Community-Based Rangeland and Livestock Management

Last registered on April 01, 2021


Trial Information

General Information

Community-Based Rangeland and Livestock Management
Initial registration date
February 06, 2018

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 06, 2018, 6:29 PM EST

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

Last updated
April 01, 2021, 9:34 AM EDT

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


Primary Investigator

Northwestern University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
World Bank

Additional Trial Information

Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
The primary academic purpose of the study is to test the impact of a community-based livestock and rangeland management program in northern Namibia on livestock assets, income, social cohesion and rangeland health.

It is theorized that pastoral farmers in communal areas like northern Namibia face a “tragedy of the commons” problem regarding their choice of where to graze and how many cattle to keep, and that formalizing community resource management practices (via group meetings, defined responsibilities and sanctions), as GOPA sought to do, can alleviate this problem.

GOPA also tried to introduce animal husbandry best practices, including herd restructuring to reduce the share of unproductive cattle and use of vaccinations and supplements. Similarly, GOPA sought to teach farmers to commercialize their practices and sell more of their animals through the formal market.

This evaluation also speaks to a body of literature in ecology on holistic rangeland management, the theory that guided GOPA’s farmer training. This technique, which involves grazing cattle in large combined herds and following a regular rotational plan, has been posited to improve the long-term health of the rangeland in areas at risk of desertification.

In addition to instituting community groups as well as regional livestock marketing cooperatives and training on animal husbandry and rangeland management, the CBRLM project provided direct support to farmers in the form of installing water points, providing matching funds to community groups and implementing a livestock pass-on scheme.

To address all these potential avenues of impact, this analysis will examine changes in farmer behaviors and attitudes, cattle herd structure and health, rangeland quality and grass availability, and household well-being.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Jamison, Julian and Dean Karlan. 2021. "Community-Based Rangeland and Livestock Management." AEA RCT Registry. April 01.
Former Citation
Jamison, Julian and Dean Karlan. 2021. "Community-Based Rangeland and Livestock Management." AEA RCT Registry. April 01.
Experimental Details


In each treatment community, GOPA conducted CBRLM trainings for farmers over the course of 2012 through 2014. Training topics included planned grazing, combined herding, and best practices for raising cattle for commercial production. GOPA also helped formalize existing farmers associations to adjudicate disputes over natural resources and manage financial contributions for common goods by strengthening bookkeeping practices, creating shared bank accounts, and developing a clear structure for dispute settlement. GOPA matched farmers’ financial contributions for common goods for the first year of the program, and constructed new borehole wells in 39 communities where water access was limited.
Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Rangeland management behavior, livestock management behavior, community dynamics, knowledge / attitudes / beliefs, rangeland health, cattle wealth and herd structure, household income and expenditure
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Each of these outcome areas includes several indices, which are in turn comprised of several component variables. Full details on the construction of each component variable and the method of indexing are available in the attached analysis plan.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Movement of cattle, political participation, directly observed herding and community group activities, fencing, behavioral games, community structures, village headman attitudes, intra-kraal trust, persistence of behaviors over time, inequality, monitoring of others' behavior
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Each of these outcomes includes several component variables. The attached analysis plan includes a full list of secondary outcome variables and their construction.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The unit of randomization in this study is the Rangeland Intervention Area (RIA). RIAs are essentially intervention zones that share a commonly agreed upon boundary and a common authority over what happens within the area. Those RIAs selected to be part of the treatment group received the package of CBRLM activities while those RIAs selected for the control group did not.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Done electronically using STATA
Randomization Unit
Rangeland Intervention Area (RIA)
Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
41 RIAs
Sample size: planned number of observations
1,250 cattle-owning households, 1,230 rangeland assessment sites
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
21 treatment RIAs, 20 control RIAs
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials


Document Name
Index construction and variable definition details, 2021
Document Type
Document Description
2021 version of index construction details. Includes survey questions, updated variable construction description, and description of changes in index construction from PAP for unforeseen reasons, as applicable.
Index construction and variable definition details, 2021

MD5: 3d3dc1c04219b93c39d8aa507c494603

SHA1: d76b4e2c1637c59df5132b3709619e82b100be3f

Uploaded At: March 30, 2021

Document Name
Index construction and variable definition details, 2018
Document Type
Document Description
2018 version of index construction details, as specified in the PAP. Includes survey questions and variable construction description.
Index construction and variable definition details, 2018

MD5: 320dd5bf52d346641606735eb0a6d4e3

SHA1: dfff01f2381810e0447bcf0b69e0a0b087f4a5aa

Uploaded At: February 06, 2018


Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

Namibia Data Analysis Plan (All Datasets)

MD5: d4d556e8097147714ebd7fa61a7ba996

SHA1: 8f65dd45c6f6f019802667e8cce351dd666e931a

Uploaded At: February 06, 2018


Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information


Is the intervention completed?
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials