Download StudyGeneral

Study Overview

Title:
The Effect of Demonstration Plots and the Warehouse Receipt System on ISFM Adoption, Yield and Income of Smallholder Farmers in Malawi
Study ID:
RIDIE-STUDY-ID-594a087632c1a
Initial Registration Date:
06/21/2017
Last Update Date:
06/21/2017
Study Status:
Ongoing
Location(s):
Malawi
Abstract:
Established in 2008, the Anchor Farm Model of the Clinton Development Initiative is designed to increase agricultural production, income and food security through promotion of the adoption of yield-enhancing integrated soil fertility management practices (ISFM) - and soybean production in particular - by smallholder farmers in central Malawi. To reach this goal, CDI disseminates production knowledge and improves farmers’ access to markets and storage. In this research study, we support CDI in this scale-up. We use the random assignment of 250 villages into various treatment arms to establish the impacts of these interventions on farmers’ welfare. Using detailed panel data, we identify the channels through which impacts take place and explore heterogeneity across households. The latter allows us to draw lessons for SSA with the goal of increase ISFM adoption across the continent.
Change History for Abstract
Changed On Previous Value
06/21/2017 The Anchor Farm Model (AFM) of Clinton Development Initiatives (CDI) uses a multipronged approach to address these issues. Established in 2008, the AFM is designed to increase agricultural production, income and food security through promotion of the adoption of yield-enhancing integrated soil fertility management practices (ISFM) - and soybean production in particular - by smallholder farmers in central Malawi. To reach this goal, CDI disseminates production knowledge and improves farmers’ access to markets and storage. In this research study, we support CDI in this scale-up. We use the random assignment of 250 villages into various treatment arms to establish the impacts of these interventions on farmers’ welfare. Using detailed panel data, we identify the channels through which impacts take place and explore heterogeneity across households. The latter allows us to draw lessons for SSA with the goal of increase ISFM adoption across the continent.
Categories:
Agriculture and Rural Development
Additional Keywords:
Agriculture, Extension, Social Learning, Integrated Soil Fertility Management, Markets
Secondary ID Number(s):
TW4.1018 (3IE ID number)

Principal Investigator(s)

Name of First PI:
Maertens
Affiliation:
Sussex University
Name of Second PI:
Hope Michelson
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Study Sponsor

Name:
3IE
Study Sponsor Location:
Funding Proposal:

Research Partner

Name of Partner Institution:
The University of Malawi
Type of Organization:
Research institute/University
Website:
Location:
Malawi
Intervention

Intervention Overview

Intervention:
The Anchor Farm Model (AFM) of the Clinton Development Initiative (CDI) aims to increase agricultural production, income and food security through adoption of Integrated Soil Fertility Management practices (ISFM) - and soybean production in particular - by smallholder farmers in Malawi. To reach this goal: (i) CDI disseminates production knowledge through the use of demonstration plots, lead farmers and farmer field days; (ii) CDI improves farmers’ access to input markets, in particular credit and seed markets through CDI’s contract with seed companies and intermediary role in the credit market; (iii) CDI provides access to structured output markets through its established relationship with international soybean buyers. CDI primarily works with farmers in groups, organizing farmers into clubs of 10 to 20 members. Each club elects a leader who is provided with inputs and trained at the AF in soy production, ISFM techniques, postharvest practices and receives information on commodity markets. CDI aims to scale-up this project across the country. In this scale-up, CDI aims at both improving the current set of interventions as well as adding new interventions.
Theory of Change:
Multiple Treatment Arms Evaluated?
Yes

Implementing Agency

Name of Organization:
Clinton Development Initiative
Type of Organization:
NGO (International)

Program Funder

Name of Organization:
3IE
Type of Organization:
Research Institution/University

Intervention Timing

Intervention or Program Started at time of Registration?
Yes
Start Date:
09/01/2014
End Date:
09/01/2019
Evaluation Method

Evaluation Method Overview

Primary (or First) Evaluation Method:
Randomized control trial
Other (not Listed) Method:
Additional Evaluation Method (If Any):
Matching
Other (not Listed) Method:

Method Details

Details of Evaluation Approach:
We use a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) to evaluate the impacts of AFM’s access to credit-based demonstration plots and warehouse receipt system. In Fall 2014, we selected two Extension Planning Areas which had not been covered by CDI before: Mthumtama in Kasungu district and Chibvala in Dowa district. We randomly selected 250 villages out of 303 villages present in these two EPAs (excluding villages with less than 50 farming households) and randomly assigned these villages into a treatment and a control group. Villages in the treatment group were exposed to CDI’s extension activities during the 2014-15 and 2015-16 agricultural season. In 2016, we – again randomly – subdivided the villages in the treatment group into two groups. Only one group will be exposed to CDI’s marketing and storage activities throughout the next two seasons. We evaluate the effects of the CDI interventions midway – in 2016 – and at the end – in 2019.
Outcomes (Endpoints):
Income (agricultural), yield (of maize, soy and groundnut), adoption of integrated fertility and soil management practices and knowledge and beliefs
Measurement:
Unit of Analysis:
Individual farmer level
Hypotheses:
Unit of Intervention or Assignment:
Village level
Number of Clusters in Sample:
Number of Individuals in Sample:
2500
Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:
65

Supplementary Files

Analysis Plan:
Other Documents:
Data

Outcomes Data

Description:
Household survey
Data Already Collected?
No
Survey Name:
Data Previously Used?
Data Access:
Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?
Data Approval Process:
Approval Status:

Treatment Assignment Data

Participation or Assignment Information:
Yes
Description:
Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?
Data Previously Used?
Data Access:
Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?
Data Approval Process:
Approval Status:

Data Analysis

Data Analysis Status:

Study Materials

Upload Study Materials:

Registration Category

Registration Category:
Prospective, Category 1: Data for measuring impacts have not been collected
Completion

Completion Overview

Intervention Completion Date:
Data Collection Completion Date:
Unit of Analysis:
Clusters in Final Sample:
Total Observations in Final Sample:
Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:

Findings

Preliminary Report:
Preliminary Report URL:
Summary of Findings:
Paper:
Paper Summary:
Paper Citation:

Data Availability

Data Availability (Primary Data):
Date of Data Availability:
Data URL or Contact:
Access procedure:

Other Materials

Survey:
Survey Instrument Links or Contact:
Program Files:
Program Files Links or Contact:
External Link:
External Link Description:
Description of Changes:

Study Stopped

Date:
Reason: