|
Field
Trial Title
|
Before
Evaluating Digital versus Traditional Extension Methods to Promote Climate-Adaptive and Best Farming Practices in Rainfed Grape Cultivation in Palestine: Protocol for a Cluster- Randomized Controlled Study.
|
After
Digital versus traditional agricultural extension for promoting climate-adaptive grape farming in the West Bank of Palestine: A randomized controlled trial protocol.
|
|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
Introduction: Agriculture farming and rural living standards are massively compromised by Climate variability, especially for rainfed grape farming in Bethlehem and Hebron, situated in West Bank, Palestine. Advancements in Climate-Adaptive and Best Farming Practices (CABFPs) are providing favorable solutions, but farmers are continuously facing obstacles due to political circumstances, insufficient water access, low productivity, and lack of proper agricultural advisory services. Digital agricultural extension presents a fresh approach in the modern world, but its efficacy and impact compared to traditional methods are still limited, under-explored, and not fully studied.
Objective: This research analyzes the effectiveness of digital compared to conventional extension methodology in encouraging the adoption of CABFPs among Palestinian rainfed grape farmers. It examines methods that can be opted as the game changer in enhancing agriculture productivity, income living standards, and ability to withstand challenges in politically unstable, conflict-affected, and economically challenged regions.
Study Design and Methods: It’s a cluster-randomized controlled trial (RCT) that distributed 48 village clusters (24 treatment, 24 control) in Bethlehem and Hebron to digital or traditional extension interventions (1:1 ratio). Seven hundred and twenty grape farmers were identified from records and will be confirmed via a baseline survey. Cluster sizes varied (10, 12, 15, 17, or 20 farmers per cluster) with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.01. Sample size calculations were formulated to achieve 80% power at a 0.05 significance level to identify a 11% increase in CABFPs adoption (e.g., from 34.3% to 45.3%). The digital intervention provides advisory support, videos, and WhatsApp-based training, while the control group receives traditional services. Field agents and farmer groups will facilitate implementation. A baseline survey is currently underway to assess the primary outcome—adoption of CABFPs—along with key secondary outcomes including grape yield, quality, farm income, access to extension services, willingness to invest in CABFPs, and reduction in farming costs. An endline survey is planned to follow after the intervention period. To minimize potential spillover between study groups, a geographical buffer zone is established. Mixed-effects regression models will be used to adjust for cluster-level variation, baseline covariates, and intervention fidelity.
Expected Impacts: By combining accessible digital tools with support from field extension agents and cooperation with community based farmer groups, the intervention is designed to strengthen climate resilience and boost farming productivity. The anticipated evidence will inform policy reforms designed to scale sustainable agricultural practices across diverse crops and regions, ultimately enhancing rural livelihoods and fostering long-term development in resource-constrained settings.
|
After
Abstract:
Background
Rainfed grape farming is a critical livelihood for over 7,000 farmers in the Palestinian West Bank but faces severe threats from climate change. To enhance resilience, farmers need effective extension support, yet only seven percent currently receive it due to political restrictions and logistical barriers. Digital extension offers a potential solution to overcome these constraints, but rigorous evidence on its effectiveness in conflict-affected settings is lacking. This study aims to fill this gap by investigating the effectiveness of digital extension in promoting climate-adaptive grape farming in the West Bank.
Method
The study will be a two-arm randomized controlled trial in the Bethlehem and Hebron districts to evaluate the impacts of digital extension on climate-adaptive farming. A total of 795 farmers will be assigned to one of two arms: an intervention arm and a control arm. The intervention arm will receive digital extension through agent-facilitated websites and WhatsApp groups, which will integrate instructional videos, peer learning, and expert access. The control arm will receive standard Ministry of Agriculture extension services. The impacts of the intervention will be measured by comparing baseline and endline data collected 24 months apart. Primary outcomes will be the quality of climate-adaptive practice adoption and gross margin. Secondary outcomes will include productivity, farmer capacity, and extension engagement. The study will also examine causal pathways through mediation analysis and will assess implementation fidelity and cost-effectiveness.
Discussion
Understanding how to deliver effective agricultural extension in conflict-affected settings is crucial for building climate resilience. This study is the first to rigorously compare the effectiveness of digital and traditional extension where political restrictions constrain service delivery. The results will provide evidence for policymakers and international donors on whether digital platforms can serve as a cost-effective model for reaching marginalized communities in conflict-affected regions.
|
|
Field
Trial End Date
|
Before
April 25, 2027
|
After
June 25, 2028
|
|
Field
JEL Code(s)
|
Before
O13 – Economic Development: Agriculture; Natural Resources; Energy; Environment; Other Primary Products Q16 – R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services Q18 – Agricultural Policy; Food Policy C93 – Field Experiments (for your Randomized Controlled Trial) Q55 – Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
|
After
Q12 (Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets), Q16 (R&D, Agricultural Technology, Agricultural Extension Services), Q54 (Climate; Natural Disasters; Global Warming), O33 (Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes), D91 (Micro-Based Behavioral Economics: Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making), C93 (Field Experiments).
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
May 27, 2025 06:47 AM
|
After
November 03, 2025 01:48 AM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
This study will assess the effectiveness of two planned agricultural extension methods—digital and traditional—in promoting the adoption of Climate-Adaptive and Best Farming Practices (CABFPs) among rainfed grape farmers in Palestine. The intervention design is based on the Smallholder Horticulture Empowerment and Promotion (SHEP) approach, a participatory, market-oriented framework originally developed in Kenya and now implemented globally, including in Palestine.
1. Digital Extension Method
The digital extension activities are scheduled to begin next year and will be delivered through WhatsApp groups and a Google Sites-based platform. Participating farmers will receive biweekly training materials—videos, infographics, and market insights—aligned with seasonal farming stages. These materials will incorporate CABFPs and climate-adaptive techniques. WhatsApp groups will facilitate peer-to-peer learning and real-time expert support. Each group will consist of 10–20 farmers, with 12 planned sessions per group over one year, totaling 288 sessions across 24 clusters.
2. Traditional Extension Method
The control arm will follow the Ministry of Agriculture’s standard extension services, which involve routine in-person field visits, training workshops, and hands-on demonstrations. These activities reflect existing governmental practices and will also begin next year, aligned with the agricultural season.
3. Planned Coverage and Delivery
The intervention will target 24 treatment clusters (8 in Bethlehem and 16 in Hebron), reaching an estimated 400 grape-farming households. An equivalent number of clusters and farmers will be assigned to the control group. In localities lacking established farmer groups, new groups will be formed for the purpose of the intervention.
4. Implementation Support
Designated extension agents and facilitators will provide ongoing digital follow-up to farmers in the treatment clusters. Those who miss sessions will be contacted by phone or community channels to encourage continued participation.
|
After
Intervention description:
This randomized controlled trial evaluates two agricultural extension approaches for promoting climate-adaptive grape farming in the West Bank of Palestine, with a total duration of 40 months. A total of 795 rainfed grape farmers in Bethlehem and Hebron districts will be randomly assigned to either digital extension (treatment arm) or traditional extension services (control arm).
Treatment arm: digital extension intervention:
The treatment group receives a digital agricultural extension program designed to equip grape farmers with climate-adaptive and market-responsive farming techniques. This intervention is based on the "Improved Extension for Value-Added Agriculture" (EVAP) Extension Package, developed by the Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture in collaboration with the Japan International Cooperation Agency. EVAP is a localized adaptation of the Smallholder Horticulture Empowerment and Promotion (SHEP) approach, tailored to Palestine's agricultural context. The objective is to facilitate farmers' transition from subsistence-oriented practices to market-driven farming while building climate resilience.
Blended learning approach:
The intervention employs a blended learning model combining three components: (1) bi-monthly online training sessions (1-2 hours) following EVAP steps and aligned with the grape farming calendar; (2) continuous digital content sharing through instructional videos, photographs, and extension tips distributed by extension agents; and (3) real-time communication via WhatsApp groups enabling interactive discussions, problem-solving, peer knowledge exchange, and technical assistance.
Seven-step structured curriculum:
The curriculum includes seven steps to build farmer capacity and facilitate market linkage: (1) Extension program introduction and participant confirmation; (2) Awareness creation tour with demonstration videos and peer learning between early adopters and target farmers; (3) Market opportunity identification through stakeholder insights and virtual discussions; (4) Participatory planning for agricultural practice improvement addressing climate adaptation needs; (5) Farm record keeping training with standardized templates; (6) Tailored extension activities on climate-adaptive practices including water conservation, soil management, pest control, and varietal selection using farmer-to-farmer methodology; and (7) Profitability and program evaluation by farmers through profit analysis and feedback sessions.
Implementation scale and coverage:
The intervention will be delivered at the farmer level within each target village, with a minimum of ten participating grape farmers per village. Villages are randomly allocated to the treatment arm. This village-level clustering facilitates peer learning, collective problem-solving, and local support networks that sustain practice adoption beyond the intervention period.
Control arm: traditional extension services:
The control group receives standard Ministry of Agriculture extension services, representing existing practice in the region. This traditional approach, analogous to the Training and Visit system, includes periodic in-person farm visits, on-site technical guidance, printed material distribution, and reactive support based on farmer inquiries. This group serves as the baseline for comparing effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and scalability of digital versus traditional extension in a conflict-affected setting where mobility restrictions and resource constraints limit conventional extension reach.
|
|
Field
Intervention End Date
|
Before
February 25, 2027
|
After
February 25, 2028
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
(1). Adoption of CABF practices
(2). Adaptation of Existing Grape Farming Practices to Climate Change
|
After
1. Level and Quality of CABFPs Adoption:
A composite index measuring the depth, breadth, and quality of CABFP adoption among participating grape farmers. This index captures not only whether farmers adopt climate-adaptive practices, but also how well they implement them. The index will be constructed as a weighted score (ranging from 0 to 10) based on:
- Number of practices adopted
- Relative significance of each practice for climate adaptation
- Fidelity of implementation
2. Gross Margin from Grape Production (NIS/dunum):
The change in gross margin from grape production from baseline to endline, measured in New Israeli Shekels (NIS) per dunum.
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
(1). A binary variable indicating adoption status, coded as 1 if the grape farmer has adopted at least one recommended CABFP, and 0 otherwise.
(2). A binary variable indicating adaptation status, coded as 1 if the grape farmer reports having modified at least one existing farming practice to mitigate the effects of changing weather patterns—such as increased temperatures, irregular rainfall, or drought—and 0 otherwise.
|
After
The index incorporates five key climate-adaptive practices with differential weights reflecting their climate adaptation potential:
- Drought-resistant grape varieties (weight = 2)
- Soil moisture conservation techniques (weight = 2)
- Shade nets (weight = 1)
- Integrated pest management (weight = 1)
- Canopy management (weight = 2)
Data will be collected through farmer self-reports on adoption status and implementation methods, verified through direct field observations where logistically feasible.
Gross margin is calculated as:
Gross Margin = Total Revenue - Total Variable Costs
Where:
- Total Revenue includes all income from grape sales and grape-related products
- Total Variable Costs include direct production expenses: fertilizers, pesticides, water, hired labor, and other purchased inputs
- Unpaid family labor is excluded
This measure represents the return to the household's own labor, management, and fixed assets. Data will be collected through farmer recall supported by simplified record-keeping sheets provided to farmers during the intervention period.
Both outcomes will be measured during the post-harvest season at baseline and endline to ensure comparability and minimize seasonal confounding, allowing farmers to provide complete information about annual productivity and income.
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
This study aims to evaluate how different methods of delivering agricultural advice—digital versus traditional—affect the adoption of CABFPs and the adaptation of existing grape farming practices in response to climate change among farmers in Palestine. A total of 48 villages in the Hebron and Bethlehem districts will participate in the study. Half of the villages (24) will receive regular agricultural guidance through digital tools such as WhatsApp and an online platform, while the other half will continue receiving standard in-person services provided by agricultural extension agents.
The intervention will run for one year, from February 2026 to February 2027, and will be followed by two additional months for data collection and closing activities. The project will assess changes in farming practices, grape yield, income, access to agricultural advice, and overall resilience to climate-related challenges. Farmers will be surveyed before and after the intervention to understand the impact of each approach.
The goal is to determine whether digital extension services can be a more effective and scalable solution for reaching farmers in rural and resource-constrained areas.
|
After
This study employs a two-arm, parallel-group, individual randomized controlled trial (RCT) design to evaluate the effectiveness of digital agricultural extension compared to traditional extension services for promoting climate-adaptive grape farming in the West Bank of Palestine.
(1). Study population and setting:
A total of 795 eligible rainfed grape farmers from the Bethlehem and Hebron governorates will be recruited for the trial. Eligible farmers are those who cultivate rainfed grapes as a primary agricultural activity, own or manage at least 1 dunum (1,000 m²) of grape vineyards, reside in the study area, and provide informed consent to participate.
(2). Randomization and allocation:
Participants will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to either the intervention arm or the control arm, resulting in approximately 398 farmers per arm.
(3). Intervention arm: Digital extension service:
Farmers allocated to the intervention arm will receive digital agricultural extension services over a 40-month period. Extension agents serve as intermediaries to deliver information through digital platforms. Agents access implementation e-guidelines on one Google Sites-based website and share technical materials from another website with farmers through dedicated WhatsApp groups, where they also share instructional videos, facilitate peer-to-peer discussions, and provide real-time technical support. The digital extension program is structured around a seven-step curriculum based on the "Improved Extension for Value-Added Agriculture" (EVAP) Extension Package, focusing on CABFPs and market-oriented farming.
(4). Control arm: Traditional extension services:
Farmers allocated to the control arm will continue to receive the standard "business-as-usual" extension services provided by the Palestinian MOA. This traditional approach includes periodic in-person visits from extension agents, on-site technical guidance, distribution of printed materials, and reactive support based on farmer inquiries.
(5). Data collection and outcome measurement:
The trial's effectiveness will be determined by comparing key outcomes between the two arms. Data will be collected at baseline (pre-intervention, February–June 2025) and endline (post-intervention, February–April 2028), approximately 24 months apart. Both data collection rounds will be conducted during the post-harvest season to ensure comparability.
(5.1). Primary outcomes include: (1) Level and quality of CABFPs adoption, measured using a composite index (0–10 scale); and (2) Gross margin from grape production (NIS/dunum), calculated as total revenue minus total variable costs.
(5.2). Secondary outcomes include: (1) Grape productivity index, combining yield and quality measures; (2) Extension service engagement index, measuring farmer interaction with extension services; (3) Farmer capacity and self-efficacy, assessing knowledge, skills, and confidence; and (4) Cost-effectiveness, evaluating the economic efficiency of each extension modality.
(6). Statistical analysis:
The primary analysis will follow an intention-to-treat (ITT) principle, comparing outcomes between the intervention and control arms. Treatment effects will be estimated using appropriate regression models, adjusting for baseline values and relevant covariates. Statistical significance will be assessed at the 5% level (α = 0.05).
(7). Ethical considerations:
The study protocol has received ethical approval from the relevant institutional review board. All participants will provide written informed consent prior to enrollment. Participation is voluntary, and farmers may withdraw at any time without penalty.
|
|
Field
Randomization Method
|
Before
The clusters were randomized using a robust, well-established method designed to ensure transparency, replicability, and the elimination of selection bias. Initially, random numbers were generated within the dataset using a formula-based approach (e.g., Excel’s =RAND() function) to achieve a purely random ordering of clusters. To further enhance balance between the experimental arms, an alternating assignment method (e.g., =MOD(ROW(A2)2,2)+1) was ultimately used for equal distribution of clusters between the treatment and control groups. Comprehensive documentation of the randomization process—including all steps, formulas, and adjustments—will be provided upon request or included in upcoming appendices (Appendix 20, Appendix 21, and Map 3) that illustrate the final allocation.
|
After
Randomization will be done in office by computer. The allocation sequence will be generated using a computer-based randomization algorithm administered by an independent researcher with no involvement in fieldwork or data collection. Individual farmers within each of the 39 villages will be randomly allocated to either the intervention or control arm in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by village to account for local confounding factors.
|
|
Field
Randomization Unit
|
Before
The randomization is conducted at the cluster level, with clusters defined at the village level. The intervention targets rainfed grape farmers across selected villages in the Hebron and Bethlehem districts of Palestine. Each village constitutes a single unit of randomization to ensure consistency in extension delivery and minimize contamination between treatment arms.
|
After
Individual farmer. Randomization will be conducted at the individual farmer level within villages, stratified by village (39 villages total) (meaning villages are used as strata to ensure balance). Each eligible farmer within a village will be randomly allocated to either the intervention or control arm in a 1:1 ratio.
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Clusters
|
Before
48 villages (24 treatment villages and 24 control villages)
|
After
39 villages
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Observations
|
Before
800 grape-farming households (approximately 10–20 households per village across 48 villages) are targeted for participation in the study. However, the coefficient of variation will be recalculated based on the final average cluster size obtained from the ongoing baseline survey. Accordingly, the sample size and power calculations will be reviewed and adjusted if necessary.
|
After
795 farmers
|
|
Field
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
|
Before
(1). Treatment Arm: 24 clusters (villages), approximately 390 grape-farming households (estimated)
(2). Control Arm: 24 clusters (villages), approximately 410 grape-farming households (estimated)
(3). Total: 48 clusters and approximately 800 households across both arms. The exact number will be finalized based on the results of the ongoing baseline survey and will depend primarily on the availability of eligible grape farmers in the target villages.
|
After
398 farmers intervention arm (digital extension), 397 farmers control arm (traditional extension)
Note: The total is 795 farmers allocated 1:1, which gives approximately 398 per arm (with one arm having 397 to make the total exactly 795).
|
|
Field
Power calculation: Minimum Detectable Effect Size for Main Outcomes
|
Before
The Minimum Detectable Effect Size (MDE) for the primary outcome—adoption of CABFPs is:
- Effect Size (absolute difference in proportions): 0.11 (or 11 percentage points)
- Control Group Proportion (p₁): 34.3%
- Treatment Group Proportion (p₂): 45.3%
- Pooled Standard Deviation: 0.4436
- Unit of Analysis: Grape-farming household
- Cluster Design: 48 villages (24 per arm), ICC = 0.01, CV = 0.17
- Power: 80%
- Significance Level (α): 0.05 (two-sided)
This effect size reflects the smallest meaningful increase in CABFPs adoption attributable to the intervention, given the sample design and statistical parameters.
|
After
Primary Outcome—CABFP Adoption: The study is powered to detect a minimum detectable effect size (MDE) of 11 percentage points of absolute increase in the adoption of CABFPs, from a baseline adoption rate of 34.3% to 45.3% in the treatment group. This value corresponds to a Cohen's d of 0.32, representing a small-to-medium effect size.
The sample size of 795 farmers (398 intervention, 397 control) provides 80% statistical power to detect this effect at a 5% significance level (two-sided test), accounting for 22% anticipated attrition over the 40-month intervention period.
The MDE of an 11-percentage-point increase is grounded in existing literature on agricultural extension interventions, which have documented similar effect sizes ranging from 11% to 18.1% in comparable contexts.
|
|
Field
Additional Keyword(s)
|
Before
Climate-Adaptive Practices, Digital Extension, Rainfed Grape Cultivation, RCT, Conflict-Affected Agriculture, Palestine
|
After
Digital extension, climate-adaptive agriculture, grape farming, RCT, conflict-affected agriculture, Palestine
|
|
Field
Keyword(s)
|
Before
Agriculture, Behavior
|
After
Agriculture, Behavior, Environment And Energy
|
|
Field
Intervention (Hidden)
|
Before
The foundational intervention approach: The extension interventions in the treatment arm are structured in accordance with the Smallholder Horticulture Empowerment and Promotion (SHEP) approach. This proven, systematic, and participatory bottom-up framework transforms farmers’ concept from “grow and sell” towards "grow to sell," thereby promoting market-oriented agriculture (Shimizutani, Taguchi, Yamada, & Yamada, 2021). Importantly, it empowers farmers to identify and address challenges in marketing, technical, and managerial domains, including those associated with climate change—by integrating best farming practices with climate-adaptive strategies. Originally developed in Kenya (2006–2009) through a collaboration between the Government of Kenya and JICA, the SHEP approach has been implemented in 30 African countries ((JICA), n.d). At the Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) V2 (2013), its worldwide recognition is strengthened when Japan committed to expanding the model to 10 African nations and at TICAD 7 (2019) with the “Joint Declaration for Achieving Better Lives of One Million Small-Scale Farmers” ((JICA), 2019). Today, SHEP is implemented globally in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East (including Palestine ) offering a robust framework for empowering smallholder farmers and fostering sustainable agricultural practice((JICA), n.d). Below, we outline the systematic, interconnected steps that form the foundation of our approach.
(1). Digital Extension Method
The Digital Extension Method leverages modern communication tools along with the SHEP approach to deliver interactive and efficient agricultural extension services. In this study, participating farmers will receive carefully curated content through dedicated WhatsApp groups and a bespoke digital extension platform. The instructional materials implement climate-adaptive practices with the best farming techniques for grape cultivation, complemented by timely seasonal recommendations. To optimize knowledge transfer, extension agents will distribute biweekly communications throughout the growing season. These updates will include high-quality video tutorials, some of which are already available, with additional videos to be developed as the study progresses, dynamic infographics, and systematically arranged links to supplementary resources. Furthermore, the WhatsApp groups will serve as interactive forums, enabling farmers to share images, pose questions, and receive real-time expert guidance. For more details, see the following (link), which provides direct access to the Google Sites-based platform hosting all training materials and up-to-date agricultural resources. The contents of the website will be continuously enriched and further developed both prior to and during the study, ensuring they are responsive to the actual needs of the farmers.
Digital Extension Method Implementation Process:
1. Assessing Farmers' Willingness and Readiness: Farmers will be invited to an introductory meeting where the program will be thoroughly explained and participation requirements clearly outlined. Their interest and readiness will be gauged through interactive discussions and feedback sessions. During this online meeting, participants will be organized into WhatsApp clusters, with each group comprising a minimum of 10-15 farmers (or more, if feasible) to ensure effective collaboration and seamless communication.
2. Sharing Information on Good Practice Farmers (GPF): Success stories of farmers who have adopted CABFPS will be shared through a variety of engaging formats. Short videos, curated website resources, and active discussions on WhatsApp will collectively showcase these best practices, thereby inspiring and informing participants about the benefits and potential of the program.
3. Sharing Market Information: Pre-recorded videos featuring insights from local traders, input suppliers, and farmers who have benefited from market visits, as well as other key stakeholders, will provide essential information on pricing trends, product standards, availability, trader details, and the technical specifications of relevant farming technologies. Following these presentations, the already established WhatsApp clusters will be utilized to foster interactive discussions, facilitate knowledge sharing, and support informed decision-making among farmers.
4. Needs Assessment and Extension Planning: Farmers will collaboratively identify their specific training needs through interactive consensus-building sessions. Based on this collective input, key topics—such as soil management, pest control, and marketing—will be prioritized to tailor the program effectively to local requirements. Additionally, the training will include at least two sessions featuring practical field demonstrations to reinforce theoretical knowledge with hands-on experience. If in-person demonstrations are not feasible, a short video presentation will serve as an alternative.
5. Implementation of Planned Extension Activities: Farmers will first review materials shared via WhatsApp that correspond to the identified training topics and are scheduled according to the agreed-upon timetable. They will then participate in interactive digital sessions facilitated by extension agents. This organized approach is designed to enhance their comprehension of the content and promote active engagement during the discussions.
(2). Traditional Extension Method:
Following the MOA's established practices, the traditional extension approach will be implemented without changes by the principal researcher to ensure compliance with current governmental guidelines. Key activities generally include routine field visits by extension agents aimed at delivering direct support and practical training to farmers. During these visits, extension agents provide guidance that is intended to address critical agricultural stages such as planting, pruning, and harvesting, ensuring advice is both timely and contextually relevant. This method generally involves physical training workshops and demonstrations tailored to farmers' seasonal requirements. However, while these activities represent the intended standard practice, their actual implementation may vary depending on specific conditions, availability of resources, and on-the-ground circumstances. This method, emphasizing direct interaction and practical training, will serve as the benchmark for evaluating the effectiveness of digital extension approaches.
(3). Common Features of the Extension Program
Both extension methods are designed to alleviate farmers’ knowledge and adoption of CABFPs through interactive and comprehensive learning processes. A Google Sites-based platform will serve as the central hub for all training materials, while a newly developed Google Sheets-based system will track participant demographics, session topics, and feedback to facilitate effective monitoring and evaluation. Attendance will be recorded using a simple registration system via a compiled Excel sheet. In instances where farmer extension groups are not already established, the program will actively facilitate their formation to promote supportive learning and cooperation. Training schedules will be adjusted in consultation with farmer groups to ensure alignment with seasonal activities, local field challenges, and community events, thereby maximizing both relevance and engagement.
(4). Intended coverage:
For the dissemination of our digital extension materials, including short videos, extension information, market updates, and brochures, the intervention will target grape farmer groups in two districts. Specifically, we will engage 8 cluster in Bethlehem and 16 clusters in Hebron (totaling 24 groups), with each group comprising approximately 10–15 members (with some groups expanding to 20 members when possible). Wherever available, we will utilize existing grape farmer groups from larger localities or merge smaller local groups; in areas lacking such groups, new ones will be formed. Overall, the treatment arm will consist of 24 clusters targeting approximately 400 grape farmers, with an equal number of clusters and farmers assigned to the control arm.
Although the intervention is designed to conduct biweekly digital group sessions, scheduled breaks are incorporated to accommodate social commitments, seasonal demands, and logistical constraints. As a result, each of the 24 targeted grape farmer groups will participate in a minimum of 12 sessions over the course of a year, resulting in a total of 288 meetings. This structured schedule ensures alignment with the sequential and integrated steps of the extension approach.
Grape farmers participating in the digital extension meetings will receive dedicated follow-up support via WhatsApp from our facilitators or assigned extension agents. Those who do not attend will be identified through local community networks or contacted directly by phone and will be actively encouraged to join future sessions. The theory of change developed for this intervention highlights climate-adaptive interventions and best farming practice techniques, detailing the specific inputs, processes, and mechanisms intended to strengthen agricultural productivity and resilience.
|
After
Intervention description:
This randomized controlled trial evaluates two distinct agricultural extension approaches for promoting climate-adaptive grape farming in the West Bank of Palestine over a 40-month period. A total of 795 rainfed grape farmers in the Bethlehem and Hebron districts will be randomly assigned to either a digital extension intervention (treatment arm) or traditional extension services (control arm).
Treatment arm: digital extension intervention
The treatment group receives a comprehensive digital agricultural extension program designed to equip grape farmers with climate-adaptive and market-responsive farming techniques. This intervention is grounded in the "Improved Extension for Value-Added Agriculture" (EVAP) Extension Package, developed by the Palestinian MOA in collaboration with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). The EVAP Extension Package represents a localized adaptation of the globally recognized Smallholder Horticulture Empowerment and Promotion (SHEP) approach, specifically tailored to Palestine's unique agricultural and political context. The primary objective is to facilitate farmers' transition from subsistence-oriented practices to a market-driven, profitable farming business model while building resilience to climate change.
Blended learning approach
The intervention employs a sophisticated blended learning model that combines multiple instructional modalities to optimize knowledge transfer and enable iterative feedback. This approach includes three interconnected components. First, bi-monthly online training sessions lasting one to two hours each are conducted following the sequential steps of the EVAP Extension Package, aligned with the grape farming calendar to ensure practical relevance. Second, digital content sharing occurs continuously, with extension agents distributing short instructional videos, photographs, infographics, and extension tips that farmers can access and review at their convenience. Third, real-time communication and support are provided through dedicated WhatsApp groups, enabling interactive discussions, immediate problem-solving, peer-to-peer knowledge exchange, and responsive technical assistance.
Seven-step structured curriculum
The training curriculum is organized around seven key steps designed to systematically build farmer capacity, enhance climate adaption and facilitate market linkage:
Step 1 (Extension Program Introduction and Participant Confirmation): introduces participants to EVAP methodology principles, confirms farmer interest levels, and facilitates the registration process to ensure committed participation.
Step 2 (Awareness Creation Tour -Peer Learning Pathway): deploys demonstration videos showcasing successful climate-adaptive practices implemented by early adopter farmers, conducts virtual feedback sessions to discuss observations and questions, and enables peer knowledge exchange between experienced and target farmers.
Step 3 (Market Opportunity Identification): helps farmers assess and prioritize market demands for different grape varieties and quality standards, disseminates stakeholder video insights from buyers and market actors, and facilitates virtual market discussions to align production decisions with market opportunities.
Step 4 (Participatory Planning for Agricultural Practice Improvement): focuses on enhancing individual farming techniques through personalized guidance, co-developing collective extension strategies that address common challenges, and addressing farmer-specific technical needs related to climate adaptation.
Step 5 (Farm Record Keeping): provides comprehensive training on financial record-keeping systems, distributes standardized record templates for tracking inputs, outputs, and profitability, and emphasizes the importance of farm documentation for informed decision-making and independent outcome evaluation.
Step 6 (Tailored Extension Activities for Agricultural Practice Improvement): delivers specialized technical training on climate-adaptive practices such as water conservation, soil management, pest and disease control, green pruning, and varietal selection. This step addresses grape-specific production challenges through targeted skill-building sessions and utilizes farmer-to-farmer extension methodology to leverage local expertise and build community capacity.
Step 7 (Profitability and Program Evaluation by Farmers): guides farmers through farm profit analysis using their record-keeping data, refines management strategies participatively based on performance outcomes, assesses EVAP adoption effectiveness through farmer feedback, and conducts virtual evaluation sessions to document lessons learned and identify areas for improvement.
Implementation scale and coverage:
The extension intervention will be delivered at the farmer level within each target village, with a minimum of ten participating grape farmers per village. Villages are randomly allocated to the treatment arm, and this village-level clustering facilitates peer learning, collective problem-solving, and the formation of local support networks that can sustain practice adoption beyond the intervention period.
Control arm: traditional extension services
The control group continues receiving standard "business-as-usual" extension services provided by the Palestinian MOA, representing the existing agricultural extension practice in the region. This traditional approach, analogous to the Training and Visit (T&V) system that has been widely implemented in developing countries, consists of several key components. Extension agents conduct periodic in-person visits to farms, providing on-site technical guidance and responding to specific farmer inquiries. Printed materials such as extension bulletins, technical guides, and seasonal calendars are distributed during these visits. The service model is primarily reactive, with farmers initiating contact when they encounter specific problems or challenges. This group serves as the study's baseline, enabling rigorous comparison of the effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and scalability of digital versus traditional extension approaches in a conflict-affected setting where mobility restrictions and resource constraints significantly limit the reach and frequency of conventional extension services.
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
(1). Grape Yield per Dunum (2). Perceived Improvement in Grape Quality (3). Income from Grape Farming (4). Improved Access to Agriculture Extension (5). Willingness to Invest in CABFPs and, (6). Farming Cost Reduction
|
After
The study will measure four secondary outcome variables at baseline (February–June 2025) and endline (February–April 2028):
1. Grape productivity index:
A composite index combining standardized measures of grape yield (kg/1,000 m²) and grape quality (0–4 scale) into a single productivity score, calculated as: Productivity Index = (0.6 × Standardized Yield) + (0.4 × Standardized Quality). The quality component is based on farmer ratings across five dimensions (size, color uniformity, firmness, sweetness, pest resistance), while the yield component uses a three-year baseline average of self-reported data, verified where possible, compared to endline measurements.
2. Extension service engagement index:
A composite measure quantifying the extent and quality of farmer interaction with agricultural extension services. This continuous variable (0–1) is calculated by averaging three equally weighted, normalized components: (a) Contact Frequency (interactions with traditional and digital channels); (b) Information Diversity (variety of sources consulted); and (c) Satisfaction (reported contentment with information quality, relevance, and timeliness).
3. Farmer capacity and self-efficacy:
This outcome measures the change in farmers' knowledge, skills, and confidence related to CABFP and climate resilience. Assessment will use a mixed-methods approach, drawing on proxy indicators within the survey (e.g., reported adoption of CABFP practices, participation in training, decision-making confidence) along with qualitative interviews with a subsample of farmers.
4. Cost-effectiveness:
This outcome evaluates the economic efficiency of the digital versus traditional extension modalities, measured using three key indicators: (a) Cost per farmer reached (total program cost / number of engaged farmers); (b) Cost per farmer adopting (total program cost / number of farmers adopting at least one CABFP); and (c) Cost-benefit ratio (total economic benefits from increased net income / total program costs).
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
1. Grape Yield per Dunum
Measured in kilograms per 1,000 m² (dunum), reported by farmers at both baseline and endline to assess productivity changes over time.
Type: Continuous | Source: Farmer survey
2. Perceived Improvement in Grape Quality
Coded as 1 if the farmer rates quality (size, color, firmness, sweetness, pest resistance) as Good/Excellent (score ≥ 3), and 0 if Average or below (score ≤ 2).
Type: Binary | Source: Farmer survey
3. Income from Grape Farming
Net income (revenue minus operating costs) from grape production, reported in NIS per dunum at baseline and endline.
Type: Continuous | Source: Farmer survey
4. Improved Access to Agricultural Extension
Coded as 1 if the farmer received extension in the past year and rated access as Easy/Very Easy (score ≥ 4), and 0 otherwise.
Type: Binary | Source: Farmer survey
5. Willingness to Invest in CABFPs
Coded as 1 if the farmer reports being Very or Extremely Willing (score ≥ 4) to invest in CABFPs; 0 if score is 3 or below.
Type: Binary | Source: Farmer survey
6. Farming Cost Reduction
Change in total farming cost or input costs per dunum between baseline and endline, measured in NIS.
Type: Continuous | Source: Farmer survey
|
After
(1). Grape Productivity Index:
The Grape Productivity Index is constructed to capture both quantity and quality dimensions of agricultural productivity. Construction involves four steps:
Step 1 - Yield Measurement: Grape yield is measured in kg/1,000 m² to standardize across farm sizes. Baseline yield is calculated as a three-year average of self-reported production data to reduce year-to-year variability. Self-reported data will be verified through field observations where feasible. Endline yield uses the same methodology.
Step 2 - Quality Measurement: Grape quality is assessed on a 0–4 scale based on farmer ratings across five dimensions: size (berry and cluster), color uniformity, firmness, sweetness, and pest resistance. Each dimension is rated 0–4, and the overall quality score is the average of the five dimensions.
Step 3 - Standardization: Both yield and quality measures are standardized (z-scores) to enable meaningful combination into a single index, ensuring neither component dominates due to differences in scale or variance.
Step 4 - Index Calculation: The final index is calculated as: Productivity Index = (0.6 × Standardized Yield) + (0.4 × Standardized Quality). The weights reflect the relative market importance of quantity versus quality in the Palestinian grape market, determined through consultation with market actors and agricultural experts.
(2). Extension service engagement index:
The Extension Service Engagement Index captures the multi-dimensional nature of farmer engagement with extension services, moving beyond simple contact counts to assess depth and quality of engagement. The index is constructed from three equally weighted components, each normalized to a 0–1 scale:
Component 1- Contact Frequency: Measures the number and frequency of farmer interactions with extension services across traditional and digital channels, including in-person visits, phone calls, WhatsApp group participation, and training attendance. Raw contact counts are normalized using min-max normalization.
Component 2- Information Diversity: Measures the variety of information sources consulted, including extension agents, fellow farmers, digital platforms, printed materials, radio/television programs, and input suppliers/market actors. The diversity score is calculated as the proportion of available sources accessed by the farmer.
Component 3 - Satisfaction: Measures farmer-reported satisfaction with extension services across three dimensions: information quality (accuracy, usefulness), information relevance (applicability to context), and information timeliness (availability when needed). Each dimension is rated on a Likert scale and averaged.
=> Final Index Calculation: Engagement Index = (Contact Frequency + Information Diversity + Satisfaction) / 3
(3). Framer capacity and self-efficacy:
This outcome is constructed using a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative proxy indicators and qualitative data:
Quantitative Components include: (1) Practice Adoption Breadth - number of different CABFPs attempted or adopted; (2) Training Participation- number of training sessions attended; (3) Decision-Making Confidence- Likert-scale ratings of confidence in decisions about variety selection, input application, climate response, and market opportunities; and (4) Self-Efficacy Scale- Likert-scale responses to statements about confidence in implementing climate-adaptive practices and overcoming climate challenges.
Qualitative Component: Semi-structured interviews with 30–50 farmers from treatment and control groups to explore perceived changes in knowledge and skills, confidence in applying practices, barriers to adoption, and learning preferences.
Integration: Quantitative components are standardized and combined into a composite Farmer Capacity Index using principal component analysis (PCA) or simple averaging of standardized scores. Qualitative findings triangulate and interpret quantitative results, providing contextual understanding of capacity development processes.
(4). Cost effectiveness:
Cost-effectiveness is assessed through three complementary metrics:
1. Cost per Farmer Reached = Total Program Cost / Number of Engaged Farmers
Total Program Cost includes personnel costs (extension agent salaries, facilitators), material costs (printed materials for control; digital platform development/maintenance for treatment), communication costs (WhatsApp data, website hosting), training costs (venue rental, refreshments), and administrative/overhead costs. Number of Engaged Farmers is defined as farmers with at least one meaningful interaction with extension services (threshold based on pilot data, e.g., attending one training or having three contacts with agents).
2. Cost per Farmer Adopting = Total Program Cost / Number of Farmers Adopting at Least One CABFP
This metric focuses on actual behavior change rather than just engagement. Number of Farmers Adopting is defined as farmers reporting adoption of at least one climate-adaptive practice by endline, verified through field observations where feasible.
3. Cost-Benefit Ratio = Total Economic Benefits / Total Program Costs
Total Economic Benefits is calculated as the aggregate increase in net income (gross margin) across all treatment farmers compared to control: Total Benefits = (Average Gross Margin Increase per Farmer in Treatment) × (Number of Treatment Farmers). A ratio greater than 1 indicates economic benefits exceed program costs, suggesting positive return on investment.
Data Collection: Program cost data will be collected through detailed financial tracking of all intervention-related expenditures, categorized by type (personnel, materials, communication) and extension modality (digital vs. traditional) to enable comparative analysis.
|
|
Field
Pi as first author
|
Before
No
|
After
Yes
|