{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019205298013245033, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004635761589403974, 'mean_word_length': 5.457264957264957, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Do We Really Have to Scale Up Local Approaches? A Reflection on Scalability, Based upon a Territorial Prospective at the Burkina Faso–Togo Border

Scaling up has become an objective and an indicator of success across many fields. We challenge this norm in the field of agricultural development, where it has recently become widespread, offering a critique and alternative approaches by presenting work conducted on the border between Burkina Faso and Togo. Our territorial and prospective approach to cross-border transhumance draws on 30 years of statistical data, 61 interviews, a survey of 568 people and a demographic projection. A collective ambition grew out of the three workshops. Local cross-border debates and the subsequent dialogue between actors across territorial scales demonstrate that contextualized results can be valid without being “scaled up”. A real change in scale means going beyond individual perceptions by identifying and debating the connections between actors and with resources. Resource sustainability is considered through a collective process-based approach rather than through norms. To support practical work on sustainability, rather than fantasizing about perfectly generalizable objects of study or, on the contrary, getting wrapped up in a “small is beautiful” ideal, collective reflection should be encouraged on prospects for local actions. Where tensions run high—as in the territory that we study—these are all emerging resources in the negotiations of public action.