Assessment of agriculture insurance linked to contract farming and government input subsidy scheme in Zambia

Our expertise
3ie invented evidence gap maps to improve decision-making around where to make investments in producing more evidence or synthesising existing evidence. Since then, we have pioneered further advancements, including developing our interactive online map platform and innovating evidence mapping to broaden its use in development decision-making.

3ie funds and quality assures formative and impact evaluations of development programmes in low- and middle-income countries. These evaluations provide crucial evidence on what works, for whom, why and at what cost. On our website, we host the largest-of-its-kind impact evaluation repository that includes summaries of both 3ie-funded and other studies.

We are global leaders in producing and assuring the quality of theory-based systematic reviews of the effectiveness of development interventions. 3ie continues to innovate and improve synthesis and systematic review methodologies and the uptake and use of synthesised evidence.

3ie specialises in increasing access to, demand for and use of evidence by governments, parliaments, programme managers, civil society, programme participants and the media. We do this by emphasising the value of planning and engaging with stakeholders to ensure that evaluations and reviews are relevant and useful. We use robust and effective monitoring to measure evidence use so that we can convey evidence impact on programmes and policies with greater confidence.

We set up our replication programme to address the need for a freely available global public good that helps improve the quality and reliability of impact evaluation evidence used for development decision-making. Replication is the most established method of research validation in science, yet it has not been fully embraced by the research community or development donors, leading to this gap.

3ie’s evidence programmes and services help build technical capacity to commission and conduct rigorous evaluations, produce evidence gap maps, conduct evidence synthesis and use evidence. We also work with L&MIC governments to build effective monitoring and evaluation systems. 3ie’s bursary programme supports L&MIC policymakers, programme managers and researchers to participate in specialised training and international events.

3ie has always been strongly committed to research transparency and open access to data. We are proud to be a leader in the growing movement to improve global standards for research transparency.

On request, 3ie provides services to partners for supporting the generation and use of evidence to inform their development policies and programmes. We commission and quality assure evidence gap maps, evaluations and syntheses as well as provide training.

3ie plays a unique role in promoting collaboration among researchers, policymakers and development programme managers at country, regional and global levels. Our global advocacy for evidence-informed action helps ensure decision makers have quality evidence about what works when they need it.
Evidence hub
3ie’s Development Evidence Portal is the largest-of-its-kind repository of rigorous evidence on what works in international development. This portal includes evaluations and synthesis of studies conducted in low-and middle-income countries. It combines records from 3ie’s Impact Evaluation and Systematic Review repositories, as well as, evidence gap maps.

These provide a visual display of completed and ongoing systematic reviews and impact evaluations in a sector or sub-sector, structured around a framework of interventions and outcomes.

Evidence impact summaries briefly describe how 3ie-supported evidence has informed and influenced decision makers. Each summary highlights verified instances of evidence impact.

We provide funding for replications, conduct in-house replication research and publish guidance on replication methodology. We also provide funding to original authors of 3ie-funded for preparing their raw datasets.

As part of our mandate as a knowledge producer and translator for our main audiences, we publish a range of knowledge products. These include briefs, impact evaluation reports, systematic review reports and summaries, replication papers, evidence gap map reports, scoping reports and working papers.

3ie’s Registry for International Development Impact Evaluations (RIDIE) aims to enhance the transparency and quality of impact evaluation research before it begins.
Our work
3ie’s evidence programmes support studies to fill critical knowledge gaps in a sector, sub-sector or in an area with limited rigorous evidence. We fund studies under a specific theme or which address a particular question or set of questions in programme areas where our donors want to expand global public knowledge of what works and what does not.

To help address gaps in the understanding of what works and what does not, we fund a variety of studies across this programme area, including interventions focused on insurance, extension, land-use and forestry, and innovation and technology.

3ie supports impact evaluations, systematic reviews and evidence gap maps on education effectiveness that help answer the questions of what works, for whom, why and at what cost.

We fund the production of rigorous evidence on biodiversity and forest conservation programmes, environmental regulations, impact of sustainable fuels, climate change mitigation and adaptation.

3ie is supporting the generation of evidence in areas such as transparency and accountability in natural resource governance. We also fund the production of rigorous evidence on interventions to curb corruption, judicial and civil service reforms, land reforms, public financial management, conflict prevention and peacebuilding, decentralised governance and public service delivery.

We fund the production of rigorous evidence on interventions on HIV and AIDS, immunisation maternal and child health, nutrition and sexual and reproductive health through a number of evidence programmes. Evidence products from these programmes include replication studies, evidence gap maps, systematic reviews and impact evaluations.

We are supporting the generation of rigorous evidence in humanitarian contexts on interventions related to water, sanitation and hygiene, food security, multi-sectoral humanitarian programming and interventions targeting malnutrition.

We fund the production of rigorous evidence on the socio-economic and environmental impacts of public transportation by rail, bus and rapid transit systems, and essential services such as electricity and gas to expand access, foster inclusive growth, and combat climate change through sustainable systems.

3ie, in collaboration with India’s rural development ministry is working to generate rigorous evidence on the impact of the National Rural Livelihoods Mission.

We support policy-relevant studies that contribute to improving our understanding of public expenditure trends and improving the delivery of public goods.

We support impact evaluations to build the evidence base on the effectiveness of interventions that reduce the risks faced by the poor through participation in public works and employment programmes.

3ie’s has two major evidence programmes that support the generation and use of high-quality evidence for informing decision-making in the water, sanitation and hygiene sector

In alignment with our mission, 3ie promotes rigorous, efficient, and ethical use of innovative data sources for impact evaluations, including in those conducted by 3ie, by 3ie research partners, and in the global development community more broadly.

.

We work with various departments in the Philippines government to develop and fund rigorous evidence useful for policymakers. We also support capacity-building activities for Philippine researchers and support the impact evaluation management framework of the National Economic and Development Authority.

Working in collaboration with the Office of the Prime Minister, the primary aim is to improve developmental outcomes through evidence-informed decision making in Uganda. 3ie is currently supporting evaluation of government programmes around youth livelihood, family planning, public service delivery and local governance, and universal primary education.

3ie and the government of Benin are working on a a multi-year regional initiative that aims to promote the institutionalization of evaluation in government systems across eight countries in West Africa, including: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Togo.

This is a five-year programme (2019-23) that is working on increasing the use of evidence by policymakers in Ghana, Pakistan and Uganda. In partnership with country governments, this programme aims to develop capacity and promote innovation in increasing evidence-informed decision-making. SEDI is funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

.

3ie funds internal replications of influential or innovative impact evaluations of financial interventions on mobile money, cash transfers, bank deposits, and other financial service interventions targeted towards underserved and unbanked populations in developing countries.

3ie funds internal replications of influential or innovative impact evaluations of biomedical, behavioural, social, and structural HIV prevention and treatment interventions to improve the evidence base in low- and middle-income countries.
Funding
- Open opportunities
View our current funding opportunities for evaluations, systematic reviews and internal replication studies.

Publication Type: Other evaluations

Country: Zambia

3ie evidence programme: Agricultural Insurance Evidence Programme
Author(s): Nancy McCarthy, Agrotosh Mookerjee, Ulrich Hess, Saskia Kuhn
Institutional affiliation(s): LEAD Analytics, Risk Shield Consultants, GIZ, GIZ
Grant-holding institution: LEAD Analytics
Main implementing agency: LEAD Analytics
Sex disaggregation: No
Gender analysis: No
Equity focus: Yes
Study type: Process evaluation

Context

In Zambia, only 16 per cent of smallholder famers’ households had access to irrigation and the rest are dependent on rainfed agriculture. Despite undertaking measures to reduce potential losses, weather shocks are the major cause for farm households’ losses to both crop production and overall income. For the 2016–2017 season, an insurance product was available for all 46,346 farmers who typically contract with NWK, a cotton agro-processor in Zambia , but only 4,338 signed up.This study explores the feasibility and acceptability of a successfully marketed strategy of combined insurance package that included weather index-based crop insurance.

Intervention design

This study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of weather index-based insurance (WII) products. Smallholder cotton farmers sign up voluntarily for the insurance coverage at the beginning of the season, when they also receive their input packages from NWK.

The intervention encompasses two phases. During phase 1, the team focused on developing an ‘encouragement’ design to be implemented in Phase 2. In this phase, a review of the literature was conducted to identify lessons learned by other WII projects and an analysis of a rural household dataset to understand current exposure to weather risks, and current risk management and coping strategies. Marketing and outreach activities were implemented to obtain information on farmers’ comprehension of the insurance product and inform dissemination strategies. Outreach activities included training, using videos, posters and other literature with local shed managers, and periodically touching base with farmers via SMS messages.

During phase 2 of the intervention, the WII product was marketed to smallholder cotton growers.

The study hypothesised farmer encouragement activities with outreach and dissemination strategies would increase the uptake of WII. This hypothesis was based on the primary assumption:

Generate a sufficient amount of information that will generate an effective encouragement design.

Evaluation design and methodology

This was a mixed-methods study conducted in Southern, Central, Eastern, and Copperbelt provinces in Zambia. For the quantitative component, nationally representative administrative data from the Rural Agricultural Livelihood Survey were analysed. Qualitative methods included two rounds of focus group discussions and key informant interviews.

Primary evaluation questions

The study addressed the following questions:

Can current training materials be improved to increase farmers’ attention to, and comprehension of, the WII product?
What mechanisms and/or materials are effective at addressing some of the key barriers thought to hinder adoption of WII products, such as lack of trust of the insurer, concerns with basis risk and lack of experience with the real value of payouts on the part of the farmers?
How often should farmers be contacted throughout the year, and via what mechanisms?

Primary findings

Very few risk management or risk coping mechanisms are effective at mitigating the impacts of rainfall shocks, therefore there is ample scope to develop a WII product that complements existing risk management and coping mechanisms. The team also found that more educated farm households are more likely to invest in sustainable land management techniques and to have access to a wider range of risk-coping mechanisms.

Farmers stressed the need to make outreach materials available in local languages. Also, they reported that farmers stressed the need for more contact throughout the year to maintain a comprehension of the WII product and to sustain interest. While many participants had attended training on the WII product, the comprehension was often limited many months after the training.

Comprehension was quite good when testing farmers about half an hour after the introductory presentation.

Implications

Given the study findings, the training, outreach and marketing strategies can be developed and refined to increase uptake of the WII product by smallholder cotton farmers in rural Zambia.

The research team found that farmers are interested in WII products in general, but that information on the WII product can be more effective and consistently provided through a wide variety of mechanisms.