Learning is at the heart of AgResults

This brief by External Evaluator Abt Associates discusses quantitative methods for conducting impact assessments of smallholder farmer benefits from donor-devised interventions that stimulate private sector engagement in markets for technologies benefiting the farmers. The brief presents three AgResults Pay-for-Results competitions as examples and offers seven lessons for evaluators.

This brief, the fifth and final in the series, provides an overview of the fifth phase of AgResults’ approach to Pay-for-Results prize competition design. It explains how program designers can develop a thorough verification plan to evaluate competitors’ results and determine prize payments. It also summarizes the activities involved in project management of a prize competition.

This brief, the fourth in a series of five, provides an overview of the fourth phase of AgResults’ approach to Pay-for-Results prize competition design. It explains how program designers can determine the size of the prize purse to effectively drive participation and innovation without overpaying for results.

This brief, the third in a series of five, provides an overview of the third phase of AgResults’ approach to Pay-for-Results prize competition design. It explains how program designers can create the set of parameters and rules that determines who competes, how to win the prize(s), and the implementation timeline.

This brief, the second in a series of five, provides an overview of the second phase of AgResults’ approach to Pay-for-Results prize competition design. It explains how program designers conduct deeper research on relevant market systems to articulate a Theory of Change for the competition and to reasonably estimate the project’s impacts.

The first in a series of five, this brief provides an overview of concept sourcing, the first phase of AgResults’ Pay-for-Results prize competition design process. It shows how program designers begin the process by brainstorming and assessing potential development challenges to see if a prize competition is best suited to address the identified problem.

This sustainability assessment by External Evaluator Abt Associates looking at the Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project affirms that Pay-for-Results projects can catalyze development of a smallholder- and gender-inclusive, sustainable market for beneficial agricultural technologies. Since the project ended, there have been new entrants to the market, ongoing product innovation, and a 250% increase in sales of on-farm storage products attributable to AgResults.

This report by External Evaluator Abt Associates summarizes independent evaluation findings from competitions in Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia and offers guidance for future prize sponsors. It provides evidence that Pay-for-Results (PfR) competitions can spur development of markets for technologies benefitting smallholder farmers. It also offers guidance on how to determine whether PfR is an appropriate design option and how to maximize farmer benefits.

This toolkit is a practical guide for agricultural development practitioners who are interested in using Pay-for-Results prize competitions to stimulate new markets for agricultural technologies and engage the private sector for scale-up. It draws upon the experience of AgResults, which has designed and implemented prize competitions around the world since 2013.

This brief by External Evaluator Abt Associates explores how Pay-for-Results (PfR) projects could potentially perpetuate disadvantages that women face in agricultural market systems and suggests project design approaches to improve gender outcomes. It also presents results from AgResults’ Kenya PfR project that led to unique benefits for women.

Since 2013, AgResults has been designing and implementing agricultural prize competitions to encourage the private sector to "solve" a market failure and work toward a defined goal to receive a monetary award. In this cross-cutting learning document, AgResults presents 12 key takeaways based on its experience with prize concept design and sourcing; launch and marketing; and running a prize competition.

This brief by External Evaluator Abt Associates summarizes the evaluation of the AgResults Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project. Abt Associates found that the competition created an emerging market for improved on-farm storage devices and increased adoption of on-farm storage technologies. However, impacts on farmer income were small. The brief underscores the challenge of constructing an accurate theory of change.

This DFID Chief Economist Seminar Series presentation from February 2020 summarizes External Evaluator Abt Associates' findings about the use of “pull mechanisms” or “prize competitions” to develop markets that provide innovative agricultural technologies to smallholder farmers. Findings suggest that pull mechanisms can create markets as long as the binding constraints inhibiting market development are within the manageable interest of the companies competing for the prize.

Eastern Africa grows nearly 20% of the grain produced in sub-Saharan Africa, yet the region suffers from post-harvest grain losses that cost about US$1.6 billion per year. The AgResults Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project (2014-2018) used a Pay-for-Results prize competition to motivate private competitors to develop, market, and sell on-farm storage devices to smallholder farmers in the country's Rift Valley and Eastern Regions. Overall, participating competitors sold a total of 1,390,777 improved storage devices, creating 413,265 MT of improved storage capacity.

The external evaluation of the Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project found that the project created an emerging market for improved on-farm storage products in Kenya. Impacts on farmer income and food security were small, and the main reported benefit of adoption was reduced use of pesticide dust in maize stored for home consumption.

The AgResults Prize Concept Review Framework assesses concepts for validity as a prize competition. The framework comprises four key questions on the (a) market failure, (b) missions impact, (c) prize design, and (d) enabling environment. 

Which factors empowered private sector companies to develop, market, and sell on-farm storage devices to smallholders in Kenya? Which factors hindered others' success? This Lessons Learned article explores the perspectives of those competitors who participated in the Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project.

Written by Tanager, the Project Manager for the Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project, this report summarizes the objectives, approach, and achievements of the project, which aimed to encourage sales of on-farm grain storage devices to smallholder farmers.

This presentation from the Scaling Up Conference at Purdue University in September 2018 explores how private sector companies participating in the Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project employed different tactics to increase smallholder farmers' access to and use of on-farm storage devices.

How do you design an effective approach to project verification in a Pay-for-Results project? This Lessons Learned article explains how the Kenya On-Farm Storage Challenge Project ran into challenges with its original verification structure and course-corrected using survey data.