
































Microsoft Word - 161-.docx


Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 3, Issue 1, 2021 
  agdevresearch.org 

 
1. Raphael Gikunda, Lecturer, Chuka University, Po Box 109, Chuka, rgikunda@chuka.ac.ke, 

  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7154-7025  
2. Mary Jepkurui, Graduate Student, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, 72701, AR, marysamoei@yahoo.com, 

 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8845-0000 
3. Simion Kiptoo, Graduate student, Chuka University, Po Box 109, Chuka, skiptoo43@gmail.com,  

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0619-7030 
4. Mathew Baker, Professor & Department Head, Texas A&M, 2116 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-2116, 

mathew.baker@ag.tamu.edu,   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0556-744X  
 
 
32 

 

Quality of Climate-Smart Agricultural Advice Offered by 
Private and Public Sectors Extensionists in Mbeere North Sub-

County, Kenya 
 

R. Gikunda1, M. Jepkurui2, S. Kiptoo3, M. Baker4 
 

 

 
 
 
  

Abstract 

This research adds to the knowledge of extension education by revealing the quality of climate-smart 
agricultural (CSA) advice offered by private and public extension sectors. The study was aimed at 
addressing the paucity of empirical data that exists relating to the quality of CSA advice. Using a 
semi-structured questionnaire, the descriptive and correlational study gathered data from a 
systematic sample of 115 farmers. There was a moderate positive correlation between extension 
effectiveness and adoption of CSA. There were significant differences between public, private, and 
both sectors in relation to the quality of information disseminated. The quality of private sector’s 
advice was significantly lower than that of public sector and both sectors. There was no significant 
difference in quality of advice between public sector and both sectors. The quality of CSA advice was 
generally fair, however, heightened dissemination of CSA practices by both sectors of extension 
would yield better quality advice thus improve the adoption of the practices among farmers.  
 
 
Keywords 

Adoption, climate change, extension education, effectiveness 

 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   33 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement  
 
The climatic changes currently being experienced in the globe have resulted in reduced 
livestock and crop yields thus threatening farmers' livelihoods especially in rural areas (Oduniyi 
& Tekana, 2019; World Bank, 2015). The climate risks are expected to increase in the coming 
decade especially in less developed countries. Globally, more than a billion farmers are facing 
climate-related risks and hazards (Nagargade et al., 2017). It is estimated that between five to 
170 million people will be food insecure by 2080 in Africa as a result of climate change 
(Rosegrant et al., 2008). To mitigate the climate risks such as heat stress, flooding, and drought, 
climate-smart agriculture (CSA) was developed. CSA has the potential to improve productivity, 
the resilience of farming systems, and mitigate climate change (Ministry of Agriculture, 
Livestock, and Fisheries [MoALF], 2017; Netherlands Enterprise Agency, 2019). CSA 
encompasses verified practices such as mulching, intercropping, minimum tillage, crop rotation, 
integrated crop-livestock management, agroforestry, improved grazing, and improved water, 
management (Jirata et al., 2016; World Bank & CIAT, 2015). CSA also encompasses practices 
such as improved weather forecasting, early-warning systems, and climate-risk insurance. 
Technologies such as remote sensing, global positioning systems, and cloud sensing have been 
incorporated into CSA farming systems (Adamides, 2020).  
 
It is projected that between 140 and 300 billion US dollars annually are needed in less 
developed countries to adopt CSA fully by 2030 (United Nations Environment Programme 
[UNEP], 2016). Although a significant amount of resources have been secured to promote the 
dissemination and application of CSA farming systems, many of the smallholder farmers lack 
adequate skills and knowledge in the subject (Jirata et al., 2016). Additionally, the effects of 
widespread application of the practices have not been investigated (De Pinto et al., 2020). 
Sustained incorporation of CSA into national agriculture and food security programs is a 
necessity in realizing greater resilience to climate change in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Safe 
access and control of land, water, and natural resources will be critical for improved utilization 
of CSA practices (United States Agency for International Development [USAID], 2016). 
 
Kenya has not been able to realize the benefits of CSA due to the low adoption rates resulting 
from poor policies formulation and implementation. This has been worsened by duplication of 
roles and inefficiencies among institutions mandated to enforce the policies. However, a variety 
of initiatives involving the diffusion and adoption of CSA are largely ongoing (World Bank, 
2012). Effective CSA drives require sufficient mechanisms for creating, documenting, and 
diffusing knowledge through the use of effective procedures and institutional engagements. 
Climate information and policies are very essential to address the impacts of climate variability 
(Jirata et al., 2016). Opportunities to increase adaptation and mitigation to climate change go 
beyond cultivation to postharvest handling, value chains, and the larger agri-food system that 
connects farmers with consumers. The adoption of CSA farming practices can be enhanced 
through innovative county extension delivery systems and public-private service providers’ 
partnerships (Gikunda et al., 2021; USAID, 2016). This comprises the institutions and players 
engaged in offering extension and associated services.  



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   34 
 

Awareness creation on climate change adaptation and mitigation is crucial and should 
encompass structures of information sharing through field visits and demonstrations 
(Wambugu et al., 2014). Notwithstanding the recognized significance of CSA by local and 
international institutions and the continued initiatives in the system’s awareness creation, the 
dissemination and uptake of the CSA innovations and practices is still largely an ongoing, 
challenging process (Sala et al., 2016). Even though literature on the adoption and impact of 
CSA is growing (Kurgat et al., 2020), researchers have largely neglected to focus on the 
effectiveness of extension and quality of information disseminated by different sectors. The 
provision of extension services particularly by the private sector has also been skewed towards 
high potential regions (Muyanga & Jayne, 2008). Mbeere North being a semi-arid region may 
have been underprivileged. A gap that this research was set out to address. 
 

Methods 
 
A descriptive correlational survey was conducted in Mbeere North Sub-County involving a 
population of 2,047 farmers (Chimoita et al., 2017). The design was deemed suitable since the 
study was aimed at drawing a connection between culture and effective dissemination of 
climate-smart practices (Fraenkel et al., 2015). The study utilized a sample of 115 farmers 
selected through systematic random sampling to ensure representativeness with regard to 
gender and farm sizes. Fraenkel et al. (2015) observed that a sample of 100 is adequate for 
survey research. Of the 115 farmers, 59 (51.3%) were male and 54 (47.0%) were female. The 
participants farm sizes ranged from 0.25 to 15 acres (M = 3.89, SD = 2.79). 
  
The research was conducted with the assistance of four enumerators selected from the study 
area. Data collection involved a peer-reviewed semi-structured questionnaire that had been 
distributed to the farmers in the farms. A pilot study was conducted in Embu North Sub-County 
involving 30 smallholder farmers where 12 were male and 18 were female prior to actual data 
collection. The Cronbach's alpha values study variables were; quality of CSA information (M = 
4.37, α =.72), extension effectiveness (M = 2.42, α =.72), and adoption of climate-smart 
practices (M = 3.89, α = .69).  
 
Pearson's correlation test was performed to determine the correlation between effective 
dissemination and adoption of CSA. A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was utilized to 
find out if private, public, and both sectors differed based upon the quality of CSA advice. The 
assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances were checked before the analysis. The 
objectives of the study were tested at a 95% level of significance or 0.05 alpha level apriori. 
Tukey’s HSD post hoc test was conducted to compare the three groups of extension advice 
providers. Effect size was estimated using omega squared. 
 

Findings 
 
The study involved 115 farmers where 59 (51.3%) were male and 54 (47.0%) were female. This 
implied that most of the households were headed by male farmers. A majority of the farmers 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   35 
 

were smallholder farmers with farm sizes ranging from 0.25 to 15 acres (M = 4.22 acres, SD = 
2.91). Very few farmers (n = 24, 20.9%) had received CSA advice in the sub-county as a result of 
few contacts (M = 2.60, SD = 4.89) with the extension staff. This may have resulted from the 
inefficiencies and inadequacy of county extension staff. However, most of the farmers (n = 68, 
59.1%) were receiving advice on general agricultural production from both private and public 
sector extension staff (Muyanga & Jayne, 2008). 
 
Effectiveness of Extension Services 
The study also sought to determine the effectiveness of the extension services as shown in 
Table 1. Many of the farmers stated that information disseminated was easy to apply (M = 4.16, 
SD = 1.00, materials provided were written in simple language (M = 4.06, SD = 1.09), and 
extensionists utilized local languages (M = 4.03, SD = 1.14). Nonetheless, extension service 
providers were moderately effective in the dissemination of CSA information. The information 
provided was generally moderately met the farmers’ needs (M = 3.99, SD = 1.15), offered at the 
right season (M = 3.81, SD = 1.09), up to date (M = 3.80, SD = 1.07), resulted in CSA practices 
adoption (M = 3.77, SD =1.34), and timely manner (M = 3.73, SD =1.17). The deficiency in 
effectiveness may have been brought about by inadequate extension resources resulting in few 
farmer-extension staff contacts as reported by Odhong’et al. (2018). Many of the farmers 
received information from mass media such as television and radio programs that did not 
necessarily target their needs and may not have been adequate to drive adoption. 
 
Table 1 
 
Descriptive Statistics for Effectiveness of Extension (N = 115)  
Statementa  M SD 
The practices disseminated are easy to apply 4.16 1.00 
The materials provided are written in simple language 4.06 1.09 
Extension providers utilize local languages to ease the understanding of 
the diffused information 

4.03 1.14 

The information provided meets the needs of the farmers 3.99 1.15 
CSA information is provided at the right season 3.81 1.09 
The information provided is up to date 3.80 1.07 
Most farmers have reported increased crop yields as a result of CSA 
practices adoption 

3.77 1.34 

CSA information is provision is done on time 3.73 1.17 
Access to CSA information is easy 3.68 1.18 
The CSA information diffused by extension providers is adequate 3.65 1.30 
On-farm and field demonstrations are organized to ease the 
understanding of most practices 

3.57 1.32 

There is a constant interaction between farmers and extension agents on 
CSA 

3.36 1.33 

Note. a1 = not effective, 2 = slightly effective, 3 = moderately effective, 4 = effective, 5 = very 
effective. 
 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   36 
 

Adoption of Climate-Smart Practices 
Table 2 shows the application rates of the climate-smart practices among farmers in Mbeere 
North. Among the three categories of CSA practices, cropping such as timely planting (M = 4.43, 
SD = .87), intercropping (M = 4.30, SD = 1.18), and crop rotation (M = 4.30, SD = .98) were 
frequently applied as compared to livestock management, and soil and water management 
practices. This may have stemmed from the fact that that a majority of the cropping practices 
did not require advanced knowledge and skills as compared to soil and water management 
practices such as terracing that requires engineering knowledge. Many of the farmers utilized 
indigenous knowledge acquired through experiences and observations since they had limited 
access to extension advice. 
 
Table 2 
 
Descriptive Statistics for Adoption of Climate-Smart Practices (N = 115) 
Practicea  M SD 
Cropping management practices  
Timely planting 4.43 .87 
Intercropping to maximize space 4.30 1.18 
Use of legumes in crop rotation 4.30 .98 
Use of drought-resistant crop varieties 4.15 1.37 
Use of disease-resistant varieties 3.99 1.45 
Livestock management practices  
Use of organic manure 4.30 1.12 
Diversified animal breeds 3.65 1.19 
Use of improved livestock breeds 2.96 1.34 
Soil and water management practices  
Use of cover crops 4.35 1.02 
Use of terraces 4.26 1.07 
Use of mulching 3.66 1.29 
Diversification of water sources e.g., rainwater harvesting 3.38 1.43 
Contour farming 3.29 1.29 
Agroforestry 3.23 1.28 
Water-saving irrigation methods 3.11 1.35 
Minimum tillage 2.70 1.40 

Note. a1 = not at all; 2 = rarely; 3 = sometimes; 4 = often; 5 = always.  
 
Extension Effectiveness and Adoption of Climate-Smart Practices 
Extension effectiveness, quality of advice, and adoption of CSA practices were assessed through 
summated scores of Likert-type items. The scale for extension effectiveness was comprised of 
12 items hence the scores ranged from 1-60.  Table 3 presents the correlation between 
extension effectiveness, quality of CSA advice, and adoption of CSA practices. Quality of advice 
involved four items with a maximum sum of 20 points, adoption of CSA practices had 16 items 
with a total 80 points. There was a moderate positive correlation between extension 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   37 
 

effectiveness and adoption of CSA, r = 0.38, p = < 0.05. This implied that as the level of 
extension effectiveness increases, the adoption of CSA practices also increases. The correlation 
between quality of advice and adoption of CSA was positive and substantial, r = 0.57, p = < 0.05 
(Davis, 1971). This meant that the adoption of practices would increase with improved quality 
of advice. Quality of advice was positively and moderately related to extension effectiveness, r 
= 0.40, p = < 0.05. This showed that improved extension effectiveness would enrich the quality 
of CSA advice. 
 
Table 3 
 
Pearson Correlation Statistics for Adoption of CSA by Quality and Effective Dissemination (N = 
115) 
Variables  1 2 3 
1. Effective disseminationa - .40* .38* 
2. Quality of Climate-smart informationb  - .57* 
3. Adoption of climate-smart practicesc   - 

Note. a = scale = 1- 60; b = 1- 20; c = 1- 80. 
 
Quality of Extension Advice 
Table 4 presents the quality of CSA advice offered to farmers in Mbeere North. Among the 
quality elements, relevance (M = 3.85, SD = 1.10) and accuracy (M = 3.78, SD = 1.06) emerged 
top. However, the quality of advice was observed to be fair. This may have been contributed by 
extension staff in-competencies, advise that is not packaged to meet the needs of the farmers, 
easy to understand, and inaccurate. Many of the county extension agents were not from the 
area thus had difficulties communicating with the local farmers especially those with no formal 
education. The failure of the agents to make regular follow-ups to ensure that farmers adopted 
the practices appropriately may have compromised the quality of the advice. 
 
Table 4 
 
Descriptive Statistics for Quality of CSA Advise (n = 98) 
Quality elementsa  M SD 
Relevance 3.85 1.10 
Accuracy 3.78 1.06 
Depth of coverage 3.60 1.03 
Ease to understand 3.60 1.16 

Note a = 1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = fair; 4 = good; 5 = excellent. 
 
Objective two sought to determine if private, public, and both sectors differed significantly 
based upon the quality of CSA advice. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to determine if the 
quality of climate-smart practices disseminated to farmers was dependent upon the extension 
provider. The extension provider groups included public, private, and a combination of private 
and public extensionists. As presented in Table 5, public sector extension (M = 45.27, SD = 6.92) 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   38 
 

was found to provide better quality advise compared to the private sector (M = 39.20, SD = 
9.23). However, a joint effort by the private and public sector extension bore a better quality 
advise than the individual sectors (M = 48.04, SD = 10.07). This may have resulted from the 
diverse aspects of agricultural information and experiences that emerge from the various 
sources (Mamun-ur-Rashid & Qijie, 2016). 
 
Table 5 
 
Descriptive Statistics for the Quality of Climate-Smart Information Disseminated By Private and 
Public Extension Agents (N = 115)  
Group of farmers  n Ma SD 
Public extension  22 45.27 6.92 
Private extension 25 39.20 9.23 
Both sectors  68 48.04 10.07 

Note. a =1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = fair; 4 = good; 5 = excellent. 
 
The results in Table 6 show that there were significant differences between public, private, and 
both sectors in relation to the quality of information disseminated, F (2) = 12.98, p = < 0.05, ω = 
.33 (medium effect). As reported in Table 5, the quality of the private sector's advice (39.20 ± 
10.94) was significantly lower than that of the public sector (45.27 ± 6.92, p < 0.05) and both 
sectors (48.04 ± 10.07, p = < 0.05). A Tukey HSD post hoc test revealed that there was no 
significant difference in quality of advice between public sector and both sectors (p > .45). This 
may have resulted from the fact that the main role of public extensionists is to advise farmers 
while the private sector, particularly the agrochemical companies, are principally involved in 
marketing agrochemicals (Muyanga & Jayne, 2008). The narrow scope of advice packages of the 
private sector extensionists may also have contributed. Nonetheless, the quality of private 
sector extension has been observed to be better than that of public extension (Ayansina et al., 
2015). The main agrochemical companies working in the area included Amiran, Osho, and 
Bayer. The agrochemical extensionists organize occasional field days and demonstrations for 
diffusing agricultural information.  Among the private sector extensionists, agrochemical 
retailers (agro-vets) were the main agents of CSA information diffusion. Other private extension 
institutions included community-based organizations and non-governmental organizations. 
 
Table 6 
 
Analysis of Variance for Quality of Climate-smart Advice by Private Sector Extension, Public-
Sector Extension, and both Sectors Combined (N =115) 
Source  SS df MS F p 
Between Groups 1432.56 2 716.28 8.14 < 0.05 
Within Groups 9851.23 112 87.96   
Total 11283.79 114    

Note. Tukey’s HSD = p = .45; ω = .33.  
 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   39 
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
CSA advice in Mbeere North was being offered by public and private sector extensionists. The 
quality of CSA advice offered by private and public sector extension was fair although very few 
farmers had access to it. However, the quality of public extensionists' advice was better than 
that of the private sector. Collaborative efforts involving both private and public sectors 
resulted in better quality CSA advice. This is so because the sectors enhanced the qualities of 
one another. Whenever public sector agents organized field days, exhibits, and agricultural 
shows, private sector agents would be invited to participate. This provided private sector 
extensionists with opportunities to supplement the public agents’ advice thus enhancing the 
quality. There is need for sustainable public-private partnerships to sustain provision better 
quality advice.  
 
The limited access to extension advice, particularly that offered by public extension staff, may 
be attributed to content that was not focused on farmers' needs, lack of adequate staff, staff 
inefficiencies, limited transport facilities, and language barrier (Gikunda et al., 2021; Odhong’et 
al., 2018). These factors may have compromised the quality of extension. To improve on the 
quality of extension service, the County Government of Embu needs to commit much more 
human, financial, and transportation resources (Antwi- Agyei & Stringer, 2021). This will not 
only facilitate timely delivery of extension services but also advice that targets the needs of the 
farmers since there will be much more contacts between the farmers and the agents.  
Agrochemical companies also need to hire qualified extension agents who will not only market 
the products but also provide quality advice to farmers.  
 
It also emerged that extension effectiveness is a basic necessity to improved adoption of CSA 
practices. However, many of the extension workers were found to be moderately effective in 
the dissemination of CSA practices. This due to inability to meet some of the needs of the 
farmers and also the untimely delivery of some services. The county extension staff should be 
closely monitored and facilitated to ensure that agricultural information gets to the farmers at 
the right time. For extension programs to be beneficial to the farmers, the programs should be 
founded on the needs of the farmers. 
 
The adoption of CSA practices was found to be good as most farmers depended on indigenous 
knowledge accumulated over years. Soil and water management practices were primarily 
utilized by a majority of farmers to manage perennial soil erosion that was largely contributed 
by the topography of the area. There is need for public extension agents to organize training 
programs on soil and water conservation that would boost farmers indigenous knowledge and 
improve the efficiency, design, and construction of better structures such as terraces, contour 
bunds, and gabions.  Most of the farmers practiced agroforestry and mixed farming systems to 
minimize the risks associated with erratic rainfall patterns as agriculture is majorly rainfed. 
There is a need to design and implement intricate CSA programs involving both sectors of 
extension to improve the adoption levels of the practices in Mbeere North. The County 
Government of Embu would increase the adoption of CSA by facilitating extension workers 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   40 
 

through the provision of alternative means of transport like bicycles and motorbikes that 
require minimal operational costs. Increasing the number of extension staff by hiring frontline 
extension workers and close supervision to ensure efficient service delivery are also core to 
advance CSA adoption. A confirmatory study in other parts of the country with similar 
conditions as Mbeere North such as Northeastern would be worthwhile. A comparative study 
should be conducted in high potential areas to find out if private sector extension is skewed 
towards those areas.  
 

References  
 
Adamides, G. (2020). A review of climate-smart agriculture applications in Cyprus. Atmosphere, 

11(9), 1-15. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/11/9/898  
 
Antwi- Agyei, P., & Stringer, L. (2021). Improving the effectiveness of agricultural Extension 

services in supporting farmers to adapt to climate change: Insights from Northeastern 
Ghana. Climate Risk Management, 32,1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100304  

 
Ayansina, S. O., Oyenyinka, R. A., & Ayinde, A. F. (2015). Farmers' participation in the services of 

public and private extension in Southwestern Nigeria. British Journal of Applied Science 
& Technology, 8(3), 238–245. 
https://www.journalcjast.com/index.php/CJAST/article/view/7682/13686  

 
Chimoita, E. L., Onyango, C. M., Kimenju, J. W., & Gweyi-Onyango, J. P. (2017). Agricultural 

Extension approaches influencing uptake of improved sorghum technologies in Embu 
County, Kenya. Universal Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(1), 39–45. 
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujar.2017.050106 

 
De Pinto, A., Cenacchi, N., Kwon, H., & Koo, J. D. (2020). Climate smart agriculture and global 

food-crop production. PLoS ONE, 15(4), 1-19. 
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231764  

 
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2015). How to design and evaluate research in 

education (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. 
 
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and references. 

(4th ed.). Pearson. 
https://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/385/394732/george4answers.pdf 

 
Gikunda, M. R., Lawver, D. E., Baker, M., Boren-Alpizar, A. E., & Guo, W. (2021). Extension 

education needs for improved adoption of sustainable organic agriculture in Central 
Kenya. American Journal of Geographic Information System, 10(2), 61-71. 
http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.ajgis.20211002.01.html  



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   41 
 

Jirata, M., Grey, S., & Kilawe, E. (2016). Ethiopia climate -smart agriculture scoping study. Food 
and Agriculture Organization. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5518e.pdf 

 
Kurgat, B. K., Lamanna, C., Kimaro, A., Namoi, N., Manda, L., & Rosenstock, T. S. (2020). 

Adoption of climate-smart agriculture technologies in Tanzania. Frontiers in Sustainable 
Food Systems, 4(55), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00055  

 
Mamun-ur-Rashid, M. D., & Qijie, G. (2016). An assessment of public and private crop Extension 

services in Bangladesh. Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 9(1), 7–16. 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326316473_An_Assessment_of_Public_and
_Private_Crop_Extension_Services_in_Bangladesh  

 
Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries. (2017). Kenya climate smart agriculture 

strategy-2017-2026. https://www.adaptation-
undp.org/sites/default/files/resources/kenya_climate_smart_agriculture_strategy.pdf  

 
Muyanga, M., & Jayne, T. S. (2008). Private agricultural extension system in Kenya: Practice and 

policy lessons. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 14(2), 101–114. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/13892240802019063  

 
Nagargade, M., Tyagi, V., & Kumar, M. (2017). Climate smart agriculture: An option for changing 

climatic situation. In S. Jurić, Plant engineering (pp. 143–165). IntechOpen.  
https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.69971 

 
Netherlands Enterprise Agency. (2019). Climate smart agriculture-opportunities in the Kenyan 

horticulture sector. https://www.advanceconsulting.nl/assets/Uploads/CSA-
opportunities-in-Kenya.pdf 

 
Odhong’, C., Wilkes, A., & Dijk, S. V. (2018). Private-sector led extension in Kenya’s dairy sector. 

CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). 
https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93175  

 
Oduniyi, O. S., & Tekana, S. S. (2019). Adoption of agroforestry practices and climate change 

mitigation strategies in North West province of South Africa. International Journal of 
Climate Change Strategies and Management, 11(5), 716-729. 
https://doi.org/doi:10.1108/IJCCSM-02-2019-0009  

 
Rosegrant, M. W., Ewing, M., Yohe, G., Burton, I., & Huq, S. V.-S. (2008). Climate change and 

agriculture: Threats and opportunities . Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische 
Zusammenarbeit . 
https://www.preventionweb.net/files/11890_gtzclimatechangeagriculture1.pdf  

 



Gikunda et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v3i1.161   42 
 

Sala, S., Rossi, F., & David, S. (2016). Supporting agricultural extension towards climate-smart 
agriculture an overview of existing tools. Food and Agriculture Organization of the 
United Nations . http://www.fao.org/3/a-bl361e.pdf  

 
United Nations Environment Programme. (2016, May 11). The adaption finance gap report. 

https://unepdtu.org/uneps-adaptation-finance-gap-report-2016-released/ 
 
United States Agency for International Development. (2016). Climate-smart agriculture in the 

feed the future programs. 
https://www.agrilinks.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Framework%20CSA%20pap
er%20final.pdf  

 
Wambugu, C., Franzel, S., & Rioux, J. (2014). Options for climate-smart agriculture at Kaptumo 

sit in Kenya (Working Paper No. 185). World Agroforestry Centre. 
https://doi.org/10.5716/WP14394.PDF  

 
World Bank. (2012). Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils. 

http://hdl.handle.net/10986/11868  
 
World Bank. (2015). Future of food: Shaping a climate-smart global food system. 

http://hdl.handle.net/10986/22927  
 
World Bank & International Center for Tropical Agriculture. (2015). Climate-smart agriculture in 

Kenya. CSA country profiles for Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean Series. 
https://hdl.handle.net/10568/69545 

 
 
© 2022 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 
 


