Impact evaluation
InovAgro household and market-level impacts of value chain interventions
- Published by
- The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
- Project implementer
- DAI
- Donor
- SDC
- Programme
- The Innovation for Agribusiness (InovAgro)
- Results level
- Poverty reduction
- Method
- Quasi-experimental
- Data source
- Mixed
- Intervention type
- Improved input supply
The Innovation for Agribusiness (InovAgro) programme aimed to increase incomes for poor smallholder farmers in northern Mozambique.
This report evaluates the impacts of the InovAgro value chain interventions (VCIs) on smallholder farmers in northern Mozambique. It analyses the use of yield-enhancing agricultural inputs, access to market information, maize productivity, and household welfare, using data from randomised controlled trials, household surveys, and geospatial data. Positive impacts include increased input usage and productivity, while unintended negative effects on women’s and youth land rights were also identified.
Intervention description
Specific interventions included facilitating access to certified seeds, improving output marketing through commodity aggregator traders (CATs), and enhancing smallholder farmers' access to finance and land tenure security.
The programme worked with private sector partners such as agrodealers, lead farmers and seed companies to promote the development of inclusive and sustainable market systems. For example, the number of demonstration plots organised by private seed companies increased from seven in 2015 to 299 in 2017, leading to a significant jump in sales of certified seeds from 0 metric tons in 2015 to 273.8 metric tons in 2017.
Many partners adopted the promoted models, with evidence showing increased use of certified seeds and participation in field days among treatment households.
Evidence methodology
The evaluation employed a modified randomised controlled trial (RCT) using a spatial identification strategy to classify beneficiary and nonbeneficiary households. Data was collected through three waves of household-level panel data (2015, 2017, 2019) and supplemented with key informant interviews (KII) and focus group discussions (FGD) with local stakeholders. The study used fixed effects (FEs) technique on a matched sample to evaluate the impact of VCIs.