The impacts of integrating microfinance with agricultural extension on seasonal food insecurity: Evidence from a high-frequency panel survey in Uganda

• Neither microfinance alone nor bundled with agricultural extension reduces food insecurity. • Dietary diversity fell during harvest and lean seasons in the bundled group. • Rigid loan repayment misaligns with agricultural cash flows, limiting program synergies. We study the impact of bundling microfinance with farming extension services on seasonal food security in rural Uganda. Using an experimental design, we monitor seasonal changes through a monthly panel spanning two years. We find that neither the combined approach nor standalone microfinance reduced food insecurity across seasons. Conversely, households in both treatment groups experienced declines in dietary diversity during harvest and land preparation seasons. Exploratory analysis suggests that the bundled approach offered sporadic benefits only to households with better market access, while standalone credit appeared to constrain dietary choices for the poorest. We attribute these results to a structural mismatch: the inflexible repayment schedule of the microfinance product likely discouraged agricultural investment, preventing the intended synergies. Our findings imply that for bundled interventions to succeed, financial products must be flexible enough to match the cash flows of the complementary agricultural activities.