Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services?
Considerable resources are allocated to agricultural extension around the world, with questionable cost effectiveness. An obvious question is whether information and communication technologies can be used to push agricultural extension messages effectively at a lower cost. Based on a clustered rando...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Artículo preliminar |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
International Food Policy Research Institute
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/143443 |
| _version_ | 1855518298887684096 |
|---|---|
| author | Almanzar, Miguel de Brauw, Alan Nakasone, Eduardo |
| author_browse | Almanzar, Miguel Nakasone, Eduardo de Brauw, Alan |
| author_facet | Almanzar, Miguel de Brauw, Alan Nakasone, Eduardo |
| author_sort | Almanzar, Miguel |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | Considerable resources are allocated to agricultural extension around the world, with questionable cost effectiveness. An obvious question is whether information and communication technologies can be used to push agricultural extension messages effectively at a lower cost. Based on a clustered randomized control trial, we evaluate a pilot in which farmers receive information about agricultural production on rice, vegetables, and chicken rearing via mobile phone voice messages. Our experimental design included groups of households without and with farmer group membership. We evaluate whether farmers received the information, learned it, shared it with non-recipients, and used it, and how the effects of the information campaign on these outcomes changes with being part of an existing farmer group and the proportion of the village population receiving information. We find farmers in the information treatment groups were more knowledgeable about the practices promoted, believe it helped them produce more, and shared it with others. The information campaign was more effective for rice and to a lesser extent chicken rearing than for vegetables. We do not find differential effects by farmer group membership. We find that the amount of information sent to the village increases information diffusion but the speed of sharing the information is similar across treatment groups and by different saturation rates. We conclude that targeted and simple information campaigns can help supplement the information needs of farmers in a cost-effective manner, independently of their participation in farmer groups or extension programs. |
| format | Artículo preliminar |
| id | CGSpace143443 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2021 |
| publishDateRange | 2021 |
| publishDateSort | 2021 |
| publisher | International Food Policy Research Institute |
| publisherStr | International Food Policy Research Institute |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace1434432025-12-02T21:03:13Z Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? Almanzar, Miguel de Brauw, Alan Nakasone, Eduardo poultry technology adoption food production agricultural production agricultural extension technology rice networks vegetables chickens information transfer Considerable resources are allocated to agricultural extension around the world, with questionable cost effectiveness. An obvious question is whether information and communication technologies can be used to push agricultural extension messages effectively at a lower cost. Based on a clustered randomized control trial, we evaluate a pilot in which farmers receive information about agricultural production on rice, vegetables, and chicken rearing via mobile phone voice messages. Our experimental design included groups of households without and with farmer group membership. We evaluate whether farmers received the information, learned it, shared it with non-recipients, and used it, and how the effects of the information campaign on these outcomes changes with being part of an existing farmer group and the proportion of the village population receiving information. We find farmers in the information treatment groups were more knowledgeable about the practices promoted, believe it helped them produce more, and shared it with others. The information campaign was more effective for rice and to a lesser extent chicken rearing than for vegetables. We do not find differential effects by farmer group membership. We find that the amount of information sent to the village increases information diffusion but the speed of sharing the information is similar across treatment groups and by different saturation rates. We conclude that targeted and simple information campaigns can help supplement the information needs of farmers in a cost-effective manner, independently of their participation in farmer groups or extension programs. 2021-06-30 2024-05-22T12:14:11Z 2024-05-22T12:14:11Z Working Paper https://hdl.handle.net/10568/143443 en https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.133523 https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.133591 https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.133323 Open Access application/pdf International Food Policy Research Institute Almanzar, Miguel; de Brauw, Alan; and Nakasone, Eduardo. 2021. Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? IFPRI Discussion Paper 2032. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.134454. |
| spellingShingle | poultry technology adoption food production agricultural production agricultural extension technology rice networks vegetables chickens information transfer Almanzar, Miguel de Brauw, Alan Nakasone, Eduardo Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? |
| title | Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? |
| title_full | Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? |
| title_fullStr | Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? |
| title_short | Sharing tips for rice, chicken and vegetable production: Do voice messages and social learning complement extension services? |
| title_sort | sharing tips for rice chicken and vegetable production do voice messages and social learning complement extension services |
| topic | poultry technology adoption food production agricultural production agricultural extension technology rice networks vegetables chickens information transfer |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/143443 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT almanzarmiguel sharingtipsforricechickenandvegetableproductiondovoicemessagesandsociallearningcomplementextensionservices AT debrauwalan sharingtipsforricechickenandvegetableproductiondovoicemessagesandsociallearningcomplementextensionservices AT nakasoneeduardo sharingtipsforricechickenandvegetableproductiondovoicemessagesandsociallearningcomplementextensionservices |