Complementarities of Training, Technology, and Credit in Smallholder Agriculture: Impact, Sustainability, and Policy for Scaling-up in Uganda
Last registered on March 31, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Complementarities of Training, Technology, and Credit in Smallholder Agriculture: Impact, Sustainability, and Policy for Scaling-up in Uganda
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004022
Initial registration date
March 28, 2019
Last updated
March 31, 2019 11:26 PM EDT
Location(s)
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
GWU
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
GWU and IADB
Additional Trial Information
Status
Completed
Start date
2013-03-01
End date
2017-04-15
Secondary IDs
AID-OAA-L-12-00001, award No.201121454-07,
Abstract
Many development programs are short-term interventions, either because of external funding constraints or an assumption of impact sustainability. Using a novel randomized phase-out research method, we provide experimental tests program phase-out effects of an extension program designed for women smallholder farmers in Uganda. We find that program phase-out does not diminish demand for improved seeds, as farmers shift purchases from NGO-sponsored village supply networks to market sources, indicating persistent learning effects. We find no evidence of declines in improved cultivation practices taught by the program. These results have implications for both efficient program design and for models of technology adoption.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Bobic, Vida and STEPHEN C SMITH. 2019. "Complementarities of Training, Technology, and Credit in Smallholder Agriculture: Impact, Sustainability, and Policy for Scaling-up in Uganda." AEA RCT Registry. March 31. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/4022/history/44457
Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Many development programs are short-term interventions, either because of external funding constraints or an assumption of impact sustainability. Using a novel randomized phase-out research method, we provide experimental tests program phase-out effects of an extension program designed for women smallholder farmers in Uganda. In particular we examine whether program phase-out diminishes demand for improved seeds, and or leads to changes in the source of seeds such as from the NGO-sponsored village supply networks to other market sources. In this, we look for the presence of persistent learning effects. We also study whether the phase-out leads to declines in improved cultivation techniques and practices taught by the program.
Intervention Start Date
2013-03-01
Intervention End Date
2016-12-31
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Input use (e.g. improved seeds, fertilizer, pesticides), application of improved cultivation techniques (e.g. crop rotation, line sowing, intercropping, pest management), number of crops grown, productivity (yield per acre), income, food security, household and farm decision-making.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We will use count-based (Alkire-Foster method) multidimensional measures including decision-making, access to finance, and work outside of family agriculture and home-based enterprises.
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Four years after the start of the agricultural extension and input supply program, it was discontinued in a randomly selected subsample of the treatment population. There are three treatment groups: Continuation (which continued to receive treatment), Model Farmer phaseout (where the Model Farmer component of the program was discontinued first, and the CAP component one year later), and CAP phaseout (where the Community Agriculture Promoter component was discontinued first, followed by the MF component a year later). The experiment covers 15 BRAC branches (broadly corresponding to Ugandan districts) in the Eastern Region of Uganda; the experiment was stratified at the branch level. We use a clustered design, where a cluster is one village or a geographically proximate pair of villages in which both components of the program were active in the year preceding phaseout (2013). There are 99 clusters in total: 32 in Continuation, 33 in Model Farmer Phaseout, and 34 in CAP Phaseout. In addition to a baseline survey in 2013, there were three follow-up surveys: one agricultural season after phaseout started (while both Phaseout treatment arms still had one active component of the program), three seasons (1.5 years) after phaseout (after both Phaseout treatment arms had both types of treatment discontinued), and finally six seasons (three years) after phaseout.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
Village cluster
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
99 village clusters.
Sample size: planned number of observations
1800
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1800 farmers
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
George Washington University Institutional Review Boards
IRB Approval Date
2014-04-28
IRB Approval Number
031411
Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
No
Is data collection complete?
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
No
Program Files
Program Files
Reports and Papers
Preliminary Reports
Relevant Papers