Table 5.

Description of intervention studies using experimental or quasiexperimental methods

Title	Publication year	Country region	Intervention(s) a	Practices	Method of analysis	Outcomes	Equity measure	References
Adoption of agroforestry and the impact on household food security among farmers in Malawi	2017	Malawi Sub‐Saharan Africa	Farmer capacity development Enhancing access to tree germplasm	Agrisilvicultural trees integrated in crop fields	Endogenous switching regression	Productivity (yield) Profitability Income and household expenditure Food security and nutrition	Gender Socioeconomic level Literacy/educational level	Coulibaly et al. (2017)
Agroforestry extension and dietary diversity—an analysis of the importance of fruit and vegetable consumption in West Pokot, Kenya	2016	Kenya Sub‐Saharan Africa	Farmer capacity development Enhancing access to tree germplasm	Agrosilvopastoral integrated production of animals, crops, and wood	Heckman two‐stage probit regression	Food security and nutrition	None	Bostedt et al. (2016)
Environmental‐economic benefits and trade‐offs on sustainably certified coffee farms	2017	Nicaragua Latin America and the Caribbean	Incentive provision	Agrisilvicultural trees integrated in crop fields	Propensity score matching	Reg & Main—physical, chemical, biological conditions Reg & Main—mediation of flows Reg & Main—mediation of waste, toxics and other nuisances Income and household expenditure Productivity (yield)	Literacy/educational level	Haggar et al. (2017)
Estimating the causal effect of improved fallows on farmer welfare using robust identification strategies in Chongwe, Zambia	2013	Zambia Sub‐Saharan Africa	Farmer capacity development	Agrisilvicultural improved or rotational fallow	Propensity score matching Endogenous switching regression	Productivity (yield) Profitability Income and household expenditure Food security and nutrition	None	Kuntashula and Mungatana (2013)
Evaluation of the permanence of land use change induced by payments for environmental services in Quindio, Colombia	2016	Colombia Latin America and the Caribbean	Incentive provision	Silvopastoral trees/shrubs on pasture	Difference‐in‐differences	Reg & Main—Physical, chemical, biological conditions	Socioeconomic level	Pagiola et al. (2016)
Impacts of the Hutan Kamasyarakatan social forestry program in the Sumberjaya watershed, West Lampung district of Sumatra, Indonesia	2008	Indonesia East Asia and Pacific	Incentive provision	Agrisilvicultural trees integrated in crop fields	Propensity score matching Instrumental variables	Housing and material assets Income and household expenditure	None	Pender et al. (2008)
Performance of an agro‐forestry based payments‐for‐environmental‐services project in Mozambique: a household level analysis	2011	Mozambique Sub‐Saharan Africa	Incentive provision	Agrisilvicultural trees integrated with plantation crops	Propensity score matching	Productivity (yield) Housing and material assets Income and household expenditure	Gender Socioeconomic level Literacy/educational level	Hegde and Bull (2011)
The impact of agroforestry‐based soil fertility replenishment practices on the poor in western Kenya	2005	Kenya Sub‐Saharan Africa	Farmer capacity development Community‐level campaigning and advocacy	Agrisilvicultural improved or rotational fallow	Instrumental variables	Productivity (yield) Food security and nutrition Income and household expenditure Housing and material assets	Gender Socioeconomic level Race/ethnicity Literacy/educational level	Place et al. (2005)

^a In cases where the study examined interventions with multiple components more than one intervention type is listed.