The AEA RCT Registry will be down for maintenance on Tuesday, April 20th, from 9pm EDT to 11pm EDT to perform necessary upgrades. The site will be in maintenance mode during that time. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Can smallholder extension transform African agriculture?
Last registered on February 19, 2021


Trial Information
General Information
Can smallholder extension transform African agriculture?
Initial registration date
February 18, 2021
Last updated
February 19, 2021 11:22 AM EST
Primary Investigator
Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
PI Affiliation
University of Wisconsin-Madison
PI Affiliation
University of Sydney
Additional Trial Information
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Agricultural productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa lags behind all other regions of the world. Decades of investment in agricultural research and extension have yielded more evidence on what fails than on what works—especially for the small-scale producers who dominate the sector. We study a program that targets multiple constraints to productivity at once, similar to anti-poverty “graduation” interventions. Analyzing a randomized controlled trial in western Kenya, we find that participation causes statistically and economically significant gains in output, yields, and profits. In our preferred specification, the program increases maize production by 26% and profits by 16%. The program increases yields uniformly across the sample, while treatment effects on total output and profit impacts are slightly attenuated at the top end of the distribution.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Deutschmann, Joshua et al. 2021. "Can smallholder extension transform African agriculture?." AEA RCT Registry. February 19. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.6675-1.0.
Experimental Details
Farmers in the the treatment group received One Acre Fund's “market bundle” which provides farmer groups with group-liability loans for improved seeds and fertilizer, regular training on modern agricultural techniques, crop and funeral insurance, and market facilitation support to help farmers obtain higher prices for their output.
Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcomes are program maize yields, total maize output, and profits. Program maize yields are treated farmers' per-acre yield on their enrolled plot. Total maize output is a weighted average of per-acre yields on the enrolled vs. non-enrolled plot (with weights proportional to the amount of land in each category). To obtain "crop cut" yields, enumerators collected and physically weighed fresh and dry harvests from two randomly placed 40-square-meter boxes. Cultivated land sizes were measured by GPS readings, with enumerators
walking the boundaries of each plot three times.

We calculate profi t as the value of output less farmers' costs. Revenues are the product of total output and average market prices from nearby vendors. For control farmers, input costs are elicited via self-reports. For treatment farmers, we know the input costs on the enrolled land (since these are administered by the program); we elicit other input costs with self-reports.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Recruitment, enrollment, and program implementation for this experiment took place in the Teso region of Kenya, following 1AF's standard
protocol. Farmers who satisfied the basic program criteria paid a participation deposit of approximately $5 USD. Once participants had self-selected into groups of 8-12 farmers, the randomization was conducted at the level of clusters, which consisted of 2-4 of these joint-liability farmer groups.

Although 1AF had never offered its program to the sampled villages, some farmers had managed to access it anyway, by "commuting" to
neighboring villages to participate. As pre-exposed farmers may introduce bias into our results we report our main results both for the full sample and for the "primary sample," which refers to the sample of farmers who had never participated in 1AF programming.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
A public lottery assigned groups of farmers into treatment clusters
Randomization Unit
cluster, where each cluster is made up of 2-4 farmer groups
Was the treatment clustered?
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
120 clusters, each cluster is made up of 2-4 farmer groups
Sample size: planned number of observations
2545 farmers
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
60 clusters in treatment and 60 clusters in control
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB Name
Strathmore University
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
SU/IRB 0062/16
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Is the intervention completed?
Intervention Completion Date
June 01, 2017, 12:00 AM +00:00
Is data collection complete?
Data Collection Completion Date
June 01, 2017, 12:00 AM +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
Program Files
Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials
Relevant Paper(s)