No Lean Season
Location
Bangladesh
Sector
Migration
Type of Investment
Grant
Project Stage
Terminated
Length of Investment
2017-2019
Investment Overview
Evidence Action specialised in scaling cost effective development interventions. The No Lean Season programme offered low income agricultural works subsidies as an incentive to migrate to take up work in urban areas during famine seasons.
The Development Challenge
Policies aimed at reducing overall poverty often disregard the impact of seasonal changes. Standard poverty statistics do not consider seasonal hunger in the official data collection and analysis and there is no direct way to determine how many of the worlds poorest people suffer from seasonal hunger. Data from the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) in 2015 indicates that globally, roughly 300 million of the worlds rural poor suffer from seasonal hunger. Seasonal hunger often occurs between planting and harvest in agrarian economies. During this time, rural families, particularly the landless poor who supply agricultural labour on others farms, experience hunger as their food stock dwindles and the demand for agricultural labour falls.
The Innovation
Evidence Action's No Lean Season offered subsidies (grants or no-interest loans) to low income agricultural workers as an incentive to migrate during the famine season to urban areas where higher wages can be earned. This intervention was supported by a series of randomised evaluations carried out between 2008 and 2014. These demonstrated large and persistent welfare gains for families at risk of famine from the take up of seasonal migration for employment.
Our Investment
GIF provided a $2,571,210 grant to rigorously test the No Lean Season at large scale (up to 90,000 subsidies) programme in Bangladesh, and undertake piloting and early stage rigorous testing at a smaller scale in Indonesia. GIF’s grant was used to cover approximately 50% of the total costs of these activities through mid-2019. Our grant complemented yearly funding provided by Good Ventures.
Progress to date
The programme was supported by a series of randomised control trials (RCTs) carried out in Bangladesh between 2008 and 2014 that demonstrated a persistent impact on the take up of seasonal migration for employment and welfare gains for families at risk of famine. This included an increase in caloric intake of 550-700 calories per person per day and an increase in consumption and expenditure of 30-35% per person per month. The impact of the programme was partly self sustaining, as re-migration rates of targeted households remained higher in subsequent years even in the absence of additional incentives.
However, the 2017 RCT found that the programme did not have the desired impact on inducing migration.
Further, in January 2019, GIF was notified by Evidence Action of the tragic deaths of people who may have travelled with No Lean Season programme subsidies in Bangladesh. Separately, Evidence Action subsequently made us aware of alleged financial impropriety with regards to the programme operations in Bangladesh. In line with our internal processes, GIF immediately suspended and withheld further funding of the No Lean Season programme. Evidence Action appointed independent legal firms to undertake investigations into these incidents, and shared the findings with GIF.
Evidence Action took the decision to terminate the programme in 2019. This decision is explained in this blog post from Evidence Action.
No Lean Season in numbers
Increase in calorific intake per person per day during RCTs in Bangladesh
People food insecure globally
No Lean Season Completion Report
Introduction
Globally, approximately 795 million people are food insecure, of which about 600 million are rural poor. Half of these people, about 300 million, are estimated to suffer from seasonal hunger. No Lean Season was a programme that sought to increase food consumption and income of poor rural households by offering small travel subsidies (grants or no-interest loans) to low-income agricultural workers, enabling them to migrate during the period of the year when the demand for agricultural wage labour falls and prices rise in rural areas.
Use of GIF Funds
GIF’s funding supported three sets of activities of the No Lean Season programme:
Rigorous testing at scale in Bangladesh;
Piloting of the programme and rigorous testing at small scale in Indonesia;
Associated global strategy and management costs.
GIF’s grant of $2,571,210 was used to cover approximately 50% of the total costs of these activities through mid-2019. Our grant complemented yearly funding provided by Good Ventures.
Objectives
To scale up the implementation in Bangladesh to disburse at least 30,000 travel subsidies by end-2017, working toward 90,000 subsidies conditional on positive results from a large scale randomised controlled trial, and to build a viable operating model for delivering the programme in Indonesia.
In Bangladesh, attempt disbursement of at least 30,000 travel subsidies by end-2017 and develop sufficient capacity to disburse at least 90,000 travel subsidies if results of the RCT are positive.
Evaluate the impact of the programme in Bangladesh on income and consumption and generate lessons on impact of programme at scale.
Build a viable operating model for delivering the programme in Indonesia and pilot the disbursement of travel subsidies to at least 1,000 people.
Evaluate the impact of the pilot programme in Indonesia on income and consumption and generate lessons on the applicability of the programme to that context.
Develop Global Strategy to explore the best possible model for scaling-up and long-term funding.
Impact to Date
The programme was supported by a series of randomised control trials (RCTs) carried out in Bangladesh between 2008 and 2014 that demonstrated a persistent impact on the take-up of seasonal migration for employment and welfare gains for families at risk of famine. This included an increase in caloric intake of 550-700 calories per person per day and an increase in consumption and expenditure of 30-35% per person per month. The impact of the programme was partly self-sustaining, as re-migration rates of targeted households remained higher in subsequent years even in the absence of additional incentives.
However, the 2017 RCT found that the programme did not have the desired impact on inducing migration. The findings of this RCT and some hypotheses on the reasons for the lack of impact on migration are discussed in this blog post from Evidence Action.
The programme was terminated in 2019. This decision is explained in this blog post from Evidence Action.