Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42673451›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026

Aligning private incentives with societal goals in smallholder agriculture.

Gashaw T Abate, Kaleab Baye, Tanguy Bernard, Jordan Chamberlin, Ruth Hill, Rachid Moussadek, Lamine Senghor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gashaw T AbateMarkets, Trade and Institutions Unit, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, DC 20005.ORCID 0000-0003-2026-8066
Kaleab BayeCenter for Food Science and Nutrition, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa 10001, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0001-7298-1096
Tanguy BernardInterdisciplinary, Policy-Oriented Research on Africa (IPORA) research consortium, Pessac 33600, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2554-0217
Jordan ChamberlinSustainable Agrifood Systems, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Nairobi 00100, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-9522-3001
Ruth HillMarkets, Trade and Institutions Unit, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, DC 20005.
Rachid MoussadekSoil, Water and Agronomy Team, International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Rabat 10100, Morocco.
Lamine SenghorPathology and Mycotoxin/Aflasafe Unit, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan 200001, Nigeria.

Funding

Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR) Policy Innovation Science ProgramConsortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR) Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentUniversité de Bordeaux (University of Bordeaux) IPORA (Interdisciplinary Policy Oriented Research on Africa)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Small-scale farmers in low-income countries are often encouraged to adopt new inputs and practices that generate significant societal benefits, such as improved nutrition, food safety, and environmental sustainability. The limited observability of these attributes, combined with small production scale and misaligned private incentives, leads to adoption levels below the social optimum. Addressing this issue often requires combining instruments identified by different scientific disciplines, spanning across multiple policy sectors, an exercise that is rarely articulated jointly. This paper aims to clarify this, through a simple conceptual framework that explains how farmers decide whether to adopt socially desirable inputs and practices, given the returns and costs they face, their access to financial instruments, and the information and preferences that shape their decisions. It identifies the relevant policy channels, and asks whether the social returns justify the public cost of delivering them. We apply it to three case studies: aflatoxin mitigation, biofortified crop varieties, and conservation agriculture. For each, we identify which parameters bind, which instruments can move them, and how emerging technologies may further contribute. The agenda that follows moves from seeking single-instrument fixes toward identifying the right combination of existing and emerging policy-actionable tools.

Indexed as

agri-food innovationssmallholder agriculturesustainable food systems

Identifiers

PMID42673451
PMCPMC13552890

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.