Policy and institutional drivers of climate-smart agriculture transition in Sub-Saharan Africa: a review of governance, regulation, and institutional support with implications for South Africa

Climate change continues to intensify agricultural vulnerability in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), threatening food security, rural livelihoods, and sustainable agrifood systems through increasing droughts, floods, land degradation, and erratic rainfall patterns. Although Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) has emerged as a strategic approach for improving agricultural productivity, resilience, and environmental sustainability, its implementation across SSA remains uneven and constrained by weak governance systems, fragmented policies, inadequate institutional support, and limited stakeholder coordination. Existing studies have largely focused on technological and agronomic dimensions of CSA, with insufficient attention given to the governance and institutional factors influencing CSA transition. This study, therefore, conducted a scoping review to examine the policy and institutional drivers of CSA transition in SSA, with emphasis on governance systems, regulatory frameworks, and institutional support mechanisms. The study adopted the PRISMA-ScR scoping review framework and systematically reviewed 21 eligible studies obtained from major academic databases and institutional repositories published between 2010 and 2026. Thematic content analysis was employed to synthesize evidence on governance systems, institutional arrangements, policy coherence, climate finance, extension services, and stakeholder partnerships influencing CSA implementation. The findings revealed that effective CSA transition depends significantly on coherent policies, institutional coordination, extension systems, climate financing, land governance, and inclusive multi-stakeholder partnerships. However, institutional fragmentation, weak policy integration, inadequate financing, poor extension services, and insecure land tenure systems remain major barriers constraining CSA adoption in SSA. The study recommends strengthening policy coherence, institutional capacity, decentralized governance systems, climate financing mechanisms, and participatory governance approaches to enhance climate-resilient agricultural transformation across Sub-Saharan Africa.

Agriculture constitutes a critical sector in the economies of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), serving as a major source of employment, food security, poverty reduction, and rural livelihoods (Akinwole et al., 2024, 2025). The sector employs more than 60% of the labor force and contributes substantially to national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) across many African countries (World Bank, 2021; Budiman, 2022; Dziwornu et al., 2025; Kolapo and Ojo, 2026; Kolapo and Sieber, 2025). However, agriculture in SSA remains highly vulnerable to climate change due to its dependence on rain-fed production systems, limited adaptive capacity, weak infrastructure, and widespread poverty among smallholder farmers. Increasing temperatures, erratic rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts, floods, desertification, and land degradation continue to threaten agricultural productivity and food systems sustainability in the region (IPCC, 2022; Khumalo et al., 2026; Kolapo et al., 2025a,b,c; Kolapo and Kolapo, 2023). Studies have shown that climate variability has significantly reduced crop yields, disrupted rural livelihoods, and intensified food insecurity across several SSA countries (Nyasimi et al., 2014; Musara et al., 2021; Ogisi and Begho, 2023; Machete et al., 2024; Kolapo et al., 2022; Kolapo and Didunyemi, 2024; Ojo et al., 2025).

The intensification of climate-related agricultural risks has generated increasing interest in sustainable agricultural transformation pathways capable of simultaneously improving productivity, enhancing resilience, and promoting environmental sustainability. Within this context, Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) has emerged as an important framework for addressing the interconnected challenges of food insecurity, climate vulnerability, and environmental degradation. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) defines CSA as an approach that sustainably increases agricultural productivity, strengthens resilience and adaptation to climate change, and reduces greenhouse gas emissions where feasible (FAO, 2013; Rosenstock et al., 2016; Thornton et al., 2018). CSA encompasses a broad range of practices and innovations including conservation agriculture, agroforestry, integrated soil fertility management, climate-resilient crop varieties, efficient irrigation systems, digital climate advisory services, and climate information systems (Lipper et al., 2014; Senyolo et al., 2018; Mutenje et al., 2019; Omotoso and Omotayo, 2024). Over the past decade, CSA has gained substantial policy recognition within regional and national development agendas in SSA. Several African countries have integrated CSA into national agricultural investment plans, climate adaptation strategies, Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and sustainable development frameworks. Regional initiatives coordinated by institutions such as the African Union, the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) have further strengthened political commitment toward climate-resilient agricultural systems (Sibanda et al., 2017; Sitko et al., 2021; Partey et al., 2020). Furthermore, international organizations including the World Bank, CGIAR, FAO, and IFAD have increasingly invested in CSA-related interventions aimed at improving food systems resilience and rural livelihoods across Africa.

Despite increasing investments and policy attention, the transition toward climate-smart agricultural systems in SSA remains uneven, fragmented, and relatively slow. Existing evidence suggests that the successful implementation and scaling of CSA practices depend not only on technological innovations but also on supportive governance systems, coherent policies, strong institutions, and effective regulatory frameworks. Weak institutional capacity, fragmented governance arrangements, poor inter-agency coordination, inadequate climate finance, insecure land tenure systems, and weak agricultural extension services continue to constrain CSA adoption among smallholder farmers in many African countries (Totin et al., 2018; Zerihun, 2020; Slayi et al., 2023; Wakweya, 2023). Similarly, limited dissemination of climate information, inadequate farmer training, and weak institutional support mechanisms reduce the effectiveness and sustainability of CSA interventions (Barasa et al., 2021).

Governance systems and institutional arrangements are increasingly recognized as fundamental drivers of climate-resilient agricultural transformation. Effective governance facilitates coordination among ministries, research institutions, development agencies, private-sector actors, civil society organizations, and farming communities. Strong institutions help create enabling environments for policy implementation, resource mobilization, knowledge dissemination, and innovation diffusion necessary for CSA transition. Conversely, fragmented governance systems characterized by overlapping institutional mandates, weak decentralization, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and policy inconsistencies undermine agricultural adaptation efforts and limit the scalability of CSA initiatives (Ghimire et al., 2022). Policy coherence remains another critical challenge affecting CSA implementation in SSA. In many countries, agricultural policies prioritize productivity enhancement and commercialization with limited integration of climate adaptation and environmental sustainability objectives. At the same time, climate change policies often lack practical implementation mechanisms tailored to agricultural realities and local livelihood systems. Kubanza and Oladele (2024) observed that weak awareness of CSA policies, institutional fragmentation, and inadequate stakeholder participation significantly hinder climate-smart agricultural transition in African communities. Furthermore, poor coordination between environmental agencies, agricultural ministries, local governments, and rural institutions frequently creates implementation gaps that weaken policy effectiveness.

Institutional support mechanisms such as agricultural extension services, public-private partnerships, climate finance systems, farmer cooperatives, research institutions, and digital agricultural platforms also play critical roles in facilitating CSA adoption and scaling. Research indicates that farmers’ access to institutional support significantly influences their adaptive capacity, technological uptake, and resilience outcomes. In particular, climate information systems, extension advisory services, and participatory governance structures have been identified as important mechanisms for improving farmers’ access to knowledge, resources, and adaptation strategies (Lipper et al., 2014). Similarly, public-private partnerships are increasingly viewed as strategic instruments for mobilizing investment, technological innovation, and institutional coordination necessary for climate-resilient agricultural transformation in SSA.

Although scholarly interest in CSA has expanded considerably, existing literature has largely focused on technological innovations, adoption determinants, productivity impacts, and adaptation outcomes, with relatively limited emphasis on governance systems, institutional drivers, and regulatory frameworks shaping CSA transitions in SSA. Evidence regarding how policies, governance structures, institutional capacities, and regulatory mechanisms interact to facilitate or constrain CSA implementation remains fragmented across disciplines and geographical contexts. Totin et al. (2018) argue that institutional dimensions of CSA remain underexplored despite their central importance in supporting sustainable agricultural transformation. Against this backdrop, this study seeks to undertake a scoping review of the policy and institutional drivers of Climate-Smart Agriculture transition in Sub-Saharan Africa. Specifically, the study aims to systematically map and synthesize existing evidence on governance systems, regulatory frameworks, and institutional support mechanisms influencing CSA adoption, implementation, and scaling across the region. Through identifying institutional barriers, governance gaps, and enabling policy pathways, the review intends to contribute to the development of coherent, inclusive, and climate-resilient agricultural governance systems capable of supporting sustainable agrifood transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa.

This study will contribute to Sub-Saharan Africa by providing a comprehensive understanding of the governance systems, regulatory frameworks, and institutional support mechanisms shaping Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) transition across the region. The study synthesizes fragmented evidence on the policy and institutional drivers of CSA adoption, thereby offering practical insights to strengthen climate-resilient agricultural governance. Its findings will support policymakers, governments, development agencies, and regional institutions in designing coherent agricultural and climate policies that enhance food security, environmental sustainability, and rural livelihoods. Furthermore, the study will identify institutional gaps, governance bottlenecks, and policy inconsistencies limiting CSA implementation and scaling. Proposing pathways to improve institutional coordination, access to climate finance, extension services, and stakeholder collaboration, the study will contribute to the transformation of sustainable agrifood systems and climate adaptation efforts in SSA while advancing scholarly discourse on climate governance and agricultural sustainability.

Unique contribution of this review

Although several reviews have examined Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) in Africa, this scoping review makes several important contributions that extend existing knowledge. Earlier reviews have generally concentrated on institutional dimensions (Totin et al., 2018), policy implementation within specific national contexts (Kubanza and Oladele, 2024), or broader technological and adoption-related aspects of CSA (Barasa et al., 2021; Makate, 2019). In contrast, the present review provides a comprehensive synthesis of the governance architecture underpinning CSA transition across Sub-Saharan Africa. First, this review moves beyond describing institutional arrangements by examining the interaction among governance systems, regulatory frameworks, institutional capacity, climate finance, extension services, land governance, and multi-stakeholder partnerships. Rather than treating these governance components independently, the review demonstrates how their interactions collectively determine the success or failure of CSA implementation. Second, unlike Totin et al. (2018), whose review primarily examined institutional perspectives surrounding CSA innovation and institutional arrangements, the present review adopts a broader governance perspective by integrating public policy, regulatory systems, decentralized governance, financing mechanisms, extension delivery, stakeholder collaboration, and implementation barriers into a unified analytical framework. This provides a more holistic understanding of governance processes driving CSA transition across SSA. Third, whereas Kubanza and Oladele (2024) focused on climate-smart agricultural policy implementation within a single South African municipality, this review synthesizes evidence from across Sub-Saharan Africa, enabling cross-country comparison of governance approaches, institutional capacities, and policy coherence. This regional perspective identifies common governance bottlenecks while highlighting contextual differences influencing implementation outcomes. Fourth, this review incorporates recent evidence published through 2026, capturing emerging developments in climate governance, digital agricultural governance, climate finance, cooperative institutions, and multi-level governance that were unavailable to previous reviews. Consequently, the review reflects the rapidly evolving institutional landscape surrounding CSA implementation. Fifth, the review contributes conceptually by developing integrated governance frameworks that illustrate relationships among regulatory systems, institutional actors, enabling mechanisms, implementation barriers, and policy pathways. These frameworks provide a systems-level understanding of CSA governance rather than simply cataloguing institutional factors identified in previous studies. Finally, the review translates the synthesized evidence into practical policy recommendations for strengthening climate-resilient agricultural governance, particularly within the South African context. Linking regional evidence to country-level governance implications, the review offers practical guidance for policymakers seeking to improve policy coherence, institutional coordination, climate finance, decentralized governance, and stakeholder participation.

Research design

This study adopts a scoping review research design to systematically map, synthesize, and analyze existing literature on the policy and institutional drivers of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) transition in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). A scoping review is considered appropriate for this study because the subject area is broad, multidisciplinary, and characterized by fragmented evidence dispersed across different policy, governance, agricultural, environmental, and institutional studies. Scoping reviews are particularly useful for identifying key concepts, knowledge gaps, institutional trends, policy frameworks, and emerging research themes within a complex body of literature (Arksey and O’Malley, 2005). The study was guided by the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005), further enhanced by Levac et al. (2010) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) (Figure 1). These frameworks provide a rigorous and transparent procedure for identifying, selecting, charting, and synthesizing relevant evidence. The design is suitable because it allows for comprehensive examination of governance systems, institutional arrangements, regulatory frameworks, and policy support mechanisms influencing CSA implementation across diverse contexts in SSA. The research design involves five major stages. The first stage involves identifying the research questions that guide the scope of the review. The study focuses on understanding the governance systems, institutional mechanisms, regulatory structures, and policy instruments that facilitate or constrain CSA transition in SSA. The second stage involves identifying relevant studies through systematic literature searches in major academic databases and institutional repositories. Databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Google Scholar, AGRIS, and JSTOR were used to retrieve peer-reviewed journal articles, policy reports, conference papers, institutional publications, and gray literature relevant to CSA governance and institutional support systems. The third stage involves study selection based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria will cover studies published in English between 2010 and 2026 that specifically address CSA, governance systems, institutional arrangements, climate policy, agricultural regulation, climate finance, extension services, or institutional support mechanisms within SSA. Studies focusing solely on agronomic or technical aspects of CSA without governance or institutional relevance will be excluded. This process ensures that only studies relevant to the objectives of the review are included. The fourth stage involves data charting and extraction. Relevant information was extracted from selected studies using a structured data extraction framework. Extracted variables include author(s), year of publication, country or region of study, governance frameworks, institutional support mechanisms, regulatory approaches, policy instruments, institutional barriers, and key findings. This stage facilitates systematic organization and comparison of evidence across studies. The fifth stage involves collating, summarizing, and synthesizing findings using thematic content analysis. Themes such as policy coherence, institutional capacity, extension systems, climate finance governance, public-private partnerships, stakeholder coordination, and regulatory barriers were identified and analyzed. The thematic synthesis enables the study to map major institutional drivers, governance challenges, and policy gaps affecting CSA transition in SSA. The scoping review design is expected to generate a comprehensive understanding of the institutional and governance dimensions of CSA in SSA. It also provides evidence-based insights for strengthening climate-resilient agricultural governance systems, enhancing policy coordination, and improving institutional support mechanisms necessary for sustainable agrifood systems transformation in the region.

Although the initial database search identified 2,633 records, only 21 studies satisfied all eligibility criteria. The large reduction reflects the highly specific focus of this review on governance systems, institutional arrangements, regulatory frameworks, and institutional support mechanisms underpinning Climate-Smart Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa. Most retrieved publications primarily examined agronomic technologies, productivity outcomes, adoption determinants, or climate adaptation practices without explicitly addressing governance or institutional dimensions. Consequently, these studies were excluded to maintain conceptual consistency and ensure that the final synthesis directly addressed the review objectives.

Eligibility criteria

The eligibility criteria for this scoping review were guided by the study objectives and research questions to ensure the inclusion of relevant and high-quality literature on the policy and institutional drivers of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) transition in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The review includes peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers, policy documents, institutional reports, working papers, and gray literature that examine governance systems, regulatory frameworks, institutional arrangements, climate policies, agricultural policies, extension services, climate finance, or institutional support mechanisms related to CSA in SSA. Studies published in English between 2010 and 2026 were considered because the concept of CSA gained global prominence after its introduction by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in the early 2010s. The review includes studies conducted within countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and those addressing regional or continental CSA governance frameworks. Both qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method studies will be considered to capture diverse evidence and perspectives. However, studies focusing exclusively on agronomic or technical dimensions of CSA without policy, governance, or institutional relevance were excluded. Non-English publications, duplicate studies, editorials, opinion papers, and studies conducted outside SSA were also be excluded from the review.

Source of data

This study relies exclusively on secondary data obtained from published and unpublished literature relevant to Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA), governance systems, institutional arrangements, and regulatory frameworks in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Data were sourced from peer-reviewed journal articles, conference proceedings, policy briefs, institutional reports, government publications, working papers, dissertations, and other forms of gray literature. The use of secondary data is appropriate because the study adopts a scoping review design aimed at systematically mapping and synthesizing existing evidence on the policy and institutional drivers of CSA transition in SSA. Relevant literature were retrieved from major academic databases and repositories including Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Google Scholar, and AGRIS. Additional documents will be sourced from international organizations and institutions such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Bank, CGIAR, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to ensure comprehensive coverage of relevant policy and institutional evidence.

Search strategy

The search strategy for this study involves a systematic and comprehensive search of electronic databases and institutional repositories to identify relevant literature on the policy and institutional drivers of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) transition in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Key databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and SpringerLink were searched using predefined keywords and Boolean operators such as “Climate-Smart Agriculture,” “governance,” “institutional support,” “climate policy,” “regulatory framework,” “agricultural policy,” and “Sub-Saharan Africa.” Boolean operators, including AND and OR were used to refine the search process. Additional literature was sourced from institutional websites including the FAO, World Bank, and CGIAR to capture gray literature and policy documents relevant to CSA governance and institutional frameworks.

Data extraction and analysis

Data extraction was conducted using a structured data-charting framework developed in line with scoping review guidelines proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) and PRISMA-ScR. Relevant information will be systematically extracted from eligible studies, including author(s), year of publication, country or region of study, research objectives, governance systems, institutional support mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, policy instruments, methodological approaches, key findings, and identified barriers or drivers of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) transition. The extracted data were organized using Microsoft Excel to facilitate coding, categorization, and comparison across studies. Data analysis was primarily employed to employ thematic content analysis to identify recurring themes, patterns, institutional trends, governance challenges, and policy gaps related to CSA implementation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Themes such as policy coherence, institutional capacity, extension services, climate finance, stakeholder coordination, and regulatory support will be synthesized narratively to provide comprehensive insights into the institutional and governance dimensions of CSA transition.

Assessment of evidence robustness

Although formal methodological quality appraisal is not a mandatory component of scoping reviews (Arksey and O’Malley, 2005; Tricco et al., 2018), an assessment of the robustness of the included evidence was undertaken to enhance the transparency and interpretability of the review findings. Rather than evaluating studies using a formal risk-of-bias instrument, this review assessed the overall strength and consistency of the evidence according to the nature of the publication, methodological approach, geographical representation, thematic relevance, and consistency of findings across studies. First, the review considered the publication quality of the included literature. Most of the 21 studies comprised peer-reviewed journal articles published in reputable international journals specializing in climate change, agricultural sustainability, environmental governance, and rural development. Additional evidence was drawn from recognized institutional publications produced by organizations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), CGIAR, the World Bank, and other international research institutions. The predominance of peer-reviewed literature increases confidence in the scientific rigor and credibility of the synthesized evidence. Second, the review evaluated the methodological diversity of the included studies. The final evidence base incorporated qualitative case studies, quantitative empirical analyses, mixed-methods research, policy analyses, institutional assessments, systematic reviews, and governance studies. This methodological diversity enabled triangulation of findings from multiple research traditions and reduced dependence on any single analytical approach. The convergence of evidence from different methodologies strengthened confidence in the major governance and institutional themes identified throughout the review. Third, the review assessed the geographical representation of the evidence. The included studies covered a broad range of Sub-Saharan African countries, including South Africa, Ethiopia, Ghana, Benin, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Kenya, and several regional and continental analyses. This diversity provided a comprehensive understanding of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) governance across varying institutional, political, and socio-economic contexts. At the same time, the review recognizes that evidence remains unevenly distributed, with relatively greater representation from Eastern and Southern Africa than from Central African countries. Consequently, the findings should be interpreted as representing dominant regional patterns rather than uniformly reflecting all national contexts within SSA. Fourth, the robustness assessment considered the conceptual relevance of each study. Only studies that explicitly examined governance systems, institutional arrangements, regulatory frameworks, policy coherence, institutional support mechanisms, climate finance, agricultural extension, land governance, or stakeholder partnerships were included in the synthesis. Studies focusing exclusively on agronomic performance, technological innovations, crop productivity, or adoption behaviour without addressing governance or institutional dimensions were excluded. This ensured that the evidence synthesized directly addressed the objectives of the review and maintained conceptual consistency throughout the analysis. Fifth, the review examined the consistency of evidence across studies. Strong convergence was observed regarding several institutional drivers of CSA transition. Across multiple studies, effective policy coherence, institutional coordination, extension services, secure land tenure, climate finance, decentralized governance, and multi-stakeholder collaboration were consistently identified as enabling factors for CSA implementation. Likewise, recurring governance barriers, including fragmented policies, weak institutional capacity, inadequate financing, poor extension systems, insecure land tenure, and limited stakeholder participation, were reported across different countries and methodological approaches. The recurrence of these findings across diverse settings enhances confidence that the identified governance challenges represent systemic issues rather than isolated national experiences.

Descriptive summary of the included studies

The 21 studies included in this review represent diverse methodological approaches, including systematic reviews, policy analyses, empirical household surveys, panel studies, institutional case studies, economic assessments, and conceptual framework papers. Geographically, the evidence spans several Sub-Saharan African countries, particularly South Africa, Ethiopia, Ghana, Benin, and broader regional assessments, with a number of studies providing continental or global governance perspectives relevant to SSA. The synthesis demonstrates that policy coherence, institutional coordination, extension services, climate finance, secure land tenure, farmer cooperatives, public institutions, and multi-stakeholder partnerships consistently emerge as the principal governance drivers of CSA transition. Conversely, institutional fragmentation, weak governance systems, inadequate financing, poor extension support, insecure land rights, and limited stakeholder participation were repeatedly identified as major barriers to scaling climate-smart agriculture across the region. Collectively, the reviewed studies indicate that successful CSA implementation depends not only on technological innovations but also on the strength and effectiveness of governance systems and institutional arrangements capable of supporting long-term agricultural transformation.

The thematic synthesis (Table 1) indicates that governance-related evidence is concentrated around eight interrelated themes: policy coherence, institutional capacity, agricultural extension, climate finance, land governance, multi-stakeholder partnerships, social inclusion, and innovation systems. Policy coherence and institutional strengthening emerged as the most frequently reported governance determinants, while inadequate financing, fragmented governance arrangements, weak extension services, and insecure land tenure consistently constrained CSA implementation. Although the themes are analytically distinct, the reviewed studies demonstrate that they operate as mutually reinforcing components of an integrated governance system. Effective CSA transition therefore depends not on isolated policy interventions but on coordinated governance mechanisms that simultaneously strengthen institutions, improve stakeholder collaboration, mobilize financial resources, enhance knowledge dissemination, and promote adaptive learning across multiple administrative levels.

Existing governance systems and policy frameworks supporting climate-smart agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa

Governance systems and policy frameworks play a critical role in facilitating the transition toward Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). As climate change increasingly threatens agricultural productivity, food security, and rural livelihoods, governments, regional institutions, development agencies, and local stakeholders across SSA have intensified efforts to establish supportive institutional and regulatory environments for CSA implementation. Existing evidence demonstrates that effective governance systems, coherent policy frameworks, institutional coordination, and stakeholder participation significantly influence the adoption, scaling, and sustainability of CSA practices in the region. Several countries in SSA have integrated CSA into national agricultural policies, climate adaptation plans, and sustainable development strategies. Regional frameworks coordinated by institutions such as the African Union, the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), and national ministries of agriculture have increasingly recognized CSA as a pathway for enhancing resilience, productivity, and environmental sustainability. However, the effectiveness of these frameworks varies considerably across countries due to differences in governance capacity, institutional coordination, policy coherence, and resource availability.

One important governance issue identified in SSA is policy coherence between food security, climate change adaptation (CCA), and disaster risk reduction (DRR). Zembe et al. (2022) examined policy coherence in South Africa and found significant misalignments in policy objectives, implementation processes, and monitoring systems among food security, climate adaptation, and disaster risk reduction institutions. The study revealed weak coordination mechanisms and inadequate institutional integration, which limit the effectiveness of CSA-related interventions. To address these gaps, the authors proposed a policy coherence framework aimed at aligning institutional objectives, implementation plans, and monitoring systems to improve governance effectiveness and climate resilience outcomes. Similarly, Makate (2019) emphasized that the scaling of CSA innovations in African smallholder agriculture depends heavily on effective institutional arrangements and supportive policy frameworks. Using the Institutional Analysis and Development framework, the study argued that CSA adoption is not autonomous but requires strong facilitation through policies, institutional support systems, and stakeholder coordination. The study further highlighted that clear policy strategies help define institutional responsibilities, improve accountability, reduce adoption barriers, and strengthen sustainability in the scaling process.

Institutional support systems such as cooperatives, agricultural extension services, local institutions, and community organizations also constitute essential governance mechanisms supporting CSA implementation in SSA. Kahsay and Endalew (2025) found that agricultural cooperatives in Ethiopia significantly enhanced the adoption of climate adaptation practices among smallholder farmers. The study demonstrated that cooperative membership increased access to institutional resources, information sharing, partnerships, and climate adaptation strategies. Furthermore, the findings showed positive spillover effects where even non-members in cooperative communities adopted more adaptation practices due to improved institutional interactions and community learning systems. In South Africa, Mwadzingeni et al. (2020) examined the role of localized institutional actors in improving the performance of smallholder irrigation schemes. The study found that community support systems, academic institutions, extension services, and local organizational linkages positively influenced irrigation productivity and sustainability. The authors concluded that institutional collaboration and integrated governance systems are crucial for improving service delivery and strengthening agricultural resilience under changing climatic conditions. Agricultural extension systems remain one of the most important institutional mechanisms supporting CSA adoption in SSA. Bontsa et al. (2023) investigated the quality of climate change extension services provided to smallholder farmers in South Africa and found that although farmers had access to extension advisory services, the quality of climate-related support remained inadequate. Factors such as age, education, knowledge of climate change, and access to extension services significantly influenced farmers’ perceptions of service quality. The study recommended strengthening institutional training, improving accessibility of extension services, and enhancing climate-related advisory systems to improve CSA adoption outcomes.

Institutional governance also influences the adoption of agroforestry and land management innovations. A study on agroforestry adoption in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa found that access to extension services, institutional trust, credit facilities, farmer organizations, and information exchange significantly promoted the adoption of agroforestry innovations. The findings suggest that governance systems capable of facilitating institutional trust, social participation, and resource accessibility create enabling conditions for climate-smart agricultural transitions. Financial and regulatory governance frameworks further shape CSA implementation in SSA. Branca et al. (2021) found that while CSA practices generate substantial economic and environmental benefits, high initial investment costs often discourage adoption among smallholder farmers. The study argued that public policy support, financial incentives, and payment systems for mitigation benefits are necessary to encourage wider CSA scaling. This demonstrates the importance of governance systems that provide climate finance, subsidies, and regulatory support mechanisms to facilitate climate-resilient agricultural transformation. Land governance and property rights systems also influence climate adaptation decisions in SSA. Yegbemey et al. (2013) using evidence from Benin, found that secure land ownership positively affected farmers’ willingness to adopt climate adaptation strategies. Institutional arrangements governing land rights therefore play a critical role in enhancing farmers’ adaptive capacity and investment decisions regarding CSA technologies.

Furthermore, governance systems supporting climate-smart agricultural innovation require inclusive stakeholder participation and climate justice considerations. Research on climate-smart agriculture policy and justice highlighted that current CSA approaches often inadequately address the needs of smallholder farmers due to unequal distribution of costs and benefits between agribusiness actors and vulnerable communities. The study argued that stronger participation of local civil society organizations, farmer groups, and local governance institutions is necessary for equitable and inclusive CSA implementation. Recent evidence also demonstrates the growing role of institutional partnerships, climate information systems, and social support interventions in promoting CSA adoption. Studies from Ghana, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa revealed that institutional coordination, extension support, climate learning networks, access to credit, farmer education, and local governance structures significantly influence farmers’ adoption decisions and resilience outcomes.

Although most studies identified institutional coordination as a prerequisite for successful CSA implementation, the relative importance of governance mechanisms differed across regions. Evidence from South Africa emphasized policy coherence and intergovernmental coordination as primary implementation constraints (Zembe et al., 2022), whereas studies from Ethiopia highlighted farmer cooperatives and decentralized institutions as the principal drivers of adoption (Kahsay and Endalew, 2025). These differences suggest that governance priorities are shaped by national institutional maturity, decentralization arrangements, and the historical organization of agricultural support systems rather than representing universally applicable governance models (see Table 2).

Comparative analysis of governance evidence across sub-Saharan Africa

The reviewed literature demonstrates broad agreement that governance systems are fundamental to the successful transition toward Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) across Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, the institutional drivers, governance priorities, and implementation challenges differ considerably across regions, reflecting variations in political institutions, policy maturity, socio-economic conditions, and agricultural development pathways. These regional differences suggest that a standardized governance approach is unlikely to achieve consistent CSA outcomes across SSA, emphasizing instead the importance of context-specific institutional reforms. Evidence from Southern Africa, particularly South Africa, consistently identifies policy coherence and institutional coordination as the most significant governance challenges constraining CSA implementation. Zembe et al. (2022) demonstrated that food security, climate change adaptation, and disaster risk reduction policies operate largely as parallel policy domains with limited coordination among implementing institutions. This institutional fragmentation weakens implementation efficiency, creates overlapping mandates, and reduces accountability in climate-resilient agricultural planning. Similar governance concerns are reflected in Kubanza and Oladele (2024), who reported that inadequate awareness of CSA policies, fragmented institutional responsibilities, and weak stakeholder participation continue to limit policy implementation at the local government level in South Africa. These findings suggest that, within Southern Africa, governance effectiveness depends less on the absence of climate policies than on improving coordination among existing institutions and ensuring that sectoral policies are integrated into coherent implementation frameworks. Institutional weaknesses in Southern Africa also extend to public service delivery mechanisms, particularly agricultural extension systems. Bontsa et al. (2023) found that although extension services were available to many smallholder farmers, their effectiveness was constrained by inadequate technical capacity, insufficient climate-specific knowledge, and limited accessibility. Likewise, Makamane et al. (2023) identified inadequate farmer training, weak institutional support, and limited dissemination of climate information as major constraints affecting the adoption of CSA technologies. Collectively, these studies indicate that governance challenges in Southern Africa are characterized not only by policy fragmentation but also by deficiencies in institutional capacity, suggesting that strengthening implementation institutions may be equally important as policy reform.

In contrast, evidence from East Africa, particularly Ethiopia and Kenya, places greater emphasis on decentralized institutions, farmer cooperatives, and community-based governance mechanisms as key drivers of CSA adoption. Kahsay and Endalew (2025) demonstrated that cooperative membership significantly increased farmers’ adoption of climate adaptation practices through improved access to information, institutional support, financial resources, and collective learning. Importantly, the study also identified positive spillover effects whereby non-members benefited indirectly from knowledge diffusion within cooperative communities. These findings indicate that local institutions can substantially enhance adaptive capacity even where formal government support remains limited. Rather than emphasizing national policy coherence, East African studies suggest that effective local institutions and community organizations play a decisive role in translating national climate policies into practical adaptation strategies.

Evidence from Kenya further reinforces the importance of institutional collaboration through international research partnerships and innovation platforms. Rosenstock et al. (2016) and Thornton et al. (2018) emphasized the need for coordinated research institutions, policy actors, and agricultural stakeholders to establish evidence-based priorities for CSA implementation. These studies shift attention beyond government institutions toward innovation systems capable of linking scientific research, policy development, and local implementation. Compared with Southern Africa, therefore, governance discussions in East Africa place relatively greater emphasis on institutional learning, collaborative research, and decentralized organizational structures.

Studies conducted in West Africa, including Ghana, Benin, Mali, and regional assessments, highlight another dimension of governance: the importance of institutional integration and climate finance in facilitating CSA transition. Dziwornu et al. (2025), through an assessment of 153 CSA initiatives in Ghana, found that government agencies played the dominant coordinating role in implementing climate-smart interventions. However, implementation effectiveness varied substantially according to the strength of partnerships among public institutions, development organizations, research institutions, and local communities. This suggests that government leadership alone is insufficient unless complemented by strong institutional collaboration across sectors. Similarly, evidence from Benin illustrates the importance of governance arrangements surrounding land tenure systems. Yegbemey et al. (2013) found that secure land ownership significantly increased farmers’ willingness to invest in climate adaptation strategies. Unlike studies emphasizing extension systems or policy coherence, this evidence demonstrates that institutional security regarding property rights directly influences farmers’ long-term investment decisions. Weak land governance therefore represents a structural barrier that cannot be addressed solely through technological interventions or improved extension services. Regional evidence synthesized by Totin et al. (2018) further demonstrates that institutional arrangements supporting CSA vary considerably across SSA because governance structures are embedded within different political, administrative, and socio-economic systems. Rather than identifying a universally effective governance model, Totin et al. argue that successful CSA implementation depends on institutional flexibility, stakeholder engagement, and the capacity of governance systems to coordinate multiple actors operating at different administrative levels. This observation is reinforced by Makate (2019), who contends that CSA scaling requires governance systems capable of clearly defining institutional responsibilities, reducing implementation barriers, and facilitating collaboration among government agencies, research institutions, extension organizations, and farming communities.

Despite these regional differences, several governance themes consistently emerge across the reviewed studies. Effective institutional coordination, policy coherence, agricultural extension, secure land tenure, climate finance, and multi-stakeholder partnerships are repeatedly identified as essential conditions for successful CSA implementation irrespective of geographical location. Conversely, fragmented governance systems, inadequate institutional capacity, weak financing mechanisms, poor extension services, and limited stakeholder participation remain common barriers across Southern, Eastern, and West African contexts. The recurrence of these findings across diverse institutional settings strengthens confidence that these governance challenges represent systemic constraints affecting CSA transition throughout SSA rather than isolated national experiences. Nevertheless, the comparative evidence also reveals important differences in governance priorities. Southern African studies predominantly focus on improving policy integration and institutional coordination; East African research emphasizes decentralized governance, cooperatives, and institutional learning; while West African evidence highlights government leadership, land governance, institutional partnerships, and financing mechanisms. These distinctions demonstrate that governance interventions should be tailored to national and regional institutional contexts rather than adopting uniform policy prescriptions across SSA.

Finally, the strength of the available evidence varies across governance dimensions. Institutional coordination, extension services, cooperative organizations, and land governance are supported by multiple empirical studies conducted across several countries, providing relatively robust evidence for their importance in CSA implementation. In contrast, evidence regarding digital governance systems, adaptive governance, governance monitoring frameworks, and institutional accountability remains comparatively limited within the reviewed literature. These emerging areas therefore represent important priorities for future research aimed at strengthening climate-resilient agricultural governance across Sub-Saharan Africa.

Assessing the role of regulatory frameworks, public institutions, and multi-stakeholder partnerships in promoting climate-smart agriculture transition in sub-Saharan Africa

The transition toward Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) depends significantly on the effectiveness of regulatory frameworks, public institutions, and multi-stakeholder partnerships that shape agricultural governance, resource allocation, institutional coordination, and implementation processes. As climate change continues to intensify agricultural vulnerability in SSA through droughts, floods, land degradation, and declining productivity, governments and development actors increasingly recognize CSA as a strategic pathway for achieving food security, climate resilience, and sustainable agricultural transformation. However, the effectiveness and scalability of CSA practices are strongly influenced by the quality of governance systems and institutional support mechanisms available within countries and regions.

Regulatory frameworks play a fundamental role in creating enabling environments for CSA implementation. These frameworks include agricultural policies, climate adaptation strategies, land tenure regulations, environmental laws, food security policies, and disaster risk reduction mechanisms that guide climate-resilient agricultural development. Effective regulatory systems provide institutional clarity, establish implementation guidelines, strengthen accountability, and facilitate coordination among stakeholders involved in CSA initiatives. Zembe et al. (2022) emphasized the importance of policy coherence in South Africa by demonstrating that fragmented governance arrangements and weak alignment between food security, climate adaptation, and disaster risk reduction policies undermine effective climate resilience planning. The study revealed that inconsistencies in policy objectives, implementation procedures, and monitoring systems create institutional inefficiencies that hinder coordinated CSA interventions. Similarly, Makate (2019) argued that regulatory and policy frameworks are critical for scaling CSA innovations among smallholder farming communities in Africa. According to the study, policy frameworks establish the “rules of the game” by defining stakeholder responsibilities, institutional roles, and implementation priorities necessary for scaling climate-smart technologies. The study further noted that effective policy systems help minimize adoption barriers, strengthen institutional accountability, and improve sustainability in CSA implementation processes. Without supportive regulatory frameworks, CSA adoption remains slow and fragmented despite the proven effectiveness of many climate-smart technologies. Land governance and property rights regulations also significantly influence CSA transition in SSA. Yegbemey et al. (2013), examining adaptation strategies among maize farmers in northern Benin, found that secure land ownership positively influenced farmers’ decisions to adopt climate adaptation measures. The study demonstrated that institutional arrangements governing land rights, resource access, and tenure security play an essential role in strengthening farmers’ adaptive capacity and willingness to invest in long-term climate-smart practices. Weak land governance systems, by contrast, discourage investment in sustainable agricultural innovations and undermine resilience-building efforts.

Public institutions constitute another critical pillar supporting CSA transition across SSA. Government ministries, extension agencies, research institutions, climate information services, local governments, and public finance systems collectively provide the institutional infrastructure necessary for implementing climate-smart agricultural policies and interventions. Public institutions facilitate knowledge dissemination, technological innovation, extension support, climate advisory services, and resource mobilization required for agricultural adaptation and resilience building. Agricultural extension services are particularly important institutional mechanisms supporting CSA adoption among smallholder farmers. Bontsa et al. (2023) assessed the quality of climate change extension services in South Africa and found that although farmers had access to extension advisory systems, the quality and effectiveness of these services remained inadequate. The study identified age, education, knowledge of climate change, and institutional accessibility as major determinants of farmers’ perceptions regarding extension quality. The authors recommended strengthening institutional capacity through enhanced training, improved service delivery systems, and increased accessibility to climate-related agricultural information.

Public financial institutions and climate financing systems also play essential roles in promoting CSA transition. Branca et al. (2021) found that although CSA practices provide substantial economic and environmental benefits, high initial investment costs remain major barriers to adoption among smallholder farmers in Southern Africa. The study emphasized the need for public support mechanisms such as subsidies, mitigation incentives, climate finance schemes, and payment systems for ecosystem services to facilitate widespread CSA adoption. Public institutions therefore play a central role in mobilizing financial resources, reducing investment risks, and promoting equitable access to climate-smart technologies. Multi-stakeholder partnerships have increasingly emerged as essential governance mechanisms for accelerating CSA transition in SSA. These partnerships involve collaboration among governments, research institutions, private-sector actors, civil society organizations, farmer cooperatives, development agencies, and local communities. Such partnerships facilitate knowledge sharing, technological innovation, resource mobilization, institutional coordination, and participatory decision-making processes necessary for effective CSA implementation. Davila et al. (2024) demonstrated the important role of cooperatives in promoting climate adaptation practices among smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. The study found that cooperative membership enhanced farmers’ access to information, resources, institutional support, and collective action mechanisms necessary for adopting climate adaptation practices. Furthermore, the study revealed spillover effects whereby non-members in cooperative communities also benefited from institutional interactions and local knowledge-sharing systems. These findings underscore the importance of farmer organizations and community-based partnerships in strengthening institutional resilience and promoting CSA adoption at local levels.

Likewise, Mwadzingeni et al. (2020) highlighted the significance of localized institutional actors, including academic institutions, community organizations, extension services, and local governance structures, in improving irrigation scheme performance in South Africa. The study showed that institutional collaboration and integrated stakeholder support positively influenced agricultural productivity and sustainability outcomes. Strong partnerships between local institutions and farming communities therefore enhance service delivery, improve adaptive capacity, and strengthen climate resilience. Recent evidence from Ghana also demonstrates the importance of institutional coordination and stakeholder networks in CSA implementation. Dziwornu et al. (2025), through a review of 153 CSA projects across Ghana, found that government agencies led the majority of CSA initiatives while partnerships among stakeholders significantly influenced regional distribution, implementation effectiveness, and social benefits of climate-smart projects. The study highlighted the importance of coordinated stakeholder participation, institutional integration, and resource allocation in strengthening climate resilience and sustainable agricultural development.

Moreover, research on climate justice and CSA governance suggests that inclusive stakeholder participation remains essential for equitable CSA implementation. Studies indicate that weak participation of local communities, civil society organizations, and smallholder farmers in policy processes often leads to unequal distribution of benefits and limited local ownership of climate-smart interventions. Inclusive multi-stakeholder governance systems therefore strengthen legitimacy, accountability, and sustainability in CSA implementation. Overall, regulatory frameworks, public institutions, and multi-stakeholder partnerships constitute fundamental drivers of CSA transition in SSA. Effective regulatory systems provide enabling policy environments, public institutions facilitate implementation and institutional support, while multi-stakeholder partnerships enhance coordination, participation, and resource mobilization. However, persistent challenges such as weak policy coherence, institutional fragmentation, inadequate financing, poor extension systems, and limited stakeholder integration continue to constrain effective CSA scaling across the region. Strengthening governance systems, institutional capacity, and collaborative partnerships remains critical for achieving sustainable climate-smart agricultural transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Major institutional and governance barriers constraining climate-smart agriculture implementation in sub-Saharan Africa

Despite increasing recognition of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) as a strategic pathway for enhancing agricultural resilience and food security in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), its implementation remains constrained by several institutional and governance barriers. Existing evidence from the reviewed studies indicates that weak policy coordination, inadequate institutional capacity, limited financial support, poor extension systems, weak stakeholder integration, and insecure land governance significantly hinder the adoption and scaling of CSA practices across the region. One of the major governance barriers affecting CSA implementation is policy fragmentation and lack of institutional coordination. Zembe et al. (2022) found that food security, climate change adaptation (CCA), and disaster risk reduction (DRR) policies in South Africa operate largely in isolation with weak alignment of objectives, implementation processes, and monitoring systems. The study revealed inadequate coordination among institutions responsible for climate adaptation and agricultural governance, resulting in fragmented implementation and reduced policy effectiveness. Such institutional disconnections limit integrated responses to climate-related agricultural challenges and weaken the scalability of CSA interventions. Another critical barrier is weak institutional capacity and inadequate support systems. Makate (2019) argued that CSA scaling in Africa is not autonomous but requires strong institutional facilitation through effective policies, institutional arrangements, and coordinated stakeholder actions. However, many African countries lack sufficient institutional structures, technical expertise, and implementation capacity necessary for promoting CSA technologies among smallholder farmers. Weak institutional support often reduces farmers’ access to information, training, and technological innovations required for climate adaptation.

Poor quality and limited accessibility of agricultural extension services also constitute major institutional barriers to CSA implementation. Bontsa et al. (2023) found that although smallholder farmers in South Africa had access to extension advisory services, the quality of climate change-related extension support was generally poor. The study identified inadequate institutional training, poor dissemination of climate information, and limited accessibility of extension systems as major challenges affecting farmers’ adaptive capacity. Similarly, Makamane et al. (2023) reported that lack of knowledge, inadequate training, and insufficient institutional support limited farmers’ adoption of CSA technologies in South Africa. Financial constraints and inadequate climate financing mechanisms further limit CSA implementation in SSA. Several studies identified lack of credit access, insufficient public financing, and high initial investment costs as major barriers to adopting climate-smart technologies. Branca et al. (2021) found that although CSA practices generate significant economic and environmental benefits, high upfront costs discourage adoption among smallholder farmers. Likewise, Slayi et al. (2023) reported that limited access to affordable credit and financial resources significantly constrained farmers’ adoption of climate-smart cattle feedlot systems in South Africa. Land governance and insecure property rights also constrain CSA adoption. Yegbemey et al. (2013) found that secure land ownership positively influenced farmers’ willingness to adopt climate adaptation strategies in Benin. Weak land tenure systems discourage long-term investment in sustainable land management and climate adaptation practices because farmers lack confidence regarding future access and control over agricultural land.

In addition, weak stakeholder participation and social exclusion undermine effective CSA governance. Studies on climate justice and CSA policy revealed that many climate-smart agricultural interventions inadequately involve local communities, smallholder farmers, and civil society organizations in decision-making processes. This often leads to unequal distribution of benefits, limited local ownership, and reduced sustainability of CSA initiatives. Finnaly, institutional fragmentation, weak governance systems, limited extension support, financial barriers, insecure land rights, and inadequate stakeholder participation remain major constraints limiting effective CSA implementation in SSA. Addressing these barriers requires stronger institutional coordination, improved policy coherence, enhanced financing mechanisms, inclusive governance systems, and strengthened institutional capacity to support sustainable climate-smart agricultural transformation across the region.

The reviewed studies do not uniformly agree on the relative importance of financial versus institutional constraints. While Branca et al. (2021) argue that inadequate climate finance represents the principal obstacle to scaling CSA, other studies suggest that financial investments alone are insufficient without effective governance, extension systems, and institutional coordination. Makate (2019), for example, emphasizes that even well-funded CSA programmes frequently underperform where governance systems remain fragmented. This apparent contradiction suggests that climate finance and institutional capacity should be viewed as complementary rather than competing determinants of successful CSA implementation.

Research gaps and policy pathways for strengthening climate-resilient agricultural governance in sub-Saharan Africa

Despite growing scholarly and policy attention toward Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), several important research and governance gaps remain insufficiently addressed. Existing literature has predominantly focused on the technical, agronomic, and productivity dimensions of CSA, while limited attention has been given to institutional governance systems, policy coherence, and multi-level coordination mechanisms shaping CSA implementation across the region.

One major research gap relates to inadequate understanding of policy coherence and institutional integration among climate adaptation, food security, and disaster risk reduction frameworks. Zembe et al. (2022) revealed significant fragmentation and weak coordination among these policy domains in South Africa, yet limited comparative evidence exists across other SSA countries regarding how institutional interactions influence CSA outcomes. Future research should therefore examine cross-country institutional governance models and evaluate the effectiveness of integrated climate-agriculture policy systems in promoting CSA transition. Another gap concerns limited evidence on the role of local governance systems, farmer organizations, indigenous institutions, and decentralized governance structures in strengthening climate resilience. Although studies highlight the importance of cooperatives, community organizations, and extension systems, empirical evidence on how these localized institutions influence long-term CSA sustainability remains inadequate. Similarly, there is insufficient research examining gender-inclusive governance systems, youth participation, and social equity dimensions within CSA implementation frameworks. Limited research also exists on climate finance governance, institutional accountability, and digital governance systems supporting CSA adoption. While financial constraints are widely acknowledged barriers, there remains inadequate evidence regarding effective financing models, public-private partnerships, and institutional mechanisms for scaling climate-smart investments among smallholder farmers. Additionally, few studies have explored how digital climate information systems, ICT platforms, and early warning systems can strengthen adaptive governance and agricultural resilience in SSA.

To strengthen climate-resilient agricultural governance in SSA, several policy pathways are necessary. First, governments should promote policy coherence by integrating climate adaptation, food security, environmental sustainability, and disaster risk reduction frameworks into unified agricultural governance systems. Strong inter-ministerial coordination mechanisms and harmonized implementation strategies are essential for reducing institutional fragmentation. Second, institutional capacity building should be prioritized through improved extension systems, farmer training programs, climate information dissemination, and investment in local governance institutions. Strengthening decentralized governance structures and supporting farmer cooperatives can improve local participation and ownership of CSA initiatives. Third, governments and development partners should expand climate financing mechanisms, agricultural subsidies, and public-private partnerships to improve farmers’ access to affordable credit, climate-smart technologies, and adaptation resources. Secure land tenure systems and inclusive governance arrangements are also necessary for encouraging long-term investment in sustainable agricultural practices. Finally, strengthening multi-stakeholder collaboration, digital agricultural governance, and participatory policy processes will be critical for building resilient, inclusive, and sustainable agrifood systems capable of addressing climate change challenges across Sub-Saharan Africa.

Implications of the study for south African agriculture under a changing climate

The findings of this review have important implications for strengthening Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) governance and implementation in South Africa. Although South Africa possesses one of the most developed agricultural policy environments in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), the evidence synthesized in this review suggests that the principal challenge is no longer the absence of policy frameworks, but rather weaknesses in policy integration, institutional coordination, implementation capacity, and governance effectiveness. Consequently, South Africa’s experience differs from that of many SSA countries where the primary constraints relate to weak institutional development, limited governance structures, and inadequate policy formulation. The review therefore demonstrates that improving CSA transition in South Africa requires governance reforms that enhance implementation rather than the development of additional standalone policies. One of the most significant policy gaps identified is the fragmentation of governance across agriculture, climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, water management, and environmental conservation. Although these sectors pursue complementary objectives, they frequently operate through separate institutional arrangements with limited coordination, resulting in duplication of responsibilities, inconsistent implementation, and inefficient allocation of resources. Zembe et al. (2022) demonstrated that food security, climate adaptation, and disaster risk reduction policies in South Africa remain weakly integrated, thereby reducing the effectiveness of climate-resilient agricultural interventions. Similarly, Kubanza and Oladele (2024) observed that fragmented institutional responsibilities, inadequate stakeholder participation, and weak awareness of CSA policies continue to constrain effective implementation. These findings suggest that South Africa requires stronger cross-sectoral governance mechanisms capable of aligning policy objectives, implementation strategies, monitoring systems, and institutional accountability across government departments. Compared with several other SSA countries, South Africa exhibits relatively stronger legislative frameworks and greater institutional capacity, yet implementation outcomes remain inconsistent. Evidence from Ethiopia indicates that farmer cooperatives significantly improve access to climate information, institutional support, financial resources, and adaptation technologies through decentralized governance arrangements (Kahsay and Endalew, 2025). Likewise, studies from Ghana demonstrate that coordinated partnerships among government agencies, research institutions, and development organizations facilitate wider implementation and scaling of CSA initiatives (Dziwornu et al., 2025). In Benin, secure land tenure has been shown to encourage long-term investment in sustainable land management and climate adaptation (Yegbemey et al., 2013). In contrast, South Africa’s constraints arise less from institutional absence than from limited coordination among existing institutions, inconsistent policy implementation, and varying institutional performance across provinces. These regional differences illustrate that governance maturity alone does not guarantee successful CSA transition; rather, effective implementation depends on institutional coherence, collaborative governance, and adaptive coordination mechanisms.

The review further indicates that strengthening institutional capacity should become a strategic priority for South African agricultural governance. Although extension systems are widely available, evidence suggests that their effectiveness in supporting climate adaptation remains limited. Bontsa et al. (2023) reported that extension services often suffer from inadequate technical capacity, poor dissemination of climate information, and insufficient training of extension personnel, thereby reducing farmers’ ability to adopt CSA technologies. Similarly, Makamane et al. (2023) identified limited institutional support and inadequate farmer training as important barriers to CSA adoption. These findings imply that strengthening extension services should extend beyond increasing personnel numbers to improving technical competencies in climate risk management, digital advisory services, participatory extension approaches, and adaptive agricultural planning. Such investments would enhance farmers’ access to timely climate information and improve the effectiveness of CSA implementation across diverse production systems. Another important implication concerns climate financing. Despite substantial evidence demonstrating the economic and environmental benefits of CSA, limited access to finance remains a persistent constraint for smallholder farmers. Branca et al. (2021) found that high initial investment costs discourage adoption even where CSA generates long-term economic returns, while Slayi et al. (2023) highlighted inadequate access to affordable credit as a major obstacle to climate-smart livestock production. These findings suggest that South African institutions should strengthen climate financing mechanisms through targeted subsidies, concessional credit facilities, blended finance, climate insurance, and incentive programmes designed specifically for smallholder farmers. Public investment should also support climate-resilient infrastructure, digital climate information systems, and innovation platforms capable of reducing adoption risks while encouraging private-sector participation in CSA investments.

The review also highlights the need for more inclusive governance systems that promote meaningful participation by farmers, cooperatives, civil society organizations, research institutions, and the private sector. Studies synthesized in this review demonstrate that collaborative governance improves institutional coordination, knowledge exchange, innovation diffusion, and implementation effectiveness. Kahsay and Endalew (2025) showed that cooperative membership substantially enhances farmers’ access to institutional support, while Mwadzingeni et al. (2020) demonstrated that collaboration among universities, extension agencies, and local organizations strengthened irrigation management and community resilience. Furthermore, Budiman (2022) emphasized that socially inclusive governance is essential for ensuring equitable access to CSA opportunities and avoiding the marginalization of vulnerable farming communities. Strengthening multi-stakeholder governance platforms in South Africa would therefore improve policy legitimacy, increase local ownership, and facilitate more effective implementation of climate adaptation programmes. The findings further suggest that South Africa could benefit from adopting more adaptive governance approaches characterized by continuous monitoring, policy learning, and institutional flexibility. Thornton et al. (2018) argued that successful CSA implementation requires governance systems capable of integrating monitoring, evaluation, and learning throughout implementation rather than relying on static policy frameworks. Likewise, Lipper et al. (2014) emphasized that CSA should be understood not simply as a collection of technologies but as an integrated governance approach requiring supportive institutions, policy coordination, innovation systems, and regulatory environments. Incorporating adaptive governance principles into South African agricultural policy would enable institutions to respond more effectively to changing climatic conditions, emerging technologies, and evolving farmer needs while improving long-term policy effectiveness.

Collectively, the evidence synthesized in this review indicates that South Africa possesses many of the institutional foundations required to support climate-smart agricultural transformation, yet significant governance gaps continue to constrain implementation. Addressing these challenges will require strengthening policy coherence across government departments, improving institutional coordination between national, provincial, and local authorities, enhancing extension and advisory services, expanding climate finance, promoting secure land governance, fostering multi-stakeholder partnerships, and institutionalizing adaptive monitoring and policy learning. Rather than introducing additional policy frameworks, greater emphasis should be placed on improving governance effectiveness, institutional accountability, and implementation capacity. Such reforms would not only accelerate CSA adoption in South Africa but also provide a governance model for strengthening climate-resilient agricultural transformation across Sub-Saharan Africa. Finally, the evidence suggests that strengthening Climate-Smart Agriculture in South Africa requires four priority governance actions: improving policy coherence and coordination across agricultural, climate adaptation, and disaster risk reduction institutions; strengthening institutional and extension capacity to support effective implementation; expanding accessible climate finance and investment incentives for farmers; and promoting inclusive, decentralized, and multi-stakeholder governance. Together, these actions can help bridge existing policy and implementation gaps and provide a stronger institutional foundation for scaling climate-resilient agricultural transformation in South Africa.

This study examined the policy and institutional drivers shaping the transition toward Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) through a comprehensive scoping review of governance systems, regulatory frameworks, and institutional support mechanisms. The review demonstrates that effective CSA implementation extends beyond technological innovations and depends significantly on coherent governance structures, strong institutional capacity, supportive regulatory environments, and inclusive stakeholder participation. Existing evidence revealed that policy coherence, institutional coordination, agricultural extension systems, climate finance, land governance, and multi-stakeholder partnerships are critical determinants influencing the adoption, scaling, and sustainability of CSA practices across SSA. However, the study also identified several persistent institutional and governance barriers constraining effective CSA transition, including fragmented policies, weak institutional coordination, inadequate financing systems, poor extension support, insecure land tenure arrangements, and limited stakeholder inclusion. These barriers continue to undermine climate resilience, agricultural productivity, and sustainable agrifood system transformation across the region. The review further highlighted important research gaps relating to climate governance, institutional integration, local governance systems, digital agricultural governance, and adaptive policy learning. Addressing these gaps requires stronger policy integration, institutional strengthening, decentralized governance systems, expanded climate financing, and enhanced multi-stakeholder collaboration. Ultimately, achieving sustainable and climate-resilient agricultural transformation in SSA will depend on the ability of governments, institutions, development partners, and farming communities to build inclusive, adaptive, and well-coordinated governance systems capable of responding effectively to the growing challenges of climate change and food insecurity.

Limitations of the study

This study is subject to some limitations. First, the review relied exclusively on secondary data obtained from published and unpublished literature, which may limit access to recent institutional developments and context-specific implementation experiences that are not adequately documented in existing studies. Second, only studies published in English between 2010 and 2026 were included, thereby excluding potentially relevant literature published in other languages. Third, the scoping review design focused primarily on mapping and synthesizing existing evidence rather than conducting empirical field investigations or statistical meta-analysis. Consequently, the study may not fully capture variations in institutional performance and governance effectiveness across different countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Additionally, differences in methodological approaches, policy contexts, and institutional environments among reviewed studies may affect comparability of findings. Despite these limitations, the study provides valuable insights into the governance and institutional dimensions influencing Climate-Smart Agriculture transition in Sub-Saharan Africa.