in this session before PAP’s conclusions, ask you whether you can provide us with your Very simple, from the heart, vision of what would be your hopes and what would be the obstacles that you feel in this agenda that you are really at the core of.

 

Poonam Muttreja: So my big hope is that the ongoing financial constraints which have intensified the challenge, we must view the moment of crisis as an opportunity to reimagine how we make grants, funding and prioritize sustainability and scale which go hand in hand. We need to learn from our mistakes. One of the biggest mistakes is not scaling up pilots that have the potential to work and make the right investments and evaluating and advocating in giving evidence To not just the donors, but the governments, we need to involve our governments in a big way. The biggest, the most important way to scale is through government programs. So having their ownership, partnership, involvement, engagement, and their vice council where it exists is very important. You know, we learn all, yes, we can learn a lot from what it works and in the scaling up area, it’s very important. But in this, when we are talking about scale and scaling up, what is most important is that we do not, we do a cost benefit analysis. and see how much it costs to do a junkyard of pilots, which is of no use at the end of the day, but investing in specific programs that have the potential for scale, and then leaving no stone unturned, whether it is evaluation, whether it is bringing allies together, whether it is looking at the cost of investing In large numbers, we found that the cost that we invested in reaching 150 million people in our behavior change communication program was really low at the end of the day. So I think costing is another area that donors need to bring in. And I am sure donors, as well as implementers, the learning has to be for both. But the one player that we need to bring in, and that’s what we did with Lahiri’s guidance and advice in India, we took the agenda to the government and helped the government understand the way of functioning at scale. And last, I want to say, that the scaling up management framework, I think it was Stu who said that that is missing, though you’re doing great work, but the framework is missing. And I would like to say, and Larry, you can contradict me, that the scaling up framework that you have done, the scaling up management framework, is applicable for every part of the world and is applicable for donors, governments, and so on to understand. And finally on donors, I want to say to donors that you have to have a long-term horizon. A short-term horizon will continue to create junkyards of violence. Thank you. I hope I haven’t overstepped my time. Thank you very much.

 

JMS: No, that was perfectly fine, Poonam. You have, thanks for having gratified Larry, for having helped us to scale up the scaling. And something that I’ve also taken from what you have said is this address to all of us, do not leave any stone unturned. So that’s why we have to do now. And Pap, we have a few minutes now for your conclusion. We expect a lot of you and being such an important supporter of our scaling effort. So the last words are for you, for what I’ve been after what has been I think a very successful, a very interesting discussion and, by the way, I thank very much all the speakers who have participated and the viewers who have been many to stay, to remain connected during the one hour and a half of our discussion. So, Pap, the floor is yours for the last words.

 

Papa Amadou Sarr: Thank you, Jean-Michel. You know, just to again thank all of the participants to this incredible work. And thank you, first of all, for your stewardship, your time with Larry, Johannes, and all the teams involved in this work for Bono. And we must make sure that we have right resources to support this work and make sure that what we’ve tested already that is working is scaled up for more impact. And also all of us together, the public development community, bilateral, multilateral and the philanthropy join the forces together to continue this work. And for me, and the IFJ, and then for my past experience of what I’ve seen over the last 20 years in the development sphere, I know that scaling is a necessity. We need to do it, we need to continue it, and we need the resources that need to be done to make it happen. and especially in the context of FFD4, we all here together in Sevilla, that people are asking for more resources. With what we’ve seen with USAID shutdown and the decrease in ODA from several OECD countries, we have to make sure we scale up the few resources we have and make sure that this is something that is good for us, for the developing nations, but also for the planet as a whole. And the discussion we have having here, we’ve seen the opening remark from S.G. Guterres, which said that the rich countries and the powerful people have to make sure to sit at the table to negotiate now, to discuss, to find solutions sooner than later, where they will be obliged. I want to finish with that. And thanks to all of us for the incredible work that’s been done.

 

Jean-Michel Severino: This agenda of skinning up is the core agenda of aid efficiency those days. And it’s important not only because we will have to work with less resources, as we know anyway, but also because proving that we can be more efficient, that aid can reach high-level impacts, is a condition for having financing flowing back to the policy. So it’s at the same time a constraint and the basis for renewal of our policy. Thanks to all of you for being so bright in making the case and being so frank and open in highlighting obstacles, problems, difficulties, addressing the issue of systemic management in the aid community. And I will not like to end this discussion without paying tribute to Eric Beugnot and the colleagues from AFD who have made this discussion possible and spent a lot of work behind the scenes to allow us for this discussion. Have a nice day. I hope the best for the ones who are in Seville. And great. All my best wishes to all of you in India, Africa, in the US, in Paris. I’m maybe forgetting one place. If that’s the case, I will apologize. Bye-bye, everyone.

 

[1] Development Innovation Ventures (DIV) was an open innovation program by USAID that seeks to fund breakthrough solutions to critical global development challenges. It provided grant funding to innovators and researchers to test new ideas, take strategic risks, build evidence