1. Scaling Readiness of SDSR for the management of banana wilt
Wageningen, December
Scaling Readiness of SDSR for the management of banana wilt
Boudy van Schagen & DIETMAR STOIAN
Bioversity International

2. BXW: Serious livelihoods threat in ECA
20+ million banana-based households in East and Central Africa impacted by BXW
Yield loss of up to 100% if not managed
US$2-8 billion lost production value since 2005
Serious risk of further spread into Congo Basin – ultimately threatening US$1.2 billion/year
Mainly transmitted via contaminated farming tools, insects and infected planting material
Several projects in ECA failed to control BXW as proposed technology was not in line with diverse farmer realities

3. Innovative management practices validated, disseminated
Single diseased stem removal (SDSR): core technology validated in both controlled and participatory farmer trials in DR Congo (2015) and Burundi (2017)
Disease incidence reduced from 80% to under 2% in 3 months
Already 20,000 users in DR Congo, Uganda and Burundi
SDSR focus on control of BXW
SDSR allows management by individual households
SDSR is an adaptive technology

4. BEFORE AFTER (+2years)

5. Case study progress
First survey translated and administered to 47 stakeholders in July but website inaccessible due to technical problems
New URL circulated – also did not work.
Third URL circulated, then survey postponed – possible data loss for at least 2 participants
Online survey administration during a BXW workshop in DR Congo not possible due technical platform problems – also, many participants found it difficult to understand exactly what was expected of them.
Switch to paper-based surveys in DR Congo, but these are time and resource intensive to administer.
In addition, versions of #2 and #3 also need to be personalized for each respondent – currently not the case
As of today: multiple participant profile and innovation profile surveys completed, but no innovation assessment surveys  scaling readiness assessment not yet completed – finalization expected by mid-March 2018

6. Strengths
Approach will provide insight into complex scaling landscape, with clear recommendations for action and elements needed for further refinement to achieve scaling readiness
Current project supportive of 'learning by doing', offering a process through which we can adapt, modify, and engage with the scaling process
Important potential for joint learning across cases as scaling partners and approaches need to be context-specific

7. Weaknesses
Survey jargon ('innovation', 'next-user'…) implies that respondents have certain education / background – what about farmers who co-developed tech? How to ensure data quality across diverse groups of respondents?
Stakeholder targeted by the survey require better identification – need for customizing survey to those who are familiar with SDSR and those who are not
Process is intensive – five (?) sequential surveys. If distribution is via hardcopy, then separated in time AND space – how to administer pragmatically? What alternatives exist to avoid 'questionnaire fatigue'?
Scaling readiness currently a 'tacked-on' process (rather than integrated), implemented at or near the end of technology development pipeline
'Scaling readiness' ends where effective scaling begins  need for a broader view spanning the whole impact pathway for impact at scale

8. Opportunities Opportunities for adapting methodology and application:
simplify content
remove jargon
reduce number of iterations
customize to different stakeholder groups
A typology (checklist with definitions) could be applied to better define the stakeholders that should be implicated
SDSR already being successfully scaled: opportunity to verify SR concept and methodology 'ex-post', but also need/opportunity for conceptualizing, implementing and monitoring effective scaling approaches and mechanisms
Scaling readiness should be fully embedded in projects – scaling stakeholders to be engaged early on and scaling readiness to become integral to technology development

9. Threats
Assessment of enabling environment missing – this is critical for a broader view on scaling approaches and mechanisms that spans the whole impact pathway
Technology + EE cannot be separated and both are dynamic – technology refinement needs to go along with refinement of scaling approaches – adaptive management / continuous improvement
Validity of methodology when applying to new country, for example SDSR in Western Kenya where it is unknown/unused – SR surveys difficult to apply there  need for alternative approach

10. Why the EE is critical – the Burundi duality
Burundi Gov to NGOs: either you’re with us or you’re against us
Scaling or technologies need not be rational:
Q: How to position SDSR scaling in this context? Opportunity but also risk

11. How Earmarked Funds were utilised by the team
Staff time:
EF used for covering two 0.1 FTE
NEF/bilateral used for another two 0.1 FTE
Consultant to administer paper-based surveys, data-entry.
Operational costs:
Travel to 5.4 meetings in the Netherlands (August, December)
Communications (three editions of SR Newsletter)
Stakeholder surveys (online / workshop in DRC / print distribution)

12. Way forward
Participating in scaling readiness is a valuable learning process for Bioversity and our partners – we are keen to continue our engagement
Our SDSR case study continues to offer valuable insights into process issues and suggestions for improving the methodology
Need for fixing the technical issues with the survey platform (incl. printing of hard-copy versions) and survey design – once done, we can complete the scaling readiness evaluation for SDSR (target: completion by mid-March)
Strong need for addressing the enabling environment and developing a broader view on scaling approaches and mechanisms spanning the whole impact pathway – Bioversity offers to take the lead on this expansion, and to develop and validate practical tools
Strategic approach to scaling, paired with opportunistic approach to take advantage of emerging 'scaling spaces'?

13. Thank you