Mechanizing Together: Leveraging Local Governments for Rice Mechanization

Last registered on September 04, 2023

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Mechanizing Together: Leveraging Local Governments for Rice Mechanization
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0010642
Initial registration date
December 24, 2022

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
January 03, 2023, 4:19 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
September 04, 2023, 2:52 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
UC San Diego

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2022-12-01
End date
2024-05-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This project tests whether local elected leaders can coordinate technology adoption making rental markets and farmer training programs more successful. The technology I am studying is direct seeding of paddy with a $65 USD manual drum seeder. While growing rice without transplantation requires new agronomic practices, it removes the need for labor intensive rice transplantation. Since one drum seeder can cover a hectare in a day the device is well suited for rental if adoption is high enough in a local area. Multiple small-holders can effectively share a drum seeder during one days rental. This pilot RCT will allow me to test whether rental markets alone or rental markets and extension delegated to local elected leaders can successfully disseminate drum seeders. If this study achieves substantial dissemination of drum seeders, I also hope to study the local labor market effects of this technology induced labor demand shock.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Brownstone, Steven. 2023. "Mechanizing Together: Leveraging Local Governments for Rice Mechanization." AEA RCT Registry. September 04. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.10642-3.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The study has two interventions. In both interventions farmers will be able to rent drum seeders on a daily basis. In one arm the rental will be managed by the village government with its elected leader responsible for managing the rentals. In the other arm, agricultural extensionists employed by the state government not accountable to the village elected government will manage the rentals. An additional individually randomized intervention will be an unconditional 250 INR payment to large farmers in a village with an additional 1000 INR/ acre of drum seeded rice to be paid once the planting is verified by enumerators.
Intervention Start Date
2022-12-01
Intervention End Date
2024-01-04

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The uptake primary outcome is whether a farmer used a drum seeder on any of their land. This is the overall primary outcome of the study for which I expect to be most powered to detect significant treatment effects.
The primary profit outcome is reduction in cultivation costs.
The primary extensionist effort outcome is whether the farmer ever reported receiving information from the extensionist on drum seeders.
The primary labor market outcome will be wages for workers on the gram panchayats NREGA rolls who worked as transplanters during either the past winter or summer seasons. The working data will be collected multiple times throughout the season and treatment and control gram panchayats will be matched based on nearest neighbor, based on smallest Kolmogorov distance of the distribution of planting dates. I plan on obtaining the full distribution of planting dates using remote sensing.
The primary political economy outcome will be the population level support for the sarpanch with the NREGA and farmer frames re-weighted using dual frame weights to reflect the overall population.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
To compare the sarpanch managed and extensionist managed rental arms the total amount of rental income which is a function of the days the drum seeders were rented serves as a secondary uptake outcome. Acreage under drum seeding and profitability are all farmer level secondary outcomes. We will also try to collect cultivation costs and profitability at a plot level. Another secondary outcome is the wages for male and female workers with active NREGA job cards who had not worked as transplanters. The industry of these NREGA workers is a further secondary outcome.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Village leaders, sarpanches, were asked to apply to be considered for the rental program. Among those that applied, one village was selected per cluster. These villages were randomized into control, a sarpanch rental arm, and an agricultural extensionist rental arm. There is also a second level of individual randomization.
Experimental Design Details
At the time of the initial pre-registration, the intervention has begun but only limited administrative monitoring data on self-reported rentals had been collected for the initial winter 2022-2023 season. The survey which will be the primary data source for the primary outcomes had yet to take place. Similarly, the reconciliation of village bank accounts to verify rental income has yet to take place. Due to immense delays in implementation and receiving the necessary data for sampling from the government, the original winter season will not be used as the main season for analysis. Instead, I plan on using the latest season where I am able to collect data as the main season for analysis. Depending on funding and state elections that will either be the summer 2023 season or the winter 2023-2024 season. An alternative specification will be to use the sum of treatment effects across program seasons since the sum of effects across the two main agronomic seasons is also policy-relevant.

We will sample from all farmers who cultivated rice in the past winter and summer season seasons in the gram panchayat using the administrative crop booking database. We will sample 25% of farmers from those with less than half a hectare and the remainder from those with more than half a hectare so that we can focus on farmers whose uptake will meaningfully effect the acreage under drum seeding and thus labor markets, carbon emissions, and water consumption. The half-hectare cut-off was chosen to match how landholding is reported in the agricultural census. We will further sample a particular plot within a farmer's lands in the event some of the land is cultivated by someone other than the owner we will interview the cultivator of the sampled plot. While this is not a fully representative sample of all cultivators it is the best possible sample that can be constructed using administrative data.

For the laborer sample we will take a simple random sample from holders of active NREGA job cards in treatment and control villages.

The number of farmers sampled in each village is not uniform. Some districts and gram panchayats had very low numbers of rentals in the monitoring data. Thus it was not a prudent use of survey resources to extensively sample those strata. The number of rentals recorded in the administrative monitoring data was predicted using administrative data on historical drum seeder usage, a stratification variable, and district, also a stratification variable. Then the randomization strata were divided into quintiles of predicted uptake. In the lowest uptake quintile, "extra" control villages were dropped if a strata had multiple control villages. In these villages, 4 farmers are sampled per village. In the next quintile, no villages were dropped, but still only 4 farmers were sampled. In the 40th to 60th percentile quintile, 8 farmers were sampled and in the 60th to 80th percentile quintile and final quintiles 12 farmers are sampled per village. For the main analysis, I will focus on the third through 5th quintiles, e.g. the strata in the 40th to 100th percentiles of predicted uptake. However, I will also report reweighted results representative of the full sample of GPs.
Randomization Method
Randomization was done on a computer using Stata 17. The randomization was stratified by district, historical use of drum seeders, and wages for transplanting labor.

The individual randomization is stratified by any past direct seeding, extent of paddy cultivation, and gram panchayat. We will only randomize in GPs with more than 5 rentals in either the past winter or the current kharif season. Gram Panchayats with more than 20 rentals in either season will also be excluded. GPs whose reported nursery planting time was after the date of the initial randomization were also included.
Randomization Unit
The administrative name for the unit of randomization is confusingly "cluster." The agriculture department defines the group of 3-5 gram panchayats, village level administrative unit, in which agricultural extensionists work as a "cluster". One gram panchayat was selected from each cluster and then randomization was done at the cluster level to ensure each agricultural extensionist only handled one treatment gram panchayat of either type.

A second level of individual randomization will take place at the farmer level. This randomization will take place among farmers with more than 2 acres of historical paddy cultivation who picked up and fully listened to an IVRS call describing the benefits of drum seeding. This filter is necessary since only a subset of the phone numbers in the government crop booking database are valid. The individual randomization was clustered by village and experience using a drum seeder. Those that had used a drum seeder themselves or seen a drum seeded field in the village were treated as the "experienced" group all others were treated as "inexperienced" for the purpose of randomization.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
361
Sample size: planned number of observations
2,888, 172 individually randomized
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
100 clusters sarpanch rents, 100 clusters AEO rents, and 161 clusters control. 86 treatment and 86 control individual farmers.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Between the two 100 cluster arms the MDE at 80% power is .18 SD assuming an ICC of .1 with observations per cluster of 8. Between the 200 cluster treatment arms and the 161 cluster control arm the MDE is .16 SD.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of California San Diego
IRB Approval Date
2022-11-03
IRB Approval Number
805598
IRB Name
Institute for Financial Management and Research
IRB Approval Date
2022-11-22
IRB Approval Number
7554

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials