What are the qualities of ‘frontier’ technology solutions? Insights from Call 6 Applications
On the Frontier Technologies programme, working at the ‘frontier’ means generating new learning about how different technologies can be used to deliver the greatest impact. We believe that solutions can be ‘frontier’ in different ways, whether because they contain the latest and most progressive technologies or because solutions are unique to the sectors, geographies and use cases in which they are tested.
Over the last few months we ran our sixth call for applications for Frontier Technologies pilots. We received 110 applications from 33 different countries, more than double what we’ve received from previous calls. Through reviewing these applications, we learned from FCDO colleagues about a range of pressing development, environmental and social challenges. We learnt about specific geographical hotbeds of technology and innovation activity, and areas of untapped potential for different technologies to address challenges using new solutions and approaches.
Looking across the applications, we conducted our own analysis of the traits shared by the most cutting edge applications. Below we have outlined four key qualities that we identify with ‘frontier’ approaches for piloting and testing technologies. These are approaches which are most likely to generate new evidence and insight around how technologies can drive catalytic impact, and help solve significant challenges.
Key qualities of ‘frontier’ applications of technology
- Solve an important problem that isn’t already being met by existing solutions
In many of the contexts for which we received applications — the proposed technologies were no longer that new or cutting edge. However, we still considered applications ‘frontier’ if they identified new ways to solve important problems that aren’t already being met through other solutions. This was particularly true if solutions tackled the major underlying issues within a given problem space through new technologies, approaches or business models that had not previously been tried in that context. Subject matter experts helped us to identify when this was the case, and also identified whether applications had avoided making ‘false assumptions’ about specific problems or user needs.
Around 1 in 10 applications we received were for Nature Based Solutions, which sought to work with nature in order to deliver specific environmental benefits. Many of these applications proposed specific ways to overcome challenges faced by previous attempts to successfully implement and scale similar solutions. Many also proposed to deliver multiple combinations of benefits, including improved biodiversity, environmental resilience and wider benefits for local communities. For example, one of the Call 6 pilots will be testing how to enable smallholder farmers in Uganda to access global carbon markets. This pilot will use satellite imagery and GPS technology to overcome the known challenges associated with effectively (and verifiably) mapping smallholding carbon contributions at scale. In doing so, the pilot aims to support smallholders to capture carbon, and access new sources of income, through accessing carbon credits.
2. Focus on where others have failed
Some of our most frontier applications were developed with a keen understanding of the known challenges and constraints to innovation within the local ecosystem. In some cases, this included an understanding of where and how other similar solutions had been tested, and why they had failed. We received a wide range of applications for electric vehicle solutions. What distinguished some proposals as ‘frontier’ was when they sought ways to tackle known constraints associated with limited supporting infrastructure or lack of incentives and significant upfront costs, either through innovative technology solutions or new business models. One example of this is the Call 6 pilot ‘‘Electrifying Water Transport for Better Livelihoods’’ which proposes to test electric boat motors that use pay-as-you-go solar batteries for cleaner, cheaper transportation for low-income communities in Senegal. This pilot will look to test wider constraints facing the innovation, including testing what’s needed for a financially sustainable pay-as-you-go business model and the suitability of the electric motors for different audiences and businesses in the local community.
Over the course of the Frontier Technologies programme, we have generated evidence around where different technologies can be used to solve different types of needs. Technologies like UAVs or blockchain have become increasingly common within the contexts we work, and more generalised applications of these technologies have been tested and proven — such as the application of UAVs for cargo or mapping purposes. Nevertheless, significant questions often remain around how to effectively scale these technologies within different contexts and for different use cases. The ‘technology frontier’ here is about building on existing evidence, and testing new approaches for scaling solutions, rather than covering existing ground. One of the Call 6 pilots is ‘‘Building Strong Foundations for Flying Medicines over Mountains.’ This pilot will test how UAVs can be used to help distribute medicine in Nepal. This pilot will build on the existing evidence base around the use of UAVs within Nepal, focussing on specific questions around how UAVs can be integrated sustainably within public health systems and low-resource settings.
3. Add value by combining complementary technologies
Many of the applications we received identified new ways of combining existing technologies to create solutions that were new to the contexts in which they were to be tested. This included solutions which blended electric vehicles with solar power and sensors with machine learning.
The strongest applications contained a joined up understanding on how different technologies would work together, including how they might share data or present a seamless experience for end users. These applications also appreciated the specific ‘value-add’ of combining technologies, and explained how the additional technology might strengthen the ability for the solution to achieve its goals, or deliver additional benefits to end users and local communities.
However, just as there can be additional value in combining technologies, there can also be risks. In the search for more innovative solutions to complex problems, it can be tempting for projects to add relatively complex technologies like Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence or Machine Learning alongside a proposed solution. Introducing these technologies, in combination with a proposed solution, does not necessarily make for a ‘frontier’ application of technology. Indeed, a wider case needs to be made for the pay-off of the additional investment and effort needed to test, learn and implement these technologies, including their benefits over lighter-touch alternatives, as well as their suitability to the wider context.
Within the Hub, we look to test new solutions in accordance with agile principles. In practice this can mean ‘starting small’, and working with our grantees to identify the lightest touch ways for delivering the most amount of impact. What set apart the strongest applications that combined technologies was the compatibility of the proposed technologies. In other words, they focussed on the relative potential value each technology would unlock — and consequently the value in ‘starting’ with the proposed solution — despite the additional complexity and risks that combining technologies would add to the pilot.
4. Focus on learning over implementation
The Frontier Technologies Hub is particularly interested in supporting pilots to test new ideas, and generate new learning about what works. This often means embracing significant levels of risk that proposed solutions might fail, but testing solutions in order to generate insights into what iterations and changes are needed for them to work. This also includes generating insights on what does not work (and shouldn’t be tried again) and why it did not work. We intend that the insights and learning generated through our pilots are useful to both our implementing teams, and those in the wider sector interested in identifying ways to solve similar challenges in similar contexts.
For Call 6, applications were scored highly when they identified and targeted the riskiest assumptions around a proposed solution, and put forward a plan of experiments to test and generate new and valuable learning about these assumptions. These experiments would provide the implementing teams with an opportunity to find out, as quickly as possible, whether the proposed solution might be able to achieve its proposed objective, or whether it might be more worthwhile for the team to pivot their idea, or try something different altogether. In the context of our programme, less ‘frontier’ approaches often had an emphasis on building and implementing technologies, rather than testing risky assumptions and generating new learning.
Trends in frontier technologies: ‘‘Where is the ‘frontier’?”
Through this post we have sought to highlight some qualities of ‘frontier’ applications of technology. Underpinning each of these qualities, is an overarching lesson that frontier technology is not about innovative technology alone, but about approaches to using innovative technology that are experimental, search for the greatest impact, and look to solve problems in new ways.
Through the Call 6 process, we were also able to learn from our FCDO colleagues on where there are specific clusters of opportunity and activity for the testing of frontier technologies for impact. In future posts we will be sharing these trends, and highlighting the specific geographies, sectors and use cases where FCDO colleagues have repeatedly told us that there are opportunities for specific technologies to deliver impact, as well as lessons about where the potential value add of frontier technologies may be greatest.
