The sample consists of 299 clubs with 3,150 farmers surveyed at baseline, and 298 clubs with 2,835 farmers surveyed at endline.<sup>12</sup> Attrition from the baseline to the endline survey was 10.0% and does not vary substantially by treatment status (as shown in Appendix Table 1). While attrition is uncorrelated with treatment assignment for five out of the six treatment groups, farmers in the ordinary (private raffle) treatment group have a three percentage point lower rate of attrition from baseline to endline survey, compared to the control group, and this difference is statistically significant at the 10% level (p-value 0.085 in the specification with full baseline controls). Since the focus of the paper is on the impacts of ordinary and commitment (no raffle) treatments, and the difference is very small, we do not view this as an important concern. **_Balance of baseline characteristics across treatment conditions_** To examine whether randomization across treatments achieved balance in pre-treatment characteristics, Table 3 presents the differences in means of 17 baseline variables for the six treatment groups vis-a-vis the control group. For statistical inference about the differences in means we estimate the following regression for farmer _i_ in club _j_ for each baseline variable _Yij_ : (1) _Yij = δ + α_ 1 _Ordinaryj + α_ 2 _Ord_PrivRafj + α_ 3 _Ord_PubRafj_ _+ α_ 4 _Commitmentj + α_ 5 _Com_PrivRafj + α_ 6 _Com_PubRafj +β_ ’ **_S_** ij _+ εij_ _Ordinaryi_ is an indicator variable for assignment to the ordinary treatment and _Commitmenti_ is an indicator variable for assignment to the commitment treatment. _Ord_PrivRafj_ and _Ord_PubRafj_ are indicator variables for the assignment to the ordinary treatment _and_ the private or public raffle treatment, respectively. _Com_PrivRafj_ and _Com_PubRafj_ are defined similarly, indicating assignment to the commitment treatment _and_ either the private or the public raffle treatment condition. These indicators are essentially interactions of _Ordinaryj_ and _Commitmentj_ , respectively, with variables indicating assignment to the private or public raffle treatment conditions. **_S_** is a vector that includes stratification cell dummies. _ε_ is a mean-zero error and ij _ij_ because the unit of randomization is the club, standard errors are clustered at this level (Moulton 1986).

Coefficients _α_ 1 and _α_ 4 measure the difference in means of the dependent variable between

> 12 60 clubs in two locations had to be excluded from the sample because of serious implementation irregularities. Clubs in Kasungu Central were discovered to contain substantial numbers of “ghost” (nonexistent) club members and served as vehicles for larger landowners to fraudulently obtain very large loans from our partner institution; survey data collected for these individuals is thus likely to be fictitious. Clubs in Mndolera were excluded because of clerical and communications errors that led to ambiguity in treatment assignment. In the two locations subject to these issues, we excluded all clubs (amounting to three stratification cells) from the sample. Because entire stratification cells were excluded, inference among the remaining stratification cells yields internally valid results.

10