Early Adopters, Peer Leaders and the Diffusion of Agroecological Knowledge

Last registered on July 18, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Early Adopters, Peer Leaders and the Diffusion of Agroecological Knowledge
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0011129
Initial registration date
March 21, 2023

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
March 30, 2023, 2:55 PM EDT

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

Last updated
July 18, 2024, 8:47 AM EDT

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Julie Subervie
Affiliation
French National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE)
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Rose Deperrois
PI Affiliation
French National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE)
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Adélaïde Fadhuile
PI Affiliation
Université Grenoble Alpes
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Sophie Thoyer
PI Affiliation
French National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE)
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-03-15
End date
2026-06-30
Keywords
Agriculture, Behavior, Environment & Energy
Additional Keywords
Social Learning, Peer Learning, Peer Effects, Agroecological Transition, Agricultural Technology
JEL code(s)
Q15; Q18; Q25; Q28; Q53
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Peer effects are a subject of increasing attention in many areas of economics research. Influence from peers can indeed generate social multiplier effects, whereby an initial investment targeting one small group can lead to larger changes, since individuals close to the target group tend to imitate them and learn from their experience. When it comes to the green transition in agriculture, the diffusion of new knowledge through peers could play a crucial role in promoting the adoption of agroecological practices. However, the conditions for successful peer learning in this context are still poorly understood. In particular, it is unknown whether the profile of the first individuals in peer groups to receive information affects its diffusion to other peers.
To answer this question, we run a randomized-controlled-trial (RCT) from a large sample of voluntary French farmers, where individuals are randomly assigned to peer groups and receive informative content for 18 months through a digital platform. Only one farmer per peer group receives the information directly, serving as the injection point of the group. Treatment varies depending on the profile of the designated injection point, which is either chosen randomly among early adopters of agroecological practices (Treatment~A) or among ordinary peers (Treatment~B). Farmers assigned to the control arm are also placed in peer groups but they receive no specific information on innovative practices (Treatment~C).
We can first verify that farmers' knowledge of agroecology can be improved by injecting informative content using a digital platform. In addition, we can measure the sharing of information between peers and test the hypothesis that receiving second-hand information can improve knowledge level. A major advantage of this protocol is that it can test the hypothesis that early adopters do better than ordinary peers, whether it is improving their own knowledge or transmitting newly acquired knowledge to their peers. Focusing on ordinary peers who receive information second-hand, who are the most representative farmers and therefore the target of public programs outside the experiment, we can further verify whether they acquire more knowledge when the information comes from an early adopter rather than from another ordinary peer.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Deperrois, Rose et al. 2024. "Early Adopters, Peer Leaders and the Diffusion of Agroecological Knowledge." AEA RCT Registry. July 18. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.11129-1.2
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The digital platform, managed by the service provider Landfiles, has been customized for the experiment. In particular, participants do not have the possibility to share the content outside the platform, or even outside their peer group. Only the injection points receive the information specially designed for the study; they can only share it with members of their group. Members of the same peer group can exchange with each other, but not with members of other peer groups.
While all participants receive some generic content linked to environmental regulations (non-technical and not focused on agroecological practices) throughout the experiment, participants assigned to treatment arms A and B will also receive a specific content on ecological practices, which we call the intervention. The content of the intervention will take the form of portraits of innovative farms, follow-up of agronomic trials, and newsletters. It will include several agroecological topics, including companion plants, plant cover, non-tillage associated with the reduction of herbicides, cereal-vegetable association, foliar fertilization. In practice, the injection points in arms~A and~B will receive one portrait of an innovative farm every two weeks, one agronomic trial follow-up every three weeks, and one newsletter every month.
Intervention Start Date
2024-09-01
Intervention End Date
2026-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcomes measure participants’ access to information through user data automatically collected through the digital platform. These data includes information about user connections, viewing posts, reacting to posts, and reaction time to posts.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Primary outcomes that record the activity of each user on the digital platform aim at evaluating participants’ interest in the information shared through the platform. This also includes whether injection points share the informative content with their peer group or not – and if yes, at what frequency and at what speed. We want to verify that the individuals who received the information second-hand have reached the same information as the injection points. We also want to know if injection points in treatment arm~A (who are EA) do better than injection points in treatment arm~B (who are ordinary peers) in disseminating information. We can assume, for example, that EA injection points, who are more familiar with agroecology, transmit information more often, more regularly and with more involvement (by inserting personal comments or answering questions from their peers for example) than their ordinary counterparts.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes include scores of knowledge tests relating to the content distributed to the treated peer groups through the platform. The control peer groups take the knowledge tests too.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
The scores on the knowledge tests which are taken several times during the protocol and whose objective is to evaluate to what extent the information disseminated in the content within the peer groups has been assimilated by the recipients of the content.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We run a stratified randomized control trial (RCT) that include three arms: two treatment arms(A and B) and one control arm. The first strata includes farmers previously identified as early adopters. The second strata include ordinary peers. In the first phase of randomization, individuals are randomly assigned to the arms of the trial. Thereafter, we form peer groups of around ten farmers within each treatment arm. After peer groups are defined, we then randomly select injection points within peer groups of treatment arms A and B. In treatment arm A (resp., B), the injection point is randomly selected among early adopters (resp., ordinary peers) in each peer group. In the control group, no one is designated as an injection point (neither early adopters nor ordinary peers) since no information is disseminated in this treatment arm.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Random assignment to the arms of the trial, as well as random selection of injection points among ordinary peers in treatment arm B will be performed using computer software.
Randomization Unit
We will randomize individuals.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Randomization is conducted at the individual level, not based on clusters.
Sample size: planned number of observations
1,500 farmers
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
500 individuals in treatment arm A, 500 individuals in treatment arm B, 500 individuals in the control group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
For plausible values of standard deviations and intra-cluster correlations, we should be able to detect a difference of less than 2 points between the scores of two treatment arms.
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
Analysis Plan