Hazel Zaranyika Campbell Presentation

Report
Centre for Anthropological Research (CfAR)
University of Johannesburg
23 May 2013
Ruth Stewart, Marcel Korth, Hazel Zaranyika, Natalie Rebelo Da Silva , Laurenz Langer, Nolizwe Madinga






Brief overview of smallholder farming
Methodology adopted in this review of
systematic reviews
What areas do the available reviews cover?
What do we already know about smallholder
farming?
What are the gaps in the systematic review
evidence?
What next?
Significance of smallholder
farming in Africa
◦ Produce 80% food in developing
countries
◦ Majority of Africa’s farmers
◦ Increasingly recognized by donors
and governments as important

Definitions of smallholder
farming
Family farms
Size based (2 hectares)
Resource poor
Mix of commercial and
subsistence production
◦ Lack of consensus
◦
◦
◦
◦
http://secure.worldbank.org/photolibrary/shared/SiteResources/PhotoLibrary/Images/secur
e/LowRes/BJ001S08.jpg



Systematic review funded by CIDA - which
interventions work best for smallholder
farmers in Africa, especially young farmers?
3 stage review: 1) Review of reviews 2) Map of
impact studies 3) Focused synthesis
Searched for systematic reviews:
◦ 7 Databases
◦ 6 Systematic Review Libraries

Screened them using inclusion criteria:
◦ Study design: systematic reviews with structured
methodology
◦ Population: smallholder farmers (noting studies
targeting young farmers & female farmers)
◦ Region: included or focused on Africa
(Also captured individual impact studies from
within reviews for our map of impact studies)
http://secure.worldbank.org/photolibrary/servlet/main?contentMDK=20104453&startIndex=233&theSitePK=265652&piPK=145042&pa
gePK=145040&imgfilename=BF021S06



Coded included reviews using our framework
Extracted findings from each review and did a simple narrative
synthesis
Framework for
describing
systematic reviews
Investment
Innovation
Yield / Productivity
Income / wealth
Food security / Nutrition
Training
Innovation / new
technology
Infrastructure
Finance

Included 14 relevant
systematic reviews
◦ One review on training
◦ Nine reviews on innovation
and new technology
◦ One review on agricultural
infrastructure
◦ Four reviews on finance for
farmers
(one review is about both
innovation and about
infrastructure)
Framework for
describing
systematic reviews
Training
Innovation / new
technology
Infrastructure
Finance
Yield / Productivity
Waddington et al
Bayala et al.
Bennet & Franzel
IOB
Rusinamhodzi et al.
IOB
Cole et al
Income / wealth
Waddington et al
Hall et al.
Investment
Innovation
Food security / Nutrition
Berti et al.
Girad et al.
Gunaratna et al.
IOB
Masset et al.
Cole et al.
Duvendack et
al.
Stewart et al. a.
Stewart et al. b.



These are findings from the reviews with
relevance to smallholder farming
In our map of impact studies we will explore
in more detail interventions which focused
specifically on farmers
We haven’t conducted quality appraisal of
these reviews – we are trusting what the
review authors reported
Training: farmer field schools
One systematic review
Yield / Productivity
Productivity increased
Improved agricultural outputs
Income / wealth
Reduction in pesticide costs
Increased income and revenue

But, we don’t know how sustainable these positive outcomes are
Innovation / new technology
Nine systematic reviews
Yield /
Productivity
Conservation agriculture increases crop yield
Organic and Resource Conserving Agriculture increases yield
Income /
wealth
Certification for organic crops increases incomes
Food security /
Nutrition
GM crops have mixed results on economic impacts
Biofortification has mixed results on nutrition impacts
Infrastructure
One systematic review
Yield /
Productivity
Generally positive, particularly for land reform
Finance
Four systematic reviews
Income/wealth
Microcredit and microsavings have a positive impact on savings,
expenditure and accumulation of assets – but only limited evidence
Commitment savings improve levels of non-financial assets
Microcredit encourages the poor to engage in economic activities
No improvement in income and wealth
Index based insurance increases the use of agricultural inputs i.e.
fertilizers
Food security and
Nutrition
Microcredit and microsavings have positive effects on food security and
nutrition
Number of reviews
Investment
Innovation
Food security
Income
Yield/productivity
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Training
Innovation &
Infrastructure
new tech.
Interventions
Finance

3 stage review:

Our (pre)protocol for this map has just been peer
reviewed through 3ie
◦ 1) Review of reviews
◦ 2) Map of impact studies conducted in Africa
◦ 3) Focused synthesis
◦ We’re now re-focusing the scope of our map
◦ And revising the framework
◦ Currently searching and screening for impact studies



Map completed in July to inform decisions about
where to focus our full synthesis (our 3rd stage)
Prepare full Campbell protocol
Draft report of our full Campbell review will be ready
in early 2014
http://secure.worldbank.org/photolibrary/servlet/main?contentMDK=90001258
&startIndex=425&theSitePK=265652&piPK=145042&pagePK=145040&imgfilena
me=ET006S08
Bayala J, SileshiGW, Coe R, Kalinganire A, Tchoundjeu Z, Sinclair F, Garrity D (2012) Cereal yield response to
conservation agriculture practices in drylands of West Africa: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Arid
Environments (78): 13-25.
Bennett M and Franzel S (2009) Can organic and resource-conserving agriculture improve livelihoods? A
meta-analysis and conceptual framework for site-specific evaluation.ICRAF Occasional Paper No. 11.
Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre.
Berti RP, Krasevec J, FitzGerald F (2004) A review of the effectiveness of agriculture interventions in improving
nutrition outcomes. Public Health Nutrition,7 (5): 599-609.
Cole S, Bastian G, Vyas S, Wendel C, Stein D (2012) The effectiveness of index based micro-insurance in helping
smallholders manage weather-related risks. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute
of Education, University of London.
Duvendack M, Palmer-Jones R,Copestake JG, Hooper L, Loke Y, Rao N (2011) What is the evidence of the
impact of microfinance on the well-being of poor people? London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research
Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
Gunaratna NS, De Groote H, Nestel P, Pixley KV, McCabe GP (2010) A meta-analysis of community-based
studies on quality protein maize, Food Policy, (35): 202–210
Girard AW, Self JL, McAuliffe C, Oludea O (2012) The Effects of Household Food Production Strategies on the
Health and Nutrition Outcomes of Women and Young Children: A Systematic Review. Paediatric and
Perinatal Epidemiology 26(Suppl. 1), 205–222.
Hall C, Knight B, Ringrose S, Knox O (2012) What have been the farm-level economic impacts of the global
cultivation of GM crops?Systematic Review No.CEE 11-002.
IOB (2011) Improving food security.A systematic review of the impact of interventions in agricultural
production, value chains, market regulation, and land security.IOB Study No 363.
Masset E, Haddad L, Cornelius A and Isaza-Castro J (2011) A systematic review of agricultural interventions
that aim to improve nutritional status of children. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit,
Institute of Education, University of London.
Rusinamhodzi L, Corbeels M, van Wijk MT, Rufino MC, Nyamangara J and GillerKE (2011) A meta-analysis of
long-term effects of conservation agriculture on maize grain yield under rain-fed conditions. Agronomy
Sustainable Development, (31): 657–673.
Stewart R, van Rooyen C, Dickson K, Majoro M, de Wet T (2010) What is the impact of microfinance on poor
people? A systematic review of evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Technical report. London: EPPI-Centre,
Social Science Research Unit, University of London.
Stewart R, van Rooyen C, KorthM, Chereni A, Rebelo Da Silva N, de Wet T (2012) Do micro-credit, microsavings and micro-leasing serve as effective financial inclusion interventions enabling poor people, and
especially women, to engage in meaningful economic opportunities in low- and middle-income countries.
A systematic review of the evidence. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of
Education, University of London.
Waddington H,Snilstveit B, Hombrados J, Vojtkova M, White H (in press) Farmer Field Schools for improving
farming practices and farmer outcomes in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.
Campbell Systematic Reviews.

similar documents