Mobile phone-based extension programs offer a promising way to disseminate modern agricultural practices to smallholder farmers in low-income countries, overcoming the challenges of in-person visits. An evaluation of six text message-based agricultural extension programs in Kenya and Rwanda, involving over 128,000 farmers, sheds light on their effectiveness and potential. While these interventions show modest impacts, their low cost makes them an extremely cost-effective approach to influencing farmer behavior.
Digital initiatives leverage the widespread adoption of mobile phones to deliver information at scale and low cost, making them particularly suited to regions where basic phones are prevalent. Text message-based programs are simple and inexpensive but face limitations, such as character constraints and reliance on top-down communication. Despite these challenges, these programs hold significant potential for reaching farmers with vital information on modern agricultural inputs and practices.
The evaluated programs, implemented by different organizations, aimed to encourage farmers to adopt locally appropriate inputs, focusing on agricultural lime, a relatively unknown soil additive in the region. These programs varied in their design, including recruitment strategies, message content and framing, and supplementary support like phone calls. The evaluation combined experimental studies and a meta-analysis, benefiting from large sample sizes and the use of administrative data to objectively measure farmer behavior.
The findings indicate that text message-based programs modestly increase the likelihood of farmers adopting recommended practices. A meta-analysis revealed a 1.22-fold increase in the odds of following these recommendations, equating to a two-percentage-point absolute improvement. For agricultural lime, the odds of adoption increased by 19%, while fertilizer adoption saw a 27% rise. These impacts, though modest, underscore the high cost-effectiveness of these interventions. With economies of scale, these programs can achieve a benefit-cost ratio of 46:1, making them highly viable at large scales.
Importantly, the programs did not displace other input purchases or cause message fatigue, with effects persisting as long as messages were received. These findings suggest the interventions maintain their relevance by keeping recommendations top of mind.
Additional insights emerged from design variations across programs. Providing localized information, emphasizing soil-specific recommendations, did not significantly improve outcomes compared to broader messaging. Similarly, behavioral framings, such as emphasizing gains or losses, were no more effective than simple messages. Message repetition, however, had a small but statistically significant positive impact on adoption rates. On the other hand, adding phone calls to explain messages showed no additional benefit, highlighting that their content may not have been sufficiently distinct.
One noteworthy finding is the potential for spillover effects, particularly among farmers without phones who were part of active farming groups. These spillovers suggest that the benefits of such programs may extend beyond direct participants, underscoring the broader impact of mobile-based interventions. However, discrepancies between administrative and survey data highlight the need for caution in interpreting results, as survey misreporting or unrecorded purchases may affect impact estimates.
The evaluation underscores that the modest impacts of text-based interventions represent a lower bound for what digital agriculture can achieve. As technologies like smartphone apps, interactive platforms, and advanced weather and soil data become more accessible, the potential for personalized and interactive interventions will grow. The challenge lies in scaling these innovations effectively to ensure that smallholder farmers in low-income regions can fully benefit from them.
These findings illustrate that mobile phone-based programs, despite their simplicity, can play a vital role in promoting agricultural innovation. By leveraging their cost-effectiveness and potential for scale, such interventions can support the transformation of agriculture in low-income countries, improving productivity and livelihoods for smallholder farmers.
