Agricultural Technology Adoption Initiative (ATAI)

Evidence from Mobile Phone-Based Agricultural Extension

Sharanya Chandran, Policy Manager, J-PAL South Asia Hyderabad, 18 December 2014

J-PAL started in 2003 as a center in the economics department at MIT and works to reduce poverty by ensuring that policy is based on scientific evidence

2

J-PAL’s research is led by its network of 100+ affiliated professors from more than 35 leading universities around the world

3

J-PAL has over 550 ongoing and completed projects in 8 sectors in 61 countries

4

Over 120 evaluations in South Asia, including 13 states of India

• J-PAL South Asia office set up in 2007 at the Institute for Financial Management and Research (IFMR), Chennai and Delhi • Scientific Directors: Prof. Esther Duflo, MIT Iqbal Dhaliwal, MIT 5

J-PAL’s Partners in India

6

J-PAL’s work in Agriculture

There are 57 ongoing and completed projects related to Agriculture

Cereal Yields (Metric Tons/Hectare)

1 0 3 2 8 7 6 5 4 Sub-Saharan Afria East Asia South Asia U.S.

Fertilizer Use (Metric Tons/Hectare)

30 20 10 0 80 70 60 50 40 Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia South Asia U.S.

Agricultural Technology Adoption Initiative (ATAI)

• • •

J-PAL’s first initiative, started in 2009, with UC Berkeley’s Center of Evaluation for Global Action (CEGA)

Aim: to develop and rigorously test programs that improve

the adoption and profitable use of agricultural technology by small-scale farmers in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

The long-term objective: to ensure that the poor derive

greater benefit from existing and new technologies.

ATAI’s Approach to Technology Adoption

Market inefficiencies constrain technology adoption: 1. Credit markets 2. Risk markets 3. Information 4. Externalities 5. Input and output markets 6. Labor markets 7. Land markets

ATAI’s has funded 32 projects

The value of advice -- Evidence from Mobile Phone-Based Agricultural Extension

Researchers: Shawn A. Cole and A. Nilesh Fernando Partners: ATAI, Australian Aid, USAID, DSC Fieldwork: Centre for Microfinance (CMF) Timeline: 2011-2012 Location: Surendranagar District, Gujarat, INDIA

Goal of the evaluation

•

Background:

Large variations in agricultural productivity across the world. Why?

 Credit constraints? Missing insurance markets? Inadequate infrastructure? Information inefficiencies? • Large-scale agricultural extension programmes common in developing countries. But multiple challenges faced by traditional extension •

Research Question:

Can providing farmers with agricultural advice via mobile phone increase knowledge and adoption of improved farming technologies and practices?

Context of the Evaluation

•

GOI spent nearly US$60 million on public agricultural extension programs from 2009 to 2010 , yet less than 6% of farmers benefitted

•

36 percent of those working in agriculture have a wireless

subscription, 9 million people in Gujarat.

• Profile of farmers participating in the study: Cotton farmers of Gujarat, 36 years old on an average, approximately 4 years of education, owned roughly 6.5 acres of land, and earned around US$288 a month. 32% reported seeking/ receiving advice from any source (82% from other farmers, also input vendors - however, govt. extension services: virtually unmentioned)

Details of the Intervention

Sample: 1200 HHs:

• 400 HHs randomly assigned to receive access to agricultural advice over mobile phone technology, Avaaj Otalo (AO) • • 400 HHs received access to AO + traditional Extension 400 HHs: control group • Treatment HHs (AO and AOT) – also provided with training By DSC to use AO, and weekly information and tips via automated voice message • Free airtime to respondents to encourage take-up • Baseline in June/ July 2011 and two follow-up mobile phone surveys conducted in late 2011 and early 2012 with half of the HHs from each treatment group and the entire comparison group.

Results and Policy Lessons

Take-up of mobile information services:

• Demand for AO was high -- more than half the farmers called into AO line within seven months, making an average of 7.5 calls.

• Farmers were 22 percentage points more likely to use mobile

phone-based information as their main source of information for cotton fertilizer decisions, and 30 percentage points more likely for cotton pesticide decisions relative to comparison households.

• These effects were larger among more educated farmers – digital divide?

Results and Policy Lessons continued…

Impact on pesticide use:

• Access to AO increased the use of more effective pesticides • Most questions submitted through the AO system related to pest management and pesticide use.

• But preliminary findings suggest that farmers appear to be willing to follow advice without necessarily understanding ‘why’ the advice is correct.

Results and Policy Lessons continued…

Impact on sowing choices:

• Access to AO technology increased the number of farmers who planted cumin • About 8 percentage points more farmers in the treatment group farmers planted cumin relative to the comparison group. • Results on the relative effectiveness of traditional extension versus mobile phone-based extension in terms of knowledge, farm yields, and revenues - forthcoming…

Ongoing Research…

•

Scaling up AO to provide extension to 3,000 cotton farming households Madhya Pradesh.

• Our technology partner, Awaaz.de, has also rolled out a mobile phone-based extension service following the encouraging results from AO. 

Within a year, this service has enrolled over 15,000 farmers across Gujarat, India.

Information Policy Lessons

• General extension is often ineffective, and information given to farmers may be wrong  Farmers know a lot and if they are not adopting a practice there may be a good reason • Information provision can have strong effects on the behavior of farmers when the information: 1. Provides information on a new crop 2. Overcomes a behavioral hurdle

Thank You