110
participatory design in a multi-stakeholder process) may be conducive to achieving
this (Sartas et al. 2019). As already hinted at, the realisation that scaling involves
many interdependencies and a plurality of practices and stakeholders implies that
approaches that allow for multi-stakeholder learning and negotiation are likely to be
relevant in many instances (Leeuwis and Aarts 2011).
Responsible scaling Thinking in terms of interdependent practices between stakeholders also highlights that scaling a particular practice may trigger and/or result in
the scaling of other practices and phenomena that were not initially considered.
Thus, new practices may yield positive or negative consequences for those directly
involved and also generate outcomes that occur at other levels of aggregation. The
use of a new drought-resistant variety may, for example, make households dependent on credit for buying seeds, which – in case of high interest rates – may negatively affect households’ resilience or ability to pay school fees. Similarly, the
application of new oil palm production systems at a large scale may have negative
consequences for biodiversity in a region, or put farmers in another region out of
business. Investigating and anticipating these kinds of interrelations is part and parcel of a broader approach that Wigboldus has labelled ‘responsible scaling’
(Wigboldus 2018) – the careful consideration of possible positive and negative consequences of scaling with regard to diverse societal values and categories of people,
as well as principles of ethics and democracy. Thinking in terms of interdependencies between practices is a useful way of starting such a process (see for more elaboration and guidance Wigboldus and Brouwers 2016).
The kind of thinking presented here about scaling has been further translated into
tools and methods that may support the development of scaling strategies elsewhere
(Sartas et al. 2019).
4.6.2 Rethinking Information Provision Through ICT4Ag:
The Example of Disease Control
The early work of Rogers (1962) and Van den Ban (1963) already highlighted the
importance of communication and information provision (see Table 1) in supporting
adoption and scaling processes. In the current age of enhanced mobile phone and
internet connectivity in developing countries (Dey et al. 2016; De Bruijn and Van
Dijk 2012), there is a lot of attention to how digital ICT platforms may be leveraged
to enhance scaling. Therefore, a relevant question is how our ‘interactional’ and
‘sociologically enhanced’ understanding of ‘reasons for (non)adoption’ may
impinge on communicative intervention and information provision through ICT (or
other media).
First of all, it is relevant to note that the individualist and rationalist perspective
on adoption has greatly inspired and influenced communicative interventions geared
towards agricultural development, as exemplified in the practice of agricultural
C. Leeuwis and N. Aarts
participatory design in a multi-stakeholder process) may be conducive to achieving
this (Sartas et al. 2019). As already hinted at, the realisation that scaling involves
many interdependencies and a plurality of practices and stakeholders implies that
approaches that allow for multi-stakeholder learning and negotiation are likely to be
relevant in many instances (Leeuwis and Aarts 2011).
Responsible scaling Thinking in terms of interdependent practices between stakeholders also highlights that scaling a particular practice may trigger and/or result in
the scaling of other practices and phenomena that were not initially considered.
Thus, new practices may yield positive or negative consequences for those directly
involved and also generate outcomes that occur at other levels of aggregation. The
use of a new drought-resistant variety may, for example, make households dependent on credit for buying seeds, which – in case of high interest rates – may negatively affect households’ resilience or ability to pay school fees. Similarly, the
application of new oil palm production systems at a large scale may have negative
consequences for biodiversity in a region, or put farmers in another region out of
business. Investigating and anticipating these kinds of interrelations is part and parcel of a broader approach that Wigboldus has labelled ‘responsible scaling’
(Wigboldus 2018) – the careful consideration of possible positive and negative consequences of scaling with regard to diverse societal values and categories of people,
as well as principles of ethics and democracy. Thinking in terms of interdependencies between practices is a useful way of starting such a process (see for more elaboration and guidance Wigboldus and Brouwers 2016).
The kind of thinking presented here about scaling has been further translated into
tools and methods that may support the development of scaling strategies elsewhere
(Sartas et al. 2019).
4.6.2 Rethinking Information Provision Through ICT4Ag:
The Example of Disease Control
The early work of Rogers (1962) and Van den Ban (1963) already highlighted the
importance of communication and information provision (see Table 1) in supporting
adoption and scaling processes. In the current age of enhanced mobile phone and
internet connectivity in developing countries (Dey et al. 2016; De Bruijn and Van
Dijk 2012), there is a lot of attention to how digital ICT platforms may be leveraged
to enhance scaling. Therefore, a relevant question is how our ‘interactional’ and
‘sociologically enhanced’ understanding of ‘reasons for (non)adoption’ may
impinge on communicative intervention and information provision through ICT (or
other media).
First of all, it is relevant to note that the individualist and rationalist perspective
on adoption has greatly inspired and influenced communicative interventions geared
towards agricultural development, as exemplified in the practice of agricultural
C. Leeuwis and N. Aarts