Making Family Farmers more Productive: Evaluating the Brazilian Model in Senegal and Malawi

2014-06-02

2015-05-30

production
investment and spending on agriculture
agricultural decision making

The primary goal of this project is to test whether alleviating constraints facing small holder farmers can increase their production, and ultimately sell their production through commercial channels. Specifically, we test two constraints:
• Constraint 1 – Information: We hypothesize that many farmers lack knowledge that is keeping them from producing as efficiently as they could. This knowledge could be technical (for example what farming techniques are most effective, what crops are best suited to the farmer’s fields) or managerial (for example how to decide how much to invest in fertilizer, high quality seeds, etc).
• Constraint 2 – Capital: We hypothesize that farmers are restricted from making productive investments because they lack capital (and access to affordable credit).

In Malawi, the evaluation will be conducted by comparing results among two cross-cutting randomization interventions.
The first intervention is the information intervention:
• Group 1 – Control: This group will receive no new services and their behavior will serve as a comparison.
• Group 2 – Intensive agriculture extension: Farmers in this group will receive individualized information from experts on how to make their farms more productive. The experts will work with farmers to develop a plan. The exact nature of information provided will be developed with our partners and conditional on the context and the needs of the farmers. Comparison of this group to Group 1 will tell us if alleviation of the information constraint results in improved farmer outcomes.
The second intervention is the provision of capital through different mechanisms to test the most appropriate modality of this production transfer:
• Group 1 – Control: This group will receive no additional inputs nor any cash and their behavior will serve as a comparison.
• Group 2 - Cash transfer: Farmers in this group will additionally receive a cash transfer in several installments that is intended to help them carry out the plan developed with the expert.
• Group 3 – In-kind transfer: Farmers in this group will additionally receive an in-kind transfer of agricultural inputs that will help them carry out the plan developed with the expert. This in-kind transfer will be of equivalent size to the cash transfer made where inputs are priced at local market prices.
Given the pilot nature of this study and the size of the study the interaction of the cross-cutting interventions is not of primary importance. Given group level assignment stratification is only possible at this level. We will stratify on district, age of group, and size of group.

In Senegal, the evaluation will be conducted by comparing results across three randomized groups:
o Group 1: Basic agricultural assessment only, developed with farmer and farmers' association. No extension services nor transfers provided.
o Group 2: Basic agricultural assessment and extension plan developed with farmer and farmers' association, with extension services provided.
o Group 3: Basic agricultural assessment and extension plan developed with farmer and farmers' association, with extension services provided, as well as a cash transfer to help farmers carry out the plan developed with the farmers' association.

Randomization done in office by a computer

Malawi: randomized by farmer group (average size of 13 farmers)
Senegal: randomized by farmers' association "animateur" (farmers' association representative) (average number of 6 farmers/"animateur")

Yes

Malawi: 120 farmer groups
Senegal: 109 "animateurs"

Malawi: 1560 farmers Senegal: 600 farmers

Malawi:
•260 farmers (20 farmer groups). no new information services & no inputs (control)
•260 farmers (20 farmer groups). no new information services & cash transfers
•260 farmers (20 farmer groups). no new information services & in-kind transfer
•260 farmers (20 farmer groups). intensive agriculture extension & no inputs
•260 farmers (20 farmer groups). intensive agriculture extension & cash transfers
•260 farmers (20 farmer groups). intensive agriculture extension & in-kind transfers

Senegal:
o 200 farmers (37 "animateurs"). Basic agricultural assessment only
o 200 farmers (36 "animateurs"). Basic agricultural assessment & extension plan
o 200 farmers (36 "animateurs"). Basic agricultural assessment & extension plan & cash transfer

Malawi: We will sample 13 individuals in 120 farmer groups registered with NASFAM in the Ntchisi and Dowa districts, yielding a total sample size of 1,560 individuals. Farmer groups range in size from 10 to 15, with an average size of approximately 13. The intraclass correlation coefficient varies considerably depending on the outcome of interest one is using. Using IHS 2010/11 data this ranges from 0.04 (amount of acreage dedicated to maize) to 0.24 (number of different crops). For agricultural productivity measures with a reasonably low correlation coefficient we will be able to detect reasonable effect sizes even in this pilot study that will help determine which interventions to focus on in future larger scale interventions. For all power calculations we assume a correlation coefficient of 0.05, power of 0.8, and a 5 percent significance level. For the intensive extension service treatments we are able to detect a standardized effect size of 0.18; for the production transfer modality treatments we are able to detect a standardized effect size of 0.22. We do not anticipate that take-up will be low given that the benefits to the farmers are substantial. Assuming compliance of 90 percent, the estimated standardized effect size is 0.28.