Beach Robert H, Milliken Caleb, Franzen Kirsten, Lapidus Daniel
RTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, PO Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA.
Glob Food Sec. 2025 Jun;45:100866. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2025.100866.
Digital means of delivering advisory and other information services to small-scale agricultural producers are widely expected to expand the reach of extension and other information provision services while reducing costs. However, there is currently little evidence systematically quantifying these benefits. In this paper, we synthesize quantitative information on the impacts of digital information interventions, which may integrate human support, on adoption of modern farm inputs (fertilizer and improved seeds), yield, and income, covering interventions implemented between 2005 and 2019. Our starting point for the meta-analysis was the Agriculture in the Digital Age Evidence Gap Map dataset, which provided a consistent set of studies of digital interventions, though one limitation is that it excludes more recent studies published after 2021. After applying our criteria for relevance, rigor, and availability of necessary data, we used estimates from 20 studies in our analyses where fifteen were from Sub-Saharan Africa, four from India, and one from Cambodia. Mean impacts of digital information interventions on adoption of fertilizer (+23 %; 95 % CI +6 % to +40 %), yield (+6 %; +2 % to +9 %), and income (+6 %; +2 % to +9 %) are positive while effects on adoption of improved seeds were not statistically significant. Although our analysis indicates that digital farmer services have provided benefits on average, there is considerable variability in estimates across individual studies. However, there are not enough comparable quantitative observations from the literature included within our study population to reliably further disaggregate estimated impacts (e.g., by intervention, level of human assistance, geography, modality of information delivery, farmer type). Expansion of the available evidence base to facilitate quantification of these heterogeneous impacts is needed to better inform program design to maximize effectiveness.
人们普遍期望,通过数字手段向小规模农业生产者提供咨询和其他信息服务,既能扩大推广服务及其他信息提供服务的覆盖范围,又能降低成本。然而,目前几乎没有证据对这些益处进行系统量化。在本文中,我们综合了有关数字信息干预措施影响的定量信息,这些干预措施可能整合了人力支持,涉及2005年至2019年间实施的干预措施对现代农场投入品(化肥和改良种子)的采用、产量和收入的影响。我们进行荟萃分析的起点是《数字时代的农业证据差距地图》数据集,该数据集提供了一组关于数字干预措施的一致研究,不过一个局限性是它排除了2021年之后发表的最新研究。在应用我们关于相关性、严谨性和必要数据可用性的标准后,我们在分析中使用了20项研究的估计值,其中15项来自撒哈拉以南非洲,4项来自印度,1项来自柬埔寨。数字信息干预措施对化肥采用率(+23%;95%置信区间为+6%至+40%)、产量(+6%;+2%至+9%)和收入(+6%;+2%至+9%)的平均影响是积极的,而对改良种子采用率的影响在统计上不显著。尽管我们的分析表明数字农民服务平均带来了益处,但各单项研究的估计值存在相当大的差异。然而,在我们的研究群体所纳入的文献中,没有足够多可比的定量观察结果来可靠地进一步细分估计影响(例如,按干预措施、人力协助水平、地理位置、信息传递方式、农民类型)。需要扩大可用证据库,以便对这些异质性影响进行量化,从而更好地为项目设计提供信息,以实现最大效益。