No abstract

Farmers in Africa have long adapted to climatic and other risks by diversifying their farming activities. Using a multi‐scale approach, we explore the relationship between farming diversity and food security and the diversification potential of African agriculture and its limits on the household and continental scale. On the household scale, we use agricultural surveys from more than 28,000 households located in 18 African countries. In a next step, we use the relationship between rainfall, rainfall variability, and farming diversity to determine the available diversification options for farmers on the continental scale. On the household scale, we show that households with greater farming diversity are more successful in meeting their consumption needs, but only up to a certain level of diversity per ha cropland and more often if food can be purchased from off‐farm income or income from farm sales. More diverse farming systems can contribute to household food security; however, the relationship is influenced by other factors, for example, the market orientation of a household, livestock ownership, nonagricultural employment opportunities, and available land resources. On the continental scale, the greatest opportunities for diversification of food crops, cash crops, and livestock are located in areas with 500–1,000 mm annual rainfall and 17%–22% rainfall variability. Forty‐three percent of the African cropland lacks these opportunities at present which may hamper the ability of agricultural systems to respond to climate change. While sustainable intensification practices that increase yields have received most attention to date, our study suggests that a shift in the research and policy paradigm toward agricultural diversification options may be necessary.

SUMMARYThe large diversity of farms and farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa calls for agricultural improvement options that are adapted to the context in which smallholder farmers operate. The socio-ecological niche concept incorporates the agro-ecological, socio-cultural, economic and institutional dimensions and the multiple levels of this context in order to identify which options fit best. In this paper, we illustrate how farming systems analysis, following the DEED cycle of Describe, Explain, Explore and Design, and embedding co-learning amongst researchers, farmers and other stakeholders, helps to operationalize the socio-ecological niche concept. Examples illustrate how farm typologies, detailed farm characterization and on-farm experimental work, in combination with modelling and participatory approaches inform the matching of options to the context at regional, village, farm and field level. Recommendation domains at these gradually finer levels form the basis for gradually more detailed baskets of options from which farmers and other stakeholders may choose, test and adjust to their specific needs. Tailored options identified through the DEED cycle proof to be more relevant, feasible and performant as compared to blanket recommendations in terms of both researcher and farmer-identified criteria. As part of DEED, on-farm experiments are particularly useful in revealing constraints and risks faced by farmers. We show that targeting options to the niches in which they perform best, helps to reduce this risk. Whereas the conclusions of our work about the potential for improving smallholders' livelihoods are often sobering, farming systems analysis allows substantiating the limitations of technological options, thus highlighting the need for enabling policies and institutions that may improve the larger-scale context and increase the uptake potential of options.

Fraval et al.Food Access Deficiencies in Sub-saharan Africa nutrition-sensitive and nutrition-specific interventions. Interventions need to be tailored to agro-ecological zone, household composition, scale of operation and production mix. Increasing income will not necessarily result in improved diet diversity or healthy dietary choices. Interventions focused on income generation should monitor and promote crop and livestock production diversity and provide nutrition education.

SUMMARYHousehold surveys are one of the most commonly used tools for generating insight into rural communities. Despite their prevalence, few studies comprehensively evaluate the quality of data derived from farm household surveys. We critically evaluated a series of standard reported values and indicators that are captured in multiple farm household surveys, and then quantified their credibility, consistency and, thus, their reliability. Surprisingly, even variables which might be considered ‘easy to estimate’ had instances of non-credible observations. In addition, measurements of maize yields and land owned were found to be less reliable than other stationary variables. This lack of reliability has implications for monitoring food security status, poverty status and the land productivity of households. Despite this rather bleak picture, our analysis also shows that if the same farm households are followed over time, the sample sizes needed to detect substantial changes are in the order of hundreds of surveys, and not in the thousands. Our research highlights the value of targeted and systematised household surveys and the importance of ongoing efforts to improve data quality. Improvements must be based on the foundations of robust survey design, transparency of experimental design and effective training. The quality and usability of such data can be further enhanced by improving coordination between agencies, incorporating mixed modes of data collection and continuing systematic validation programmes.