Does subsidized adult labor reduce child labor in cacao: Evidence from Ghana

Last registered on February 25, 2025

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

Does subsidized adult labor reduce child labor in cacao: Evidence from Ghana

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0015377

Initial registration date

February 24, 2025

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

February 25, 2025, 10:47 AM EST

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

Locations

Country

Ghana

Region

Eastern and Ashanti

Primary Investigator

Name

Jan Averkin

Affiliation

ETH Zürich

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Isabel Günther

PI Affiliation

ETH Zürich

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Edward Asiedu

PI Affiliation

University of Ghana

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

Completed

Start date

2024-10-09

End date

2024-12-02

Keywords

Agriculture, Labor, Welfare

Additional Keywords

Child labor

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.

Abstract

It is estimated that one in two children in cocoa-growing communities is involved in child labor, threatening their education, health and overall well-being. While previous interventions to reduce child labor have focused on improving school attendance or enforcing labor regulations, no study has directly addressed the underlying economic constraints that may drive child labor in cocoa-producing communities: financial constraints of households to pay for adult labor during the labor-intensive cocoa harvest season. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing whether fully subsidized provision of labor to cocoa farms can serve as an effective strategy to reduce child labor. We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial (RCT) in 55 villages in the cocoa-growing regions of Ghana, comprising 1,171 households. Households in treatment villages were provided with adult labor to assist with cutting cocoa pods from trees, breaking pods and transporting cocoa beans to the farm. These are activities that typically involve child labor in these areas. The policy led to a 9.7 percentage points decrease in child labor in cacao from a baseline incidence of 37%. A broader measure of child labor, including all child labor activities, showed a reduction of 10.6 percentage points from an initial prevalence of 66%. These results suggest that financial constraints drive child labor in these communities, and that providing fully subsidized adult labor during the critical cocoa harvest period can address this root cause of child labor. Our findings also suggest that providing financial support to employ adult labor is more effective and efficient than most previous interventions to reduce child labor in cocoa regions.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Asiedu, Edward, Jan Averkin and Isabel Günther. 2025. "Does subsidized adult labor reduce child labor in cacao: Evidence from Ghana." AEA RCT Registry. February 25. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15377-1.0

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

Intervention (Hidden)

Intervention Start Date

2024-10-17

Intervention End Date

2024-11-29

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Whether a child, aged between 9 and 17, has been involved in hazardous and non-hazardous child labor in the past 7 days. A distinction is made between child labor on cocoa farming activities specifically, as well as on other farm and non-farm activities.

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

We apply a clustered RCT, where 55 villages are randomly assigned to a treatment group (receiving subsidized adult labor) or a control group, stratified at the regional level (Ashanti or Eastern). Half are selected from four districts in the Eastern region (Abwakwa South, Ayensuano, Suhum, West Akim) and the other half from two districts in the Ashanti region (Asante Akim Central and Asante Akim South). The villages are randomly selected from cocoa-growing communities in which, to our knowledge, no programs are actively present to combat child labor and improve education. In each village of our sample, we target households with at least one child at the end of grades 4-5 (approximately aged 12 years old) who are, according to the literature, most at risk of transitioning into child labor and forgoing formal education to overcome financial challenges.

Experimental Design Details

Randomization Method

Randomization has been done by a computer.

Randomization Unit

Villages were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups, with randomization clustered at the regional level.

Was the treatment clustered?

Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

55 villages

Sample size: planned number of observations

1171 households, with two observations per household: one for an adult and one for a child living in the household.

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

29 treatment villages, 26 control villages.

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Based on our sample of 55 clusters, with approximately 21 children per cluster, an intra-cluster correlation of 0.112, and a baseline child labor prevalence in cocoa of 40% (self-reported by children for the past seven days) among children with an average age of 13 years in the Ashanti and Eastern regions, we estimate a minimum detectable effect size of 12.5 percentage points. This means that the study has 80% statistical power at a 5% significance level to detect a true reduction in self-reported child labor of at least this magnitude. These calculations did not consider covariates, which could reduce the variance of the point estimate and consequently the minimum detectable effect size.

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB