Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Land Tenure & Resource Management
IMPACT EVALUATION OF THE TENURE AND
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE (TGCC)—ZAMBIA
Lead researchers...
OUTLINE
• Context:
• Background on agroforestry relating to tenure and climate change in Zambia
• Program overview of USAI...
CONTEXT
Evaluation Context
• Resurgence in promoting agroforestry in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): to meet
food security challenges an...
Development Problem
Despite promotion and studied benefits, agroforestry uptake in SSA has
been persistently low, due in p...
Research Motivation
• To what extent does land tenure insecurity serve as a barrier to agroforestry
uptake, and wider impl...
Research Motivation, cont’d.
• Challenges to research methods also contribute to equivocal knowledge base
• Different defi...
USAID’s Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC)
Project
• 2-year RCT in 5 chiefdoms of Chipata District, Eastern Province
...
USAID’s Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC)
Project, cont’d.
• Tenure intervention focuses on:
• Establishing Village ...
Evaluation Purpose
How do changes in property rights that strengthen a farmer’s perception of long-term
security over farm...
METHODOLOGY
Evaluation Design & Analytic Approach
• Randomized Control Trial (RCT) implemented across 294 villages in Chipata District...
TGCC Project: A Randomized Control Trial of Land Tenure
Strengthening and Agroforestry Extension Impacts on
Smallholder Ad...
Baseline Data
Collection
• Baseline completed Aug 2014;
Endline expected Aug 2017;
True panel survey
• Qualitative & Quant...
Household Impacts
Assessed for Indicators of:
• Female- vs male-headed households
• Widows vs other households
• Land-cons...
KEY BASELINE FINDINGS
Outcome 1—Tenure Security:
High Overall, but Elite Capture Concerns
• Relatively high tenure security across the surveyed ...
Outcome 1—Tenure Security: Land Reallocation
Risk
• Land expropriation events are uncommon (experienced by < 2% HHs)
• But...
Outcome 1—Tenure Security:
Land Documentation
• 91% of HHs would like to obtain
documentation over customary land
they use...
Outcome 1—Tenure Security
Land Disputes
• HHs commonly experience land-related disputes, despite fairly high overall
tenur...
Outcome 2—Agricultural Investment & Land Use
Planning
• Upfront costly field investments are uncommon:
• Planting basins: ...
Field Investments at the Household and Field Level
Field Household
Statistically significant difference between
male and f...
Outcome 3—Agroforestry & Climate Smart
Agriculture
• Agroforestry uptake currently very low (11% of HHs (N=383); 5% of fie...
Summary of Findings: Agricultural Investments &
Agroforestry
• Agroforestry uptake currently very low (11% of HHs (N=383);...
CONCLUSIONS
LEARNING FROM BASELINE
PROCESS:
PRACTICAL CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED
Evaluation Challenges and Lessons Learned
Methodological
• GPS
• Village listing
• Accounting for spillovers
• Unexpected ...
LEARNING FROM BASELINE
RESULTS:
POLICY & PROGRAMMING LINKAGES
Key Overall Messages: TGCC Baseline Findings
• Overall, relatively high tenure security across the surveyed chiefdoms
• Co...
Key Overall Messages: TGCC Baseline Findings,
cont’d.
However
• Clear indication of dampening effect of land disputes on h...
Ongoing Research drawing on TGCC Baseline
Data
(L. Persha, H. Huntington, M. M. Stickler, in prep)
To what extent does lan...
Thank You
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

AEA Presentation: Impact Evaluation of TGCC - Zambia

903 views

Published on

Key baseline findings of the impact evaluation of USAID's Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC) Project impact evaluation in Zambia. Presented at the American Evaluation Association's Evaluation 2015 Conference. Credit:

- Heather Huntington, PhD, The Cloudburst Group
- Lauren Persha, PhD, The Cloudburst Group and UNC Chapel Hill
- M. Mercedes Stickler, USAID

Learn more: http://bit.ly/TCGtgcc

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

AEA Presentation: Impact Evaluation of TGCC - Zambia

  1. 1. Land Tenure & Resource Management IMPACT EVALUATION OF THE TENURE AND GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE (TGCC)—ZAMBIA Lead researchers—Heather Huntington, PhD (The Cloudburst Group), Lauren Persha, PhD, (The Cloudburst Group and UNC Chapel Hill), M. Mercedes Stickler (USAID) November 2015
  2. 2. OUTLINE • Context: • Background on agroforestry relating to tenure and climate change in Zambia • Program overview of USAID-funded Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC) • Objectives and methodology of the impact evaluation • Key baseline findings • Tenure security • Agricultural Investment & Land Use Planning • Agroforestry & Climate Smart Agriculture • Conclusions and lessons learned from the process and results.
  3. 3. CONTEXT
  4. 4. Evaluation Context • Resurgence in promoting agroforestry in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): to meet food security challenges and climate change (CC) adaptation objectives for poor rural farmers • Many small-scale studies show a range of benefits to smallholders from agroforestry: • Improved soil fertility & crop yields • Risk smoothing via crop diversification; increased or more reliable income • Increased availability of wood products for HH use (e.g., fuelwood, fodder)
  5. 5. Development Problem Despite promotion and studied benefits, agroforestry uptake in SSA has been persistently low, due in part to • Cash, resource and inputs constraints • e.g. labor & credit availability; farm size • Insufficient technical knowledge • Incompatible land management practices within villages • e.g. communal livestock browsing during past-harvest season • Broader cultural, demographic, institutional factors • Insecurity over rights to land
  6. 6. Research Motivation • To what extent does land tenure insecurity serve as a barrier to agroforestry uptake, and wider implementation of other climate-smart agricultural practices? • Widely hypothesized, but few studies show a definitive link • Difficult to rigorously test at scale (challenges of piloting tenure interventions; introducing experiments) • Empirical studies have substantial endogeneity challenges to overcome • Widely varying results across existing empirical work (Place 2009; Arnot et al 2011; Lawry et al 2014)
  7. 7. Research Motivation, cont’d. • Challenges to research methods also contribute to equivocal knowledge base • Different definitions & measures of tenure security • Different empirical strategies for analysis • Generally, small-N studies: few villages, couple hundred HHs • Household level rather than field level data • No clear consensus; little understanding of how this relationship might vary across different country, socio-cultural, policy contexts
  8. 8. USAID’s Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC) Project • 2-year RCT in 5 chiefdoms of Chipata District, Eastern Province • Cross-cutting tenure and agroforestry interventions aimed at increasing the adoption of CSA • Opportunity to test relative contributions of strengthening customary land governance and agroforestry extension support on HH tenure security and CSA adoption • IE focuses on identifying effects of village and household level interventions • Agroforestry intervention focuses on: • Extension support around establishment of 3 agroforestry species: Faidherbia albida (msangu); Gliricidia sepium; Cajanus cajan (Pigeon pea)
  9. 9. USAID’s Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC) Project, cont’d. • Tenure intervention focuses on: • Establishing Village Land Committees • Participatory mapping to aid land allocation • Support dissemination of land management rules agreed at chief level • Capacity building to headmen, indunas, VLCs, around land administration processes, including land dispute resolution and administration of customary land certificates • Facilitate implementation of customary land certificates (at chief’s consent) • HH-level paralegal extension support around land rights, certification and dispute resolution
  10. 10. Evaluation Purpose How do changes in property rights that strengthen a farmer’s perception of long-term security over farmland affect a farmer’s decision to practice climate smart agriculture, including agroforestry, on their own farms? Motivating Questions: 1. Do chiefdom- and village-level tenure strengthening activities reduce land disputes? 2. What is the additional effect of documenting land occupancy at the household level on farmer perception of tenure security, as well as behavior change towards CSA? 3. Are land tenure strengthening activities alone sufficient to change farmer behavior towards greater agroforestry uptake? 4. How does improved farmer access to agroforestry extension resources additionally impact a farmer’s decision to engage in agroforestry?
  11. 11. METHODOLOGY
  12. 12. Evaluation Design & Analytic Approach • Randomized Control Trial (RCT) implemented across 294 villages in Chipata District • 5 survey instruments developed: • (1) household survey, (2) headperson survey, (3) land tenure key informant interview, (4) agroforestry key informant interview and (5) focus group protocol for women, youth, and land-constrained households. • 15 HHs sampled per village, stratified by gender of HH head, wealth status and tribe. • Quantitative instruments designed to cover three outcome areas: 1. Household perceptions of tenure security over their smallholdings; 2. Planned and applied agricultural investment and other land use plans resulting from perceived tenure security, including improved adoption of agroforestry and related CSA activities; and 3. Distal outcomes around improved agricultural productivity, livelihood improvements, and increased climate resilience. • Qualitative instruments to add context and depth, particularly around agroforestry, land tenure and land disputes, and land governance and management issues.
  13. 13. TGCC Project: A Randomized Control Trial of Land Tenure Strengthening and Agroforestry Extension Impacts on Smallholder Adoption of Climate-Smart Agriculture Agroforestry interventions implemented in 177 villages; land tenure intervention implemented in approximately 130 villages. Eligible Chiefdoms Randomization Step Control Villages CONTROL Agroforestry Villages AGROFORESTRY Land Tenure Villages LAND TENURE Agroforestry and Land Tenure Villages AGROFORESTRY and LAND TENURE Saili AGROFORESTRY TGCC Chiefdoms PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION DESIGN
  14. 14. Baseline Data Collection • Baseline completed Aug 2014; Endline expected Aug 2017; True panel survey • Qualitative & Quantitative: • 3,523 households surveyed across 294 villages in Chipata District • Headperson survey • Key informant interviews: • agricultural extension officers; individuals involved in local land issues (e.g., Indunas, village elders) • Focus groups with women, youth, land- constrained HHs (45 villages) • Nested data collection across fields, HHs, villages
  15. 15. Household Impacts Assessed for Indicators of: • Female- vs male-headed households • Widows vs other households • Land-constrained households • Household wealth status • Land disputes & resolution • Land decision-making & allocation • Tenure security (perceived expropriation risk) • Land rights & administration knowledge • Land use & agricultural investments, particularly for CSA • Agroforestry uptake & survivorship rates Variance of Impacts Assessed Across:
  16. 16. KEY BASELINE FINDINGS
  17. 17. Outcome 1—Tenure Security: High Overall, but Elite Capture Concerns • Relatively high tenure security across the surveyed chiefdoms • Little evidence of strong marginalization around land issues for female-headed or poorer household Perceived Likelihood of Elite Capture at Household Level Response Category Elites/Big people may take this field without your permission in 1–3 years? Chief will give up this field for investment purposes in 1–3 years Household level—at least one field— ‘Impossible/would never happen’ or ‘highly unlikely’ 93% (N=3271) 89% (N=3129) Household level—at least one field—‘Very likely’ or ‘likely’ 28% (N=993) 40% (N=1393)
  18. 18. Outcome 1—Tenure Security: Land Reallocation Risk • Land expropriation events are uncommon (experienced by < 2% HHs) • But, household concern over this is high (15–25% of fields surveyed). Two main sources of concern: • dispossession by chiefs for investment purposes; and • boundary disputes with other HHs in village Per field, Perceived Livelihoods of Reallocation or Forced Removal Response Category Reallocation by headperson: 1–3 years Reallocation by headperson: beyond 4 years Encroachment by extended family: 1–3 years Encroachment by extended family: beyond 4 years N % N % N % N % Impossible/Would never happen 6659 75% 6619 75% 6389 72% 6369 72% Highly unlikely 1030 12% 849 10% 960 11% 786 9% Unsure/I don't know 185 2% 200 2% 140 2% 148 2% Likely 792 9% 784 9% 1158 13% 1178 13% Very likely 155 2% 368 4% 170 2% 337 4% Happening right now 2 <1% 3 <1% 8 <1% 9 <1% Prefer not to respond 29 <1% 29 <1% 27 <1% 35 <1% Statistically significant difference between male- and female- headed households? No (p=.77) No (p=.71) No (p=.62) No (p=.69)
  19. 19. Outcome 1—Tenure Security: Land Documentation • 91% of HHs would like to obtain documentation over customary land they use (current holders of documentation are very uncommon; < 1% of households) • Links to strong household-level interest in land documentation 2% 98% Yes; N=86 No; N=3523 HOUSEHOLD HAS PAPER DOCUMENTATION FOR THEIR LAND 33% 9% 13% 25% 20% Husband only; N=34 Wife only; N=10 Husband and Wife; N=14 Husband, Wife, and Children; N=27 Other; N=21 HOUSEHOLD MEMBER LISTED ON LAND DOCUMENTATION 6% 94% Yes; N=207 No; N=3242 HOUSEHOLD HAS RECEIVED INFORMATION ABOUT CUSTOMARY LAND CERTIFICATES 92% 8% Yes; N=3224 No; N=299 HOUSEHOLDS WANT TO OBTAIN PAPER DOCUMENTATION FOR THEIR LAND
  20. 20. Outcome 1—Tenure Security Land Disputes • HHs commonly experience land-related disputes, despite fairly high overall tenure security: • 26% of households (N=707) experienced a land conflict on at least one field in past 3 years; • prior disputes recorded on 10% of fields surveyed (N = 1007 fields) • Clear indication of dampening effect of land disputes on household perception of security over land
  21. 21. Outcome 2—Agricultural Investment & Land Use Planning • Upfront costly field investments are uncommon: • Planting basins: 10% of fields • Live fencing: 1% of fields • Drip irrigation: < 1% of fields • Less costly CSA investments somewhat more common: • Zero tillage: 8% of fields • Manuring: 18% of fields • Fallowing: 7% of fields • Ridging (85% of fields) and crop rotation (82% of fields) very common
  22. 22. Field Investments at the Household and Field Level Field Household Statistically significant difference between male and female-headed households? Planting basins N 909 789 .20 (.65)% 10% 22% Zero tillage N 748 626 .65 (.42)% 8% 18% Ridging N 7528 3300 .94 (.33)% 85% 94% Fencing N 88 77 .30 (.58)% 1% 2% Manure N 1568 1278 3.93 (.047)**% 18% 36% Crop rotation N 7264 3219 2.25 (.13)% 82% 91% Fallowing N 656 559 .004 (.95)% 7% 16% Drip irrigation N 5 5 % <1% <1% Asterisks indicate statistical signifigance: * at 90%, ** at 95%, and *** at 99%
  23. 23. Outcome 3—Agroforestry & Climate Smart Agriculture • Agroforestry uptake currently very low (11% of HHs (N=383); 5% of fields (N=404)) Response Category Percent (%) Planted agroforestry trees 11% (N= 383) No agroforestry trees planted 89% (N=3140) 5% of fields have agroforestry trees planted (404 out of 8859 fields) Statistically significant difference between male- and female-headed households? No (p value=.85) Statistically significant difference between across treatment arms? No (p value=.32) 63%14% 5% 1% 4% 1% 12% Musangu (Faidherbiaalbida); N=239 Gliricidia (Gliricidiasepim); N=54 Sesbaniasesban; N=20 Ububa (Tephrosiavogelii); N=4 Cowpeas; N=14 Pigeon peas; N=4 Mix/other species; N=47 AGROFORESTRY TREE SPECIES PLANTED 10% 43% 18% 14% 15% None; N=41 1-10 trees/shrubs or crops; N=167 10-20 trees/shrubs or crops; N=69 20-49 trees/shrubs or crops; N=57 50 or more trees/shrubs or crops; N=57 AGROFORESTRY SPECIES SURVIVAL
  24. 24. Summary of Findings: Agricultural Investments & Agroforestry • Agroforestry uptake currently very low (11% of HHs (N=383); 5% of fields (N=404)) • Other upfront costly field investments also uncommon: • Planting basins: 10% of fields • Live fencing: 1% of fields • Drip irrigation: < 1% of fields • Less costly CSA investments somewhat more common: • Zero tillage: 8% of fields • Manuring: 18% of fields • Fallowing: 7% of fields • Ridging (85% of fields) and crop rotation (82% of fields) very common
  25. 25. CONCLUSIONS
  26. 26. LEARNING FROM BASELINE PROCESS: PRACTICAL CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED
  27. 27. Evaluation Challenges and Lessons Learned Methodological • GPS • Village listing • Accounting for spillovers • Unexpected rarity of occurrences—power of the study • Capturing implementation shift or variation • Linking the IE with program M&E
  28. 28. LEARNING FROM BASELINE RESULTS: POLICY & PROGRAMMING LINKAGES
  29. 29. Key Overall Messages: TGCC Baseline Findings • Overall, relatively high tenure security across the surveyed chiefdoms • Collective understanding of cultural norms around customary land access, allocation and inheritance appear to be strong overall and well-functioning, including mediating equitable access to land for traditionally vulnerable groups (also strongly supported by qualitative data) • Traditional informal and customary norms over land access, allocation, inheritance appear to be strong • Little evidence of strong marginalization around land issues for female- headed or poorer households.
  30. 30. Key Overall Messages: TGCC Baseline Findings, cont’d. However • Clear indication of dampening effect of land disputes on household perception of security over land • Clear indication of concern over emergent challenges to land rights, such as expropriation by chiefs for investments • Links to strong household-level interest in land documentation. Role of stronger tenure security in promoting agroforestry? • Some indication of its effect on broader costly land investments • Currently very low uptake constrains the baseline analyses; • A need for more nuanced work as a next step
  31. 31. Ongoing Research drawing on TGCC Baseline Data (L. Persha, H. Huntington, M. M. Stickler, in prep) To what extent does land tenure insecurity serve as a barrier to agroforestry uptake, and wider implementation of other climate-smart agricultural practices? 1. How secure are the rights of Eastern Province smallholders over the land they use, under Zambia’s prevailing dual customary and state tenure system? 2. What are household level determinants of stronger tenure security? 3. What role does tenure security play in shaping household land use strategies and CSA investments (agroforestry uptake in particular)?
  32. 32. Thank You

×