This paper presents results from a framed field experiment in which participants make decisions about extraction of a common-pool resource, a community forest. The experiment was designed and piloted as both a research activity and an experiential learning intervention during 2017-2018 with 120 groups of resource users (split by gender) from 60 habitations in two Indian states, Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan. We examine whether local beliefs and norms about community forest, gender of participants, within-experiment treatments (non-communication, communication, and optional election of institutional arrangements (rules)) and remuneration methods affect harvest behaviour and groups’ tendency to cooperate. Furthermore, we explore whether the experiment and subsequent community debriefing had learning effects. Results reveal a “weak” Nash Equilibrium in which participants harvested substantially less than the Nash prediction even in the absence of communication, a phenomenon stronger for male than female participants in both states. For male groups in both states, both communication and optional rule election are associated with lower group harvest per round, as compared to the reference non-communication game. For female groups in both states, however, communication itself did not significantly slow down resource depletion; but the introduction of optional rule election did reduce harvest amounts. For both men and women in Andhra Pradesh and men in Rajasthan, incentivized payments to individual participants significantly lowered group harvest, relative to community flat payment, suggesting a possible “crowding-in” effect on pro-social norms. Despite the generally positive memory of the activity, reported actual changes are limited. This may be due to the lack of follow-up with the communities between the experiment and the revisit. The fact that many of the communities already have a good understanding of the importance of the relationships between (not) cutting trees and the ecosystem services from forests, with rules and strong internal norms against cutting that go beyond the felling of trees in the game, may have also meant that the game did not have as much to add. Findings have methodological and practical implications for designing behavioral intervention programs to improve common-pool resource governance.

Many rural producer groups face poor management practices, low productivity, and weak market linkages. An information and communication technology (ICT)-based intervention bundle was provided to producer groups to transform them into ICT hubs, where members learn about and adopt improved management practices and increase their productivity and incomes. The intervention bundle includes phone messages and videos, promotion of the call center/hotline, and facilitation of radio listening clubs and collective marketing. The study, a cluster-randomized controlled trial, randomly assigned 59 groups into treatment groups and 59 into control groups. After 18 months of interventions, results show positive but small impact on crop sales (USD65 per household) and no impact on productivity. The income effect was mainly from Kasungu and Nkhota-kota, which experienced increased production and sales of rice, soybean, and groundnut and received higher prices due to collective marketing. Farmers in Kasungu and Nkhota-kota improved a few agricultural management practices, while farmers in other districts did not improve their management practices. Results show more farmers accessing phone messaging on agriculture and markets, greater awareness and use of the call center, more listening groups established, and more farmers—especially women—joining these groups. Nevertheless, coverage and uptake remain very low, which are likely reasons for the limited impact.

The new Kenyan government faces a complex domestic and global environment, and it is widely expected to address key food and agricultural challenges with a new set of policies and programs. This policy brief presents key recommendations from a forthcoming book, Food Systems Transformation in Kenya: Lessons from the Past and Policy Options for the Future, which provides research-based “food for thought and action” to support the Kenyan government’s efforts to improve food security.

Access to agricultural extension and crop advisory services can play a crucial role in ensuring widespread and appropriate use of new and improved agricultural technologies, but the delivery and use of such services is not well understood in Myanmar. We assess their use based on repeated large-scale and nationally representative farm surveys from 2020 onwards, as well as on insights from key informant interviews and secondary data. The major findings are the following: Agricultural extension use is low and declining. Before the crisis years – due to COVID-19 and a military coup – agricultural extension provision and use in Myanmar was at much lower levels than in neighboring countries. There has been a further decline in use since. Forty-one percent of farmers reported to have received crop advice during the monsoon of 2020, but this share declined by 9 percentage points to 32 percent of farmers in the monsoon of 2022. In-person agricultural extension is more widely used than digital extension. In the last dry season, 26 and 20 percent of the farmers relied on in-person and digital extension respectively. The private sector is the main provider of in-person agricultural extension. During the last dry season, the main provider of in-person agricultural extension was the private sector (used by 18 percent of the farmers), followed by the public sector (13 percent of the farmers), and NGOs (6 percent). Previous seasons show similar shares. In-person agricultural extension has been declining since 2020. In the last three years, there has been a significant decline in the provision of in-person extension services by all providers. In the case of the public sector in particular, the number of agricultural extension events in 2021/22 dropped by more than 50 percent compared to before the crisis years. Digital agricultural extension service provision increased rapidly before 2020. Before the COVID-19 pandemic and the political crisis, the provision of digital extension services grew rapidly, linked to the rapid expansion of mobile cellphone networks and the spread of cheap smart phones. The total number of posts on Facebook by agricultural companies and organizations from July 2015 until November 2019 more than tripled. The biggest growth in posts was seen in 2018 and 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital agricultural extension provision decreased immediately after the coup, but then expanded again in the years after. It was used by 20 percent of the farmers during the last dry season. Most users started using digital agricultural extension since the COVID-19 pandemic and the political crisis. After the initial drop in 2021 - as the use of Facebook was banned and as there were severe communication blockages - there has been an increase in activity since, and this has occurred despite the persistent communication and internet problems and reduced mobile network access in the country. Digital agricultural extension is mostly provided through Facebook by agricultural input companies and social enterprises. The most widely used services are provided through Facebook pages, that for a number of organizations and companies have millions of followers. An analysis of the posts on these Facebook pages shows they contain more technical information than product advertisements, even so for (almost) all commercial input retail companies. We also recently note the establishment of farmer extension groups – a more interactive model – and specific commodity focused groups on Facebook. There are also groups on other online platforms, including specialized agricultural apps and call centers. However, these platforms are less used. Digital extension services are almost exclusively provided by the private sector, including social businesses. Use of agricultural extension is non-inclusive, with less educated, more remote, female, and smaller farmers accessing them less, for digital as well as for in-person extension. We also note an important difference by age, with older farmers relying more on in-person services and younger ones more on digital extension. Conflict-affected areas access agricultural extension services significantly less frequently. Farmers residing in townships under martial law – 13 percent of the townships – use any extension (in-person or digital) service less (8 percent compared to townships not under martial law, often because they lack access to the internet in these townships). While farmers residing in the most insecure areas use in-person extension less (11 percent less), they are however able to rely on digital services to a similar extent as farmers in the more secure townships. The findings of the study have a number of important implications. Scaling of digital extension. Given the widespread insecurity and mobility constraints in the country, limiting in-person travel, alternative digital opportunities have recently emerged that can provide crop advisory services at scale, and especially in some – but not all – of the conflict-affected areas. The scaling-up of such services would be very much welcomed, given that currently only one out of five farmers in Myanmar are relying on such services. Leverage the experience of the private sector. The private sector is most active in agricultural extension, in-person and digital. It has been leading the pivot from in-person to the provision of digital services – not only focusing on sales of their products, but very much being involved in crop advice overall – providing important opportunities to work with these initiatives to finetune and extend the reach of agronomic and other advice for farmers, especially as a large share of farmers is not yet reached by current agricultural extension models. Embrace innovations. Innovations in digital agriculture are quickly emerging - such as chatbots and A.I. - but are not yet being used to their fullest extent in Myanmar. Further piloting, testing, and evaluating the impact of such innovations should be encouraged. Ensure internet access. Access to the internet is problematic in Myanmar – more than 40 percent of all households in Myanmar reported in a recent national survey that they never or only occasionally use the internet - and further efforts to ensure access, especially in conflict affected areas, as well as improve digital literacy should be encouraged. Assess impact of agricultural extension. Despite the interest in the country, few rigorous assessments have been done on the impact of different modalities of extension on adoption of improved technologies and agricultural performance. This would be useful evidence to stimulate the scale-up of the most promising models.

This book offers a critical primer on how Artificial Intelligence and digitalization are shaping our planet and the risks posed to society and environmental sustainability. As the pressure of human activities accelerates on Earth, so too does the hope that digital and artificially intelligent technologies will be able to help us deal with dangerous climate and environmental change. Technology giants, international think-tanks and policy-makers are increasingly keen to advance agendas that contribute to “AI for Good” or “AI for the Planet." Dark Machines explores why it is naïve and dangerous to assume converging forces of a growing climate crisis and technological change will act synergistically to the benefit of people and the planet. It explores why AI and associated digital technologies may lead to accelerated discrimination, automated inequality, and augmented diffusion of misinformation, while simultaneously amplifying risks for people and the planet. We face a profound challenge. We can either allow AI accelerate the loss of resilience of people and our planet, or we can decide to act forcefully in ways that redirects its destructive direction. This urgent book will be of interest to students and researchers with an interest in Artificial Intelligence, digitalization and automation, social and political dimensions of science and technology, and sustainability sciences.