What did we learn from impact evaluations in agriculture?

2. Florence Kondylis What did we learn from impact evaluations in agriculture?

3. State of the knowledge There are very few rigorous impact evaluations of agricultural interventions. Why? • Mostly, a few, scattered evaluations • do not respond to a larger learning agenda and needs on the ground • Not effective in affecting policy making! • Methods often improvised ex-post • Harder to isolate causal links

4. Things are looking up • It’s all getting better! • Increasing interest and innovative work: many of the papers in the talk are recent • We are doing it (cf. Mushfiq’s talk) • 2/4 years from now, we will be in a different place

5. A quick tour of some of the evidence • Technology adoption/diversification • Information Technology & Rural Markets • Price Information Kiosks/Quality Hubs for Soybeans in MP • Cellphones and market performance in Niger and Kerala • Fertilizers in Kenya • How much? • How to?

6. 1. In Kenya, researchers asked:(Ashraf, Gine, Karlan 2008) What is the impact of agricultural extension and export facilitation services provision (in various combinations) on: • Crop choice • Technology adoption, and • Market access? • What is the additional effect on all the above of providing in-kind credit for inputs (seeds, fertilizers)? Used experimental design (2 treatment arms; farmers assoc) and found: • Farmers in program 19.2% more likely to grow export crops, have 4.3% more land devoted to cash crops • No overall impact on Input usage, HH income , Harvest value • No significant additional impact of credit

7. 2.1. Soybeans In Madhya Pradesh(Goyal, 2008) • What is the effect of price information provision, quality testing and direct private marketing facilitation on: • Sale prices received by farmers in the mandis? • Fraction of production sold through the mandis? • Farmers’ subsequent planting decision? • Exploited the gradual phase-in of the intervention to find: • Increase in the sale price by 1.6% for HHs in close proximity to the mandis+ decline in price dispersion acrossmandis • Steep decline in volume sold through the mandis (14-20%, increases with distance to the closestmandis) • 3 percentage point increase area under soy cultivation

8. 2.2. Cellphones and Market Performance in Kerala (Jensen 2007) and Niger(Aker 2009) • What is the effect of an increase in cellphone coverage on • Market performance (price dispersion) • Traders’ behavior • Consumer, producer and trader welfare? • Exploit regional variations in the timing of cellphones introduction and find: • Large reductions in price dispersion (20-38 %), • increase with transportation costs/distance to markets • Not attributable to collusive behavior • Increase in farmer/fisherman’s and trader’s welfare despite decrease in price (lower waste)

9. Fertilizer in Kenya: How much and How to?(Duflo, Kremer, Robinson 2008 & 2009)

10. Fertilizer in Kenya: How much and How to?(Duflo, Kremer, Robinson 2008 & 2009)

11. Fertilizer in Kenya: How much and How to?(Duflo, Kremer, Robinson 2008 & 2009)

12. Fertilizer in Kenya: How much and How to?(Duflo, Kremer, Robinson 2008 & 2009)

13. Fertilizer in Kenya: How much and How to?(Duflo, Kremer, Robinson 2008 & 2009) • Free delivery after harvest • Impact did not persist past the 2 seasons the intervention lasted • Now need to learn how to achieve sustainable results??

14. So what did we learn? • Some interesting things about a few programs in some areas in a few countries • Evaluations to date are often (but not always) opportunistic: • no overall strategy • (Showed you the “best identified” ones but…) Often methodologically challenged because they weren’t set up beforehand • Shift the focus on getting clear answers for key projects and areas • Start evaluations early on!