A new study examining small-scale farming in Tanzania argues that major agricultural development initiatives, including the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), are built on flawed assumptions about how rural households make decisions. The research, led by Daniel Tobin of the University of Vermont, finds that household composition, gender dynamics, and labor constraints strongly shape how small-scale farmers allocate land and labor, factors that AGRA and similar programs routinely overlook.
Published as On Repeat? The Logic of Agricultural Modernization, the Choices of Tanzanian Small-scale Farmers, and Implications for the Second Green Revolution , the study draws on panel data from Tanzania's National Panel Survey (2014–2022) to analyze how household demographics influence agricultural labor, land use, and labor intensity. The findings challenge modernization efforts that assume farmers will readily adopt new technologies or scale up production if given access to markets and improved inputs.
"Our research shows that farmers' decisions do not follow the one-size-fits-all logic embedded in many development programs," said lead author Daniel Tobin. "Agricultural modernization has repeatedly failed when it ignores the actual priorities, constraints, and rationalities of small-scale farmers."
Gender Dynamics Often Determine Farming Outcomes
Across the study's analyses, women plot managers consistently worked more days, managed smaller plots, and demonstrated higher labor intensity compared to men. Women within women-headed households emerged as the most constrained group, with limited flexibility to adjust their labor or land use even as household size or resource availability changed.
These findings reveal deep gendered inequalities in access to land, inputs, and off-farm wage opportunities, inequalities that development initiatives often fail to address.
Labor Constraints, Not Technology Gaps, Shape Decisions
Contrary to assumptions held by many modernization programs, the study finds:
- Household labor availability, not just land or inputs, is a key driver of both land use and labor allocation.
- As households gain access to off-farm wage opportunities, land under cultivation often decreases, especially for male-headed households.
- Expanded land area correlates with more total labor but lower labor intensity, suggesting that many small-scale farmers cannot intensify production because labor, not land, is the limiting factor.
These dynamics run counter to AGRA's theory of change, which assumes farmers will intensify production through new technologies when provided the opportunity.
Historical Lessons Repeated, But Not Learned
The study situates AGRA within a century-long pattern of top-down agricultural modernization efforts, from Soviet collectivization and U.S. industrialization to Tanzania's villagization program. Despite ideological differences, these initiatives shared a modernist belief that technology and centralized planning could transform rural livelihoods.
"We see the same logic repeated over and over," Tobin explained. "Development planners imagine an ideal future farmer and design interventions to create that farmer, rather than working with real farmers."
A Call for Pragmatic, Farmer‑Centered Development
Rather than advocate for or against modernization, the authors argue for a pragmatic development approach grounded in farmers' own experiences, including their needs for risk management, household wellbeing, and flexibility in labor allocation.
The study points to historical alternatives, such as early 20th-century Germany's regionally responsive breeding and extension programs, as evidence that successful agricultural support can be built around farmer priorities rather than imposed technological visions.
Implications for the Future of Agricultural Development
As funders and policy organizations reassess the role and impact of AGRA, the study provides timely evidence that effective interventions must:
- center gender-sensitive approaches
- acknowledge labor and demographic constraints
- avoid assuming uniform farmer motivations
- engage directly with farmers to understand their priorities and decision-making
"If development efforts are to be successful both humanitarianly and ecologically, they must start by taking the viewpoints of farmers into account," Tobin said. "Not as imagined future entrepreneurs, but as they are today."
About the Authors:
Daniel Tobin is an associate professor at the University of Vermont's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, specializing in agrarian change, agricultural development, and rural livelihoods. His co-authors include researchers examining gender, labor, and the political economy of rural development.
Leland Glenna is a Professor of Rural Sociology at the Pennsylvania State University. His research focuses on the sociology of science and technology
Lizah Makombore is a PhD student at the University of Vermont's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and a Fellow at the Gund Institute for the Environment, the Institute for Agroecology, and Leadership for the Ecozoic. Her doctoral research focuses on scaling agroecology by designing just and resilient economic systems that prioritize collective wellbeing.
Travis Reynolds is an associate professor at the University of Vermont's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, specializing in agricultural development, small- and medium-scale farm viability, and food and agricultural policy.
