Exploring the Plausibility of Inoculated Cowpeas as a Climate Adaptation Strategy for Namibian Smallholder Farmers

Abstract

Increased cultivation of cowpeas is a possible adaptation option for Namibian farmers under changing climatic conditions. Using inoculated cowpeas can potentially double the yields under favorable climate conditions. But is such a potentially beneficial agricultural adaptation technique likely to be adopted? We surveyed 90 cowpea farmers from 30 villages in the Kavango region of northern Namibia on their households and farms, access to institutions and services, food consumption and preferences, and perceptions of climate change. Our survey reveals that smallholder farmers will not readily adopt the new technology. At most, about 50% of farmers can be convinced by new information to change their agricultural activities. When specifically asked about their willingness to grow inoculated cowpeas, almost all farmers responded that they would be willing to do so. However, the farmers are reluctant to allocate more land for cowpea cultivation, mainly because harvesting is very time and labor-intensive. The study shows that technology assessments should be conducted in combination with socio-economic assessments to realistically assess the potential success of proposed adaptation measures, as the extent to which a new technology may be adopted is an essential indicator for justifying funding of new technologies or adaptation programs.

1. Introduction

Climate change poses a serious threat to agriculture and food security. Rising average temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and an increase in extreme weather events threaten agricultural production and contribute to malnutrition [1,2,3]. Africa is one of the world’s regions most affected by climate change impacts. Southern Africa is expected to experience a decrease in precipitation associated with a high risk of drought [4,5]. Rural communities in the semi-arid areas of southern Africa are particularly vulnerable to such climate changes, as they rely predominantly on rain-fed agriculture and pastoralism for their livelihoods [6,7].

Adaptation to climate change is thus central to strengthening the resilience of rural communities [5,8,9,10]. The need for adaptation is becoming increasingly urgent as the likelihood of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as agreed to in the Paris Climate Agreement, diminishes [11,12]. In a recent global stocktake of climate change adaptation measures actually implemented worldwide, Berrang-Ford et al. [13] find that drought and precipitation variability are considered the most critical climate hazards in Africa against which adaptation measures are already being taken. Individuals or households were identified as the most important actors who implement respective measures.

Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is a key approach to adapting agricultural systems to support food security under climate change [14]. Agroecological and conservation agriculture practices, such as no-tillage or reduced tillage, crop residue retention, or the use of new crop varieties that are more resilient to drought, emerging pests, and diseases, can thereby increase the resilience of agricultural systems under climate change in Africa [5,15,16]. However, as African smallholder farmers tend to rely on coping responses rather than transformative and sustainable adaptation [5,17,18], the question arises as to what factors influence their adoption of new measures.

In Namibia, smallholder farmers face low soil fertility and already low precipitation levels [19]. To improve food security, the Namibian government plans to increase the domestic production of plant protein [20]. Namibian farmers, however, consider their current cowpea production to be inadequate and blame this mainly on local varieties [21]. Improved legumes are a possible option to adapt to the climate change-induced precipitation decreases [22]. The use of inoculated cowpeas in Namibian agriculture provides the potential to up to double yields in the near future, i.e., in the period 2030–2050 [23]. An open question in this context is how plausible it is that Namibian smallholder farmers will adopt improved seeds as an adaptation measure to climate change.

Research on the potential of new technologies has a long and multidisciplinary history in science. Technology assessments usually relate to two principal questions: (1) What are the benefits, costs, and risks of new technologies? (2) Why would or should actors adopt new technologies? Answers to the first question include technical, geographic, economic, and environmental assessments of primary or direct, and secondary or indirect impacts. For example, primary (direct) impacts of agricultural technologies may include increased productivity and increased commodity supply. Secondary (indirect) impacts may include market price adjustments, environmental and social externalities, and their feedback on adaptation decisions. Answers to the question of the impacts are usually quantitative answers and involve engineering, economics, environmental sciences, and geography. Engineering studies focus on technical efficiencies without considering costs or actor preference [24]. The results of such studies yield the technical potential and may be extrapolated to larger regions using geographic information systems. However, variations in the original assessment scale can lead to substantial differences in impact projections [25]. Furthermore, the extent to which new technology may be adopted is an essential indicator for justifying private or public funding of new technologies or adaptation programs. A continued stakeholder participation and effective knowledge management are key factors for successful adaptation strategies (https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-resilience/the-big-picture/introduction, last accessed 14 November 2024).

To assess the potential success of new adaptation measures in agriculture, it is necessary to understand farmers’ local knowledge, as well as their positions and attitudes toward adopting new measures, management, or technologies. Our overarching research question thus is the following: Are potentially feasible agricultural adaptation techniques also plausible? This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of the opportunities and barriers for Namibian smallholder farmers to adopt inoculated seeds as a possible adaptation to reduced precipitation under climate change. To this end, we surveyed Namibian cowpea farmers about their farm management; their access to institutions, information, goods, and services; their food consumption and food preferences; their perceptions of climate change; and their potential use of inoculated cowpea seeds. The findings of this research provide experts and policy makers with valuable information for the necessary development of tailored and suitable climate change adaptation measures for smallholder farmers in southern Africa and beyond.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Region

In Namibia, arable farming is mainly practiced in the extreme North of the country, where rainfall is more abundant than in the dry middle and Southern parts. We therefore conducted our survey in the Kavango region of Namibia (Figure 1). Climatically, the region is classified as semi-arid, with a mean annual rainfall of 550 mm and average maximum temperatures above 30 °C in summer [26]. The rainy season usually starts in late October/early November and is followed by a cool to warm period from April to September [27]. The soil texture in the region is predominantly sandy with a low water-retention capacity [28]. The staple crops grown in the region are mainly pearl millet, sorghum, and maize, with smaller shares of cowpeas, groundnuts, and Bambara nuts [21]. In the Kavango regions, cowpeas are usually intercropped with pearl millet. Cowpea is primarily cultivated for human consumption.

2.2. Farmer Survey

The survey was conducted from August to October 2019 in combination with a conservation agriculture project, where the soil fertility on more than 100 smallholder farms was measured. All participating smallholder farmers grow cowpea, among other crops. To balance available resources for interviews with the requirements for statistical power, we chose a sample size of 90 survey participants, who were randomly selected from the pool of participating farms. Both open-ended and closed questions were compiled for the questionnaire, which consisted of six sections with questions on (1) the socio-economic profile of the farmers; (2) household information; (3) farm information; (4) farmers’ access to institutions, information, and goods and services; (5) food consumption and food preferences; and (6) farmers’ perceptions of climate change and their general situation. The farmers were interviewed using a printed questionnaire; responses were later entered into an Excel file for further analysis. Participation in the survey was voluntary, all farmers gave explicit verbal consent to the interviewer before the first survey question was asked and were assured of the anonymity of their data. All data were handled confidentially. Approval for the study was granted by the Ethics Screening Committee of the Faculty of Health, Natural Resources, and Applied Sciences of the Namibia University of Science and Technology. Participation was voluntary, and each participant was assured beforehand that data confidentiality would be maintained. The interview started only after their verbal agreement to participate. A list of all questions asked in the questionnaire pertaining to this study is provided in Appendix A. Declarative data on adoption intentions obtained through the questionnaire may be affected by a hypothetical bias, whereby respondents’ expressed intentions may be higher than their actual future behavior.

3. Results

3.1. General Farmer and Farm Characteristics and Assets

Of the 90 farmers surveyed, 70 were from Kavango East and 20 from Kavango West. Their ages ranged from 28 to 77, with a mean of 47 years; 46% of the 90 interviewees were male, 54% female; 69% lived in joint families, 31% in nuclear families. On average, four children younger than 15 years lived in the families (range 0–15), four adults aged 15–65 (range 0–13), and no adults older than 65 (range 0–2). The interviewees’ residence time in their home villages ranged from 3 to 66 years, with an average of 31 years. The farmers’ education level ranged from illiterate (8%) to higher secondary school (11%), with 48% having finished primary school and 33% having finished secondary school.

The average monthly income of the interviewees ranged from NAD 100 to 7000, with a mean of NAD 1088 (

Table 1. Income, desired income, and prosperity.

	Unit	Mean	Min	Max
Monthly income	NAD	1088	100	7000
Estimated income needed to run household normally	NAD	3383	500	30,000
Needs of family met currently	%	37	5	75

), of which on average 32% came from farming, 34% from wages, 1.6% from livestock, 19% from other business, and 66% from government subsidies such as disability support or payments under the Harambee Prosperity Project. They estimated that they would need an average of NAD 3383 per month to run their household normally (NAD 500–30,000), and that their current income can cover just over one-third (37%) of their family’s basic needs (5–75%). The major living expenses in the last month where on average NAD 576 (NAD 0–1800) for food, NAD 234 (NAD 0–3000) for education, NAD 118 (NAD 0–1000) for clothing, NAD 36 (NAD 0–800) for travel, NAD 36 (NAD 0–600) for housing, and NAD 25 (NAD 0–300) for health care. A total of 69% of farmers said they could put aside some savings each year, while 31% could not; 97% of the farmers kept savings at home, 36% had a bank account, 37% had a debit card, and 2% had a credit card.

The average land holding of the farmers was 4.2 ha, with a range of 1–20 ha. Most farmers rated the fertility of their land as high (41%) or average (41%), 18% as low, and no farmers considered their soil fertility to be very high or very low. The interviewed farmers have been practicing agriculture for 20 years on average (3–47 years). On average, two of the family members work full-time on the farm (1–7), and two work part-time (0–8). 100% of the surveyed farmers practiced traditional agriculture, 82% animal husbandry, 18% horticulture, and 2% agro-forestry. 81% of the farmers owned poultry, 76% cattle, 72% goats, 38% donkey(s), 7% pig(s), 3% horse(s), and 1% sheep. None of the farmers owned a tractor, 12% owned a car, 14% a drawn cart, and 71% some other kind of vehicle, like a boat. Other farm assets included ploughs (owned by 94% of farmers), cattle sheds (76%), poultry houses (22%), pigsties (9%), wells (2%), and drip irrigation (1%).

A total of 97% of the 90 farmers received agriculture-related assistance: 96% received seeds, 80% received training, 64% received fertilizers, and 64% received farming tools. Crop insurance, help with irrigation, or support prices were not offered to the farmers. The seeds the farmers planted last season were acquired from NGOs by 94% of the farmers, from the previous year’s crop by 72%, from the government by 62%, from traders by 11%, from neighbors also by 11%, and from seed companies by 1%. A total of 63% of the surveyed farmers had heard about inoculant-treated seeds, 98% of the 90 farmers would be willing to plant inoculant-treated seeds if it increased their yields, and 92% would pay more for inoculant-treated seeds if it increased their yields. This high level of stated willingness primarily reflects interest in the potential benefits of the technology, but as subsequent findings on land allocation show, this does not translate directly into a willingness to significantly expand cowpea acreage.

The most commonly grown staple food crops of the surveyed farmers were millet, maize, sorghum, wheat, and cowpeas, with 77% of farmers reporting using fertilizer on a regular basis. Of the five staple food crops, only millet, maize, and cowpeas were fertilized, and only millet received mineral fertilizer in addition to manure (

Table 2. Key figures of crops grown by surveyed farmers. Data were only considered from those farmers who grow the specific crop.

	Cowpea	Maize	Millet	Sorghum	Wheat
Mean (median) yield [kg/ha]	239 (150)	366 (300)	1299 (1200)	177 (150)	400 (400)
Range of yields [kg/ha]	50–3000	100–1350	350–3000	25–400	50–750
Crop fertilized? [% farmers]	3	6	63	0	0
Mean (median) fertilizer application rate [kg/ha]	3 (0)	6 (0)	23 (25)	-	-
Range of fertilizer application rates [kg/ha]	0–100	0–150	0–250	-	-
Fertilizer type	Manure	Manure	NPK, NPK+urea Manure	-	-
Field tilled? [% farmers]	100	99	100	22	2
Own use [% of yield]	74	80	77	78	100
Sale [% of yield]	26	20	23	22	0

). On average, the farmers use three-quarters of the yields themselves, and only one-quarter is sold (Table 2).

A total of 96% of farmers stated that their main objective in farming was to sustain their families’ livelihoods, 2% wanted to maintain current yield levels, and another 2% had no specific goal. Of the 90 farmers, 82% indicated they could meet their family’s nutritional needs. For non-vegetarian foods, the majority of farmers (56%) consumed beef and milk products, 51% consumed poultry, 42% fish, 3% pork, and 2% eggs. The main cereal/vegetable foods were millet (100%), cowpeas (100%), groundnuts (100%), and maize (99%), followed by sorghum (34%) and wheat (3%).

3.2. Cowpeas

All surveyed farmers grow cowpeas on their farms and regularly consume them. A total of 62% of farmers prefer to eat white cowpeas, 6% prefer black cowpeas, and 2% prefer brown cowpeas, with 17% stating that their preference depends on the dish, and 13% do not care. When asked what challenges prevented the farmers from planting cowpeas on a larger area, nearly 70% responded that harvesting cowpeas was very time-consuming and labor-intensive (

Table 3. What challenges prevent you from dedicating more land to cowpea production?

Answers	#	%
Harvesting cowpeas is very time and labor-intensive	62	69
Insects, goats, and wild animals (Kudus, Springbok) feed on or destroy cowpeas	17	19
There is no market/demand for cowpeas	14	16
Cowpeas have a short storability and get easily damaged	12	13
There is not enough land for both cowpeas and other, more popular staple crops	10	11
Cowpeas are difficult and labor-intensive to weed	9	10
There is a lack of resources (labor, machinery)	9	10
Cowpeas in large quantities attract insect pests	3	3
It is too dry for cowpeas	2	2
It is difficult to preserve some seeds for next season	1	1
There are no challenges	1	1

).

3.3. Accessibility and Access to Information for Farmers

A total of 42% of the surveyed farmers are members of a religious institution, 40% are in their village council, 31% belong to a farmers’ association, but none are members of a farmers’ cooperative. A total of 70% of the farmers regularly receive news about new farming knowledge or technology, 18% infrequently, and 3% not at all (9% did not answer the question). A total of 87% of farmers receive information from agricultural extension services, 53% from NGOs (GIZ), 31% from the Namibia Nature Foundation (NNF), 26% from universities, 22% from neighbors, 3% from the state department of agriculture, and 3% from private companies. A total of 84% of farmers have altered something about their agricultural activities in the last decade due to new information, while 16% have not (

Table 4. Agricultural activities farmers have adapted or adopted in the last decade due to new information.

Answers	#	%
Change from heavy tillage to minimum/conservation tillage	44	49
Maintaining proper planting densities by planting in rows instead of random	19	21
Change from monoculture to crop rotation or intercropping	17	19
No change	14	16
Use of fertilizer before planting	10	11
Early planting	2	2
Weed control	1	1
More horticultural products	1	1

). The surveyed farmers have access to a variety of institutions, machinery, and services (

Table 5. Access to and use of agricultural assets.

	Access		Use
	#	%	#	%
New seed varieties	89	99	89	99
Farm tools	79	88	79	88
Extension services	72	80	70	78
Weather forecasts	42	47	35	39
Seasonal forecasts	28	31	25	28
Market information	22	24	8	9
Machines	17	19	16	18
Agricultural credit	5	6	4	4
Post-harvest processing	1	1	1	1
Soil testing	1	1	0	0
Crop insurance	0	0	0	0

). The numbers show that most farmers make use of the assets they have access to.

3.4. Farmers’ Assessment of Climate Change

The participating farmers were asked to rate the following statements on a scale of 1 to 5 (1: strongly agree, 2: agree, 3: neutral, 4: disagree, 5: strongly disagree) to assess their perception of climate change.

• I have observed unusual climate events in the last 10–15 years.
• Climate change is manmade.
• I am concerned about climate change and will contribute to fighting it.
• I am aware about climate change.
• I have felt the need to change my agricultural decisions because of climate change.
• Climate change is real and is currently happening.

Nearly all farmers stated that they are aware of and concerned about climate change, that they believe climate change is real and currently happening, and that they feel the need to change their agricultural decisions because of climate change (Figure 2). There is less consensus on whether climate change is manmade: 40% of the respondents stated that they disagree or strongly disagree, and 34% are neutral. Only 24% of farmers have observed unusual climate events in the last 10 to 15 years.

4. Discussion

Numerous scientific studies have assessed agricultural adaptation measures in response to climate change [29]. An increasing number of these investigations integrate biophysical, technical, and economic approaches to evaluate the potential net benefits of adaptation strategies [30]. While this interdisciplinary approach bridges natural sciences, engineering, and economics, it often overlooks a crucial element: the perspectives and opinions of farmers themselves. This oversight creates a significant gap between theoretical assessments and practical implementation, leaving uncertainty about the real-world viability of adaptation measures that have been positively evaluated in academic contexts.

This study aimed to assess the real-world feasibility of climate change adaptation measures that previous research has identified as potentially beneficial for farmers. Specifically, we focused on the adoption of inoculated cowpeas, a measure that earlier studies have evaluated through biochemical experiments [31] and biophysical simulations [23]. To achieve our objective, we surveyed farmers’ willingness to use inoculated cowpea seeds and assessed the factors influencing their adoption decisions.

The surveyed farmers were generally open to utilizing new or improved farming methods and technologies. The survey showed that farmers with access to agricultural assets, such as new seed varieties, farm tools and machinery, seasonal weather forecasts, or extension services, usually took advantage of them. The survey also revealed that over 80% of farmers have changed their farming practices based solely on new information, even without new assets. While this number relates to the general willingness of the farmers to adapt to a changing situation, the survey also showed that more specific adaptation measures, i.e., the change from heavy tillage to minimum/conservation tillage, have only been adopted by a maximum of fifty percent of the farmers so far. It is thus unclear if all farmers who express a willingness to adopt new technologies will actually implement them if the opportunity arises.

While we could not find a significant statistical model to explain the farmers’ decision to change something about their farming activities due to new information, other studies were able to do so. Jamil and Jun [32] found that in Punjab, Pakistan, education, access to credit, farming experience, and access to extension services determined the rate of adoption of agricultural adaptation methods. In a study in Nepal, it was age and education of the household head, family size, income sources, access to credit and extension services, number of plots cultivated, previous experience with climate change, access to climate information, acceptance of climate change, and belief in adaptation [33]. Farming experience, education, and receiving climate information were also the most important determinants of climate change adaptation in a study in Kenya [34]; and in a study in Northern Uganda it was household size, access to agricultural information from NGOs, perception of future changes in climate, number of years resident in the village, and asset index [35]. The studies show that the most common factors of adoption/non-adoption of adaptive measures seem to be access to information/extension services, education, and farming experiences, followed by access to credit and perception of climate change.

We found that potential barriers to adoption start with the food preferences of the target farmer group. More than sixty percent of farmers indicated a preference for white over black cowpeas. Since the farmers consume three-quarters of the produced cowpeas themselves, offering inoculated seeds for black cowpeas instead of white would most likely mean that fewer farmers would take advantage of them.

Furthermore, although the majority of farmers stated that they would use the technique if they could achieve higher yields, even if the seeds were more expensive, they were reluctant to devote more land to its cultivation, mainly because harvesting is very time and labor-intensive. This is important for policy planning, since the Namibian government plans to increase domestic plant protein production [20]. Using inoculated instead of non-inoculated cowpea seeds would increase yields, but reaching the government’s goals would also require increasing the area under cultivation. The farmers’ statements show that additional support with harvesting may increase their willingness to devote a larger area to cowpea production.

In addition, the provision of a large quantity of inoculated seeds could pose a problem. Cramer [15] notes that it should not be assumed that commercial breeders and seed companies have the resources to supply the seeds, as this was rarely the case. In addition, our survey showed that the majority of farmers received their seeds from NGOs and the government rather than from traders or seed companies, indicating that these institutions would have to serve as intermediaries between farmers and seed producers.

Indigenous knowledge and religious beliefs may influence the acceptance of new agricultural practices in Namibia [36]. Only 26% of the surveyed farmers believed that climate change is manmade. This belief seems to be prevalent in northern Namibia; Angula and Ntombela [37] write that many farmers there believe that rainfall and crop productivity cannot be predicted, but depend solely on the will of God. Measures that include using weather or seasonal forecasts may thus have a lower acceptance rate in this community.

In general, a large majority of the surveyed farmers stated that they are aware of and concerned about climate change and that they have already felt the need to adapt their agricultural decisions due to the effects of climate change. However, we believe that the last statement should be interpreted with some caution, as more than sixty percent of farmers also indicated that they had not observed any unusual climate events in the last ten to fifteen years. Furthermore, in another survey among pastoralists in northern Namibia, 80% stated that they had never heard of climate change [37]. Interestingly, the pastoralists did observe an increase in droughts in previous years, but they did not attribute this to climate change. The pastoralists define a drought as a situation where there is not enough forage for the livestock and thus attribute such events to an increase in people and livestock, to more area-consuming mining, to poor farming methods that reduce vegetation cover, and to fires.

For approaching farmers to disseminate new farming methods and techniques, local NGOs and agricultural extension services are best suited in Namibia. Other studies have found that many farmers rely on other farmers as their primary source of information about new technologies [38], and that cooperation and knowledge exchange between farmers and agricultural extension officers can strengthen the adaptive capacity to future climate change [39]. The farmer-to-farmer and farmer-to-extension service approach can therefore be viewed as the most promising approach for disseminating information and persuading farmers to adopt new technologies.

One limitation of this study is that the sample size of 90 farmers surveyed may not fully represent the diversity and variability of the cowpea farmers in northern Namibia; however, despite this constraint, our study provides valuable initial insights on the adoption potential of inoculated cowpeas and possibly further agricultural adaptation measures.

5. Conclusions

While agricultural adaptation technologies identified as promising in field trials may seem like feasible solutions, the actual adoption of the technology by smallholder farmers may not be plausible for a variety of reasons. Field studies should therefore always be preceded or at least accompanied by a socioeconomic assessment of the smallholder farmer population to avoid costly failures and increase the likelihood of actual adoption.