Household survey data
agricultural labor, ’ labor
SECONDARY
To obtain much more granular information on the relationship between program exposure and land conversion, we conducted a household survey through which we obtained farmers’ own classification of previous land cover and forest categories for each of the plots cultivated in 2014. For land converted from the forest, respondents were asked to distinguish between primary forest, which has no observable traces of previous cultivation, and secondary forest, which is a more recent regrowth on land that had been previously cultivated. As explained above, farmers are strongly aware of this distinction, both because the first clearing often implies subsequent property rights and given that labor efforts for clearing the more dense primary forest are substantially larger. As a result, farmers’ categorization of primary versus secondary forest maps closely into common definitions and is notably consistent with the definition of The Food and Agriculture Organization, which defines primary forest as “naturally regenerated forests of native tree species, where there are no clearly visible indications of human activities and the ecological processes are not significantly disturbed”Plot-level data on conversion decisions come from a household survey collected 1.5 years after the voucher distribution (July 2014), after planting for the main season was completed. A second wave of data was collected after the harvest between November 2014 and March 2015. This is the main source of plot-level data used in the analysis, as its timing allows us to fully capture the impact of modern seed varieties on households’ conversion decisions. The household head (often a man in this context) was asked for detailed information about all the plots the household cultivated in the main season of 2014, including crop use, prior use of the plot, the period of fallow, planting and harvesting dates, tenure, etc. A separate module asked for recall data, for each plot, on agricultural labor for all main agricultural activities (clearing, land preparation, sowing, weeding, and harvesting), separately for men and women in the household, estimating both the number of people and the hours worked to obtain an estimate of total man-days. The module similarly asked for any hired labor and participation in labor exchanges. Data on agricultural wage labor income by household members come from an income module with all household members. Household surveys are further described in the Sample selection for the surveys was based on village census and administrative data from the voucher distribution. In each of the treatment villages, we randomly drew two beneficiaries assigned the 30, 60, and 90% subsidy and three beneficiaries assigned the 100% subsidy for a total of 9 households per treatment village. The sample selection was stratified based on the households’ membership in producer organizations, on having a leadership position in the village, and on polygyny. In each control village, 12 households were randomly selected based on the same stratification criteria.From the household data, we can exploit differences in subsidy levels at the household level to measure forest conversion decisions at a granular (plot)-level and to distinguish between primary and secondary forest. We further rely on households’ labor allocation for field preparation as an indirect measure of deforestation. Given the limited supply of labor at peak demand times in the study area and the labor intensity of tree cover removal, changes in land use decisions should translate into labor reallocation at the household level.