PROTOCOL: The Effects of Training, Innovation and New Technology on African Smallholder Farmers' Wealth and Food Security: A Systematic Review

A large proportion of the world's poor live in rural areas, dependent on subsistence farming for their survival (FAO, 2011). Smallholder farmers have been credited with providing up to 80 per cent of food in developing countries (IFAD, 2012) and have the potential to feed themselves and also supply urban markets. Vietnam's smallholder farmers are often credited, for example, with transforming the country from a net-importer of food, to a major exporter (ibid). Whilst definitions of smallholder farming vary, the concept usually incorporates a number of key elements (Morton, 2007): farms on which labour is predominantly family (‘family farms’) (IFAD, 2009); farmers and farms that are resource poor (Nagayets 2005; Dixon et al., 2003); farms of a particular size, most commonly two hectares (Nagayets, 2005; Hazell et al. 2010; Wiggins et al., 2010; World Bank 2003; IFAD, 2011a); and farms which are predominantly subsistence, but might also include a mix of commercial and subsistence activities (Narayan and Gulati, 2002). Smallholder farming is of particular significance to Africa for a number of reasons. Africa's economy is dominated by agriculture (Massett et al., 2011) and the vast majority of farmers in Africa are smallholders (World Bank, 2007). Smallholder farmers contribute significantly to food security on the continent, for example, in sub-Saharan African smallholder farmers contribute up to 80 per cent of the food supply (IFAD, 2011b). Smallholder farmers also include many of the continent's poorest and most marginalised people (World Bank, 2007). In southern Africa in particular, large numbers of women and girls rely on smallholder farming, and it provides a survival strategy for many of the continent's young people, many of whom are orphans and head of their households. Furthermore, supporting Africa's development is a priority within the G8, and working towards increasing food security in the region is high on the agendas of the majority of international donors, including the Canadian Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development agency (DFATD), who have commissioned this review. Given both the importance of smallholder farming in Africa and its potential to contribute to the food security of so many, it is not surprising that considerable efforts are being invested in its success. Both national and international agencies are investing in improving the productivity of smallholder farming, including the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Canadian Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development agency (DFATD). Additionally, in 2009, the G8's L'Aquila initiative pledged $22 billion USD for agriculture in developing countries (G8, 2009). In 2012, IFAD launched the Adaptation for Small Holder Agriculture Programme (www.ifad.org/climate/asap/). On a national level, heads of state in Africa are increasingly stressing the need for support for smallholder farmers. For instance, South African President Jacob Zuma emphasized the need for support of smallholder famers in his 2013 State of the Nation Address (RSA, 2013). Parallel efforts are being invested in agricultural research, such as impact evaluations and systematic reviews, to assess the effectiveness of these agricultural programmes. Agricultural productivity of particularly starchy cereals is important since this category of crop accounts for two thirds of the region's energy intake as well as 70 per cent of the income of the extremely poor population living in Africa (AGRA, 2013). The 2013 Africa agriculture report issued by AGRA (ibid) identifies the general production trend for Africa as somewhat erratic, but with most countries reporting a steady increase in production. According to the report, Kenya, Ghana, Mali, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and possibly Mozambique have all reported steady increases in agricultural production (AGRA, 2013, 21). Areas that have experienced civil unrest, political instability, or mismanagement of the macroeconomics of the country in the last decade have seen a decrease in agricultural productivity; included among these are Sierra Leone and Liberia (AGRA, 2013, 21). Technologies typically used to increase agricultural productivity in the region include the “increased use of agricultural inputs, modern farming techniques, and reduced market inefficiencies” (AGRA, 2013, 20). However, a much larger array of factors come to bear on agricultural productivity. Political, technological, physical environmental, and micro- and macroeconomic factors related to each country play a pivotal role in shaping the region's agricultural productivity. World prices of inputs and outputs, and international trade policies also influence the agricultural productivity within countries (AGRA, 2013). As such, any technology addressing any one of these aspects may be expected to have an influence on the food security or income of smallholder farmers in Africa. Examples of specific technologies include treadle pump irrigation technology (Adeoti et al., 2009); biofortification and health information (de Brauw et al., 2013); and adopting an export crop and marketing techniques (Ashraf et al., 2008). In the context of this considerable and growing emphasis on smallholder farming, there is a need to understand the relative effectiveness of the different interventions targeting smallholder agriculture in achieving various outcomes. Today, there are a multitude of agricultural interventions in place across Africa (Sapa, 2009). The focus of these interventions has shifted as understanding of the relationship between agriculture and poverty has developed (Massett et al., 2011). Early interventions focused on increasing productivity to meet a perceived lack of food. With the realisation that undernourishment persists alongside high levels of production (Reutlinger & Pellekaan, 1986), structural issues came to the fore and the concept of food security was introduced (Sen, 1981). Interventions shifted towards income generation, access to markets and the production of more nutritious and calorific foods. Two groups of interventions have specifically sought to increase food security and reduce poverty by farmers and or to agricultural and Interventions that are as the of a farming or of this of is the of to increase the intake of A technology emphasis on the of a agricultural be a different of or interventions place emphasis on providing of to farmers. The of such may not be to but However, that interventions on the of technology For instance, an of this of is Brauw et of biofortification and a health information on the food security of smallholder farmers A systematic of the of interventions targeting smallholder farmers et al., that there in the African a lack of systematic addressing various on the of smallholder and a lack of of the impact of interventions on food The of the has been by these as well as by with and interventions for farmers interventions focus on and interventions are also often as a for which to and people in agricultural production to and to and as a to have more in et al., in which may be one of agricultural use a more to and et al., 2009). are and in and on and by farmers by et al., in developed to an on have been across 80 countries important of these interventions to the there is a in the between that are to agricultural and increase example, on resource and which focus on aspects of example, the most of the of interventions is to of the or the the of the and the of the of an of this of is et al. who a in improving the income and food security of smallholder farmers a number of including to the farmers and as well as providing on marketing et al. on the agricultural interventions that with groups and farmers with information and to export and and with Agricultural interventions to of technologies more nutritious and et al., 2013); and these with et al., 2008). and a of these in of and The a number of of evaluations of these and For example, et al. the impact of a the of in South Africa. on the a the effectiveness of of on factors such as smallholder farming income and resource in The of these are from or to income generation, food and poverty (World Bank, 2007). In particular, there is increasing emphasis international on the of food security and poverty Smallholder farming has been credited with the potential to food (Sen, & Pellekaan, The is that it is both an subsistence strategy and a potential poor farmers to food (IFAD, Furthermore, it is to of the population that are most to the of and (World Bank, 2007). Whilst there is for of the effectiveness of and and technology on the and food security of smallholder the by which these interventions are and are dependent on factors such as the political and as well as more elements such as to their and increase their productivity. As there are key on the to food security and of of and increase in and productivity. include that to the of food the of crop as well as crop et al., 2013). may include of the impact of interventions the or of of the of or and food et al., 2013). is by and in the systematic of African as of various such as of resource reduced on labour and of et al., 2013). The importance of smallholder farming in and the multitude of interventions to increase the and food security of smallholder farmers has been with agencies and supporting these farmers to their for to their programmes. on the of interventions and their the need for on the effectiveness of and or and their on both poverty and food to the to which these more on one but not the that and which to in and and for more on this A of systematic of to smallholder farming in Africa two & et al., and a is et al. 2013). The both focus on agricultural & et al., and focus on agricultural The of the and and one of the focused on specifically et al. 2013). the for and of farming, systematic that the of and technology et al., & et al., et al., et al., et al., 2010; et al., et al., 2011). included evaluations of the effectiveness of agriculture in general et al., 2012, & 2009, et al., as well as specific agriculture with et al., et al., et al., et al., crop and et al., et al., and et al., et al., and et al., 2011). systematic also the of agriculture & and et al. as well as specific interventions increasing of such as et al., et al. et al., et al., irrigation et al. and biofortification et al., et al. The impact of interventions to increase food production have been including particular of specifically et al., and in particular development et al., et al. 2011) and development et al., et al., et al. and and et al., have for et al., et al., et al., et al., et al., and agricultural et al., 2013). systematic focused on the impact of agricultural specifically agricultural interventions and food security in and irrigation et al., 2013); and et al., the somewhat in and that there in the African two of which be by this the lack of systematic addressing various on the of smallholder and on their food Given the potential for African smallholder farmers to contribute to the food security across the with the increasing in the there is a need for as to which interventions are most The of and and the need to focus the increases the importance of this review. in this systematic are In information to not in the being who have commissioned this be included in this a use an or include in which the use a or and in which one of the is be included a For this the or in these may include farmers as or an be on of for which the within Africa be be from the review. Given focus on the of the interventions and food for the include a of between of and of these may For example, an that a of to access to in the in the but it be to the of these as an increase in food be a include African farmers of smallholder include both and women who their farms or by not by as that there are large numbers of in and it is that smallholder farmers be For the of in young farmers as the of Smallholder farms be in a number of Whilst of is often most commonly hectares the productivity of the that in countries much larger farms are to be In for example, farms of up to hectares have been as smallholder The of the the and the of all the of may their this is often not the smallholder farms are usually to be farms also be a of smallholder farms as the of labour and not a and family provides a for of smallholder young farmers and have been by as key of within this review. groups be included within the and on two be included in the meet one of the Interventions that not smallholder farmers specifically be not be by or of on two and food as any of or that a for example, income from food or from not to food on the for et al. is an of a in which the impact of on South African is that not one of these be from the review. According to the of the World food security all people, all have physical and access to nutritious food to meet their and food for an (FAO, 2013). food security is the of food and access to the of food security in review. on this and on the specific for food have also included an which any which not in this not be from the on the of be in and for include since Both the for impact of these and the of the interventions have developed significantly since et al., 2003; it that any to this for since and on any in a was to the be In to the for this as as have strategy to include both general and with both and more have from two from the and the in the of these impact evaluations Africa African African the of the Africa IFAD evaluations The and The key in are have that in may be and the concept is to for the large numbers of and is also to for country a is is usually reported in the for in these the for smallholder impact and the interventions of in the impact have developed in to all for the However, use of to The be to each of the as within the and this is not the also the of all impact In the of a of agricultural in sub-Saharan and A Agricultural in Africa and South A from key to key include of and of reviews, as in Two assess the the and each from included be by and a be to any used in the to this include and a of that include factors and the or the et al., in which to or is include that have a with and impact that have a be included in this review. the or and is an of a which including in this review. and assess one across two groups of which the and one of which also and a In example, and assess the impact of and and of the used to to their and use a with information that a is to be included or for this from the included as in the including on the the of of and and use the included in to to to including and of for both and each of and be on and for included be in of for in included that be used in A of the of be by an of the and be and et al. 2011). be and and a assess the of the included the of developed by the et al., 2011) and for et al., 2013). these include to particular is in a and for the to rely on the of for the and the for a for and The are with of the included in of be for in all the The of be as or and to are the be as The of to be of be but not for for more on each of these a of and these in to a to in a 2009). For use the to of included & For and as the of and their be as by information is and be from as per et al. are not be but information is be to in to as by and For be for and be reported but not included in the or to on all many reported but not be included to an to the is to any of the within an of the In have used a and et al., so that each that are may more one is reported in a report the of one include with one or more one in of the within one not be to that are included in any one as more one or report is on a one as the one with the most and the be which on for information that one including not reported in the a report more one these be two or more which be and which might be or in these information on and in be to all between report for the the that is most commonly reported across included and not the that is most be For reporting in the more has been increasing the of an of the report for two or more to assess the which provides for the two both a the of and be to assess the potential of different The with the of be included in the of interventions are a different the of has the of the from the from in the are to be more across the 2011). from the be to be from one In the are the reported in and this is not the of including have been For with of and be used to for or from the in the for of Interventions 2011). The the to the The is as is the The with the in may be by the of the have for the be in 2013). the the in each to to from and as per The that have for or on related or to be as these are more the are to be to in a in a but the be that a high or be as well as with be to of are included for that may not be are not addressing the the of a or the are might that the are different and these for a not be be of the for lack of of and of the & also and report the and to of the of the that is to is that the of on to levels of to of as by and The specific are of the of have of of the interventions and of et al., 2011) of of of of of of crop or be as a of to the by the as by The relationship between two be by a a be to the number of with these particular The be used to the of & that that may have interventions and may be is important to include all and to but there is also the that the are different from the in two an of the and and include of use to and for et al. et al., 2008). The of be in included in The is on the that in the increase as from the of the with the among larger In the of the a However, there is often be and and be of to the understanding of have the to to and of et al., 2011). not include but information and context from or within the included as in the use this information to and of included as much as on including have for specific groups effectiveness rural crop production and and crop farming and and irrigation biofortification have the of The is on and but not have an the of the and these with of was in but these not Small farms Agricultural Agriculture Agriculture Agriculture Agriculture The is on and but not have an the of the and these with of was in and be included Small farms Agricultural Small smallholders smallholders Agriculture impact Agriculture Agriculture Agriculture Agriculture Agriculture the & The have been developed in and be the of and or or or or of or or or or or or or or or population or or or or or or or or or or or population or or or economy or or or population or or or economy or or or population or or or economy or or or or or of be to on or The related be used for all income food subsistence impact rural poor subsistence subsistence subsistence subsistence subsistence effectiveness and Given the for within this all to key include of and of reviews, as of et al. A of the effectiveness of agriculture interventions in improving of et al. The of on the and of and A of et al. A of on of et al. have been the of the of and who the food A systematic of the impact of interventions in agricultural market and of et A systematic of agricultural interventions that to of of et al. for improving farming and in and a systematic The of for of impact groups the population include smallholder the as much as to a in a of or and and of the was the of the was the of is on the for in being by their For more is with more in in the context of this to of of each in the the in this specific to the of this particular each the in this and that the as potential that are not included in the In the are for in the context of this is expected to to a important in the of the to the or the to the of the all important and and and of of a important that not one important not or not or or of of a important was that the to be in the context of this the interventions and such that a of be to of of a of that between groups and have an impact on outcomes. to be in the context of this this of the one or more that most to the impact of the within each The may be on the or the are or between In a be the has the potential to significantly impact the or the of is to the in the may not the of is of of the interventions being assess the the groups of in with to of of The to a of the the between groups and the for For example, the number of with is by but the for are to be different lack of the might be to be of to proportion of or in for impact on to the being an important is the are that has not of in whom may be example, people and also have more For an important is the of between and or and of across or in the of or for across or not in the are a or or a for the or are in the and the is and The is and there are with different or of the is of of the or for and reporting on the of the has been to the of many and is by Foreign Affairs, Trade and the International for who have also As such, of the was However, a with two of a of and a systematic as well as with the of the was to its In the for the of has to the review. With to international and for their to have any in any of the included in this review. The are also a related on the of urban agriculture on food security and & are the of urban agriculture on food security and in and income A systematic The is the who and the and for of the with the and for the of the review. have a large to to within in have on the the on specific elements as and be much of the for this with support from and and have both systematic of including agricultural The is a on urban The be by the on the who have been for their specific in international development in Africa and in agricultural and a of the who in and be for on the and for all of the review. of systematic and a of of reviews, systematic effectiveness and and working with a number of and for is well to this review. and have all in systematic and have of working on on this in their in this and be on as the as well as systematic as the and and be working on the much of the many of and alongside is the and the elements of the to by be for the of the the of and with and the the in the for this by a with of for systematic In an experienced with in and in providing to has his to the has has to the and is to on the for the as and are both in for and have in and are all experienced in in systematic on systematic is being by the is a in developing and for systematic in be in this role by who also has of these systematic is experienced in for in systematic and is most of by the of the from included in this and of all of which have different access to the are to to this have been by a number of from international agencies that in As well as their have an in with the of the review. is that agriculture to the review. be in be by and be by an experienced systematic to support their the of the review. is on on the of which is dependent on the importance of the to international has been considerable in the from not but also international agencies such as are to for to this in for the potential for and with the International Development this for and the in with The as much support as to with the of the review. A be to the within two of are not the or are to for an the has the to the or the to The also has the to or the it not meet the of the the for the in of and and and the for the to as with the The support of the and the in is to the and in the in is However, a systematic be or the its in not in are for in the to include a the in any of the review. understand the to a and to in the on of the 2013

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.