Abstract
Building resilient and sustainable food production systems is a major challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) due to environmental, climatic, and economic pressures. Farmers in the region must adopt effective adaptation strategies to maintain productivity and contribute toward achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 2, “Zero Hunger.” Among these, water scarcity adaptation strategies are critical for building resilient food systems that also address poverty reduction. However, various obstacles hinder their widespread adoption, and documentation on these strategies remains fragmented. This paper examines available water scarcity adaptation strategies, the opportunities and challenges faced by farmers, and the policy and infrastructure implications for sustainable food production. The findings highlight the essential role of Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) in adopting these strategies. IKS supports natural resource conservation, promotes inclusive market participation, strengthens institutional frameworks, and improves resource-use efficiency under climate stress. The paper recommends further research on transferring Indigenous Knowledge to future generations and exploring the role of policy in preserving and promoting IKS, especially within the SSA context. Emphasizing Indigenous Knowledge is crucial for creating sustainable, resilient agricultural systems that can thrive amid the region’s growing environmental challenges.
1. Introduction
Agricultural production in the SSA is increasingly constrained by water scarcity, which undermines yields, livelihoods, and progress toward Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) [1,2,3,4]. Climatic variability, land degradation, and limited access to reliable irrigation combine to make water the single most binding constraint for many smallholder farming systems [5,6]. Although many studies [3,7,8] discuss technical solutions such as small-scale irrigation and rainwater harvesting, as well as various policy approaches, the contribution of locally embedded responses, especially IKS, has not yet been adequately synthesized across different contexts.
The review synthesizes empirical and policy literature from 2010 to 2025 to map the full spectrum of water scarcity adaptation strategies used by farmers in SSA; to identify the enabling conditions and barriers to uptake; and highlight policy and research priorities for scaling context-appropriate solutions. Unlike prior reviews [9,10] that focus narrowly on technological interventions or single countries, this paper integrates technological, biophysical and sociocultural adaptation practices with particular attention on IKS to offer a more holistic view of how smallholder systems adapt to water scarcity. Doing so highlights under-recognized complementarities among low-cost, locally adapted practices, and modern innovations, and identifies where policy or research support can unlock greater resilience.
And thus, the paper’s novelty lies in gathering evidence on IKS, small-scale irrigation, digital climate services and institutional frameworks into a unified synthesis that explicitly examines interactions across these categories and their implications for inclusive, scalable water scarcity adaptation in SSA.
2. Water Scarcity Adaptation: Theory of Change (ToC)
This review is guided by the Theory of Change (ToC) approach to climate adaptation. The ToC provides a structured way of linking interventions to outcomes by making explicit the pathways, assumptions, and feedback through which adaptation strategies are expected to deliver resilience and long-term impact [11]. Applied to the context of agricultural water scarcity in SSA, the framework situates adaptation practices (ranging from IKS and small-scale irrigation to digital tools and institutional reforms) as the inputs or activities that initiate change. These inputs generate immediate outputs such as improved access to water, strengthened farmer knowledge, and/or the formation of water user associations, which in turn contribute to intermediate outcomes like reduced vulnerability, enhanced adaptive capacity, and strengthened governance systems.
The framework also highlights the importance of tracing these outcomes to their intended long-term impacts [12]. Ultimately, adaptation interventions are expected to improve household well-being, stabilize agricultural productivity, reduce losses from climate shocks, and promote equitable and sustainable resource use. However, the ToC outlook reminds researchers, farmers, and agricultural stakeholders that these causal chains are not automatic as they rest on specific assumptions and are subject to contextual risks. For instance, the effectiveness of irrigation assumes the availability of reliable water sources and functioning maintenance systems, while the success of digital advisory services depends on connectivity, literacy, and trust [13,14]. Similarly, the adoption of drought-tolerant crops presumes functioning seed systems and supportive markets. Through the explicit identification of these assumptions, the framework underscores the need for critical appraisal of both the evidence base and the contextual conditions that shape adaptation outcomes.
Using this theoretical framing, the review evaluates not only whether strategies exist but also how well they align with resilience theory and broader adaptation debates. Practices can be located along a range of resilience capacities which are, namely, absorptive (buffering immediate shocks), adaptive (enabling flexible responses to variability), and transformative (driving structural change in systems and institutions). Positioning strategies within this framework allows for a deeper scientific and scholarly contribution, as it shows how interventions interact across scales and where they fall short of delivering durable resilience. This theoretical grounding strengthens the analysis by linking descriptive evidence on adaptation practices to broader conceptual debates on climate resilience, while also providing a basis for identifying gaps, limitations, and priorities for future research and policy action.
3. Review of Literature
Water scarcity is a critical threat to sustainable agriculture and food systems in SSA, where farmers remain among the most vulnerable actors in the agricultural value chain. In response, farmers employ a wide range of adaptation strategies that include IKS, small-scale irrigation, rainwater harvesting, soil moisture conservation, and the cultivation of drought-resistant and indigenous crops. These strategies are reinforced by government interventions through policy frameworks, extension services, infrastructure, and the digitalization of agriculture, creating a mosaic of responses shaped by both local realities and institutional support.
Rainwater harvesting and soil moisture conservation have become indispensable in regions with sporadic rainfall. Practices such as water pans, rock catchments, and rooftop tanks are common in Kenya and Ethiopia [15,16], supported by mulching, tied ridges, and contour bunds that improve infiltration, reduce runoff, and retain soil moisture [17]. These methods offer dual benefits by enhancing crop productivity and restoring degraded ecosystems, although adoption remains uneven. Many farmers prioritize short-term food needs over long-term ecological gains [18,19], yet evidence shows that farmer-led innovation and extension support significantly increase uptake. Similarly, drought-resistant and indigenous crops such as sorghum, millet, cowpea, and amaranth offer resilience under low-water conditions [20,21] while also providing nutritional advantages [22]. Their cultural embeddedness lowers behavioral barriers to adoption, but marginalization in seed systems and markets has constrained their potential [23]. Expanding their use requires stronger seed systems, nutrition education, and market development [24].
Policy and institutional frameworks are equally vital. Kenya’s Water Act and Ethiopia’s Climate Resilient Green Economy framework illustrate national efforts to embed water security into development planning [25,26]. Regional collaborations, such as those under the Southern African Development Community (SADC), demonstrate recognition that water management must transcend political borders [27]. However, fragmented institutions, weak enforcement, and parallel statutory and customary systems undermine effective governance [28,29,30]. Without coherence and participatory governance, well-designed policies risk failing at the point of implementation.
Adaptation strategies are therefore diverse, complex, and interconnected. Their strength lies less in isolated interventions than in their complementarity, where indigenous practices, modern technologies, and institutional frameworks reinforce one another. Yet several challenges persist. Fragmented governance remains a key barrier, with overlapping mandates across government levels creating regulatory confusion and mismatched priorities [31,32]. Disconnection between statutory laws and customary rights further complicates water governance [33,34,35]. Technical and infrastructural limitations also constrain adaptation: many extension officers lack specialized training [36,37,38,39], and rural communities often lack roads, electricity, or storage facilities [40,41]. Imported technologies are sometimes poorly adapted to local contexts, leading to abandonment [42].
Financial constraints add another obstacle. Smallholders rarely afford upfront costs for water infrastructure or improved seeds [42,43], while credit facilities carry high interest rates and are poorly tailored to seasonal incomes. Markets often fail to reward climate-resilient crops [44], as staples such as maize and wheat dominate [10]. Sociocultural barriers also play a role: crops like millet and cowpea are still stigmatized as “poor man’s food” [45,46], while youth may dismiss indigenous practices as outdated [47]. Behavioral inertia further reduces willingness to adopt unfamiliar methods [48]. Climate uncertainty and environmental degradation compound these barriers, with increasingly unpredictable rainfall, droughts, and degraded ecosystems undermining adaptation measures [10,49,50].
Despite these challenges, important opportunities exist. Revitalizing indigenous knowledge and agroecological practices has gained momentum, supported by research and policy integration [51,52]. Scaling up Zai pits, mulching, and intercropping demonstrates the potential of locally adapted low-cost approaches [53]. At the same time, technological innovation and digital tools offer new opportunities. Mobile platforms provide farmers with weather forecasts, irrigation schedules, and market prices [34,54,55], while advances in solar energy, precision agriculture, and remote sensing improve water-use efficiency and monitoring [56]. Policy reform and investment momentum are also significant. Initiatives such as the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) and global climate funds increasingly channel resources into water-smart agriculture [57,58,59,60,61,62,63]. Youth engagement further enhances long-term sustainability, as younger generations are more receptive to digital technologies and climate-resilient practices [1,64,65,66]. Finally, community-based adaptation, including farmer field schools and watershed committees, strengthens ownership, accountability, and social cohesion [67,68,69].
In sum, adaptation in SSA is not a one-size-fits-all process but a dynamic, evolving set of strategies that draw on local knowledge, modern innovations, and supportive policies. The literature shows that while technical, financial, and institutional barriers persist, the opportunities created by agroecology, digital transformation, policy reforms, youth engagement, and participatory governance provide a strong foundation for building climate-resilient and equitable food systems across the region.
4. Methodology
This study made use of a systematic review guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework [70,71] to identify, select, and synthesize adaptation strategies to water scarcity in the SSA agriculture. The aim was to comprehensively map peer-reviewed and high-quality gray literature that explores both technological and indigenous adaptation approaches, their implementation contexts, and effectiveness. A systematic review was deemed appropriate due to the growing and fragmented body of literature on climate adaptation, which requires consolidation to inform policy, practice, and future research. The review adhered to the four PRISMA phases: identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion [72]. The protocol for this review was designed prior to the literature search, outlining the review objectives, inclusion/exclusion criteria, databases, and data extraction strategy to enhance transparency and reproducibility (see Figure 1 below).
Figure 1.
Flowchart indicating the inclusion criteria.
A structured and comprehensive search was conducted across six electronic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, JSTOR, FAO’s Open Knowledge Repository, and CGSpace (a repository of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)). The search string included keywords and Boolean operators such as water scarcity, drought, adaptation, resilience, agriculture, farming systems, and SSA. Literature published between January 2010, and April 2025 was included to capture both historical and contemporary adaptation insights. After removing duplicates, a total of 419 records were retrieved. Titles and abstracts were screened for relevance, after which full-text articles and reports were assessed against predefined inclusion criteria: (1) relevance to agricultural water scarcity adaptation in SSA; (2) description of adaptation strategies or enabling frameworks; and (3) empirical, theoretical, or policy-driven orientation. The studies/articles or publications reviewed in the study were broken down into theme to streamline the results as highlighted in Table 1.
Table 1.
Summary of studies included per theme and their total.
Studies focusing solely on urban or industrial water use or lacking methodological clarity were excluded to maintain a targeted synthesis of farm-level and rural community adaptation relevant to food production. This exclusion of urban or industrial water use was motivated by looking at urban water governance, infrastructure financing and demand management dynamics (such as municipal utilities, piped networks, industrial allocation) differ qualitatively from rural smallholder contexts. As such, the inclusion of urban literature would have conflated governance and technological solutions tailored to cities with those applicable to dispersed or marginalized agricultural households, weakening the review’s practical relevance to agricultural policy and extension.
However, this exclusion narrows the review’s scope and creates limitations by reducing the coverage of peri-urban cropping systems and urban agriculture (which may share hybrid features), and it omits lessons from urban water management innovations (such as large-scale stormwater capture) that could be adapted for community-level water banking.
Moreover, the data extraction was conducted using a standardized matrix capturing publication year, country or region, the type of adaptation (for example, indigenous, institutional, technological), stakeholder involvement, reported outcomes, and challenges or enablers. The final synthesis was performed using narrative and thematic analysis, with strategies grouped under six emergent categories: IKS, Small-Scale Irrigation, Rainwater Harvesting and Soil Moisture Conservation, Drought-Tolerant and Indigenous Crops, Policy and Institutional Frameworks, and Digital Tools for Climate Information Services. Cross-cutting themes such as institutional coordination, capacity constraints, and gender inclusivity were also identified. This approach ensured that both converging and diverging perspectives across the selected studies were preserved, enhancing the robustness of the findings.
5. Results and Discussion
5.1. Unpacking the Water Scarcity Adaptation Strategies in Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) faces growing water stress driven by climate change, environmental degradation, and socioeconomic pressures as mentioned in the previous sections. As rainfall patterns become more erratic and dry seasons lengthen, farming communities are turning to a range of adaptation strategies to sustain their livelihoods and food systems. Among these, locally grounded approaches rooted in IKS are emerging as essential tools for resilience. These include time-tested practices such as zai pits in Burkina Faso and the matengo system in Tanzania, which conserve water, improve soil health, and foster social cohesion [73]. However, such practices often remain overlooked in policy and development agendas.
In parallel, small-scale irrigation systems are gaining traction as affordable, decentralized alternatives to large infrastructure projects. Technologies like treadle pumps and solar kits enable farmers to extend growing seasons and diversify crops, although maintenance and water governance remain ongoing challenges [74]. Complementary strategies discussed below such as rainwater harvesting, soil moisture conservation, and conservation agriculture further enhance water use efficiency and drought preparedness. Promoting drought-tolerant and indigenous crops also reduces the water footprint of agriculture while boosting nutrition. Despite clear benefits, these approaches face barriers including labor demands, limited support, and cultural biases.
5.1.1. Indigenous Knowledge Systems an Anchor for Farmer Resilience
Indigenous Knowledge Systems are widely recognized as an important foundation for water scarcity adaptation in SSA. Practices such as Zai pits in Burkina Faso and the Matengo pits of Tanzania exemplify low-cost, context-specific techniques that enhance soil fertility, improve water infiltration, and sustain productivity in marginal environments [73]. These systems are notable for their participatory and locally embedded nature as they are often transmitted intergenerationally and require little external investment [75]. This makes them attractive for smallholders who lack access to formal irrigation or modern technologies.
Despite these strengths, the evidence base remains uneven. Much of the literature provides rich descriptive accounts of these practices but rarely evaluates outcomes with rigorous, quantitative methodologies [76,77,78]. Systematic yield measurements, cost-effectiveness comparisons, or long-term sustainability data across multiple agroecological zones is less reported. As a result, while the effectiveness of IKS is widely asserted, the quality of the supporting evidence is often anecdotal or case-specific, which limits the ability to generalize findings across the region [79].
A further limitation is the vulnerability of IKS under conditions of rapid environmental and social change [80]. Climate non-stationarity means that ecological cues historically used to forecast rainfall may no longer hold, and intergenerational knowledge transfer is weakening as younger generations migrate or adopt different livelihood strategies [81]. Moreover, IKS often remain marginalized in formal policy and extension systems, reducing their recognition and scalability. To strengthen this area, future research should employ mixed-methods evaluations that quantify agronomic outcomes while also documenting the sociocultural processes that support knowledge transmission.
5.1.2. Small-Scale Irrigation as a Decentralized Water Security Strategy
Small-scale irrigation, including treadle pumps, solar-powered drip systems, and community-managed schemes, is often highlighted as a transformative strategy for mitigating water scarcity [82]. Evidence from pilot projects and country-specific initiatives demonstrates that irrigation can extend growing seasons, enable crop diversification, and increase household income [83,84]. For many farmers, access to reliable water supply translates directly into reduced vulnerability to rainfall variability and improved food security.
However, the evidence base in the reviewed studies included in this paper is not consistently robust. While some evaluations show yield improvements and income gains, these are frequently based on small samples, case studies, or project reports with limited external validity. Few studies provide longitudinal data on system sustainability or measure potential trade-offs, such as the impact on groundwater levels or downstream water availability [85]. As a result, while irrigation appears effective in the short term, its broader environmental and social consequences remain insufficiently examined.
Contextual barriers further limit widespread adoption. The high upfront costs of pumps and drip systems often exclude the poorest households, while inadequate maintenance services and lack of spare parts lead to frequent system abandonment [86]. There is also an equity dimension as better-off farmers are typically the first to benefit, which risks widening existing socio-economic gaps. Moreover, poorly managed irrigation can result in salinization, waterlogging, or unsustainable extraction [87]. Addressing these challenges requires integrated studies that assess not only productivity but also equity and environmental sustainability, coupled with governance mechanisms to ensure fair access and long-term viability.
5.1.3. Rainwater Harvesting and Soil Moisture Conservation as Water Banking Tools
Rainwater harvesting and soil-moisture conservation techniques, such as contour bunds, rock catchments, mulching, and tied ridges, are promoted as low-cost and widely accessible solutions for managing scarce rainfall [75]. When implemented effectively, these methods improve infiltration, enhance soil water retention, and provide critical buffers during dry spells. The reviewed literature presents several examples where these interventions have led to improved crop performance and greater resilience to seasonal variability [88].
Nevertheless, the strength of the supporting evidence is variable. Much of it derives from localized case studies or programmatic reports rather than comparative, peer-reviewed evaluations [89,90,91]. In many instances, outcomes are described in general terms, such as “improved yields” or “greater resilience” without providing detailed metrics or counterfactual analyses [92,93]. This weakens the empirical basis for claiming effectiveness, especially when attempting to generalize across highly diverse agroecological contexts.
Adoption of rainwater harvesting also faces significant challenges. These practices are labor-intensive and require upfront investment, which may discourage resource-constrained households. Furthermore, their success is highly dependent on rainfall timing and distribution: if rain is delayed or fails, constructed pans and bunds provide little benefit. Long-term sustainability is also uncertain, as structures require ongoing maintenance that is not always feasible for smallholders. To address these gaps, future work should establish standardized monitoring protocols that assess water capture efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and crop yield responses under different climate scenarios.
5.1.4. Drought-Resistant and Indigenous Crops for Climate-Smart Nutrition
The promotion of drought-tolerant crops such as sorghum, millet, cowpea, and indigenous leafy vegetables has been identified as a promising strategy for coping with water scarcity [10]. These crops require less water than maize or rice, and many offers nutritional advantages that can strengthen household food security as presented in Table 2 below [25]. Studies reviewed highlight cases where smallholders who adopted these crops were less vulnerable to rainfall variability and experienced more stable production in dry years [94,95,96].
Table 2.
Nutritional benefits of indigenous and drought-tolerant African crops.
The agronomic evidence supporting drought tolerance is generally solid, but the literature reviewed often neglects the socio-economic dimensions [97,98,99]. There is limited analysis of market demand, price stability, and consumer acceptance, which are factors that strongly influence whether farmers adopt these crops beyond subsistence purposes [100]. While some projects report yields’ benefits [101,102], few assess profitability in relation to input costs, or compare returns to those of other crops under real market conditions [103,104]. Without addressing these gaps, the long-term economic viability of drought-tolerant crops remains uncertain.
Adoption is further constrained by systemic challenges as formal seed systems for indigenous crops remain underdeveloped, and many farmers rely on informal seed exchange networks, which can limit access to high-quality or improved varieties [105]. Cultural perceptions also play a role as in some communities, indigenous foods are stigmatized as “poor people’s food,” reducing market incentives [106]. Expanding adoption will therefore require not only agronomic research but also interventions along the value chain, including seed system development, consumer education, and efforts to create sustainable markets for these crops.
5.1.5. The Use of Digital Tools in Combating Water Scarcity in SSA
Digital technologies are increasingly recognized as critical enablers of agricultural adaptation in SSA, particularly in response to water scarcity [107]. Mobile phones, remote sensing platforms, and internet-based applications provide farmers with timely climate and water information that was previously inaccessible. Services such as SMS-based weather advisories and market updates (for example, Esoko in Ghana and M-Farm in Kenya) allow farmers to make informed decisions about planting dates, crop selection, and the allocation of scarce water resources [108]. Remote sensing technologies and geographic information systems (GIS) further enhance the monitoring of rainfall variability, soil moisture, and water availability at scales relevant to smallholder decision-making, offering opportunities for early warning and proactive risk management [109].
The value of these tools lies in their capacity to reduce uncertainty. Accurate short-term forecasts, combined with seasonal climate outlooks, enable farmers to adjust planting schedules and adopt water-efficient practices before water stress becomes critical. In many cases, digital tools complement IKS by combining local experiential insights with scientific data. This integration improves both the precision and the acceptance of adaptation measures. Furthermore, digital innovations can be scaled efficiently; once the necessary infrastructure is established, services can be delivered to large numbers of farmers at relatively low marginal cost [110].
Despite these advantages, the adoption and impact of digital tools remain uneven across the region. Structural barriers such as limited network coverage, low levels of digital literacy, affordability constraints, and gendered access to mobile technology often exclude the most vulnerable populations [111]. Research also shows that farmers may receive weather information but do not consistently act on it unless the information is locally relevant, easy to interpret, and provided in a trusted format [112,113]. This suggests that information provision alone is insufficient to drive behavioral change. Effective use of digital tools requires parallel investments in agricultural extension, training, and mechanisms that translate forecasts into actionable advice at the farm level.
Maximizing the contribution of digital tools to water scarcity adaptation will require deliberate attention to inclusivity and integration. Programs must be designed to accommodate linguistic, cultural, and literacy differences in order to reach diverse farming populations. Strong partnerships between governments, private providers, and local institutions are also needed to ensure trust, data reliability, and equitable access. In addition, rigorous impact evaluations are necessary to move beyond anecdotal reports and establish clear evidence of how digital services influence yields, household incomes, and water-use efficiency. Addressing these challenges will allow digital tools to progress from promising innovations to established components of climate-resilient agriculture in SSA.
5.1.6. Legislative Framework on Agricultural Water Use in SSA
- West Africa
In West Africa, the management of agricultural water resources is primarily guided by the West Africa Water Resources Policy (WAWRP), developed by Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in collaboration with West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA) and Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS) [114,115]. Adopted in 2008, this policy emphasizes integrated water resources management (IWRM) to ensure equitable access, enhance agricultural productivity, and protect ecosystems [116]. It serves as a foundational document for harmonizing national policies and promoting regional cooperation in water management.
Complementing the WAWRP, the ECOWAS Agricultural Policy (ECOWAP) addresses the challenges of food security and agricultural development in the region [117]. Revised in 2016, ECOWAP incorporates climate change considerations and aims to improve agricultural productivity through sustainable water use practices [118]. The policy framework encourages member states to adopt strategies that integrate water management with agricultural development.
At the national level, countries like Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire have enacted specific laws to regulate water use in agriculture [119,120]. These laws typically require farmers to obtain permits for irrigation and impose restrictions to prevent over-extraction of water resources. However, enforcement remains a challenge due to limited resources and capacity at the local level.
- East Africa
East Africa’s approach to agricultural water management is characterized by a mix of regional cooperation and national legislation. The East African Community (EAC), comprising Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, and South Sudan, has developed a regional framework to promote sustainable water use in agriculture [121]. This framework encourages member states to harmonize their water policies and share best practices in water management.
Nationally, countries have enacted specific laws to govern agricultural water use. For instance, Kenya’s Water Act of 2002 established the Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA) to regulate and manage water resources, including those used for irrigation [122]. Similarly, Uganda’s Water Act (Cap 152) provides for the use, protection, and management of water resources, with provisions for licensing water use in agriculture [123,124]. These laws aim to ensure that water resources are used efficiently and equitably in the agricultural sector.
Despite these legal frameworks, challenges persist in enforcement and capacity building. Inadequate infrastructure, limited technical expertise, and competing demands for water resources often hinder effective implementation of water management policies. Addressing these challenges requires strengthening institutional frameworks, improving data collection and monitoring systems, and enhancing public awareness on sustainable water use practices.
- Central Africa
In Central Africa, the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) adopted a Regional Water Policy in 2009 to promote integrated water resources management (IWRM) across member states [114]. This policy emphasizes the sustainable and equitable use of water resources, with a focus on agriculture as a key sector for development. It encourages countries to adopt national policies that align with regional objectives and to collaborate on transboundary water management.
To operationalize the regional policy, ECCAS developed the Regional Action Plan for Integrated Water Resources Management in 2014 [125]. This plan outlines strategic orientations and actions to address water-related challenges in the region, including those affecting agricultural water use [126]. It aims to enhance cooperation among member states, improve infrastructure, and promote sustainable agricultural practices.
At the national level, countries like Cameroon and the Central African Republic have established laws and institutions to manage water resources. For example, Cameroon has a Water Law that regulates the use of water resources, including for irrigation, and establishes the National Water Board to oversee water management [127]. However, implementation remains uneven, and capacity constraints at the local level impede effective management of agricultural water use.
- Southern Africa
The SADC has established a comprehensive Regional Water Policy (RWP) to guide the sustainable and equitable use of water resources across its member states [128]. Adopted in 2002, the RWP emphasizes integrated water resources management (IWRM) and highlights water as a social good essential to human dignity and well-being. It underscores the importance of prioritizing water allocation for basic human needs before considering its use for productive purposes, including agriculture.
Complementing the RWP, SADC’s Revised Protocol on Shared Watercourses (2000) provides a legal framework for the equitable and reasonable utilization of transboundary water resources [129]. This protocol is particularly pertinent in Southern Africa, where many countries share river basins such as the Zambezi, Limpopo, and Orange-Senqu [130]. The protocol facilitates cooperation among member states to manage these shared resources effectively, ensuring that agricultural water use does not compromise the needs of other sectors or countries.
At the national level, countries within the SADC region have enacted various laws and policies to regulate agricultural water use. For instance, Zimbabwe’s Water Act (1998) governs the allocation and use of water resources, including those for irrigation [131]. Similarly, Zambia’s Water Resources Management Act (2011) establishes a framework for the sustainable management of water resources, with provisions for agricultural water use [132]. These national laws are designed to align with regional frameworks, promoting consistency and cooperation in managing water resources for agriculture across the Southern African region.
5.2. Implications for Sustainable Food Production Systems in SSA
Rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, and ongoing environmental degradation are making it increasingly difficult for farmers in SSA to sustain their livelihoods. Conventional agricultural models, which depend on costly inputs and imported technologies, are proving less effective and less accessible for smallholder farmers. In response, more locally grounded and environmentally sustainable strategies are gaining traction. Adaptation approaches rooted in indigenous knowledge, which improve soil health, conserve water, and reduce reliance on external inputs, are helping farming communities become more resilient, inclusive, and productive [133].
This discussion explores four key areas where such strategies are shaping more sustainable and climate-resilient food systems. These include improving agroecological resilience, supporting inclusive economic growth, strengthening institutional support, and enhancing food and nutrition security. Collectively, these approaches offer a promising pathway for building food systems that can adapt to climate challenges while remaining rooted in local knowledge and ecological sustainability.
5.2.1. Enhancing Agroecological Resilience and Resource Efficiency
One of the most immediate implications is the strengthening of agroecological resilience. Indigenous practices, drought-tolerant crops, and soil moisture conservation techniques promote farming systems better adapted to water stress and climate variability [10]. These approaches lessen the reliance on external inputs like synthetic fertilizers and heavy irrigation resources, which are often out of reach for the majority if smallholder farmers and not always environmentally sustainable. Instead, they draw on local knowledge and available materials, which helps cut costs and minimize environmental harm. Improving soil health, encouraging biodiversity, and enhancing water retention create a strong foundation for regenerative farming systems [134]. Soils in better condition retain more moisture and nutrients, foster richer microbial life, and provide greater resilience against climate-related stress [135].
This further enables continuous cropping with less yield volatility, which is vital for communities living in chronically food-insecure regions. By improving water-use efficiency, these systems also contribute to conserving groundwater and reducing the stress on already overburdened water catchments [6]. Over time, this helps build a more stable and self-sufficient farming system less exposed to outside disruptions. Just as important, bringing indigenous knowledge back into practice restores a more profound sense of environmental responsibility [136]. When farmers rely on methods that reflect their cultural and spiritual values, they are more inclined to care for and preserve natural resources. This behavioral side of adaptation often gets overlooked, yet ensuring interventions last and truly take root is vital. Therefore, a sustainable food system is defined not only by what is produced or consumed but also by how production interacts with a place’s cultural and ecological integrity [137].
5.2.2. Promoting Inclusive Economic Growth and Market Integration
Water scarcity adaptation strategies also significantly affect rural livelihoods and inclusive economic development [135]. Small-scale irrigation and climate-resilient crops provide pathways for diversification and income generation [136]. When farmers can produce vegetables, fruits, or indigenous grains during the dry season or in water-scarce areas, they open new marketing windows and price premiums that were previously inaccessible. This seasonal production shift helps to stabilize household incomes and reduce vulnerability to food price volatility.
More importantly, these strategies directly support marginalized groups, especially women and young people. Women (who are often responsible for home gardens and small plots) gain from crops and techniques that reduce water use and lighten labor demands [137]. Likewise, many drought-tolerant crops have shorter growing seasons, making it easier to stagger planting and harvesting in ways that fit household duties or off-farm work [138]. When adaptation strategies are designed with these groups in mind, food systems become more resilient, inclusive, and productive.
Still, one of the key hurdles that remains is access to markets. The economic benefits of sustainable adaptation strategies can only be realized if enabling conditions such as transport infrastructure, market information systems, and supportive policies for local value chain development [139]. Farmers risk staying locked in subsistence farming without these supports, with little opportunity to sell their surplus or scale up. That is why sustainable food production should not be viewed in isolation as it is part of a broader development system that depends on infrastructure, access to finance, and strong institutional backing.
5.2.3. Strengthening Institutional Legitimacy and Adaptive Governance
A third point is how governance and institutional strength shape the path toward sustainable food systems [140]. When adaptation strategies are included in national policies, like agriculture, water management, or extension services, it helps to legitimize those efforts and makes it easier to scale them up. If governments recognize the importance of indigenous knowledge or put money into smallholder irrigation, it shows they are serious about inclusive, climate-resilient development [141]. That commitment builds trust and encourages more farmers to get on board.
Strong governance also helps prevent conflict. Water shortages in many parts of SSA can lead to disputes between groups, like upstream and downstream users, farmers and herders, or even neighboring villages [142]. Setting up local systems like water user groups or catchment committees creates a space for people to talk, settle disputes, and manage resources together [143]. These platforms give communities a voice, help set fair rules, and allow people to work together in managing shared water sources. It strengthens both social ties and environmental stewardship.
At the same time, digital tools and climate services are changing how people access and act on information. When farmers can get accurate weather forecasts, early warnings, or advice through mobile platforms, they can plan better and avoid some of the risks [144]. The institutions that provide these tools become more connected to the people they serve and can step in more quickly when things go wrong. Over time, these efforts do not build stronger farming systems and create institutions that can learn, adapt, and respond to the changing climate.
5.2.4. Advancing Food and Nutrition Security Under Climate Stress
The final and arguably most important point is how these adaptation strategies help ensure food and nutritional security as the climate becomes more unpredictable. By encouraging more diverse cropping systems, especially ones that include indigenous and less commonly grown crops, SSA can simultaneously tackle different aspects of malnutrition [145]. Many of these crops have higher levels of protein, vitamins, and minerals than the major staples, and they tend to fit better with local diets and food cultures [146].
Better water management through harvesting and conservation also plays a key role. It supports the growth of perishable but highly nutritious foods like leafy greens, legumes, and fruits [147]. These are often the first to disappear from household diets during dry spells simply because they require more water. Nevertheless, when water is more reliably available, families can grow and eat various foods year-round, improving nutrition and health. This has lasting effects, not just on physical growth in children but also on maternal health, brain development, and people’s ability to work productively [148].
There is also a deeper issue at play. Food security is not only about calories but about dignity and self-reliance [149,150,151,152,153,154]. When communities adapt in ways that reduce their dependence on food aid or imports, they regain some control over how they feed themselves [155]. In a region where hunger and marginalization in agriculture have been long-standing problems, bringing back traditional crops, practices, and knowledge is more than just a strategy, it is a statement. It shows that sustainability is not just about weathering the next drought. It is about restoring the ability to grow food with confidence, resilience, and pride.
5.2.5. Digital Tools and Their Effects on Improved Food Systems in SSA
The integration of digital tools into agricultural adaptation strategies has several important implications for food systems in SSA. At the production level, access to timely and localized climate and water information enables farmers to make more precise decisions about planting schedules, irrigation, and crop choices [156]. This reduces the risk of crop failure during periods of rainfall variability and promotes more efficient use of scarce water resources. Over time, such improvements in decision-making can enhance productivity and stabilize yields, which are critical foundations for food system resilience.
At the systems level, digital platforms contribute to greater connectivity between producers, markets, and institutions [157]. Mobile applications that provide price information or link farmers to buyers can strengthen value chains and reduce information asymmetries, thereby improving farm incomes and incentivizing the adoption of climate-resilient practices. In addition, digital monitoring tools support policymakers and extension agents by supplying real-time data on weather patterns, soil moisture, and water availability [158]. This strengthens institutional capacity to anticipate shocks, coordinate responses, and design evidence-based interventions.
However, the benefits of digital tools are not automatically distributed across all groups as highlighted in Figure 2 that not the entire population of SSA makes full use of digital technology. Inequalities in access to mobile technologies and digital literacy mean that women, youth, and the poorest farmers are at risk of exclusion [159]. If these disparities are not addressed, digital innovations could reinforce existing structural inequalities within food systems. Furthermore, the reliability of information and trust in its accuracy are essential for behavioral change. Without careful tailoring to local contexts, the information provided may remain underutilized, limiting the potential impact on food security.
Figure 2.
Access and use of the internet and smartphones in SSA (adapted from [160]).
Taken together, the implications of digital tools for food systems in SSA are twofold. On one hand, they present a significant opportunity to enhance productivity, strengthen value chains, and support adaptive governance, thereby advancing progress toward resilient and sustainable food systems. On the other hand, their effectiveness depends on addressing barriers of access, inclusivity, and institutional integration. Future strategies should therefore prioritize not only the technological dimension but also the social and policy frameworks that ensure digital tools contribute to equitable and climate-resilient food systems in the region.
5.2.6. Summary
While this review identified a wide range of adaptation strategies ranging from IKS to small-scale irrigation and emerging digital tools, it is equally important to interrogate their effectiveness and constraints. Evidence [91,161,162] suggests that rainwater harvesting, and small-scale irrigation can improve yields and buffer seasonal variability, but their success is contingent on sustained maintenance, capital investment, and access to local markets. Studies often highlight positive yield gains yet under-report issues of equity in the context of wealthier households being more likely to afford pumps or storage tanks, while poorer farmers may be excluded from such benefits [163,164].
Similarly, IKS offer context-appropriate, low-cost practices such as early warning through ecological indicators or seed preservation, but their effectiveness can be undermined by rapid environmental change, erosion of intergenerational knowledge transfer, and limited formal recognition in policy frameworks. Conversely, digital climate services are celebrated for their potential to democratize access to timely weather information, yet their adoption remains uneven due to digital divides in literacy, affordability, and infrastructure.
This highlights a critical gap in literature because while strategies are well documented, systematic evaluations of outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and scalability across diverse agro-ecologies are limited. Few studies [165,166,167,168,169] compare interventions head-to-head, and many rely on case studies with small samples. This constrains our ability to generalize which strategies are most resilient or cost-effective under specific contexts.
6. Conclusions
In conclusion, this review demonstrates that farmers across Sub-Saharan Africa employ a diverse portfolio of strategies to cope with water scarcity, ranging from long-standing indigenous knowledge practices to emerging digital innovations. The study’s originality lies in synthesizing these responses into a unified framework that cuts across technological, sociocultural, and institutional domains, while explicitly linking them to adaptation theory.
Despite the breadth of strategies, evidence quality remains uneven and often based on small-scale case studies without the rigorous evaluation of effectiveness. This limits the ability of policymakers to prioritize interventions. As such, the review identifies three critical gaps: (i) insufficient comparative analysis of costs, scalability, and long-term outcomes; (ii) under-exploration of digital and institutional innovations compared to traditional practices; and (iii) weak integration of adaptation practices into national policy frameworks.
Actionable recommendations emerge from this synthesis:
- Research should invest in longitudinal studies and comparative evaluations that measure both technical outcomes and social equity impacts.
- Policy should create enabling environments that validate and integrate Indigenous Knowledge alongside modern technologies, with attention to gender and youth inclusivity.
- For the practical application of water adaptation strategies, blended approaches that combine low-cost, farmer-driven adaptations with institutional support and digital innovations should be implemented.
Thus, through the articulation of these contributions, this review not only consolidates existing knowledge but also charts clear pathways for future inquiry and policy action toward resilient, water-secure agriculture in SSA.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, M.Z.S. and M.T.M.; methodology, T.I.M.; validation, M.Z.S. and M.T.M.; formal analysis, M.Z.S.; investigation, T.I.M.; resources, M.Z.S.; data curation, M.Z.S.; writing—original draft preparation, M.T.M.; writing—review and editing, T.I.M., M.Z.S. and M.T.M.; supervision, M.Z.S.; project administration, M.T.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
The APC was funded by the University of Mpumalanga.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
No new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Acknowledgments
During the preparation of this manuscript/study, the author(s) used Perplexity.ai (free version), Grammarly (business subscription), and ChatGPT (version 5) for the purposes of English grammar editing, idea generation, and paper/articles/literature identification. The authors have reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
| SSA | Sub-Saharan Africa |
| IKS | Indigenous Knowledge Systems |
| AVC | Agricultural Value Chain |
| SADC | Southern African Development Community |
| CAADP | African Union’s Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme |
| PRISMA | Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses |
| JSTOR | Journal Storage |
| FAO | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations |
| CGspace | Digital Library of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research |
| CGIAR | Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research |
| WAWRP | West Africa Water Resources Policy |
| ECOWAS | Economic Community of West African States |
| IWRM | Integrated Water Resources Management |
| UEMOA | West African Economic and Monetary Union |
| CILSS | Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel |
| ECOWAP | Economic Community of West African States Agricultural Policy |
| EAC | East African Community |
| WRMA | Water Resources Management Authority |
| ECCAS | Economic Community of Central African States |
| RWP | Regional Water Policy |
References
- Morepje, M.T.; Agholor, I.A.; Sithole, M.Z.; Mgwenya, L.I.; Msweli, N.S.; Thabane, V.N. An analysis of the acceptance of water management systems among smallholder farmers in Numbi, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa. Sustainability 2024, 16, 1952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chavula, P.; Kayusi, F. Challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa’s food systems and the potential role of AI. LatIA 2025, 3, 318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giller, K.E. The food security conundrum of sub-Saharan Africa. Glob. Food Secur. 2020, 26, 100431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sithole, M.Z.; Agholor, A.I. Assessing the adoption of conservation agriculture towards climate change adaptation: A case of Nkomazi, Mpumalanga Province. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Agriculture, Online, 19–20 August 2021; TIIKM Publishing: Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2022; Volume 6, pp. 68–80. Available online: https://tiikmpublishing.com/proceedings/index.php/agrico/article/view/874 (accessed on 24 June 2025).
- Mabuza, M.; Ndoro, J.T. Borich’s needs model analysis of smallholder farmers’ competence in irrigation water management: Case study of Nkomazi Local Municipality, Mpumalanga Province in South Africa. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morepje, M.T.; Agholor, I.A.; Sithole, M.Z.; Msweli, N.S.; Thabane, V.N.; Mgwenya, L.I. Examining the barriers to redesigning smallholder production practices for water-use efficiency in Numbi, Mbombela Local Municipality, South Africa. Water 2024, 16, 3221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayanlade, A.; Oluwaranti, A.; Ayanlade, O.S.; Borderon, M.; Sterly, H.; Sakdapolrak, P.; Jegede, M.O.; Weldemariam, L.F.; Ayinde, A.F. Extreme climate events in sub-Saharan Africa: A call for improving agricultural technology transfer to enhance adaptive capacity. Clim. Serv. 2022, 27, 100311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ongoma, V.; Brouziyne, Y.; Bouras, E.H.; Chehbouni, A. Closing yield gap for sustainable food security in sub-Saharan Africa—Progress, challenges, and opportunities. Front. Agron. 2025, 7, 1572061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ndlovu, M.; Scheelbeek, P.; Ngidi, M.; Mabhaudhi, T. Underutilized crops for diverse, resilient and healthy agri-food systems: A systematic review of sub-Saharan Africa. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2024, 8, 1498402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Msweli, N.S.; Agholor, I.A.; Morepje, M.T.; Sithole, M.Z.; Nkambule, T.B.; Thabane, V.N.; Mgwenya, L.I.; Nkosi, N.P. Optimizing water conservation in South Africa’s arid and semi-arid regions through the cultivation of indigenous climate-resilient food crops. Sustainability 2025, 17, 1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bours, D.; McGinn, C.; Pringle, P. Guidance Note 3: Theory of Change Approach to Climate Change Adaptation Programming. In Guidance Note 3: Theory of Change Approach to Climate Change Adaptation Programming. SEA Change CoP and UKCIP. 2014, pp. 2–12. Available online: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f932e933-8bcd-4203-a39b-27b462753952 (accessed on 2 October 2025).
- Bagagnan, A.R.; Berre, D.; Webber, H.; Lairez, J.; Sawadogo, H.; Descheemaeker, K. From typology to criteria considered by farmers: What explains agroecological practice implementation in North-Sudanian Burkina Faso? Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2024, 8, 1386143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monamodi, P.; Ndoro, J.T.; Matiwane, M.B. The Impact of Innovative Irrigation System Use on Crop Yield Among Smallholder Farmers in Mbombela Local Municipality, South Africa. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boujdi, S.; Ezzahri, A.; Bouziani, M.; Yaagoubi, R.; Kenny, L. A benchmarking study of irrigation advisory platforms. Digital 2024, 4, 425–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yusuf, I.; Sanusi, A. Reliability and performance optimization of solar-powered water irrigation system for rural small-scale farming. Int. J. Appl. Comput. Math. 2025, 11, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldwin, G.L.; Stwalley, R.M., III. Opportunities for the scale-up of irrigation systems in Ghana, West Africa. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nyika, J.; Dinka, M.O. Water Challenges in Rural and Urban Sub-Saharan Africa and Their Management; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roba, N.T.; Kassa, A.K.; Geleta, D.Y.; Hishe, B.K. Achievements, Challenges and Opportunities of Rainwater Harvesting in the Ethiopia Context: A Review. Water Suppl. 2022, 22, 1611–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ndekezi, M.; Kaluli, J.W.; Home, P.G. Performance Evaluation of Sand Dams as a Rural Rainwater Conservation and Domestic Water Supply Technology in East-African Drylands, a Case-Study from South-Eastern Kenya. Cogent Eng. 2023, 10, 2163572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walia, S.S.; Kaur, K.; Kaur, T. Soil and Water Conservation Techniques in Rainfed Areas. In Rainfed Agriculture and Watershed Management; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2024; pp. 115–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mizik, T. Climate-Smart Agriculture on Small-Scale Farms: A Systematic Literature Review. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ricart, S.; Gandolfi, C.; Castelletti, A. What Drives Farmers’ Behavior under Climate Change? Decoding Risk Awareness, Perceived Impacts, and Adaptive Capacity in Northern Italy. Heliyon 2025, 11, e41328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuo, W.H.J.; Chung, C.L.; Juang, K.W.; Tung, C.W.; Liu, L.Y.D. Challenges to Agriculture Production under Climate Change. In Agricultural Nutrient Pollution and Climate Change: Challenges and Opportunities; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; pp. 29–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sukanya, T.S.; Kumar, A.; Sathya, K.; Narayanan, A.L.; Kishore, K.; Shyam, M.; Nag, N.K.; Chaithra, C. Millet Based Cropping Systems for Enhanced Productivity. In Genetic Improvement of Small Millets; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2024; pp. 63–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mgwenya, L.I.; Agholor, I.A.; Ludidi, N.; Morepje, M.T.; Sithole, M.Z.; Msweli, N.S.; Thabane, V.N. Unpacking the Multifaceted Benefits of Indigenous Crops for Food Security: A Review of Nutritional, Economic and Environmental Impacts in Southern Africa. World 2025, 6, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farooq, M.; Rehman, A.; Li, X.; Siddique, K.H. Neglected and Underutilized Crops and Global Food Security. In Neglected and Underutilized Crops; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2023; pp. 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kennedy, G.; Wang, Z.; Maundu, P.; Hunter, D. The Role of Traditional Knowledge and Food Biodiversity to Transform Modern Food Systems. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 130, 32–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koehler, J.; Nyaga, C.; Hope, R.; Kiamba, P.; Gladstone, N.; Thomas, M.; Mumma, A.; Trevett, A. Water Policy, Politics, and Practice: The Case of Kitui County, Kenya. Front. Water 2022, 4, 1022730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bisare Bitire, B. Appraisal of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Regulatory Frameworks in Ethiopia and Their Congruency with the UN Climate Change Convention. Int. J. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag. 2023, 15, 638–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mndzebele, D. An Investigation of the Impact of Agricultural Extension Services on the Productivity of Smallholder Farmers in Swaziland; Selinus University of Sciences and Literature: London, UK, 2022; Available online: https://uniselinus.co.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Dumsani%20Mndzebele.pdf (accessed on 24 June 2025).
- Puplampu, K.P.; Patrick, H.O.; Ofori, B.D. Natural Resources Management, Sovereign Wealth Fund, and the Green Economy: Digitalization, Policies, and Institutions for Sustainable Development in Africa. In Sustainable Development, Digitalization, and the Green Economy in Africa Post-COVID-19; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 125–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mbatha, P. Unravelling the perpetuated marginalization of customary livelihoods on the coast by plural and multi-level conservation governance systems. Mar. Policy 2022, 143, 105143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geyer, H.S., Jr. Conflicts and synergies between customary land use management and urban planning in informal settlements. Land Use Pol. 2023, 125, 106459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morepje, M.T.; Sithole, M.Z.; Msweli, N.S.; Agholor, A.I. The influence of E-commerce platforms on sustainable agriculture practices among smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anadozie, C.; Fonkam, M.; Cleron, J.P. Assessing mobile phone use in farming: The case of Nigerian rural farmers. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2022, 14, 418–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Namasani, M. Linking Local Climate Change Institutional Coordination to Climate Change Adaptation Among Smallholder Farmers in Mkushi District, Zambia. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia, 2022. Available online: https://dspace.unza.zm/items/5bae1132-c151-43a1-9ca3-82b4c2425ea9 (accessed on 24 June 2025).
- Adom, R.K.; Simatele, M.D. The role of stakeholder engagement in sustainable water resource management in South Africa. In Natural Resources Forum; Blackwell Publishing Ltd.: Oxford, UK, 2022; Volume 46, pp. 410–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abegaz, D.M. The Enabling Environment to Scale Water and Irrigation Solutions and Services in Ethiopia. 2022. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dagmawi-Abegaz/publication/370547517_The_enabling_environment_to_scale_water_and_irrigation_solutions_and_services_in_Ethiopia/links/64550bfa5762c95ac3764831/The-enabling-environment-to-scale-water-and-irrigation-solutions-and-services-in-Ethiopia.pdf (accessed on 24 June 2025).
- Getnet, M.; Anantha, K.H.; Garg, K.K.; Barron, J.; Amede, T. Scaling-up water management interventions for rainfed agriculture in the Ethiopian Highlands: Status, issues, and opportunities. In Rainfed Systems Intensification and Scaling of Water and Soil Management: Four Case Studies of Development in Family Farming; Department of Soil and Environment, SLU: Uppsala, Sweden, 2023; pp. 79–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Senbeta, R. Assessing the impact of small-scale irrigation on food security in Gorogutu District, Ethiopia. J. Policy Options 2023, 6, 12–19. [Google Scholar]
- Adom, R.K.; Simatele, M.D.; Das, D.K.; Mukalazi, K.A.; Sonwabo, M.; Mudau, L.; Sithole, M.; Kubanza, S.; Vogel, C.; Zhou, L. Enhancing climate change adaptation governance through transforming institutions in Kwa-Zulu Natal Province, South Africa. Int. J. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag. 2024, 16, 413–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antwi-Agyei, P.; Stringer, L.C. Improving the effectiveness of agricultural extension services in supporting farmers to adapt to climate change: Insights from Northeastern Ghana. Clim. Risk Manag. 2021, 32, 100304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osumba, J.J.; Recha, J.W.; Oroma, G.W. Transforming agricultural extension service delivery through innovative bottom–up climate-resilient agribusiness farmer field schools. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Defrance, D.; Lescure, T.; Sultan, B. Bridging Research, Policy, and practice: A Meta-Analysis of 56 Climate Adaptation Studies in Nigerian Agriculture. Center for Open Science, No. p8nb6_v1. 2025. Available online: https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/p8nb6_v1.html (accessed on 25 June 2025).
- Aruleba, K.; Jere, N. Exploring digital transforming challenges in rural areas of South Africa through a systematic review of empirical studies. Sci. Afr. 2022, 16, e01190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raj, S.; Roodbar, S.; Brinkley, C.; Wolfe, D.W. Food security and climate change: Differences in impacts and adaptation strategies for rural communities in the global south and north. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022, 5, 691191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suri, T.; Udry, C. Agricultural technology in Africa. J. Econ. Perspect. 2022, 36, 33–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balana, B.B.; Mekonnen, D.; Haile, B.; Hagos, F.; Yimam, S.; Ringler, C. Demand and supply constraints of credit in smallholder farming: Evidence from Ethiopia and Tanzania. World Dev. 2022, 159, 106033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morepje, M.T. Redesigning Production Systems for Water-Use Efficiency Amongst Smallholder Farmers at Numbi, South Africa. Master’s Dissertation, University of Mpumalanga, Mbombela, South Africa, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jayasinghe, S.; Byrne, N.M.; Hills, A.P. Cultural influences on dietary choices. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2025, 90, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parihar, M.A.N.; Kumar, A.M.I.T.; Bisht, J.K.; Bhinda, M.S.; Shyamnath, R.P.M.; Mondal, T.I.L.A.K.; Joshi, D.C.; Bijarniya, H.I.T.E.S.H.; Singh, S.; Kant, L. Reviving the forgotten food network of potential crops to strengthen nutritional and livelihood security in North-Western Himalayas. Indian J. Agron. 2021, 66, S44–S59. [Google Scholar]
- Ucel, C. Rethinking Modern Agriculture: Essays on Farmers, Productivity and the Environment. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2022. Available online: https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/80eb6280-a35e-4773-8cfe-2497fdb9e432 (accessed on 25 June 2025).
- Manning, L. Innovating in an uncertain world: Understanding the social, technical and systemic barriers to farmers adopting new technologies. Challenges 2024, 15, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ishaque, W.; Zia ur Rehman, M. Impact of climate change on water quality and sustainability in Baluchistan: Pakistan’s challenges in meeting United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (UNSDG) number 6. Sustainability 2025, 17, 2553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bayata, A. Soil degradation: Contributing factors and extensive impacts on agricultural practices and ecological systems—Systematic review. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2024, 13, 16–34. Available online: https://jaes.thebrpi.org/journals/jaes/Vol_13_2024/3.pdf. (accessed on 7 October 2025).
- Ghorbani, M.; Eskandari-Damaneh, H.; Cotton, M.; Ghoochani, O.M.; Borji, M. Harnessing indigenous knowledge for climate change-resilient water management—Lessons from an ethnographic case study in Iran. Clim. Dev. 2021, 13, 766–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mbah, M.; Johnson, A.T.; Chipindi, F.M. Institutionalizing the intangible through research and engagement: Indigenous knowledge and higher education for sustainable development in Zambia. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 2021, 82, 102355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anukwonke, C.; Okonkwo, A. Leveraging Climate-Smart Agriculture and Indigenous Knowledge for Sustainable Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa: Policy and Practice Insights. FESCON Conf. Proc. 2025, 5, 277–293. Available online: https://ajer.org.ng/index.php/fescon-proceedings/article/view/169 (accessed on 10 September 2025).
- Mujeyi, A.; Mujeyi, K. Digitalization options for scaling Climate Smart Agriculture in smallholder farming systems: Lessons and opportunities. FARA Res. Rep. 2023, 7, 10–21. Available online: https://library.faraafrica.org/storage/2023/04/FRR-Vol-7410-21.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2025).
- Kansiime, M.K.; Mugambi, I.; Rware, H.; Alokit, C.; Aliamo, C.; Zhang, F.; Latzko, J.; Puyun, Y.; Karanja, D.; Dannie, R. Challenges and capacity gaps in smallholder access to digital extension and advisory services in Kenya and Uganda. Front. Agric. Sci. Eng. 2022, 9, 642–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oiganji, E.; Igbadun, H.; Amaza, P.S.; Lenka, R.Z. Innovative technologies for improved water productivity and climate change mitigation, adaptation, and resilience: A review. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag. 2025, 29, 123–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, Z. Worlds Apart: The Fairness Dimension of Securitisation Narratives in the Climate Change and Foreign Investment Context. In European Yearbook of International Economic Law; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelakis, A.; Manioudis, M.; Koskina, A. The political economy of green transition: The need for a two-pronged approach to address climate change and the necessity of “science citizens”. Economies 2025, 13, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.J. Government policies and greenhouse gas emissions: A comparative analysis of high- and low-income nations in the context of the Paris Agreement. Int. J. Res. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2025, 6, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diallo, M.; Wouterse, F. Agricultural development promises more growth and less poverty in Africa: Modelling the potential impact of implementing the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme in six countries. Dev. Policy Rev. 2023, 41, e12669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kibugi, R. Assessment of the African Union, FAO, and UNCCD Roles in Enhancing Soil Governance in Africa through the Lens of Agriculture Policy Actions. In International Yearbook of Soil Law and Policy 2020/2021; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 225–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bayala, J.; Ky-Dembele, C.; Dayamba, S.D.; Somda, J.; Ouédraogo, M.; Diakité, A.; Chabi, A.; Alhassane, A.; Bationo, A.B.; Buah, S.S.; et al. Multi-actors’ co-implementation of climate-smart village approach in West Africa: Achievements and lessons learnt. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 637007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dev, P.; Khandelwal, S.; Yadav, S.C.; Arya, V.; Mali, H.R.; Poonam. Climate based smart agriculture: Need for food security and sustainability. Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change 2023, 13, 224–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woldegiorgis, M.M. Drivers of demographic dividend in sub-Saharan Africa. Rev. Evol. Political Econ. 2023, 4, 387–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkis-Onofre, R.; Catalá-López, F.; Aromataris, E.; Lockwood, C. How to properly use the PRISMA Statement. Syst. Rev. 2021, 10, 117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sohrabi, C.; Franchi, T.; Mathew, G.; Kerwan, A.; Nicola, M.; Griffin, M.; Agha, M.; Agha, R. PRISMA 2020 statement: What’s new and the importance of reporting guidelines. Int. J. Surg. 2021, 88, 105918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kihara, J.; Mkiza, M.; Mutambu, D.; Kinyua, M.; Mwangi, O.; Bolo, P.; Liben, F.; Abera, W. Soil health challenges in sub-Saharan Africa: Status and solutions. Grow. Afr. 2023, 1, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angom, J.; Viswanathan, P.K. Irrigation technology interventions as potential options to improve water security in India and Africa: A comparative review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kugedera, A.T.; Nyamadzawo, G.; Mandumbu, R.; Nyamangara, J. Potential of field edge rainwater harvesting, biomass transfer and integrated nutrient management in improving sorghum productivity in semi-arid regions: A review. Agrofor. Syst. 2022, 96, 909–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kugedera, A.T.; Kokerai, L.K. Effects of in situ rainwater harvesting and cattle manure to improve sorghum yield. Int. J. Agric. Agribus. 2019, 2, 243–248. [Google Scholar]
- Caggiano, H.; Weber, E.U. Advances in qualitative methods in environmental research. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2023, 48, 793–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogello, E.; Ogindo, H.; Outa, N.; Muthoka, M.; Pokupec, D.; Borec, A.; Ombok, B.; Aila, F.; Kiggundu, N.; Nakavuma, J.; et al. A synthesis of agroecology indicator frameworks and application for East Africa. CABI Agric. Biosci. 2025, 6, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gardeazabal, A.; Lunt, T.; Jahn, M.M.; Verhulst, N.; Hellin, J.; Govaerts, B. Knowledge management for innovation in agri-food systems: A conceptual framework. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2023, 21, 303–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mbah, M.; Ajaps, S.; Molthan-Hill, P. A systematic review of the deployment of indigenous knowledge systems towards climate change adaptation in developing world contexts: Implications for climate change education. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bueno de Mesquita, C.P.; White, C.T.; Farrer, E.C.; Hallett, L.M.; Suding, K.N. Taking climate change into account: Non-stationarity in climate drivers of ecological response. J. Ecol. 2021, 109, 1491–1500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mabhaudhi, T.; Dirwai, T.L.; Taguta, C.; Kanda, E.K.; Nhamo, L.; Cofie, O. A systematic review of irrigation development and agricultural water management in Mali. In Enhancing Water and Food Security Through Improved Agricultural Water Productivity: New Knowledge, Innovations and Applications; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; pp. 299–340. [Google Scholar]
- Bjornlund, H.; Parry, K.; van Rooyen, A.; Pittock, J. Institutional and technological innovations for sustained change in smallholder irrigation schemes in southern and eastern Africa. Agric. Water Manag. 2025, 309, 109330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olarewaju, O.O.; Fawole, O.A.; Baiyegunhi, L.J.; Mabhaudhi, T. Integrating sustainable agricultural practices to enhance climate resilience and food security in sub-Saharan Africa: A multidisciplinary perspective. Sustainability 2025, 17, 6259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Vos, L.; Biemans, H.; Doelman, J.C.; Stehfest, E.; van Vuuren, D.P. Trade-offs between water needs for food, utilities, and the environment—A nexus quantification at different scales. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 115003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Negera, M.; Dejen, Z.A.; Melaku, D.; Tegegne, D.; Adamseged, M.E.; Haileslassie, A. Agricultural productivity of solar pump and water harvesting irrigation technologies and their impacts on smallholder farmers’ income and food security: Evidence from Ethiopia. Sustainability 2025, 17, 1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hagage, M.; Abdulaziz, A.M.; Elbeih, S.F.; Hewaidy, A.G.A. Monitoring soil salinization and waterlogging in the northeastern Nile Delta linked to shallow saline groundwater and irrigation water quality. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 27838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- TAAT Clearinghouse. Climate-Smart Agriculture Technologies for the Sahel and Horn of Africa; Clearinghouse Technical Report Series 009; Clearinghouse Office IITA: Nairobi, Kenya, 2021; Volume 5, p. 167. [Google Scholar]
- Gee, K.D.; Sojka, S. Maximizing the benefits of rainwater harvesting systems: Review and analysis of selected case study examples. In Resilient Water Management Strategies in Urban Settings: Innovations in Decentralized Water Infrastructure Systems; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 77–117. [Google Scholar]
- Ndeketeya, A.; Dundu, M. Maximising the benefits of rainwater harvesting technology towards sustainability in urban areas of South Africa: A case study. Urban Water J. 2019, 16, 163–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Umukiza, E.; Ntole, R.; Chikavumbwa, S.R.; Bwambale, E.; Sibale, D.; Jeremaih, Z.; Apollonio, C.; Petroselli, A. Rainwater harvesting in arid and semi-arid lands of Africa: Challenges and opportunities. Acta Sci. Pol. Formatio Circumiectus 2023, 22, 41–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chisadza, B.; Gwate, O.; Musinguzi, S.P.; Mpofu, N.; Macherera, M.; Dube, T. Resilient agriculture in semi-arid Zimbabwe: Adaptation strategies and influencers among smallholder farmers. Discov. Agric. 2025, 3, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, R.; Rallapalli, S.; Magner, J. Optimizing water-efficient agriculture: Evaluating the sustainability of soil management and irrigation synergies using fuzzy extent analysis. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 29382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalele, D.N.; Ogara, W.O.; Oludhe, C.; Onono, J.O. Climate change impacts and relevance of smallholder farmers’ response in arid and semi-arid lands in Kenya. Sci. Afr. 2021, 12, e00814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bedeke, S.B. Climate change vulnerability and adaptation of crop producers in sub-Saharan Africa: A review on concepts, approaches and methods. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 25, 1017–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ariom, T.O.; Dimon, E.; Nambeye, E.; Diouf, N.S.; Adelusi, O.O.; Boudalia, S. Climate-smart agriculture in African countries: A review of strategies and impacts on smallholder farmers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yahaya, M.A.; Shimelis, H.; Nebié, B.; Mashilo, J.; Pop, G. Response of African sorghum genotypes for drought tolerance under variable environments. Agronomy 2023, 13, 557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nkomo, G.V.; Sedibe, M.M.; Mofokeng, M.A. Production constraints and improvement strategies of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.) genotypes for drought tolerance. Int. J. Agron. 2021, 2021, 5536417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soumare, A.; Diedhiou, A.G.; Kane, A. Bambara groundnut: A neglected and underutilized climate-resilient crop with great potential to alleviate food insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa. J. Crop Improv. 2022, 36, 747–767. [Google Scholar]
- Castellini, G.; Romanò, S.; Merlino, V.M.; Barbera, F.; Costamagna, C.; Brun, F.; Graffigna, G. Determinants of consumer and farmer acceptance of new production technologies: A systematic review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2025, 9, 1557974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gebre, G.G.; Rahut, D.B.; Aryal, J.P.; Mawia, H. Potential impact of scaling adaptation strategies for drought stress: A case of drought-tolerant maize varieties in Tanzania. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2023, 21, 2189396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Njinju, S.M.; Gweyi, J.O.; Mayoli, R.N. Drought-resilient climate-smart sorghum varieties for food and industrial use in marginal frontier areas of Kenya. In Agriculture, Livestock Production and Aquaculture: Advances for Smallholder Farming Systems; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; Volume 2, pp. 33–44. [Google Scholar]
- Kamara, A.Y.; Oyinbo, O.; Manda, J.; Kamara, A.; Idowu, E.O.; Mbavai, J.J. Beyond average: Are the yield and income impacts of adopting drought-tolerant maize varieties heterogeneous? Clim. Dev. 2024, 16, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Willy, D.K.; Macharia, I.; Marechera, G.; Muinga, G.; Mugo, S.; Rotich, R.; Oniang’o, R.K.; Karanja, J.; Obunyali, C.O.; Oikeh, S.O. Economic impact of DroughtTEGO hybrid maize in Kenya. J. Dev. Agric. Econ. 2021, 13, 215–226. [Google Scholar]
- Leakey, R.R.; Tientcheu Avana, M.L.; Awazi, N.P.; Assogbadjo, A.E.; Mabhaudhi, T.; Hendre, P.S.; Degrande, A.; Hlahla, S.; Manda, L. The future of food: Domestication and commercialization of indigenous food crops in Africa over the third decade (2012–2021). Sustainability 2022, 14, 2355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Imathiu, S. Neglected and underutilized cultivated crops with respect to indigenous African leafy vegetables for food and nutrition security. J. Food Secur. 2021, 9, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zondo, W.N.S.; Ndoro, J.T.; Mlambo, V. The adoption and impact of climate-smart water management technologies in smallholder farming systems of sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic literature review. Water 2024, 16, 2787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Institute of Tropical Agriculture; CGIAR Excellence in Agronomy Initiative. Agronomy Solution Profile for ES-OKO: Ghana Digital Sustainable Soybean Production Advisory Tool; CGIAR: Rome, Italy, 2025; Available online: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ecb0beda-27fd-4dff-ac9f-7fbe9e02b233/content (accessed on 2 October 2025).
- Katkani, D.; Babbar, A.; Mishra, V.K.; Trivedi, A.; Tiwari, S.; Kumawat, R.K. A review on applications and utility of remote sensing and geographic information systems in agriculture and natural resource management. Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change 2022, 12, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferdinand, T.; Illick-Frank, E.; Postema, L.; Stephenson, J.; Rose, A.; Petrovic, D.; Migisha, C.; Fara, K.; Zebiak, S.; Siantonas, T.; et al. A Blueprint for Digital Climate-Informed Advisory Services: Building the Resilience of 300 Million Small-Scale Producers by 2030; Working Paper No. 20; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2021; p. 116623. [Google Scholar]
- Raihan, M.M.; Subroto, S.; Chowdhury, N.; Koch, K.; Ruttan, E.; Turin, T.C. Dimensions and barriers for digital (in)equity and digital divide: A systematic integrative review. Digit. Transform. Soc. 2025, 4, 111–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Király, G.; Vágó, S.; Bull, E.; Cruyssen, L.V.D.; Arbour, T.; Spanoghe, P.; van Dijk, L. Information behaviour of farmers, foresters, and advisors in the context of digitalisation in the EU. Stud. Agric. Econ. 2023, 125, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rigby, J.M.; Preist, C.; Lutta, A.; Wasonga, O.; Michaelides, K.; Singer, M. Mobile phones in the drylands: How technology supports community information sharing in rural Kenya. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCAS/SIGCHI Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies (COMPASS), Online, 22–25 July 2025; pp. 167–183. [Google Scholar]
- Dirwai, T.L.; Kanda, E.K.; Senzanje, A.; Busari, T.I. Water resource management: IWRM strategies for improved water management—A systematic review of case studies of East, West and Southern Africa. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0236903, Erratum in PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0304228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Commission. West Africa Water Resources Policy. 2008. Available online: https://afwasakm.afwasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PREAO_-_West_Africa_Water_Resources_Policy_EN.pdf (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- Ako, A.A.; Eyong, G.E.T.; Nkeng, G.E. Water resources management and integrated water resources management (IWRM) in Cameroon. Water Resour. Manag. 2010, 24, 871–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nwozor, A.; Olanrewaju, J.S. The ECOWAS agricultural policy and the quest for food security: Assessing Nigeria’s implementation strategies. Dev. Stud. Res. 2020, 7, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bamoi, A.G.A.; Yilmaz, H. A multi-perspective analysis of agricultural policies in West Africa: Policy strategies for rethinking sustainable agricultural development. J. Glob. Innov. Agric. Sci. 2021, 9, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Government of Ghana, Ministry of Water Resources, Works and Housing. National Water Policy; Government of Ghana: Accra, Ghana, 2007. Available online: https://www.gwcl.com.gh/national_water_policy.pdf (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- World Bank. Côte d’Ivoire: Agriculture Sector Support Project; Independent Evaluation Group, Project Performance Assessment Report 178814; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2023; Available online: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099306303292311596/pdf/SECBOS07377729088095ef0a5be24a0e30d.pdf (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- Tramberend, S.; Burtscher, R.; Burek, P.; Kahil, T.; Fischer, G.; Mochizuki, J.; Greve, P.; Kimwaga, R.; Nyenje, P.; Ondiek, R.; et al. Co-development of East African regional water scenarios for 2050. One Earth 2021, 4, 434–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanda, E.; Taragon, J.; Waweru, S.; Kimokoti, S. The Water Act 2002 and the Constitution of Kenya 2010: Coherence and conflicts towards implementation. Int. J. Disaster Manag. Risk Reduct. 2013, 5, 31–40. [Google Scholar]
- Uganda Government. The Water Act, Cap 152. 2018. Available online: https://data.unhcr.org/ar/documents/details/64629 (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- Jackline, A. Public water and waste management in Uganda: The legal framework, obstacles and challenges. KAS Afr. Law Study Libr. 2021, 7, 642–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Global Water Partnership Central Africa. GWP-CAf and ECCAS Assess Implementation of SDG 6.5.1 in Central Africa. 2023. Available online: https://www.gwp.org/en/GWP-Central-Africa/WE-ACT/news/gwp-caf-and-eccas-assess-implementation-of-sdg-6.5.1-in-central-africa/ (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- COMIFAC. ECCAS-Regional Validation Workshop of the Regional Action Plan for Integrated Water Resources Management in Central Africa; COMIFAC: N’Djamena, Chad, 2013; Available online: https://archive.pfbc-cbfp.org/events_en/events/ECCAS-RAC-en.html?month=201307 (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- Global Water Partnership Central Africa. Cameroon Reaffirms Its Commitment to Water Access Through Its National Water Policy. 2025. Available online: https://www.gwp.org/en/GWP-Central-Africa/WE-ACT/news/cameroon-reaffirms-its-commitment-to-water-access-through-its-national-water-policy/ (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- Southern African Development Community (SADC). Regional Water Policy; SADC Secretariat: Gaborone, Botswana, 2005; Available online: https://www.sadc.int/sites/default/files/2021-08/Regional_Water_Policy.pdf (accessed on 3 October 2025).
- Kaniaru, W. The role of international law in promoting transboundary freshwater governance: The UN Watercourses Convention and the Revised SADC Water Protocol. S. Afr. J. Int. Aff. 2021, 28, 583–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moseki, M.C. Mainstreaming climate change into transboundary river basins: A SADC regional case study. In Climate Change and Water Resources in Africa: Perspectives and Solutions Towards an Imminent Water Crisis; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 433–458. [Google Scholar]
- Mukonavanhu, T.; Ukwandu, D.; Nel-Sanders, D. Commercialisation of water supply in Zimbabwe and its effects on the poor: A working framework. Afr. Public Serv. Deliv. Perform. Rev. 2021, 9, 536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lehner, B.; Katiyo, L.; Chivava, F.; Sichingabula, H.M.; Nyirenda, E.; Rivers-Moore, N.A.; Paxton, B.R.; Grill, G.; Nyoni, F.; Shambok-Mbale, B.; et al. Identifying priority areas for surface water protection in data-scarce regions: An integrated spatial analysis for Zambia. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2021, 31, 1998–2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kom, Z.; Nethengwe, N.S.; Mpandeli, S.; Chikoore, H. Indigenous knowledge indicators employed by farmers for adaptation to climate change in rural South Africa. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2023, 66, 2778–2793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadiq, F.K.; Anyebe, O.; Tanko, F.; Abdulkadir, A.; Manono, B.O.; Matsika, T.A.; Abubakar, F.; Bello, S.K. Conservation agriculture for sustainable soil health management: A review of impacts, benefits and future directions. Soil Syst. 2025, 9, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babaniyi, G.G.; Ibrahim, F.; Akor, U.J.; Daramola, O.E. Regenerative agriculture for food security. In Prospects for Soil Regeneration and Its Impact on Environmental Protection; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 227–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Imran; Ortas, I. Mechanism in soil health improvement with soil microbial actions and its role in potential agriculture. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2025, 56, 2066–2087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walker, E.; Jowett, T.; Whaanga, H.; Wehi, P.M. Cultural stewardship in urban spaces: Reviving Indigenous knowledge for the restoration of nature. People Nat. 2024, 6, 1696–1712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uhlenbrook, S.; Yu, W.; Schmitter, P.; Smith, D.M. Optimising the water we eat—Rethinking policy to enhance productive and sustainable use of water in agri-food systems across scales. Lancet Planet. Health 2022, 6, e59–e65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mpatlise, R. Feminine Impact of Water Scarcity on Rural Livelihoods. Master’s Thesis, National University of Lesotho, Roma, Lesotho, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Karri, V.; Nalluri, N. Enhancing resilience to climate change through prospective strategies for climate-resilient agriculture to improve crop yield and food security. Plant Sci. Today 2024, 11, 21–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agarwal, B. Women and technological change in agriculture: The Asian and African experience. In Technology and Rural Women; Routledge: London, UK, 2022; pp. 67–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voss, R.C. On- and non-farm adaptation in Senegal: Understanding differentiation and drivers of farmer strategies. Climate Dev. 2022, 14, 52–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, L. Toward resilient agriculture value chains: Challenges and opportunities. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2021, 30, 666–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patay, D.; Ravuvu, A.; Iese, V.; Wilson, D.; Mauli, S.; Maelaua, J.; Reeve, E.; Farmery, A.; Farrell, P.; Johnson, E.; et al. Catalysing sustainable development through regional food system governance: Strengthening the translation of regional food system policy guidance to national level in the Pacific. Sustain. Dev. 2024, 32, 1261–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baidoo, A.A. Bridging Traditional Knowledge and Agricultural Policy in Climate Change Adaptation in Ghana. Ph.D. Thesis, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK, 2025. [Google Scholar]
- Safari, S.N.; Wambua, P.P. Water scarcity role on violent conflicts amongst pastoralist communities in Tiaty Sub-County, Baringo County Kenya. Rev. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2024, 5, 137–163. [Google Scholar]
- Lema, M.W. Sustaining rural livelihoods through participatory water governance: A review of community-driven water resource management models in East and Central Africa. Environ. Qual. Manag. 2025, 34, e70023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamati, W.K. An Interactive Near Real-Time Early Warning Agricultural System for Northern Farmers in Namibia. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Mendi, G.; Matiwane, M. Determinants of the Barriers Preventing Smallholder Farmers from Adopting Conservation Agriculture in Hazyview, Mpumalanga, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Agric. Ext. 2025, 53, 20–38. [Google Scholar]
- Mijena, D.F.; Alamerew, S.; Assefa, K.; Nigusse, M. Indigenous and underutilized crops significance in food and nutritional security in the face of climate change: The case of Anchote. Ethiop. J. Crop Sci. 2024, 12, 15–38. [Google Scholar]
- Mir, M.A.; Bhat, M.A.; Gani, A.; Malik, F.A.; Rather, A.R.; Bashir, Z. Introduction to neglected and underutilized crops. In Neglected and Underutilized Crops; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2025; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogwu, M.C.; Izah, S.C.; Ntuli, N.R.; Odubo, T.C. Food security complexities in the global south. In Food Safety and Quality in the Global South; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2024; pp. 3–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fitzpatrick, C.; Chapman, A.; Harding, S. Social policy in a political vacuum: Women’s experiences of hunger during the Cost-of-Living Crisis in Northern Ireland. Soc. Policy Adm. 2025, 59, 221–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danso-Abbeam, G.; Ogundeji, A.A.; Asale, M.A.; Baiyegunhi, L.J. Effects of livestock ownership typology on household food security in rural Lesotho. GeoJournal 2024, 89, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anandi, G.Z.; Azis, A.A. Addressing hunger in South Africa: Food aid and food security programs for needy communities. Eduvest J. Univ. Stud. 2024, 4, 1088–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lakhiar, I.A.; Yan, H.; Zhang, C.; Wang, G.; He, B.; Hao, B.; Han, Y.; Wang, B.; Bao, R.; Syed, T.N.; et al. A review of precision irrigation water-saving technology under changing climate for enhancing water use efficiency, crop yield, and environmental footprints. Agriculture 2024, 14, 1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ochinanwata, C.; Igwe, P.A.; Radicic, D. The institutional impact on the digital platform ecosystem and innovation. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2024, 30, 687–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neubauer, S. The place of data in precision agricultural data asset management. Inst. Adm. J. Adm. Sci. 2021, 1, 52–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meskele, D.Y.; Shomore, M.W.; Adi, K.A. A review on harvesting rainwater for agricultural production in the rain-fed region, Ethiopia: Challenges and benefits. Sustain. Water Resour. Manag. 2023, 9, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hackfort, S. Patterns of inequalities in digital agriculture: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ngango, J.; Hong, S. Adoption of small-scale irrigation technologies and its impact on land productivity: Evidence from Rwanda. J. Integr. Agric. 2021, 20, 2302–2312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onyancha, E.O. Effect of Farmer’s Participation and Perception of NGO Interventions on Household Food Security in Kenya. Ph.D. Dissertation, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Juja, Kenya, 2024. Available online: http://ir.jkuat.ac.ke/handle/123456789/6362 (accessed on 2 October 2025).
- Dyer, J.; Shapiro, J. Pumps, prosperity and household power: Experimental evidence on irrigation pumps and smallholder farmers in Kenya. J. Dev. Econ. 2023, 163, 103034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdou, D.M.S.; Rajab, M.M.I. Water stress and sustainability challenges: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. World Water Policy 2023, 9, 893–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ofori, S.A.; Cobbina, S.J.; Obiri, S. Climate change, land, water, and food security: Perspectives from Sub-Saharan Africa. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 680924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Ittersum, M.K.; Alimagham, S.; Silva, J.V.; Adjei-Nsiah, S.; Baijukya, F.P.; Bala, A.; Chikowo, R.; Grassini, P.; de Groot, H.L.; Nshizirungu, A.; et al. Prospects for cereal self-sufficiency in sub-Saharan Africa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2025, 122, e2423669122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffmann, R.; Wiederkehr, C.; Dimitrova, A.; Hermans, K. Agricultural livelihoods, adaptation, and environmental migration in sub-Saharan drylands: A meta-analytical review. Environ. Res. Lett. 2022, 17, 083003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogunbode, T.O.; Oyebamiji, V.O.; Oyelami, A.A.; Akinkuolie, T.A.; Adekiya, A.O.; Ifabiyi, P.I. Assessing water security in Sub-Saharan Africa in the context of climate change threats: A case study. Int. J. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag. 2025, 17, 805–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Msweli, N.S.; Agholor, I.A.; Sithole, M.Z.; Morepje, M.T.; Thabane, V.N.; Mgwenya, L.I. The determinants and acceptance of climate smart agriculture practices in South Africa. Afr. J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev. 2024, 24, 24591–24610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).