|
Field
Trial Status
|
Before
on_going
|
After
in_development
|
|
Field
Trial Start Date
|
Before
April 15, 2024
|
After
August 06, 2024
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
April 16, 2024 03:54 PM
|
After
August 05, 2024 10:02 AM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
We partner with the Uganda Agricultural Insurance Consortium (AIC), to study the demand for multi-season insurance contracts among smallholder farmers. AIC will offer Pay-at-Harvest Insurance—farmers subscribe at planting time but pay the premium at the end of each insured season as a deduction from the harvest payments the off-taker makes to the farmers. The crop insurance product will be an area yield index insurance: the insurance payout is disbursed if the average yield across farmers in a certain area (e.g. an Agro-Ecological Zone, which the insurance consortium maps on the basis of similarity in weather patterns) is below a certain threshold, as measured in a crop-cutting exercise on a sample of farmers.
Farmers can choose to purchase insurance for two seasons and can decide whether they want an option to cancel the contract after the first season. They can also choose to have a cancellation option before the second season only if they receive/don’t receive payouts in the first season (i.e., a state-dependent option).
In addition, we test the effect of an information intervention on farmers' demand. The treatment group (T1) will receive an information treatment aimed at making farmers aware of the potential state dependency of the crop activities and of their insurance demand---farmers will be guided to think through farming activities and insurance demand in different scenarios when the current season is good or bad and the associated pros and cons of the cancellation option in their insurance plan. The control group (T0) will not receive such an intervention.
|
After
We partner with the Uganda Agricultural Insurance Consortium (AIC), to study the demand for multi-season insurance contracts among smallholder farmers. AIC will offer Pay-at-Harvest Insurance—farmers subscribe at planting time but pay the premium at the end of each insured season as a deduction from the harvest payments the off-taker makes to the farmers. The crop insurance product will be an area yield index insurance: the insurance payout is disbursed if the average yield across farmers in a certain area (e.g. a district) is below a certain threshold, as measured in a crop-cutting exercise on a sample of farmers.
Farmers can choose to purchase insurance for two seasons (Season B 2024: Sep-Dec 2024 and Season A 2025: Mar-Jun 2025) and can decide whether they want an option to cancel the contract after the first season. They can also choose to have this option to cancel the contract for the second season depending on if they would receive or would not receive payouts in the first season (i.e., a state-dependent option).
In addition, we test the effect of an information intervention on farmers' demand. The treatment group (T1) will receive an information treatment aimed at making farmers aware of the potential state dependency of the crop activities and of their insurance demand---farmers will be guided to think through farming activities and insurance demand in different scenarios when the current season is good or bad and the associated pros and cons of the cancellation option in their insurance plan. The control group (T0) will not receive such an intervention.
|
|
Field
Intervention Start Date
|
Before
April 15, 2024
|
After
August 06, 2024
|
|
Field
Intervention End Date
|
Before
April 30, 2025
|
After
September 30, 2025
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
The intervention targets a sample of farmers who sell their product to a local offtaker. The offtaker provided a list of farmers at the beginning of the study.
Farmers complete a baseline survey and receive a two-season insurance offer that entails paying the insurance premium via deduction from harvest time payments in each season. Specifically, farmers are given the choice to buy insurance (or not) for two seasons, and whether they would like to have the option to cancel the insurance after the first season. They are further asked whether they would like to have the cancellation option regardless of the outcome of the first season, or whether they would like to retain the cancellation option if they received/didn’t receive an insurance payout in the first season.
An information treatment is randomized at the farmer level. The treatment group (T1) will receive an information treatment that guides farmers to think through farming activities and insurance demand in different scenarios when the current season is good or bad and discusses the associated pros and cons of the cancellation option in the insurance plan. The control group (T0) will not receive such an intervention. We also randomly assign sub-counties into 3 waves of data collection.
|
After
The intervention targets a sample of farmers who sell their product to a local offtaker. The offtaker provided a list of farmers at the beginning of the study. The field team conducts confirmation calls to verify that the farmers have a basic relationship or experience with our partner and that they intend to sell their crop to the off-taker. We will specify our exclusion criteria below in more detail.
After the list of farmers is verified, the farmers on the verified list are mobilized to attend group meetings where a general introduction to insurance is provided. Farmers can additionally contact the local offtaker or call a toll-free center to ask any questions they may have. This step ensures that the farmers in our study have a good understanding of insurance terms in general.
During the data collection, each of the farmers will be reached individually to complete a baseline survey and receive a two-season insurance offer that entails paying the insurance premium via deduction from harvest time payments in each season. Specifically, farmers are given the choice to buy insurance (or not) for two seasons, and whether they would like to have the option to cancel the insurance after the first season. They are further asked whether they would like to have the cancellation option regardless of the outcome of the first season, or whether they would like to retain the cancellation option if they receive/ do not receive an insurance payout in the first season. All farmers are told that they will receive another phone call at the end of the first season during the insurance window for the second season.
The intervention consists of two treatment groups randomly assigned at the farmer level. The treatment group (T1) will receive an information treatment that guides farmers to think through farming activities and insurance demand in different scenarios when the current season is good or bad and discusses the associated pros and cons of the cancellation option in the insurance plan. Within the treatment group, we include a battery of manipulation check questions to explore mechanisms through which our treatment may be having an effect, and we randomize the order of treatment and manipulation checks. The control group (T0) will not receive the intervention or manipulation check questions.
Exclusion criteria: As mentioned above, we will only target farmers for the baseline survey if they have been verified. Specifically, in this verification process, we exclude farmer groups in which no farmer intends to sell in the next two seasons. This leaves about 500 farmers with whom we proceed to group meetings and the baseline survey (we do not expect to be able to reach all of them). In the baseline survey, we will again include questions asking whether each individual farmer has basic experience and relationships with their offtakers, and whether they intend to sell. We plan to conduct our main analysis on the full sample and on the subsample that includes only farmers who we expect to sell to offtakers, and those who have attended the group meeting.
|
|
Field
Randomization Method
|
Before
The randomization of the information treatment is done on SurveyCTO, only with farmers who are reached for the baseline survey.
The randomization of sub-counties into waves is done in Stata.
|
After
The randomization of the information treatment is done on SurveyCTO, only with farmers who are reached for the baseline survey.
|
|
Field
Randomization Unit
|
Before
The randomization of T0/T1 is at the farmer level. In addition, the order of some survey sections is randomized at the farmer level. The randomization determines whether scenarios presented to the farmers are first about a positive or a negative shock and whether a manipulation check is presented before or after the information treatment. These order-randomizations only occur for those farmers in the information treatment groups.
Survey waves are randomized at the subcounty level stratifying by two district groups such that each district group has seven farmer groups.
|
After
The randomization of T0/T1 is at the farmer level. In addition, the order of some survey sections is randomized at the farmer level. The randomization determines whether scenarios presented to the farmers are first about a positive or a negative shock and whether a manipulation check is presented before or after the information treatment. These order-randomizations only occur for those farmers in the information treatment groups.
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Clusters
|
Before
Approximately 650 farmers targeted for the baseline survey (some may not be reached).
|
After
Approximately 500 farmers targeted for the baseline survey (we do not expect to reach all of them).
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Observations
|
Before
Approximately 650 farmers targeted for the baseline survey (some may not be reached).
|
After
Approximately 500 farmers targeted for the baseline survey.
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
• Purchase of a two-season insurance product with a state-dependent cancellation option
• Follow up on whether the chosen cancellation option is used
• Manipulation checks:
o farmers' awareness of state dependence
o farmers' recalled experience with state dependence in other contexts
o farmers’ normative attitude towards state dependence
o farmers’ trust in insurance
• Robustness checks and exploration of heterogeneity with respect to the following covariates:
o Comprehension of insurance terms
o Yield of last cycle
o Trust in offtaker
o Other variables concerning household characteristics and farming activities
o Behavioral measurements
o Survey wave
|
After
1. Purchase of a two-season insurance product with a state-dependent cancellation option
2. Follow up on whether the chosen cancellation option is used
3. Manipulation checks:
- farmers' ability to imagine circumstances that have not yet happened
- farmers' self-reported tendencies for contingent thinking
- farmers' self-reported likelihood of state dependence in their insurance demand
- farmers’ normative attitude towards state dependence in their insurance demand
- farmers’ judgement about the desirability of different states
- farmers’ trust in insurance
4. Robustness checks and exploration of heterogeneity with respect to the following covariates.
- Comprehension of insurance terms
- Yield of last cycle
- Trust in offtaker
- Other variables concerning household characteristics and farming activities
- Behavioral measurements
- Responses on how they would decide about insurance and related reasoning in good/bad scenarios in the treatment
|