Table 2: Investment in planting

||All rubber<br>trees<br>planted in<br>2016|All rubber<br>trees<br>planted in<br>2017|All rubber<br>trees<br>planted in<br>2018|All rubber<br>trees<br>planted in<br>2016-18|PSAC trees<br>planted in<br>2016|<br>PSAC trees<br>planted in<br>2017|<br>PSAC trees<br>planted in<br>2016-17|<br>PSAC trees<br>planted in<br>2016-17<br>as % of<br>received in<br>2016|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Seedling Subsidy|200.01***|-39.59*|-13.53*|140.69**|171.04***|-12.31*|160.25***|-0.01|
||(46.98)|(20.89)|(7.68)|(63.41)|(24.22)|(7.30)|(25.61)|(0.01)|
|Couples' Training|64.64|80.01***|7.90|149.53**|31.87|42.16***|72.86**|0.03**|
||(53.18)|(22.64)|(8.45)|(68.99)|(28.35)|(8.92)|(31.06)|(0.01)|
|Seedling Subsidy + Couples'<br>Training (beta)|264.65***|40.42*|-5.63|290.22***|202.91***|29.85***|233.12***|0.02|
|H0: Seedling Subsidy +<br>Couples' Training = 0 (p-val)|0.00|0.08|0.48|0.00|0.00|0.00|0.00|0.14|
|Observations|1424|1424|1424|1424|1424|1424|1424|1424|
|Mean for control group|432.42|123.84|38.06|607.91|212.09|30.46|242.54|0.34|
|Mean for individual training|624.88|90.67|25.54|748.13|390.08|26.14|417.71|0.63|

Robust and clustered standard errors in parentheses. All values are winsorized at 99%. * p<0.1 ** p<0.05 *** p<0.01 Note: Baseline control variables in all regressions: Age of household head, Household size, Number of adults, Number of children, Dependency ratio, Married planter, Polygamous relationship, Matrilineal ethnicity, Planter has IGA, Asset index, Credit constrained, Share of plots owned, Average distance to plots (minutes), Number of plots, Average plot size.

# **4.2 Production Outcomes**

Moving to the land under cultivation, Table 3 shows the impact of being assigned to receive a seedling subsidy and either individual or couples’ training on the household’s number of plots (five first columns) and plot area in hectares (five last columns). These outcomes are shown for all plots, rubber plots, cocoa plots, other crops plots (excluding rubber and cocoa) and fallow plots. Throughout this study, we pay close attention to cocoa production because it is the most prevalent crop on farmers’ plots (see Appendix Table 3). This makes sense: Côte d’Ivoire is the world’s largest cocoa producer (World Bank 2019).

Receiving the seedling subsidy with individual training leads to a significant decrease of 0.36 ha in cocoa plot area (a 10.8% decrease over the control mean). The couples’ training offsets this decrease, so that couples’ training farmers see no change in cocoa plots area. Being assigned to the couples’ training also leads to a significant increase in rubber plot area (14.4% increase in area compared to the control group), driven by an increase in their number of rubber plots. The area increase of 0.63 ha is the expected area needed to plant 200 additional rubber trees, so this increase in area is consistent with Table 2’s results.<sup>5</sup> The couples’ training farmers also intensify their farming, decreasing their fallow area by 0.16 ha (a 35.5% decrease compared to control group). These results confirm the higher level of investment in rubber in the couples’ training group, and that it does not come at the expense of cocoa farming.

> 5 It should be noted that due to intercropping, the increase in the total cultivated area is lower than the sum of the increases in the cultivated areas of each crop type.

1