The cases studies illustrate that prior to moving into the domain of system change, organizations need to build a certain “platform” through successful dissemination of their ideas or products. Without this platform of experience, in-depth knowledge of the field, and established reputation, it would be practically impossible to make a difference on a larger scale.

The most important barrier found was the internal one: the organizations realized that pursuing a scaling up pathway might mean having to leave behind something that was very integral to their organization.

Scaling up involves reframing the problem, adopting a mind-set of system change, and re-evaluating the organization’s role in addressing the identified social problem. For example, not all configurations might be suitable in a climate neutrality context or for addressing specific issues regarding climate neutrality. In addition, as the skills of social and institutional entrepreneurs are quite different, a leadership transition may be required, even though such a transition could mean the loss of the original momentum grounded in the charisma of a founder.

It is important to always ask what is the need to scale up? What opportunities demand you to scale up and is it worth to scale up? Not all social innovations are meant to expand and have a larger presence. Some do very well on a local scale and in turn, they make the local system more resilient. The same goes for some local energy initiatives, who might function perfectly on a neighbourhood scale, whereas others might only reach their full potential after scaling up to encompass a larger area.