InovAgro Impact Evaluation Midline Survey, 2017

This dataset presents data collected for the midline survey that is the second round of a three-part study performed by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). The data collection effort is part of the impact evaluation of Phase II of the Innovation for Agribusiness (INOVAGRO II) intervention in northern Mozambique. INOVAGRO II is a development program intended to decrease rural poverty by improving the connectedness of farmers to market systems. The survey started in 2015 (Baseline survey), a follow-up was conducted in 2017 (Midline survey), and the last round (Endline survey) was conducted in 2019. The objective of the study is to better understand the linkages between small producers and the market in selected areas in Mozambique. The treatment unit of this evaluation is the community (comunidade) level. Communities are administrative units within localities (localidades), which in turn are administrative units inside administrative posts (posto administrativos)—the largest units on a district level. Initially the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), SDC, and the implementing agency Development Alternatives Inc. (DAI) agreed that a randomized controlled trial (RCT) (or experimental) approach would be used in the impact evaluation, and the research proposal was designed based on this approach. Shortly before conducting the baseline survey, however, it was determined that the experimental design, in which the treatment and control areas are selected randomly, was not feasible due to the following factors: (1) ethical issues were involved with the exclusion of subjects for a control group; (2) the MSD (systemic) approach adopted by InovAgro project made strict exclusion criteria impossible (it was hard to contain treatment activities from spilling over into control group areas); and (3) the adaptive nature of the MSD approach (which is highly responsive to supply and demand forces) made it difficult to randomize treatment (exposure to the program). Instead, the implementing agency selected four communities in each district where InovAgro’s intervention would be carried out. All selected treatment communities were located in the same administrative post within each district. The control communities were selected from comparable localities in a different administrative post from where the treatment communities are located. We chose a different administrative post for the control communities to limit spillovers effects. The household listing exercise in both treatment and control areas secured information about the households regarding age and gender of household head and their soybean and/or pigeon pea production. This listing information was used to select the final set of control communities based on the extent of soybean and/or pigeon pea cultivation. The final sample is drawn from 16 communities in four administrative posts in two districts.

本数据集收录了国际粮食政策研究所（International Food Policy Research Institute, IFPRI）开展的三阶段研究的第二轮中线调查所采集的全部数据。本次数据收集工作，是莫桑比克北部农业企业创新项目第二阶段（Innovation for Agribusiness Phase II, INOVAGRO II）干预措施影响评估的组成部分。INOVAGRO II是一项旨在通过提升农户与市场体系的联结度以降低农村贫困水平的发展项目。本次调查于2015年启动基线调查，2017年跟进开展中线调查，最后一轮调查（终线调查）于2019年完成。本研究旨在深入剖析莫桑比克选定区域内小型生产者与市场之间的联结机制。本次评估的处理单元为社区（comunidade）层级。社区是片区（localidades）下辖的行政单元，而片区又隶属于行政专区（posto administrativos）——后者为地区层面的最大行政单元。最初，国际粮食政策研究所（IFPRI）、瑞士发展与合作署（SDC）与执行机构开发替代公司（Development Alternatives Inc., DAI）商定，将采用随机对照试验（Randomized Controlled Trial, RCT，即实验法）开展本次影响评估，研究方案亦基于该实验框架设计完成。然而，在基线调查正式开展前不久，研究团队发现，随机选取处理组与对照组区域的实验设计因以下因素无法实施：其一，为对照组排除研究对象涉及伦理争议；其二，InovAgro项目采用的市场体系发展（Market Systems Development, MSD）方法无法满足严格的排除标准——处理活动的溢出效应难以被限制在对照组区域范围内；其三，MSD方法具备高度适应性的特征（可对供需变动做出快速响应），使得处理组（项目参与）的随机分配难以实现。为此，执行机构调整了研究方案，改为在每个地区选取4个将接受InovAgro干预的社区，所有入选的处理组社区均位于每个地区内的同一行政专区。对照组社区则从处理组社区所在行政专区之外的、具备可比性的片区中选取。研究团队选择不同行政专区作为对照组社区所在地，以尽可能降低溢出效应的影响。研究团队在处理组与对照组区域开展家庭名录普查，收集了受访家庭的户主年龄、性别，以及其大豆和/或木豆的生产信息。基于上述普查得到的大豆和/或木豆种植规模数据，研究团队最终筛选确定了对照组社区的入选名单。本数据集的最终样本取自两个地区的四个行政专区内的16个社区。