Land grabbing and its consequences for traditional institutions and collective action

Last registered on January 20, 2022

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Land grabbing and its consequences for traditional institutions and collective action
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0008677
Initial registration date
January 20, 2022

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
January 20, 2022, 2:25 PM EST

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

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
German Institute for Global and Area Studies

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
German Institute for Global and Area Studies
PI Affiliation
German Institute for Global and Area Studies

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2021-09-20
End date
2021-11-29
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
In many developing countries, the large-scale expansion of agricultural producers involves the acquisition of vast areas of land from traditional rural communities. Large-scale agricultural investments (LSAIs) may affect livelihoods positively or negatively. In this research project, we examine the consequences of LSAIs on social cohesion. We conduct household surveys and public good games with more than 2500 inhabitants from villages that are more or less affected by oil palm plantations in rural Indonesia. Before deciding how much to contribute to a public good, a randomly chosen subset is reminded of traditional institutions, the others receive a control prime. We investigate if social cohesion differs between villages that are more or less affected by oil palm plantations, and if dysfunctional traditional institutions drive this result. Furthermore, we look into migration history, ethnicity, and village elite membership.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Geissel, Daniel, Lisa Hoffmann and Jann Lay. 2022. "Land grabbing and its consequences for traditional institutions and collective action." AEA RCT Registry. January 20. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8677
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)
The intervention consists of psychological primes. Subjects are randomized into one of two groups: (i) Control group: neutral prime, (ii) treatment group: prime related to adat (customary/traditional) institutions and their role in village community. Priming consists of a question about their agreement to a statement.
Intervention Start Date
2021-09-20
Intervention End Date
2021-11-29

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcomes relate to the amount a person is willing to contribute to an (incentivized) public good game.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes include variables that we will use to investigate mechanisms through heterogenous treatment effects. These relate to changes in wealth (magnitude, fluctuations, uncertainty, working hours), local inequality, personal experience of land expropriation, intra-household bargaining power, indebtedness, conflict experience, job satisfaction, and unfulfilled expectations. Furthermore, we look into migration history, ethnicity, and village elite membership.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The research project adopts a 2x1 design in which individuals are randomized into 1 out of 2 possible treatment groups (priming groups). This will interact with a quasi-experimental design of treatment and control villages based on exposure to oil palm plantations.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
The random assignment is done by the PIs with a replicable procedure using statistical software.
Randomization Unit
Randomization is done at the individual level.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
0
Sample size: planned number of observations
In total, about 3240 individuals are surveyed.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
About 1620 subjects per treatment arm (1 treatment/ 1control).
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
In a basic group means comparison, assuming the mean contributions are the mean of the possible contributions with 80% power, a significance level of 0.05, and standard deviations of 10,000 (corresponding to two steps in the offered contribution alternatives), the MDE is 984 for a sample of 3,240 individuals (2,700 households and 540 village leaders; 1 control group vs. 1 treatment group).
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
GIGA Ethics Comittee
IRB Approval Date
2021-09-01
IRB Approval Number
07/2021
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

Pre-Analysis Plan

MD5: 6338315ca681db9c6805a1ed061d4246

SHA1: d402817dd01e4bb4055bae2d00b428d849562c65

Uploaded At: January 19, 2022

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials