AIMS Agriculture and Food, 4(4), 967–1006.

DOI: 10.3934/agrfood.2019.4.967
Received: 26 August 2019
Accepted: 03 November 2019
Published: 15 November 2019
http://www.aimspress.com/journal/agriculture

Review

Climate change adaptation in Nigerian agricultural sector: A systematic

review and resilience check of adaptation measures

Robert Ugochukwu Onyeneke1,*, Chinyere Augusta Nwajiuba2, Chukwuemeka Chinonso

Emenekwe3, Anurika Nwajiuba3, Chinenye Judith Onyeneke4, Precious Ohalete3 and Uwazie
Iyke Uwazie5

1
Faculty of Agriculture, Alex Ekwueme Federal University Ndufu-Alike, Ebonyi State, Nigeria
2
Faculty of Education, Alex Ekwueme Federal University Ndufu-Alike, Ebonyi State, Nigeria
3
Faculty of Management and Social Sciences, Alex Ekwueme Federal University Ndufu-Alike,
Ebonyi State, Nigeria
4
Faculty of Agriculture, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
5
Department of Economics, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Abia State, Nigeria

* Correspondence: Email: [email protected]; [email protected].

Abstract: The changing climate is adversely affecting the productivity and livelihoods of Nigerian
smallholder rural farmers. Several studies predict worsening outcomes for future climate events, for
example heat waves, drought and intense precipitation. Farmers are required to adopt several
measures to thrive, given the observed or expected climate change events. Existing studies about the
interaction between climate change the agriculture sector has focused evaluating the bi-directional
causal relationships, and identifying adaptation measures, but research on the climate resilience
aspect of these adaptation measures is missing, or at best, low. This study aims to fill this gap in
knowledge by assessing resilience and contribution to sustainability of farmer-adopted measures
aimed at addressing risks posed by climate change. We conduct a systematic review of 95 studies
concentrating on climate adaptation by smallholder rural farmers in Nigeria in the period 2010 to
2019. We assess the climate resilience of adaptation measures using the Ifejika-Speranza Resilience
Check Toolkit. Our findings show that farmers are using climate-resilient adaptation measures;
however, we could not ascertain how these have led to sustainable agricultural systems, since it is not
the focus of the current study. Our findings show that majority of the adaptation studies in Nigeria
are focused on crop farming subsystem. The major agricultural ecosystems and the broad adaptation
areas are: Crop farming (improved soil and land management, crop-specific Innovation, water
management practices, climate information services and education, access to finance, and off-farm

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 968

diversification), livestock farming (improved livestock management systems, improved breeding

strategies, sustainable health improvement, proper feed formulation early maturing and heat-resistant
bird varieties), and fish farming (water harvesting measures, organic material, quick-maturing varieties).

Keywords: climate change; Nigeria; agriculture; adaptation; resilience; vulnerability; buffer capacity,
self-organization; adaptive capacity

1. Introduction

Change in the global climate is having extreme impacts on the environment and human
systems [1,2]. Farmers face substantial risks due to climate change, for example, variable
precipitation patterns during planting seasons and intense weather phenomena [3,4]. The rise in risks
and vulnerabilities may have adverse effects on the livelihood of rural farmers; hence there is urgent
need for adaptation measures to manage risks and vulnerabilities resulting from adverse weather and
climate phenomena [5]. The climate change and variability discourse have occupied center stage,
globally, in recent times, due to the associated rising risks, dangers, and universality of its impacts [6].
Climate change is majorly characterized by prevalence of severe weather and temperature events,
and varying rainfall patterns [7]. Efforts to deal with the current impacts of climate change, will
require adaptation and mitigation responses [2,8]. Climate adaptation refers to a system’s capacity to
accommodate changes in the climate, together with variability and extremes, to limit possible
damage, to exploit the opportunities, and or deal with the outcomes [1,9].
Developing countries, especially in Africa, face substantial risks from climate change due to
increased exposure and inadequate adaptive potential [10]. Agricultural sector, being climate-
sensitive, dominates economic activities in these countries, hence increasing the risks faced by these
countries. Other factors increasing include underdeveloped education and health institutions, high
incidence of poverty, unsustainable growth in population, and inadequate infrastructure [11].
Following the literature on the susceptibility of African countries to climate change impacts, this
study focuses on Nigeria.
Recently, adaptation to climate change has clearly become an important domain of practice and
research. Adaptation in agricultural systems can be grouped into two broad areas; planned and
autonomous adaptation. Planned adaptation includes measures and strategies carried out consciously,
to foster the system’s capacity to adapt. Under planned adaptation, for example, farmers adopt
purposive selection and distribution of crops across various agro ecological zones and replacing old
crops with new crop varieties. Autonomous adaptation, on the other hand, is reactionary in nature.
Variable rainfall patterns that result in changes in planting dates by farmers, hence reactionary, can
be regarded as autonomous adaption [12,13].
Our knowledge of adaptation is little; despite an increasing number of studies suggesting
various assessment and adaptation measures, not many studies have systematically evaluated existing
adaptation measures, quantitative and qualitatively, as well as adaptation measures’ contribution to
sustainability and resilience, specifically at the national level [14]. Is adaptation occurring? What
adaptation measures are in place? Does adaptation contribute to resilience? There are different views
and frameworks of what constitutes resilience building to climate change. However, the crucial factors

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 969

amongst these frameworks focus attention on buffer capacity, participatory processes and knowledge co-
production, stakeholder and decision makers’ involvement [15].

1.1. Climate change and Nigerian Agriculture

Nigeria has already witnessed increased air temperatures in the recent past (1971–2000). During
this time, in Nigeria, minimum temperatures showed a faster increase of ＋0.8 ℃, which is more than
the maximum temperatures which rose by ＋0.5 ℃ [16]. This situation is further exacerbated in the
context of global warming, which is forecast to reach 1.5 degrees Celsius between 2030 and 2052 [17]
under two different scenarios—A2 and B1. A2 and B1 are scenarios for future climate projections
downscaled from the Global Circulation Models and used by scientists from the Climate Systems
Analysis Group at the University of Cape Town South Africa to predict the future impacts of climate
change on Nigeria’s economy under two scenarios [16]. The first scenario, A2, assumes that the
world will consider more regional economic development in the future while the second scenario, B1,
assumes that there would be dominance of environmental factors and global considerations in the
future. See Abiodun et al. for more details and explanations of these scenarios [16].
Figure 1 presents information on the annual predicted minimum and maximum temperature
changes during the periods: 2046–2065 and 2081–2100, using different scenarios for Nigeria. The
deviations are calculated with reference to the mean of present-day climate. The thick line represents
the models' average, while the shaded area represents the area of one standard deviation away from
the mean. In Figure 1, projected trends for Nigeria also show increased warming. This may likely
occurrence of heat waves that will increase the rates of evaporation [16].

Note: Source: [16]

Figure 1. Observed and predicted future minimum and maximum temperature changes in Nigeria.

Figure 2 presents information on the annual predicted changes in rainfall (mm/day) during the
periods: 2046–2065 and 2081–2100, using different scenarios for Nigeria. The deviations are
calculated with reference to the mean of present-day climate. The thick line represents the models’

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 970

average, while the shaded area represents the area of one standard deviation away from the mean.
The figure shows no specific trend in future rainfall deviations [16].

Note: Source: [16].

Figure 2. Observed and predicted future rainfall changes in Nigeria.

1.2. Nigerian food production in a changing climate

The Nigerian economy is largely agriculture-based. Agriculture accounts on average about 30 to

40 percent of the nominal GDP, and employs about 65 to 75 percent of the labor force, while
providing various ecosystem services [18,19]. Agriculture and rural development are vital to the
Nigerian economy; like in most developing countries, Nigerian agricultural systems depend mainly
on rainfall. The future, including current, projected variations in the climate during different seasons
makes Nigeria’s food production extremely susceptible [16,20]. Agricultural production consists
mainly of cereals and tubers; in 2013, both cereals and tubers production contributed approximately
70 percent of total output in the agricultural sector. The production of cassava (a tuber crop) is a very
important crop, due to ease of adjustment in its planting decision and high drought-tolerance. On the
other hand, rice (a cereal crop) is planted in all eco-zones of Nigeria. Together, these crops have
significant impacts on food security in Nigeria [21].
Agricultural productivity in Nigeria has recently experienced declines [21]. Smallholder rural
farmers dominate the farming system in Nigeria, accounting for about 80 to 90 percent of producers.
However, productivity is hampered by insufficient capacity to acquire necessary farm inputs such
enhanced or improved crop varieties, fertilizers, irrigation and other production inputs. Also,
agricultural productivity declines have been linked to climatic and weather variability or change,
hence facing problems with food productivity arising from dependence on rain-fed farming worsened
by low inputs [22,23]. Farmers should therefore adopt climate resilient adaptation measures to cope
with, or reduce climate vulnerability [21].

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 971

1.3. Necessity of a systematic review on Nigerian farmers towards climate change adaptation
practices

Several climate adaptation practices exist; however, academic literature is scarce on the
effectiveness, sustainability and contribution to resilience of these adaptation practices, especially in
Sub-Saharan Africa [24]. Adverse climate events in the form of variable rainfall, increased drought,
intense heat in the northern arid region, and increased erosion in the southern rainforest parts of the
country are reported to persist in Nigeria [25,26] thus requiring adaptation practices aimed at
enhancing resilience. Farmers adopt different measures to cope with a changing climate; however, often
times, the adopted measures may have negative impacts on the environment, especially on the
biophysical, social and economic dimensions, hence not contributing to resilience and sustainability [27].
A review of the current literature is required to create knowledge on where adaptation is
focused and areas requiring attention. This study also adds value by providing detailed information
on the steps adopted for reviewed [28], which is missing in most review studies. Current systematic
reviews have focused on other sectors, for example energy [29] and other countries and regions [30].
To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to attempt a review of climate resilience of
adaptation practices in Nigeria’s agricultural sector. This study identifies and classifies farmers’
adaptation practices across Nigeria. Publically available information—peer-reviewed, reports or
documentation—will be used to analyze adaptation in Nigeria.

1.4. Aims and objectives

This study extends the existing literature by identifying and analyzing many of the recent
studies, both gray and peer-reviewed literature on planned and autonomous adaptation to climate
change. It covered important areas of climate change adaptation research and practices, with focus on
assessing resilience-improving practices in the agricultural sector, and suggests which areas may
need more attention. From the foregoing, this study will conduct an online search and summarize
current studies on Nigerian farmers’ adaptation to climate change. The specific objectives include to:
1. ascertain which agricultural sectors, such as crop, fish, and livestock (including livestock)
farming, have climate change adaption practices been focused or concentrated on in Nigeria;
2. determine the agro-ecological zones the current studies on climate change adaptation focused
on in Nigeria;
3. categorize the resilience status of these identified adaptation practices in Nigeria.
The rest of this report is as follows: We present the methodological framework used for the
literature search and review in section two. In section three, we present the systematic review and
synthesis of the current research, following from our methodological framework, on Nigeria farmers’
practices aimed toward climate change adaptation. In section four, we present a detailed resilience
check of adaptation measures. Section five of this paper presents a brief discussion and way forward.
In addition, we provide appendices with relevant, supplementary information.

2. Materials and methodological framework

We search and select studies for review, as well as use a resilience-check as a general
framework to investigate how adaptation is taking place in Nigeria and contribution to climate

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 972

resilience of these measures. This study improves on the current approaches to meta-analysis and
enables a critical examination of how adaptation is taking place in Nigeria.

2.1. Describing resilient adaptation in the agricultural sector

We extend the current literature by focusing on resilient adaptation measures geared toward
coping with climate change-related risks in agricultural ecosystems. For our purpose, resilience to
climate change implies an individual’s, a social group’s or a socio-ecological systems ability to cope
with disruptions resulting from climate extremes, while maintaining its basic form or method of
functioning, ability for self-organization and the ability to learn and adapt to changes [31,32]., These
are the 3 major dimensions of resilience. This definition cuts across sustainability in agricultural
systems facing climate change impacts. In agricultural systems, sustainability implies the long-term
ability to conserve or boost natural resources, quality of the environment, productivity, economic
viability and be socially beneficial [32,33].
Following [15,32], we link the concept of resilience to study of livelihoods, focusing on the
agricultural sector. We refer to livelihood as including the abilities, assets and tasks essential for a
living. Dorward et al define livelihood functions as the welfare contributed by livelihoods, for
example, food, earnings, insurance and poverty reduction [34]. With reference to livelihoods,
resilience is dependent on one’s capabilities, social and natural conditions.
Assessing the climate resilience of adaptive measures brings up the subject of context-
specificity, since social-ecological circumstances have spatial and temporal dimensions [9]. The
toolkit we adopt for this study provides no explicit index for classifying adaptation practices, leaving
the researchers room to objectively utilize it as a general framework for this paper. Hence, our study
assesses the basic characteristics of adaptation measures based on existing literature, and objectively
classify them according to the component through which it contributes to climate resilience.

Note: Source: Authors’ diagram based on [15].

Figure 3. Resilient adaptation check toolkit.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 973

From Figure 3, resilience can be divided into three components. These components are buffer
capacity, self-organization and capacity for learning and adaptive management.
Buffer capacity: Within a livelihood context, this refers to the ability to withstand change, while
taking advantage of the resulting opportunities to realize more desirable livelihood results such as
poverty reduction. Self-organization: In self-organization, systems are assessed to see if they offer
the opportunity for farmers to self-organize. Self-organization enables cooperation and networks
among farmers with the advantage of reducing reliance on external parties for information,
innovations, and financing. Farmers’ dependence on own talent and farm reserves cause for less
reliance on external parties and quick decision making at the farm level. Capacity for learning and
adaptive management: Implies an approach to management and openness to learning by the farmers.
We briefly consider, where appropriate, the components social-ecological systems (SES) dimensions
of these components. Considering the dynamism of SES, farmers continually alter their farm
activities, while acquiring knowledge from peers on how to sustain and boost production. Adaptive
management is important because it emphasizes the importance interpreting signals from the social
and ecological systems and their management. For more details, see [15].

2.2. Literature search and selection criteria

To foster clarity and reproducibility, this study adopts the Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) framework. The PRISMA framework
systematically guides researchers in the criteria for obtaining resources for a systematic review,
inclusion and exclusion criteria, stepwise review process, data abstraction and analysis. The PRISMA
framework has been used in many climate change systematic reviews (for example, see [30,35]). We
conducted online literature search on relevant English language-published, peer-reviewed and gray
literature, using databases such as Google Scholar (GS), Web of Science (WoS), JSTOR, Nigerian
Higher Education-based Journals, Professional Association-based journals, and Government-owned
Non-Governmental Organization-owned Repositories. We focus Open Access publications or documents.
We restrict our study period to the 2010 to 2019 period. Furthermore, this study considers
literature on farmers’ adaptation practices aimed at coping with climate change-related impacts. We
also account for various agricultural sectors, for example, crop farming, livestock farming, and
fishery. This study further extends the adaptation criteria to account for sustainability in the form of
resilience, hence, using several keyword combinations to obtain our resources for the syste matic
review. These keywords include: “Climate change (accounting for shocks, weather)”,
“adaptation (accounting for resilience, vulnerability, and risk)”, “agriculture (accounting for crop,
livestock, and fishery)”, and “sub-Saharan Africa”, “Nigeria”.
We identified 248 studies from the accessed databases during our initial search, consisting of
peer-reviewed and gray literature (for example, working papers, project reports and conference
proceedings). Table 1 present our literature selection criteria:

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 974

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Search checkpoints Acceptance criteria Rejection criteria

Initial search Studies published in English Studies published in other languages

National level studies on climate change Non-national level studies on climate change
studies
Climate change adaptation in the agricultural Climate change adaptation in the non-
sector agricultural sector
Studies focused on Nigeria Other countries/regions
Distinct/single studies Non-distinct/duplicates
Title and abstract Strictly focused on agricultural systems (crop, Non-agricultural systems (crop, livestock,
screening livestock, poultry and fish production) poultry and fish production)
Focus on smallholder farmers Large scale farmers
Focus on vulnerability associated with climate Focus on vulnerability associated with non-
risks climate risks
Final step for review Non-systematic review studies Literature review or discourse analysis
Livelihoods for rural farmers households Livelihoods for urban farmers households
Adaptation studies focused on agricultural Adaptation studies focused on non-
systems / productivity agricultural systems / productivity

Figure 4 presents a schema of our literature search and selection procedure, leading to 90 studies.

Note: Source: Author’s depiction based on [30,36].

Figure 4. Flow chart of literature search and selection based on PRISMA framework.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 975

3. Results

3.1. Overview

A total of 248 studies were obtained from our literature search. Our selection criteria resulted in
a final sample of 90 final studies reviewed—85 (94%) were peer-reviewed studies and 5 studies (6%)
were gray literatures. According to Singh et al., the value in reviewing relevant gray literature on
climate change studies lies on their ability to provide useful, area-specific information, policy-
relevant responses, and practices which be ignored by peer-reviewed literature [37]. Our results show
an increase in climate change adaptation studies since 2010, with the highest number of studies
occurring in 2012, a year after the National Adaptation Strategy and Plan of Action on Climate
Change for Nigeria (NASPA-CCN) and the Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA) were
approved by the Nigeria’s Federal Government.

3.2. Climate change adaptation and agro-economic sectors

The final studies for the review are broadly analyzed based on farm-level adaptation and
institutional or policy-level adaptation measures. Furthermore, the paper identifies a total of 13
distinct broad themes of adaptation, from 58 sub-themes. Table 2 presents the farm-level agro-
economic sectors and the adaptation measures. Table 2 shows that 83.3% of the total papers analyzed
reported practices under soil and land management in the crop sector as adaptation strategy to
climate risk management. Crop-specific innovation (77.8% of the papers) was the second most
common adaptation strategy for climate risk management reported by the papers. Water-linked
management practices were reported 54.4% of the papers analyzed. In the livestock sub-sector,
improved livestock management systems, improved breeding strategies and sustainable health
management were the common broad strategies for climate change adaptation reported in the
literature in Nigeria. Improved fishery management and improved fishing infrastructure featured
prominently in the papers analyzed.
In Table 3, we find that 72 studies specifically focused on the crop farming sector and
account for about 80 percent of the total studies reviewed, the rest are: fish farming (n = 5, 5.56
percent), livestock farming (n = 6, 6.67 percent), and studies that considered multiple sectors at
once (n = 7, 7.78 percent). The focus of climate change adaptation research on the crop sub-
sector could due to the dependence of majority of farmers on this sector and the vulnerability of
the sub-sector to climate change.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 976

Table 2. Nigerian farmers’ adaptation practices classified by agricultural sector.

Agricultural Adaptation (Broad Frequency/Number of Adaptation (Sub-Theme)

sector Theme) papers reporting measures
under the broad theme
(Percentage)
Crop farming Soil and land 75 (83.3%) Mulching, make ridges across slopes, plant cover
management crops, cross-slope, sand filling; Traditional tillage;
Hand weeding farmland weeding and the control of
pests; Use of organic and inorganic fertilizers,
Herbicide use, Organic farming Integrated soil
fertility enhancement using organic and chemical
fertilizers; Integrated farming/mixed farming;
Agroforestry; Conventional tillage integrated soil
nutrient management, and slow-forming terraces;
Zero/Minimum tillage minimum tillage,
Conservation tillage; Family-supplied labor on
farm land; Mechanization; Change to new farm
land/shifting cultivation, Increase farm size;
Cultural pest control; Retention of crop residues in
fields; Family labor
Crop-specific 70 (77.8%) Intercropping/mixed cropping or intercropping
Innovation practices, crop diversification; Plant indigenous
crop varieties; Crop rotation; Improved crop
varieties Drought-resistant crop varieties, Disease-
and heat-resistant crops, Early-maturing crops;
Adjusting planting/harvesting time; Ecological pest
management, seed and grain storage; Innovative
crop development: early-maturing and higher
yielding crop species; Farmers also use pest or
disease-resistant crop varieties; Use of Nursery;
Indigenous grains
Water-linked 49 (54.4%) Improved irrigation; Water harvesting technologies
management
practices
Climate information 19 (21.1%) Climate information systems/Weather forecasting;
services and Government climate education/extension services,
education Participation in trainings
Access to finance 10 (11.1%) Access to credit facilities; Access to insurance
services
Livelihood 35 (38.9%) Other income-generating opportunities; Shift to
diversification marketing/processing of agricultural produce; Out
migration
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 977

Agricultural Adaptation (Broad Frequency/Number of Adaptation (Sub-Theme)

sector Theme) papers reporting measures
under the broad theme
(Percentage)
Livestock Improved livestock 6 (6.7%) Tree planting for wind break; Reduction in flock
farming management size; Pen infrastructural reinforcement; Adequate
systems ventilation and sanitation; Proper treatment of
water, constant water to regulate body temperature,
water harvesting; High nutrient feed/proper feed
formulation
Improved breeding 6 (6.7%) Rearing heat-resistant animals & disease resistant
strategies breed, selective breeding, keeping of resistant
varieties, cross breeding with exotic birds
Sustainable health 6 (6.7%) Quarantine services and veterinary services
management vaccines and antibiotics; introduction of anti-stress
medications; Access to training and climate
information
Mixed farming 5 (5.6%) Keeping multiple livestock animals; Mixed farming
Fish farming Improved fishery 5 (5.6%) Raising quick maturing fish species; Water
management harvesting; Introduction of organic material;
Adding of lime to reduce acidity; Building
embankment to prevent flood water; Usage of
weather and water-monitoring kits
Diversification 4 (4.4%) Diversification in non-fishing portfolios; Migration;
measures Acquiring information about climate change
Improved fishing 5 (5.6%) Specialized fishing gear, digging wells or boreholes
infrastructure to supply water during dry period, siting ponds
close to steady water sources; Cover over ponds in
dry seasons; Use of indoor fish production facilities
Note: Multiple responses reported.

Table 3. Frequency distribution of the papers according to agricultural sub-sectors covered.

Agricultural Sub-sector Frequency Percentage

Crop production 72 80.00
Fish farming 5 5.56
Livestock production 6 6.67
Multiple enterprises 7 7.78
Total 90 100.00
Note: Source: Authors’ computation.

3.3. Geographic coverage of adaptation studies

The geographical coverage of the studies reviewed is categorized according to agro-ecological

zones, geopolitical zones and states in Nigeria. In Figure 5, 5 agro-ecological zones were identified;
Guinea Savanna, Sudan Savanna, Rainforest Belt, Mangrove Forest and Sahel Savanna. About 41

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 978

percent of the studies focused on the Rainforest Zone, 37 percent of the studies focus on the Guinea
Savanna Zone, 9 percent of the studies focus on the Sudan Savanna Zone, 9 percent of the studies
focus on the Mangrove Forest Zone, 3 percent of the studies focused on the Sahel Savanna Zone,
while 1 percent studied farmers’ adaptation in multiple zones.

Figure 5. Percentage of adaptation studies classified according to agro-ecological zones.

In terms of the geopolitical zone coverage, all the 6 geopolitical zones in Nigeria were covered;
Figure 6 reports that 39 percent of the studies focused on the South East region, 28 percent of the
studies focus on the South West zone, 15 percent of the studies focus on the South South zone, 14
percent of the studies focus on the North Central zone, 2 percent focused on the North East zone and
1 percent focused on the North West zone.

Figure 6. Percentage of adaptation studies classified by geopolitical zones.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 979

3.4. Methodological and analytical approaches

3.4.1. Approaches

The studies under review applied four distinct analytical approaches. These are the qualitative,
quantitative, mixed method and participatory approaches. The studies using qualitative approaches
explore the literature and apply simple measures of central tendency such as means and percentages,
while quantitative approaches advance beyond descriptive statistics and utilize quantitative analysis
and models. Mixed methods approaches combine qualitative and quantitative approaches. Figure 7
reports that 54 percent of the studies utilized quantitative approaches, 36 percent of the studies utilized
qualitative approaches, 7 percent used mixed method and 3 percent used participatory method.

Figure 7. Percentage of adaptation studies according to methods used.

3.4.2. Research methods and data analysis

Climate change adaptation research in Nigeria utilizes various research methods. The majority
of studies used questionnaire surveys to elicit information from Nigerian farmers about their climate
change adaptation practices. Few papers (3 papers) used a participatory approach to study climate
change adaptation decisions of farmers. This paper presented the findings of these papers separately
because of the grounded approach adopted in such studies. The researchers in these studies allowed
themes to emerge from the locales instead of imposing their knowledge of adaptation on the people.
Regarding quantitative analytical approach, our results show the probit and multivariate probit model,
logit model and spatiotemporal trend analyses as the main analytical techniques.

4. Resilience check

In this section, we analyze the reported adaptation measures employed by Nigerian farmers to
address climate-related impacts within the 4 agricultural sectors under study, using the previously-
defined resilience framework. In Table 4, in the appendix, we show the adaptation practices
classified by agricultural sector and contribution to resilience.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 980

4.1. Crop farming

4.1.1. Buffer capacity

4.1.1.1. Crop-specific innovation

Farmers facing increased environmental change can use crop diversification measures such as
mixed cropping or intercropping practices to diversify farm-related risks. Rusinamhodzi et al.
showed that intercropping could prevent total loss in farm output arising due to climate induced
drought conditions [38]. Mixed farming practices, under climate change situations, that utilize
indigenous crop diversity can foster resilience; since the crops must have adapted to local climatic
conditions over time. They will thrive well and ensure sustenance of productivity at farm level [39,40].
Such crop diversification practices can provide resilience by restraining pests and diseases, due to
diverse crops responding dissimilarly to climatic impacts and retaining functional ability relative to
non-diverse cropping systems. This has the potential to improve food security, while sustaining or
improving incomes for farmers [41,42] .
Farmers also plant indigenous crop varieties that are well-suited for the immediate environment,
where other varieties might fail [43,44]. Crop rotation maximizes the use of lands for the production
of various crops, while reducing pests and diseases. Drought-resistant crop varieties: crop farmers in
drought-prone areas adopt drought-resistant to guard against yield declines. Wheat planting in dry
areas will thrive significantly better than dry season rice. Drought-resistant maize varieties
cultivation has been found to increase productivity by 617 kg/ha and of 240 kg/ha compared to
cultivation of non-drought-resistant maize varieties, in mild drought-prone areas [45]. Adjusting
planting dates: variability in rainfall has been linked with largely responsible for poor productivity in
Nigerian agricultural system [16]. To prevent crop production risks resulting from variability in
rainfall, farmers vary planting dates whereby crops are planted before the start of rains, immediately
after the first rains, and a few days after the rain. Staggering planting dates are done deliberately to
pass around risk, by ensuring that any available rainwater will be utilized maximally by crops
planted in dry fields [46,47]. Sustainable crop management practices such as crop diversification,
new crop varieties, ecological pest management, seed and grain storage foster climate resilience
through innovations in crop development. Considering innovative crop development activities, farm
productivity is increased through the use of early-maturing and higher yielding crop species.
Furthermore, farmers use drought-resistant crops as buffer against crop failure from the increased
incidence of climate-induced droughts. Farmers also use pest or disease-resistant crop varieties to
adapt to climate-related pest and disease attack. Adopting other crops for production, especially heat-
resistant crops serve as a buffer against climate change-induced high temperatures and low
precipitation [48,49].

4.1.1.2. Sustainable soil and land management

Practices that comprise sustainable soil and land management contribute to buffer capacity in
diverse ways. For example, against soil erosion, reduction of organic content, condensation, and soil
acidity are increasingly worsened by adverse climate and weather changes, like wind gusts and
variation in precipitation rates [50]. Soil erosion results in the reduction of soil surfaces, organic

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 981

matter and essential nutrient sources, leading to the crop supporting and production capacity of the soil.
Sustainable soil and land management practices that contribute to sustenance of smallholder farmers’
livelihoods by controlling erosion through structural and vegetative barriers include tree planting, cover
cropping, mulching, cross-slope [51]. Traditional tillage may be a useful measure for farmland
weeding and the control of pests, however, it may not be useful in climate change-prone areas; it may
disrupt the physical quality of the soil, resulting in increased soil erosion and deterioration [52].
Another set of approaches that avoid the negative impacts of traditional tillage, providing low
disruption of the soil layers, while maintaining or improving soil quality, is the minimum or zero
tillage practices. According to Lal, zero or minimum practices enhance productive capacity, enable
vulnerable lands to retain soil organic carbon and improve environmental sustainability [53]. On the
other hand, zero or minimum tillage is also known to increase the use of pesticides on farmlands,
which may hinder ecological sustainability [50]. Integrated soil fertility enhancement using organic
and chemical fertilizers fall under this broad theme. Fertilizer use in agriculture contributes to
income and financial capital of the farmers by increasing crop yields, and to soil management
through fixation of nitrogen. According to Stavi et al., chemical and organic fertilizers utilization
boosts the quality of the soil, water retention capacity and retention of soil organic carbon [54]. On
the other hand, improper use chemical fertilizers may lead to increase in soil degradation resulting
from increased excessive usage.
Another form of sustainable soil and land management system is the integrated agricultural
practices. Specific practices here include mixed farming and agroforestry. In rural smallholder
farming, growing trees and forests are vital to livelihoods. These practices can contribute to
increased productivity of the Nigerian smallholder farmers [55]. Sustainable farming systems help
farmers to diversify their livelihoods. The integrated diversification, where farmers move from single
cropping systems to diversified systems, such as in mixed crop-livestock-agroforestry system fosters
livelihood diversification and security. This system contributes to economic sustainability through
removing the “Single Point of Failure” problem; in the event of crop failure, income from the sale of
livestock and tree (including fruits, fuel and fodder) products could serve as buffer to farmer incomes.
In mixed farming systems, the crop residues which are wastes from crop production serve as feed for
livestock. The manure from livestock, in turn, serves to improve soil fertility and improved crop
productivity. This system provides opportunities for recycling and organic farming for farmers, thus
contributing to ecological sustainability.
Sustainable soil management practices such as integrated soil nutrient management,
conservation tillage, and slow-forming terraces foster enhanced site specific knowledge. Some soil
management practices help enhance environmental resilience and benefits in areas of intense rainfall.
To adapt to the risk of soil erosion by improving the rainwater seep-through ability of the soil, while
retaining water for plant life, Nigerian farmers apply practices such as minimum tillage and ridges,
surface mulching and agroforestry [56]. Enhanced environmental benefits: Improved soil
Management adaptation techniques foster improved soil health and are key for productive and
sustainable agriculture. These practices include integrated soil nutrient management, zero/minimum
tillage, slow forming terraces, mulching. Economic resilience can be assessed from the relationship
between productivity and income; since incomes are directly related to the rate of productivity,
practices that improve soil quality and consequently, productivity over time, will lead to increase in
incomes for the farmers. Regions with high precipitation face increasing risk of soil erosion.
Agroforestry, through trees planting on farmlands provide windbreaks, protects the soil and enhances

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 982

soil water infiltration that checks soil erosion, sustains good soil organisms, thus improving soil
fertility, and higher productivity.
Furthermore, family-supplied labor services are beneficial in terms of improvement in human
capital, where more knowledgeable household members transfer knowledge of farm practices to
other members, and the preservation or improvement of financial capital, where household farm
labor wages are retained by the household members, instead of being paid out. The associated input
cost reduction is expected to sustain current income levels or increase profitability [57].

4.1.1.3. Water-linked management practices

Water-linked management practices include practices are vital adaptation strategies by

smallholder farmers facing droughts. In regions facing drought and risk of crop failure, sustainable
water management techniques, in the form of, rainwater harvesting or application of irrigation, which
are aimed at reducing crop water, will boost crop productivity, while contributing to economic
sustainability. Water management practices contribute to improved food security, poverty reduction
and increase in farm productivity [58].

4.1.1.4. Climate information services and education

Information through climate information systems enable farmers to make better decisions, for
example, choice of crop varieties, mode of production, and adjustment of planting dates, and these
can improve farm productivity [59]. Climate education services provide knowledge to farmers about
potential avenues to cope better in the presence of climate change. This new knowledge has the
potential to improve willingness to access to credit facilities and enable farmers to adopt better farm
technologies that improve farm productivity. This has the potential to add to economic resilience by
compensating farmers in the event that adverse weather events disrupt crop production [59].

4.1.1.5. Access to finance

Access to credit service can improve household livelihoods security, and it also improves the
ability to adapt to climate change by providing ease of acquiring means of diversification. Index-
based Insurance services within agriculture also serve as incentives to farmers, to plan for climate-
related disruptions. In northern Nigeria, Abraham, Fonta find that about 96 percent of the farmers are
aware of, and are negatively impacted by climate change [60]. They also attribute their ability to
adapt to credit availability, especially through microcredit or micro insurance. Availability of credit
will enable farmers in northern Nigeria to meet other requirements for adapting to climate such as
purchasing of improved crop varieties (heat-, drought, pest and disease-resistant). Access to finance
will provide financial capital and also enable the acquisition of natural capital such as new farmland,
which are essential for the sustenance and improvement of rural livelihoods [61].

4.1.1.6. Livelihood diversification

As climate change effects persist, the need to diversify the sources of livelihoods by farmers
beyond agriculture intensifies. This is vital for poverty reduction among poor rural farmers in

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 983

Nigeria. Off-farm diversification contributes to sustained or improved incomes and farmers may earn
income to further invest in agriculture [62]. Furthermore, diversification through value chain
activities is an important adaptation measure. This could be in the form of cassava farmers in
southern Nigeria, and millet and groundnut farmers in Northern Nigeria processing their produce into
value adding products, as well as engaging in the sales and marketing of these products. Other
activities include snail farming and bee-keeping. These farmers are reported to record increased
productivity and incomes from these extra activities [61,63].,

4.1.2. Self-organization

Self-organization includes the use of indigenous resources, indigenous knowledge and ease of
decision making by smallholder rural farmers. Indigenous knowledge about plant health, as well as
the pest and disease incidence is required by the farmers to adopt appropriate adaptation measures.
These measures include application of organic manure, crop residue management, and the use of
animal droppings. Furthermore, rural households can improve their adaptive capacity by pooling
their knowledge and labor endowment toward providing labor services to their own farms. The
potential benefits accruing from the supply of family labor could be knowledge transfer from more
knowledgeable household members at little or no cost [57].
Forming farmer groups constitute a very important measure aimed at adapting to climate change.
Through own-initiatives and concerted efforts, local farmer groups ensure that their members have
access to knowledge, competence necessary for day-to-day livelihoods improvement. Lead farmers
within farmer groups are usually nominated, on behalf of the group members, to meet with different
key stakeholders, including government agencies, extension services, for the purpose of acquiring
new knowledge and skills, to be shared with group members. Hence, forming groups could foster
trust among members, while promoting cooperation, such as pooling financial resources to
purchase farm machinery, continuous training of lead farmers and test or exhibition plots, to
boost livelihoods [64].

4.1.3. Increasing capacity for adaptive management

Our results show that most farmers are conversant with climate change events, especially
unpredictable rainfall rates and extreme temperature, and the implication for their livelihoods.
Through ownership of group-managed exhibition plots, farmers could acquire knowledge and
improve their adaptive capacity by experimenting with new techniques or technology before
implementing into individual farms. Farmers also benefit from appointments between extension
services and lead farmers, where the lead farmers are trained on proper farming practices aimed at
climate adaptation, and they transfer the knowledge to the rest of the group members. Our results
show that few studies reported on self-organization or farmer groups, there may be little scope for
exchange between key stakeholders, such as government agencies, extension services, and farmers.
This has the potential to slow down the acquisition of new ideas and adoption of new farming
technologies to help adopt climate change [64].

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 984

4.2. Livestock farming

4.2.1. Buffer capacity

4.2.1.1. Health improvement

The importance of animal health cannot be over-emphasized. Given the adverse effects of
climate change, farmers adopted measures that ensure good livestock health, for them to be
productive and profitable for the farmers [65]. Some of the measures include: administration of
vaccines and antibiotics, introduction of anti-stress, planting trees to create shade around poultry pen,
proper feed formulation, animal vaccination, constant water to regulate body temperature, proper
treatment of water, veterinary services and quarantine services.

4.2.1.2. Improved breeding strategy

In developing countries, especially in Nigeria, majority of the rural population depends on

livestock as a means of livelihood. Given the livelihood implications of livestock production,
increasing production sustainably is necessary. However, production is hampered by militating
factors such as nutrient deficiency, poor genetic potential, inappropriate husbandry, shortage of
appropriate feed, zoonotic and other emerging infectious diseases [66]. Currently, productivity in
livestock subsystems of most developing countries has been hampered by climate-related phenomena.
The adaptive measures identified include the use of high nutrient feed, use of nutrient-dense diet,
cross-breeding of animals and improved grazing sites. Improved grazing pastures can be a source of
nutrient for the livestock. Proper feeding increases weight gain and high chance of reproducing. The
weight gain causes the livestock to produce meat, eggs, which can improve food security and
generate income for the farmers. Cross breeding between animals that are tolerant to harsh weather
conditions, heat and disease will lead to genetic improvement which the farmer in turn sells to
make profit [67].

4.2.1.3. Improved breeding management

The poultry produce is of great importance in developing countries, contributing to the

nutritional needs of local communities [68–71]. Climate change has been linked with reduction in
poultry production [72]. Furthermore, temperature, sunshine and relative humidity are some
environmental conditions that affect the productivity and performance of birds [73]. Growing hybrid
birds is used as a form of adaptation. In this practice, indigenous species are cross-bred with foreign,
improved species, with the aim of boosting adaptability of livestock to changing environmental
conditions. Cross-bred birds that are well-adapted can improve survivability and productivity, which
also improve farmer income. Cross breeding with exotic birds provides opportunities for knowledge
combination, promoted by existence of a variety of learning platforms. Proper feed formulation system
was adopted as an adaptation strategy which increases the economic, ecology and social benefits [65].

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 985

4.2.1.4. Improved livestock management

The low productivity of livestock to the economy can be attributed to high disease incidence,
inadequate management, and low genetic potential of indigenous breeds, poor nutrition and
reproductive performance [68,69]. At the same time farmers reported adverse climate-related
impacts on livestock. To adapt, farmers plant trees to serve as wind breaker, build shade to reduce
heat, reduce flock size for adequate ventilation and improve livestock housing system. Batima noted
that the reduced number of productive animals kept in a particular environment will lead to efficient
production and reduce greenhouse gases emission [70]. The quality of an environment plays
important roles in the growth rate and performance of livestock. In the eastern part of Nigeria, during
rainy season, the wind destroys properties and livestock due to lack of any form of wind breakers. In
such cases, the livestock farmer will lose income. Therefore, planting of trees is a necessary means of
protecting the livestock from such threatening event that even the farmers in the rural areas can afford.

4.2.2. Self-organization

Capacity building

It is important to create awareness of climate change impacts and ways to cope with them
among smallholder livestock farmers [46]. Professional training and development programs for
livestock farmers create an opportunity for knowledge and farm practice improvement. Ampaire,
Rothschild found that trainings on animal management are usually desirable among farmers, since
they seem eager to improve on their knowledge and practices [74]. It also creates an avenue for
interaction and networking amongst themselves.

4.3. Fish production

4.3.1. Buffer capacity

4.3.1.1. Improved fish management

Improved Fish Management system comprises of water harvesting, stocking of early-maturing

fish species, introduction of organic materials, use of weather and water-monitoring kits, building
embankment to prevent flood water and adding of lime which serves as acid subsiding element.
Organic materials such as fertilizers are being induced on the fish which increases fertility and thus
fish production. Supplementary feeds are being administered to the fish. Stocking of quick-maturing
fish species improves farm economy by ensuring accelerated time-to-market, which in return,
increases the farm turnover and income, as well as improving food security.

4.3.1.2. Water harvesting

In mild drought areas, fish farmers can channel and store any rainfall, for use during dry periods.
Advantages derived from water harvesting include erosion control and groundwater replacement,
which are vital for agricultural development and resource conservation. When exposed to

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 986

environmental conditions (water quality and food availability), fish are vulnerable to diseases. Water
Harvesting contributes at a high degree in the social aspect, its highly beneficial towards the ecology
system and utilized (for irrigation, herd watering, machinery cleaning, filter backwashing, washing)
in the farm. The presence of disease in the fish pond makes it difficult to identify and treat the
affected fish. The fishes get sick, the farmer loses money as harvest is delayed and the economic
sustainability is reduced. Also, water is a perfect agent for spreading disease especially from fish
farm, as the affected water from the fishpond is drained thereby affecting the ecological (animal,
plants) and social (environment) sustainability. In other words, water harvesting is a cost-effective
measure to aid smallholder fish farmers during dry periods and thus boost livelihoods.

4.3.1.3. Improved fishing infrastructure

This involves the use of indoor fish production facilities, wells and boreholes to supply water,
erecting cover over ponds and upgraded traditional fishing gear can improve access to livelihood,
especially in capture fishery. This is especially important in the context that cultivated land is not
available for extended period, thus improved traditional fishing gear can help farmers increase their
catch, while serving as an additional source of food and income [75]. Use of the listed fishing
infrastructures throws in a high input in the economy, thereby giving raise to sustainability in the
ecosystem. Specialized fishing gear, digging wells or boreholes to supply water during dry period,
building ponds close to water sources contribute towards improving the right and access to livelihood
resources. Acquisition of information on climate change issues, the use of weather and water
monitoring kits, and migration contribute to adaptation and reduce vulnerability of fish farmers and
fishers. These help in the forecasting analysis of fish farming system. The forecasting aspects could
be an ecological factor which gives insight importance of the weather and directs the flow of activity
in the farm thereby increasing human capital endowments. Migration, on the other hand, contributes
to diversity of livelihood. According to Ficke et al., fish production, growth and migration are
affected by rainfall, hydrobiology and temperature [76]. In this case, pattern of fish species abundance
and availability is highly altered [77].

4.3.2. Self-organization

Adding of lime to reduce acidity is used by farmers to make the environment of the fish to be
more conducive and foster increased fish productivity. Farmers also erect covers over ponds during
dry seasons and build embankments to prevent flood water. These adaptation practices have made
use of resources from the farmers’ environments, and require farmers’ own initiatives and thus
constitute self-organized adaptation.

4.3.3. Increasing capacity for adaptive management

Access to information on climate change, weather and monitoring of water temperature are of
great importance to fish farmers’ adaptation and resilience [78]. Infrastructural provision such as
indoor fish production facilities add to opportunities for knowledge combination, promoted by
existence of a variety of learning platforms also contributes towards the adaptive capacity. According
to Huq, Reid, in order to understand and cope with climate risks, adaptive capacity of current

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 987

knowledge and practice needs to be considered [79]. Planting of wind breakers, avoidance of pond
linkages and regular change of water pond plays a more influential role in adaptive capacity which
increases capacity to survive external shock and changes which increases production [78].

5. Conclusions

We assessed the climate-resilience capacity of measures used by smallholder rural farmers in

the crop, livestock (including poultry), and fishery (sub) ecosystems of the agricultural sector in
Nigeria. Also, the aspects of resilience considered account for contribution to livelihoods and
sustainability, as defined by [15]. Adaptation measures were determined through a review of existing
studies on climate, agriculture and adaptation in Nigeria. Using the resilience definition and
Resilience Check toolkit reference in this study, our findings show that resilient adaptation is
happening: The resilience toolkit used on the 95 studies we reviewed show several examples
measures that contribute to farm level climate-resilience, within the most recent decade (2010–2019),
in multiple agro-ecological zones in Nigeria.
Our results show that farmers are using climate-resilient adaptation measures. We also find that
existing studies on climate change adaptation in Nigeria are largely targeted at crop production. The
major agricultural ecosystems and the broad adaptation areas are: crop farming (improved soil and
land management, crop-specific innovation, water management practices, climate information
services and education, access to finance, and off-farm diversification), livestock farming (improved
livestock management systems, improved breeding strategies, sustainable health improvement,
proper feed formulation early maturing and heat-resistant bird varieties), and fish farming (water
harvesting measures, organic material, quick-maturing varieties). We find that most adaptation studies,
about 80 percent, in Nigeria’s farming system have focused on the rainforest (44 percent) and the guinea
savanna (36 percent) agro-ecological zones.
While our assessments based on the resilience check toolkit and reference to other literature
show that adaptation measures by Nigerian farmers can be classified using the three attributes of
resilience, it is however, not clear which practices are more resilient and such measures have led to
sustainable agricultural systems. We also find more practices contributing to the buffer capacity of
the crop sub-sector than any other sector. Our study set to assess climate resilience of adaptation
measures using selected indicators. Furthermore, our results show that further studies are required to
focus extensively on the broad resilience profiles of Nigerian farmers’ adaptation measures, taking
into account all the pertinent indicators that make up the three major components of resilience: buffer
capacity, self-organization and capacity for learning and adaptation.
It is clear from the review that building resilience against climate change can be pursued
systematically by analyzing strategies that show potentials to increasing buffer capacity of farmers
and farming systems, enhancing their capacities for self-organization, and improving their abilities to
learn and adapt iteratively. This can serve as a template or guideline by development partners,
government agencies, private sector operators, civil society groups and communities in building
resilience of agricultural systems.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 988

Appendix

Figure 8. Number of adaptation studies by year.

Figure 9. Number of studies reporting adaptation measures.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 989

Table 4. Nigerian farmers’ adaptation practices classified by agricultural sector and contribution to resilience.

Agricultural Adaptation Resilience Adaptation (Sub-Theme)

sector (Broad Theme) component
Crop farming Mulching, make ridges across slopes, plant cover crops, cross-slope, sand filling; Traditional tillage; Hand
weeding farmland weeding and the control of pests; Use of organic and inorganic fertilizers, Herbicide use,
Organic farming Integrated soil fertility enhancement using organic and chemical fertilizers; Integrated
Soil and land Buffer cpacity farming/mixed farming; Agroforestry; Conventional tillage integrated soil nutrient management, and slow-
management forming terraces; Zero/Minimum tillage minimum tillage, Conservation tillage; Family-supplied labor on
farm land; Mechanization; Change to new farm land/shifting cultivation, Increase farm size; Cultural pest
control; Retention of crop residues in fields
Self-oganization Family labor
Inter cropping/mixed cropping or intercropping practices, crop diversification; Plant indigenous crop varieties;
Crop rotation; Improved crop varieties Drought-resistant crop varieties, Disease- and heat-resistant crops,
Crop-specific Buffer cpacity Early-maturing crops; Adjusting planting / harvesting time; Ecological pest management, seed and grain
innovation storage; Innovative crop development: early-maturing and higher yielding crop species; Farmers also use pest
or disease-resistant crop varieties; Use of Nursery
Self-oganization Indigenous grains
Water-linked Improved irrigation; Water harvesting technologies
management Buffer cpacity
practices
Climate Climate information systems/Weather forecasting; Government climate education/extension services,
information Participation in trainings
Adaptive cpacity
services and
education
Access to finance Buffer cpacity Access to credit facilities; Access to insurance services
Livelihood Other income-generating opportunities; Shift to marketing / processing of agricultural produce; Out migration
Buffer cpacity
diversification
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 990

Agricultural Adaptation Resilience Adaptation (Sub-Theme)

sector (Broad Theme) component
Livestock Improved Buffer cpacity Tree planting for wind break; Reduction in flock size; Pen infrastructural reinforcement; Adequate ventilation
farming livestock and sanitation; Proper treatment of water, constant water to regulate body temperature, water harvesting; High
management nutrient feed / proper feed formulation
systems
Improved Buffer capacity Rearing heat-resistant animals & disease resistant breed, selective breeding, keeping of resistant varieties, cross
breeding breeding with exotic birds
strategies
Sustainable health Buffer capacity Quarantine services and veterinary services vaccines and antibiotics; introduction of anti-stress medications
management Self-organization Access to training and climate information
Mixed farming Buffer capacity Keeping multiple livestock animals; Mixed farming
Fish farming Improved fishery Buffer capacity Raising quick maturing fish species; Water harvesting; Introduction of organic material
management Self-organization Adding of lime to reduce acidity; Building embankment to prevent flood water
Adaptive capacity Usage of weather and water-monitoring kits
Diversification Buffer capacity Diversification in non-fishing portfolios; Migration
measures Adaptive capacity Acquiring information about climate change
Improved fishing Buffer capacity Specialized fishing gear, digging wells or boreholes to supply water during dry period, siting ponds close to
infrastructure steady water sources
Self-organization Cover over ponds in dry seasons
Adaptive capacity Use of indoor fish production facilities

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 991

Table 5. Adaptation studies focused on crop farming sub-sector classified according to resilience component.

Resilience component
Adaptive
Buffer capacity Self-organization
capacity
Authors [Reference] Regional focus Study design SLM CSI WMP FIN DIV SLM CSI CIS
Abraham and Fonta (2018) [60] NC QN 
Achoja and Oguh (2018) [80] SS QN   
Agomuo et al. (2015) [81] SE QN     
Ajayi (2016) [82] SW QN  
Ajieh and Okoh (2012) [83] SS QL    
Akinbile et al. (2018) [84] SW QL    
Akinwalere (2017) [85] SW QN  
Anyoha et al. (2013) [86] SE QN     
Apata (2012) [87] SW QN   
Arimi (2014) [88] SW QL     
Asadu et al. (2018) [89] SE QL   
Ayanlade et al. (2017) [90] SW QL   
Ayoade (2012) [91] SW QL   
Chukwuone (2015) [92] SE QN     
Chukwuone et al. (2018) [93] SE QN   
Emodi and Bonjoru (2013) [94] NC QL     
Enete et al. (2011) [95] SE QN   
Enete et al. (2015) [96] SW QN   
Eregha (2014) [97] MZ QN   
Esan et al. (2018) [98] SW QL   
Ezeh and Eze (2016) [99] SE QL     
Ezike (2018) [100] SE QN   
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 992

Resilience component
Adaptive
Buffer capacity Self-organization
capacity
Authors [Reference] Regional focus Study design SLM CSI WMP FIN DIV SLM CSI CIS
Falola and Achem (2017) [101] NC QN    
Farauta et al. (2011) [102] NC MM   
Henri-Ukoha and Adesope (2018) [103] SS QN  
Ifeanyi-obi (2012) [104] SS QL     
Ifeanyi-Obi et al. (2014) [105] SE QL      
Igwe (2018) [106] SE QN  
Iheke and Agodike (2016) [107] SE QN   
Ihenacho et al. (2019) [108] SE QN  
Ikehi et al. (2014) [109] SE QL    
Kim et al. (2017) [110] NC QL    
Koyenikan and Anozie (2017) [111] SS QN    
Mbah et al. (2016) [112] NC QL  
Mustapha et al. (2012) [113] NE QL 
Mustapha et al. (2017) [114] NE QL 
Nnadi et al. (2012) [115] SE QL  
Nwaiwu et al. (2014) [116] SE QL   
Nwalieji and Onwubuya (2012) [117] SE QL    
Nwankwo et al. (2017) [118] SE QN 
Nzeadibe et al. (2011) [119] SE QN     
Obayelu (2014) [120] SW MM   
Ofuoku (2011) [121] SW QN 
Ogbodo et al. (2018) [122] SE QN   
Ogogo et al. (2019) [123] SS QL  
Okpe and Aye (2015) [124] NC QN   
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 993

Resilience component
Adaptive
Buffer capacity Self-organization
capacity
Authors [Reference] Regional focus Study design SLM CSI WMP FIN DIV SLM CSI CIS
Oluwatusin (2014) [125] SW QN    
Oluwole et al. (2016) [126] SW QN   
Onyeagocha et al. (2018) [127] SE QN   
Onyegbula and Oladeji (2017) [128] SE, SS, NC MM      
Onyekuru (2017) [129] MZ QN 
Onyeneke (2016) [130] SE QN  
Onyeneke (2018) [131] SE QN    
Onyeneke and Madukwe (2010) [132] SE QL    
Onyeneke et al. (2012) [133] SS QN 
Tarfa et al. (2019) [134] MZ QN    
Onyeneke et al. (2017) [135] SE QL    
Oriakhi et al. (2017) [136] SS QN    
Orowole et al. (2015) [137] SW QN     
Oruonye (2014) [138] NW QL  
Oselebe et al. (2016) [139] SE QL  
Oti et al. (2019) [140] SE QN     
Owombo et al. (2014) [141] SW QN   
Oyekale and Oladele (2012) [57] SW QN 
Ozor et al. (2012) [142] SE, SS, SW QL    
Sangotegbe et al. (2012) [143] SW QL   
Sanni (2019) [144] SW MM   
Solomon and Edet (2018) [145] SE QN    
Tanko and Muhsinat (2014) [146] NC QN    
Tanko and Muhsinat (2014) [146] NC QN    
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 994

Resilience component
Self-organization Adaptive
Buffer capacity
capacity
Authors [Reference] Regional focus Study design SLM CSI WMP FIN DIV SLM CSI CIS
Tanko and Muhsinat (2014) [146] NC QN    
Usman et al. (2016) [147] NC QN  
Uzokwe and Okonkwo (2012) [148] SS QN   
Weli and Bajie (2017) [149] SE MM    
Legend
Region Design Adaptation Broad Theme
NC = North Central QN = Quantitative SLM = Soil and Land Management
NW = North West QL = Qualitative CSI = Crop-specific Innovation
SE = South East MM = Mixed Methods WMP = Water-linked management practices
SW = South West FIN = Access to Finance
SS = South South DIV = Livelihood Diversification
Multiple = Study conducted in more CIS = Climate information services and education
than 3 regions at one time

Table 6. Adaptation studies focused on livestock sub-sector classified according to resilience component.

Resilience Component
Buffer capacity Self-organization
Authors [Reference] Regional Focus Study Design ILM IBS SHM MF SHM
Adepoju and Osunbor (2018) [65] SW QU    
Chah et al. (2013) [150] SE MM  
Chah et al. (2018) [151] SE QN    
Ibrahim and Azemheta (2016) [152] NC QN  
Tologbonse et al. (2011) [153] MZ QL  
Ume et al. (2018) [154] SE QU   
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 995

Legend    
Region Design Adaptation Broad Theme
NC = North Central QN = Quantitative ILM = Improved Livestock management systems
SE = South East QL = Qualitative IBS = Improved breeding strategies
SW = South West MM = Mixed Methods SHM = Sustainable health management
MZ = Study conducted in more than 3 MF = Mixed Farming
regions at one time

Table 7. Adaptation studies focused on fish farming sub-sSector classified according to resilience component.

Resilience Component
Buffer capacity Self-organization Adaptive capacity
Authors [Reference] Regional Focus Study Design IFM DIV IFI IFM IFM DIV
Adebayo (2012) [78] SW QL    
Adeleke and Omoboyeje (2016) [155] SW QL  
Aphunu and Nwabeze (2012) [156] SS QN   
Nwabeze et al. (2012) [77] NC QL  
Owolabi and Olokor (2016) [157] NC QL     
Legend
Region Design Adaptation Broad Theme
NC = North Central QN = Quantitative IFM = Improved Fishery Management
SW = South West QL = Qualitative DIV = Diversification Measures
SS = South South IFI = Improved Fishing Infrastructure

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 996

Table 8. Adaptation studies focused on multiple sub-sectors classified according to resilience component.

Crop farming Livestock farming Fish farming

Resilience component
Self- Adaptive Self- Self- Adaptive
Buffer capacity Buffer capacity Buffer capacity
organization capacity organization organization capacity
Authors [Reference] Region Design SLM CSI WMP FIN DIV SLM CSI CIS ILM IBS SHM MF SHM IFM DIV IFI IFM IFM DIV
Amusa et al (2015) [158] SW QN      
BNRCC (2011) [61] MZ PA                   
NEST, Woodley (2012) SW PA  
[159]
BNRCC, Federal Ministry MZ PA    
of Environment (2012)
[160]
Nzegbule et al (2019) [63] MZ QL                   
Oladipo (2010) [161] MZ QN   
Tijjani and Chikaire SE QN      
(2016) [162]
Legend    
Region Design Adaptation Broad Theme
NC = North Central QN = Quantitative SLM = Soil and Land Management
NW = North West QL = Qualitative CSI = Crop-specific Innovation
SE = South East MM = Mixed Methods WMP = Water-linked management practices
SW = South West PA = Participatory Approach FIN = Access to Finance
SS = South South DIV = Livelihood Diversification
Continued on next page

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 997

Legend
MZ = Study conducted in more than 3 CIS = Climate information services and education
regions at one time
ILM = Improved Livestock management systems
IBS = Improved breeding strategies
SHM = Sustainable health management
MF = Mixed Farming
IFM = Improved Fishery Management
DIV = Diversification Measures
IFI = Improved Fishing Infrastructure

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 998

References

1. IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability-Contribution of

Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
2. IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved July 1, 2019, Available from:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf.
3. Abidoye BO, Kurukulasuriya P, Mendelsohn R (2017) South-East Asian farmer perceptions of
climate change. Clim Change Econ 8: 1740006.
4. Konchar KM, Staver B, Salick J, et al. (2015) Adapting in the shadow of Annapurna: a climate
tipping point. J Ethnobiol 35: 449–471.
5. Aldunce P, Handmer J, Beilin R, et al. (2016) Is climate change framed as ‘business as usual’ or
as a challenging issue? The practitioners’ dilemma. Environ Plann 34: 999–1019.
6. Scheffers BR, Meester L, Bridge TC, et al. (2016) The broad footprint of climate change from
genes to biomes to people. Science 354: 6313.
7. Voccia A (2012) Climate change: What future for small, vulnerable states? Int J Sust Dev World
Ecol 19: 101–115.
8. Spires M, Shackleton S, Cundill G (2014) Barriers to implementing planned community-based
adaptation in developing countries: A systematic literature review. Clim Dev 6: 277–287.
9. Bockel L, Vian L, Torre C (2016) Towards sustainable impact monitoring of green agriculture
and forestry investments by NDBs: Adapting MRV methodology. Rome, Italy: Food and
Agriculture Organization.
10. Glenn A, James WE, Fuller RA (2016) Global mismatch between greenhouse gas emissions and
the burden of climate change. Sci Rep 6: 20281.
11. Jackson G, McNamara K, Witt B (2017) A framework for disaster vulnerability in a small island in
the Southwest Pacific: A case study of Emae Island, Vanuatu. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 8: 358–373.
12. Easterling WE (1996) Adapting North American agriculture to climate change in review. Agric
For Meteorol 80: 1–53.
13. FAO (2007) Adaptation to climate change in agriculture, forestry and fisheries: Perspective,
framework and priorities. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.
14. Berrang-Ford L, Pearce T, Ford JD (2015) Systematic review approaches for climate change
adaptation research. Reg Environ Chang 15: 755–769.
15. Ifejika-Speranza C (2010) Resilient adaptation to climate change in African Agriculture. Bonn:
Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
16. Abiodun BJ, Salami AT, Tadross M (2011) Climate change scenarios for Nigeria:
Understanding biophysical impacts. Ibadan, Nigeria: Building Nigeria’s Response to Climate
Change (BNRCC) Project.
17. IPCC (2018) Global warming of 1.5 ℃ Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental Panel on
climate change.
18. NBS (2017) Nigerian Gross Domestic Product Report, Abuja, Nigeria: National Bureau of Statistics.
19. Yakubu MM, Akanegbu BN (2015) The Impact of international trade on economic growth in
Nigeria: 1981–2012. Eur J Bus Econ Account 3: 26–36.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 999

20. Berg A, de Noblet-Ducoudre N, Benjamin S, et al. (2013) Projections of climate change impacts
on potential C4 crop productivity over tropical regions. Agric For Meteorol 170: 89–102.
21. Mereu V, Santini M, Cervigni R, et al (2018) Robust decision making for a climate-resilient
development of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. In: Lipper L, McCarthy N, Zilberman D, et al.,
Eds., Climate Smart Agriculture: Building Resilience to Climate Change, Rome, Italy: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 277–306.
22. Adejuwon JO (2005) Food crop production in Nigeria. Present effects of climate variability.
Clim Res 30: 53–60.
23. Odekunle TO (2004) Rainfall and the length of the growing season in Nigeria. Int J Climatol
24: 467–479.
24. Remling E, Veitayaki J (2016) Community-based action in Fiji’s Gau Island: A model for the
Pacific? Int J Clim Chang Str Manage 8: 375–398.
25. Ogbo A, Lauretta NE, Ukpere W (2013) Risk management and challenges of climate change in
Nigeria. J Hum Ecol 41: 221–235.
26. Obioha EE (2008) Climate change, population drift and violent conflict over land resources in
Northeastern Nigeria. J Hum Ecol 23: 311–324.
27. Mburu BM, Kung'u JB, Muriuku JN (2015) Climate change adaptation strategies by small-scale
farmers in Yatta District, Kenya. Afr J Environ Sci Technol 9: 712–722.
28. Cooper C, Booth A, Varley-Campbell J, et al. (2018) Defining the process to literature searching
in systematic reviews: A literature review of guidance and supporting studies. BMC Med Res
Methodol 85: 1–14.
29. Babatunde KA, Begum RA, Said FF (2017) Application of computable general equilibrium (CGE)
to climate change mitigation policy: A systematic review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 78: 61–71.
30. Escarcha JF, Lassa JA, Zander KK (2018) Livestock under climate change: A systematic review
of impacts and adaptation. Climate 6: 54.
31. Folke C (2006) Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems
analyses. Global Environ Chang 16: 253–267.
32. Ifejika-Speranza C (2013) Buffer capacity: Capturing a dimension of resilience to climate
change in African smallholder agriculture. Reg Environ Chang 13: 521–535.
33. Pretty J (2008) Agricultural sustainability: Concepts, principles and evidence. Philos Trans R
Soc Lond B Biol Sci 363: 447–465.
34. Dorward A, Anderson S, Clark S (2001) Asset functions and livelihood strategies: A framework
for pro-poor analysis, policy and practice. Imperial College at Wye, Department of Agricultural
Sciences: ADU Working Papers 10918.
35. Shaffril HA, Krauss SE, Samsuddin SF (2018) A systematic review on Asian’s farmers’
adaptation practices towards climate change. Sci Total Environ 644: 683–695.
36. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews
and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6: e1000097.
37. Singh C, Deshpande T, Basu R (2017) How do we assess vulnerability to climate change in
India? A systematic review of literature. Reg Environ Chang 17: 527–538.
38. Rusinamhodzi L, Corbeels M, Nyamangara J, et al. (2012) Maize-grain legume intercropping is
an attractive option for ecological intensification that reduces climatic risk for smallholder
farmers in central Mozambique. Field Crops Res 136: 12–22.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1000

39. Challinor A, Wheeler T, Garfoth C, et al. (2007) The vulnerability of food crop systems in
Africa to climate change. Clim Chang 83: 381–399.
40. Morton JF (2007) The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 19680–19685.
41. Armbrecht I, Gallego-Ropero MC (2007) Testing ant predation on the coffee berry borer in
shaded and sun coffee plantations in Colombia. Entomol Exp Appl 124: 261–267.
42. Lin BB (2011) Resilience in agriculture through crop diversification: Adaptive management for
environmental change. BioScience 61: 183–193.
43. Grubben G, Klaver W, Nono-Womdim R, et al. (2014) Vegetables to combat the hidden hunger
in Africa. Chronica Hort 54: 24–32.
44. Luoh JW, Begg CB, Symonds RC, et al. (2014) Nutritional yield of African indigenous
vegetables in water-deficient and water-sufficient conditions. Food Nutri Sci 5: 812–822.
45. Lunduka RW, Mateva KL, Magoroshoko C, et al. (2019) Impact of adoption of drought-tolerant
maize varieties on total maize production in south Eastern Zimbabwe. Clim Dev 11: 35–46.
46. Akinnagbe OM, Irohibe IJ (2014) Agricultural adaptation strategies to climate change impacts
in Africa: A review. Bangladesh J Agric Res 39: 407–418.
47. Waha K, Müller C, Bondeau A, et al. (2013) Adaptation to climate change through the choice of
cropping system and sowing date in sub-Saharan Africa. Global Environ Chang 23: 130–143.
48. Atedhor GO (2015) Strategies for agricultural adaptation to climate change in Kogi state,
Nigeria. Ghana J Geogr 7: 20–37.
49. Westengen OT, Brysting AK (2014) Crop adaptation to climate change in the semi-arid zone in
Tanzania: The role of genetic resources and seed systems. Agri Food Secur 3: 1–12.
50. Sanz MJ, de Vente J, Chotte JL, et al. (2017) Sustainable land management contribution to
successful land-based climate change adaptation and mitigation: A report of the science-policy
interface. Bonn, Germany: United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).
51. FAO (2017) Voluntary guidelines for sustainable soil management. Rome, Italy: Food and
Agriculture Organization.
52. Stavi I (2013) Biochar use in forestry and tree-based agro-ecosystems for increasing climate
change mitigation and adaptation. Int J Sust DevWorld Ecol 20: 166–181.
53. Lal R (2015) Sequestering carbon and increasing productivity by conservation agriculture. J Soil
Water Conserv 70: 55–62.
54. Stavi I, Bel G, Zaady E (2016) Soil functions and ecosystem services in conventional,
conservation, and integrated agricultural systems. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 36: 1–12.
55. Agbonlahor MU, Aromolaran AB, Aiboni VI (2003) Sustainable soil management practices in
small farms of southern Nigeria: A poultry-food crop integrated farming approach. J Sustain
Agric 22: 51–62.
56. Thierfelder C, Matemba-Mutasa R, Rusinamhodzi L (2015) Yield response of maize (Zea mays L.)
to conservation agriculture cropping system in Southern Africa. Soil Till Res 146: 230–242.
57. Oyekale AS, Oladele OI (2012) Determinants of climate change adaptation among cocoa
farmers in Southwest Nigeria. ARPN J Sci Technol 2: 154–168.
58. Merrey DJ, Sally H (2008) Micro-AWM Technologies for food security in Southern Africa: Part
of the solution or a red herring? Water Policy 10: 515–530.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1001

59. CGIAR (2016) Agricultural practices and technologies to enhance food security, resilience and
productivity in a sustainable manner: Messages to SBSTA 44 agriculture workshops, CCAFS
Working Paper no. 146, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2016.
60. Abraham TW, Fonta WM (2018) Climate change and financing adaptation by farmers in
northern Nigeria. Financ Innov 4: 11. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-018-0094-0.
61. BNRCC (2011) Reports of pilot projects in community-based adaptation to climate change in
Nigeria. Ibadan, Nigeria: Building Nigeria’s Response to Climate Change (BNRCC) Project.
62. Asfaw A, Simane B, Hassen A, et al. (2017) Determinants of non-farm livelihood diversification:
Evidence from rainfed-dependent smallholder farmers in Northcentral Ethiopia (Woleka sub-basin).
Dev Stud Res 4: 22–36.
63. Nzegbule EC, Nwajiuba C, Ujor G, et al. (2019) Sustainability and the effectiveness of BNRCC
community-based adaptation (CBA) to address climate change impact in Nigeria. In: Leal FW
Eds., Handbook of Climate Change Resilience, Cham: Springer, 1–22.
64. Akrofi-Atitianti F, Ifejika-Speranza C, Bockel L, et al. (2018) Assessing climate smart agriculture
and its determinants of practice in Ghana: A case of the cocoa production system. Land 7: 30.
65. Adepoju AO, Osunbor PP (2018) Small scale poultry farmers’ choice of adaption strategies to
climate change in Ogun State, Nigeria. Rural Sustain Res 40: 32–40.
66. Salem BH, López-Francos A (2012) Feeding and management strategies to improve livestock
productivity, welfare and product quality under climate change. 14th International Seminar of
the Sub-Network on Nutrition of the FAO-CIHEAM Inter-Regional Cooperative Research and
Development Network on Sheep and Goats. Hammamet, Tunisia.
67. IAEA (2010) Improving livestock production using indigenous resources and conserving the
environment. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency.
68. Lamy E, van Harten S, Sales-Baptista E, et al. (2012) Factors influencing livestock productivity.
In: Sejian V, Naqvi SM, Ezeji T, et al. Eds., Environmental Stress and Amelioration in
Livestock Production, Berlin, Germany: Springer, 19–51.
69. Gebremedhin B, Hoekstra D, Jemaneh S (2007) Heading towards commercialization? The case of
live animal marketing in Ethiopia. Nairobi, Kenya: Improving Productivity and Market Success
(IPMS) of Ethiopian Farmers. Working Paper 5. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute).
70. Batima P (2006) Climate change vulnerability and adaptation in the livestock sector of
Mongolia. Washington, DC: Assessments of Impacts and Adaptations to Climate Change
(AIACC), Project No. AS 06.
71. Okonkwo WI, Akubuo CO (2001) Thermal analysis and evaluation of heat requirement of a
passive solar energy poultry chick brooder. Nig J Renew Energ 9: 83–87.
72. Nyoni NM, Grab S, Archer ER (2019) Heat stress and chickens: Climate risk effects on rural
poultry farming in low-income countries. Clim Dev 11: 83–90.
73. Elijah OA, Adedapo A (2006) The effect of climate on poultry productivity in Ilorin Kwara
State, Nigeria. Int J Poult Sci 5: 1061–1068.
74. Ampaire A, Rothschild MF (2010) Effects of training and facilitation of farmers in Uganda on
livestock development. Livest Res Rural Dev 22: 1–7.
75. Shelton C (2014) Climate change adaptation in fisheries and aquaculture: Compilation of initial
examples. FAO Fisheries and Agriculture Circular No. 1088. Rome: Food and Agriculture
Organization.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1002

76. Ficke AD, Myrick CA, Hansen LJ (2007) Potential impacts of global climate change on
freshwater fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 17: 581–613.
77. Nwabeze GO, Erie AP, Erie GO (2012) Fishers’ adaptation to climate change in the Jebba Lake
Basin, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 16: 68–78.
78. Adebayo OO (2012) Climate change perception and adaptation strategies on catfish farming in
Oyo State, Nigeria. Glob J Sci Frontier Res Agric Vet Sci 12: 1–7.
79. Huq S, Reid H (2007) Community-based adaptation: A vital approach to the threat climate
change poses to the poor. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
80. Achoja FO, Oguh VO (2018) Income effect of climate change adaptation technologies among
crop farmers in Delta State, Nigeria. Int J Agric Rural Dev 21: 3611–3616.
81. Agomuo CI, Asiabaka CC, Nnadi FN, et al. (2015) Rural women farmers’ use of adaptation
strategies to climate change in Imo State. Nigeria Int J Agric Rural Dev 18: 2305–2310.
82. Ajayi JO (2015) Adaptation strategies to climate change by farmers in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Appl
Trop Agric 20: 01–07.
83. Ajieh PC, Okoh RN (2012) Constraints to the implementation of climate change adaptation
measures by farmers in delta state, Nigeria. Glob J Sci Frontier Res Agric Vet Sci 12: 1–7.
84. Akinbile LA, Oluwafunmilayo AO, Kolade RI (2018) Perceived effect of climate change on
forest dependent livelihoods in Oyo State, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 22: 169–179.
85. Akinwalere BO (2017) Determinants of adoption of agroforestry practices among farmers in
Southwest Nigeria. Appl Trop Agric 22: 67–72.
86. Anyoha NO, Nnadi FN, Chikaire J, et al. (2013) Socio-economic factors influencing climate
change adaptation among crop farmers in Umuahia South Area of Abia State, Nigeria. Net J
Agric Sci 1: 42–47.
87. Apata TG (2011) Factors influencing the perception and choice of adaptation measures to
climate change among farmers in Nigeria: Evidence from farm households in Southwest Nigeria.
Environ Econ 2: 74–83.
88. Arimi K (2014) Determinants of climate change adaptation strategies used by rice farmers in
Southwestern, Nigeria. J Agr Rural Dev Trop 115: 91–99.
89. Asadu AN, Ozioko RI, Dimelu MU (2018) Climate change information source and indigenous
adaptation strategies of cucumber farmers in Enugu State, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 22: 136–146.
90. Ayanlade A, Radeny M, Morton JF (2017) Comparing smallholder farmers’ perception of
climate change with meteorological data: A case study from southwestern Nigeria. Weather
Clim Extremes 15: 24–33.
91. Ayoade AR (2012) Determinants of climate change on cassava production in Oyo State, Nigeria.
Glob J Sci Frontier Res Agric Vet Sci 12: 1–7.
92. Chukwuone N (2015) Analysis of impact of climate change on growth and yield of yam and
cassava and adaptation strategies by farmers in Southern Nigeria. African Growth and
Development Policy Modelling Consortium Working Paper 0012. Dakar-Almadies, Senegal:
African Growth and Development Policy Modelling Consortium.
93. Chukwuone NA, Chukwuone C, Amaechina EC (2018) Sustainable land management
practices used by farm households for climate change adaptation in South East Nigeria. J
Agric Ext 22: 185–194.
94. Emodi AI, Bonjoru FH (2013) Effects of climate change on rice farming in Ardo Kola Local
Government Area of Taraba State, Nigeria. Agric J 8: 17–21.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1003

95. Enete AA, Madu II, Mojekwu JC, et al. (2011) Indigenous agricultural adaptation to climate
change: Study of Imo and Enugu States in Southeast Nigeria. African Technology Policy
Studies Network Working Paper No. 53. Nairobi: African Technology Policy Studies Network.
96. Enete AA, Otitoju MA, Ihemezie EJ (2015) The choice of climate change adaptation strategies
among food crop farmers in Southwest Nigeria. Nig J Agric Econ 5: 72–80.
97. Eregha PB, Babatolu JS, Akinnubi RT (2014) Climate change and crop production in Nigeria:
An error correction modelling approach. Int J Energ Econ Policy 4: 297–311.
98. Esan VI, Lawi MB, Okedigba I (2018) Analysis of cashew farmers adaptation to climate change
in South-Western Nigeria. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Sociol 23: 1–12.
99. Ezeh AN, Eze AV (2016) Farm-level adaptation measures to climate change and constraints
among arable crop farmers in Ebonyi State of Nigeria. Agric Res J 53: 492–500.
100. Ezike KN (2019) Implications for mitigation and adaptation measures: Rice farmers’ response
and constraints to climate change in Ivo Local Government Area of Ebonyi State. In: Leal FW
Eds., Handbook of Climate Change Resilience, Cham: Springer, 1787–1799.
101. Falola A, Achem BA (2017) Perceptions on climate change and adaptation strategies among
sweet potato farming households in Kwara State, Northcentral Nigeria. Ceylon J Sci 46: 55–63.
102. Farauta BK, Egbule CL, Idrisa YL, et al. (2011) Farmers’ perceptions of climate change and
adaptation strategies in Northern Nigeria: An empirical assessment. African Technology
Policy Studies Network Research Paper No 15. Nairobi, Kenya: African Technology Policy
Studies Network.
103. Henri-Ukoha A, Adesope OM (2019) Sustainability of climate change adaptation measures in
Rivers State, South-South, Nigeria. In: Leal FW, Eds., Handbook of Climate Change Resilience,
Cham: Springer, 675–683.
104. Ifeanyi-Obi CC, Asiabaka CC, Matthews-Njoku E, et al. (2012) Effects of climate change on
fluted pumpkin production and adaptation measures used among farmers in Rivers State. J Agric
Ext 16: 50–58.
105. Ifeanyi-Obi CC, Asiabaka CC, Adesope OM (2014) Determinants of climate change adaptation
measures used by crop and livestock farmers in Southeast Nigeria. J Human Soc Sci 19: 61–70.
106. Igwe AA (2018) Effect of livelihood factors on climate change adaptation of rural farmers in
Ebonyi State. J Biol Agric Healthc 8: 10–15.
107. Iheke OR, Agodike WC (2016) Analysis of factors influencing the adoption of climate change
mitigating measures by smallholder farmers in Imo State, Nigeria. Sci Papers Ser Manag Econ
Eng Agric Rural Dev 16: 213–220.
108. Ihenacho RA, Orusha JO, Onogu B (2019) Rural farmers use of indigenous knowledge systems
in agriculture for climate change adaptation and mitigation in Southeast Nigeria. Ann Ecol
Environ Sci 3: 1–11.
109. Ikehi ME, Onu FM, Ifeanyieze FO, et al. (2014) Farming families and climate change issues in
Niger Delta Region of Nigeria: Extent of impact and adaptation strategies. Agric Sci 5: 1140–1151.
110. Kim I, Elisha I, Lawrence E, et al. (2017) Farmers adaptation strategies to the effect of climate
variation on rice production: Insight from Benue State, Nigeria. Environ Ecol Res 5: 289–301.
111. Koyenikan MJ. Anozie O (2017) Climate change adaptation needs of male and female oil palm
entrepreneurs in Edo State, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 21: 162–175.
112. Mbah EN, Ezeano CI, Saror SF (2016) Analysis of climate change effects among rice farmers in
Benue State, Nigeria. Curr Res Agric Sci 3: 7–15.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1004

113. Mustapha SB, Undiandeye UC, Gwary MM (2012) The role of extension in agricultural
adaptation to climate change in the Sahelian Zone of Nigeria. J Environ Earth Sci 2: 48–58.
114. Mustapha SB, Alkali A, Zongoma BA, et al. (2017) Effects of climatic factors on preference for
climate change adaptation strategies among food crop farmers in Borno State, Nigeria. Int Acad
Inst Sci Technol 4: 23–31.
115. Nnadi FN, Chikaire J, Nnadi CD, et al. (2012) Sustainable land management practices for
climate change adaptation in Imo State, Nigeria. J Emerg Trends Eng Appl Sci 3: 801–805.
116. Nwaiwu IU, Ohajianya DO, Orebiyi JS, et al. (2014) Climate change trend and appropriate
mitigation and adaptation strategies in Southeast Nigeria. Glob J Biol Agric Health Sci 3: 120–125.
117. Nwalieji HU, Onwubuya EA (2012) Adaptation practices to climate change among rice farmers
in Anambra State of Nigeria. J Agric Ext 16: 42–49.
118. Nwankwo GC, Nwaobiala UC, Ekumankama OO, et al. (2017) Analysis of perceived effect of
climate change and adaptation among cocoa farmers in Ikwuano Local Government Area of
Abia State, Nigeria. ARPN J Sci Technol 7: 1–7.
119. Nzeadibe TC, Egbule CL, Chukwuone NA, et al. (2011) Climate change awareness and
adaptation in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria. Nairobi, Kenya: African Technology Policy
Studies Network Working Paper Series No.57. Nairobi, Kenya: African Technology Policy
Studies Network.
120. Obayelu OA, Adepoju AO, Idowu T (2014) Factors influencing farmers’ choices of adaptation
to climate change in Ekiti State, Nigeria. J Agric Environ Int Dev 108: 3–16.
121. Ofuoku AU (2011) Rural farmers’ perception of climate change in central agricultural zone of
Delta State, Nigeria. Indones J Agric Sci 12: 63–69.
122. Ogbodo JA, Anarah SE, Abubakar SM (2018) GIS-based assessment of smallholder farmers’
perception of climate change impacts and their adaptation strategies for maize production in
Anambra State, Nigeria. In: Amanullah, & S. Fahad (Eds.), Corn production and human health
in changing climate, 115–138.
123. Ogogo AU, Ekong MU, Ifebueme NM (2019) Climate change awareness and adaptation
measures among farmers in Cross River and Akwa Ibom States of Nigeria. In: Leal FW (Ed),
Handbook of Climate Change Resilience ,1983–2002, Cham: Springer.
124. Okpe B, Aye GC (2015) Adaptation to climate change by farmers in Makurdi, Nigeria. J Agric
Ecol Res Int 2: 46–57.
125. Oluwatusin FM (2014) The perception of and adaptation to climate change among cocoa farm
households in Ondo State, Nigeria. Acad J Interdiscipli Stud 3: 147–156.
126. Oluwole AJ, Shuaib L, Dasgupta P (2016) Assessment of level of use of climate change
adaptation strategies among arable crop farmers in Oyo and Ekiti States, Nigeria. J Earth Sci
Clim Chang 7: 369.
127. Onyeagocha SU, Nwaiwu IU, Obasi PC, et al. (2018) Encouraging climate smart agriculture as
part solution to the negative effects of climate change on agricultural sustainability in Southeast
Nigeria. Int J Agric Rural Dev 21: 3600–3610.
128. Onyegbula CB, Oladeji JO (2017) Utilization of climate change adaptation strategies among
rice farmers in three states of Nigeria. J Agric Ext Rural Dev 9: 223–229.
129. Onyekuru NA (2017) Determinants of adaptation strategies to climate change in Nigerian forest
communities. Nig Agric Policy Res J 3: 42–59.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1005

130. Onyeneke RU (2016) Effects of livelihood strategies on sustainable land management practices
among food crop farmers in Imo State, Nigeria. Nig J Agric Food Environ 12: 230–235.
131. Onyeneke RU (2018) Challenges of adaptation to climate change by farmers Anambra State,
Nigeria. Int J BioSciences Agric Technol 9: 1–7.
132. Onyeneke RU, Madukwe DK (2010) Adaptation measures by crop farmers in the Southeast
Rainforest Zone of Nigeria to climate change. Sci World J 5: 32–34.
133. Onyeneke RU, Iruo FA, Ogoko IM (2012) Micro-level analysis of determinants of farmers’
adaptation measures to climate change in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria: Lessons from
Bayelsa State. Nig J Agric Econ 3: 9–18.
134. Tarfa PY, Ayuba HK, Onyeneke RU, et al. (2019) Climate change perception and adaptation in
Nigeria’s Guinea Savanna: Empirical evidence from farmers in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Appl
Ecol Environ Res 17: 7085–7112.
135. Onyeneke R, Mmagu CJ, Aligbe JO (2017) Crop farmers’ understanding of climate change and
adaptation practices in South-east Nigeria. World Rev Sci Technol Sust Dev 13: 299–318.
136. Oriakhi LO, Ekunwe PA, Erie GO, et al. (2017) Socio-economic determinants of farmers’
adoption of climate change adaptation strategies in Edo State, Nigeria. Nig J Agric Food
Environ 13: 115–121.
137. Orowole PF, Okeowo TA, Obilaja OA (2015) Analysis of level of awareness and adaptation
strategies to climate change among crop farmers in Lagos State, Nigeria. Int J Appl Res Technol
4: 8–15.
138. Oruonye ED (2014) An Assessment of the level of awareness of climate change and variability
among rural farmers in Taraba State, Nigeria. Int J Sustain Agric Res 1: 70–84.
139. Oselebe HO, Nnamani CV, Efisue A, et al. (2016) Perceptions of climate change and variability,
impacts and adaptation strategies by rice farmers in south east Nigeria. Our Nature 14: 54–63.
140. Oti OG, Enete AA, Nweze NJ (2019) Effectiveness of climate change adaptation practices of
farmers in Southeast Nigeria: An empirical approach. Int J Agric Rural Dev 22: 4094–4099.
141. Owombo PT, Koledoye GF, Ogunjimi SI, et al. (2014) Farmers’ adaptation to climate change in
Ondo State, Nigeria: A gender analysis. J Geog Reg Plann 7: 30–35.
142. Ozor N, Madukwe MC, Enete AA, et al. (2012) A framework for agricultural adaptation to
climate change in Southern Nigeria. Int J Agric 4: 243–251.
143. Sangotegbe NS, Odebode SO, Onikoyi MP (2012) Adaptation strategies to climate change by
food crop farmers in Oke-Ogun Area of South Western Nigeria. J Agric Ext 16: 119–131.
144. Sanni DO (2018) Local knowledge of climate change among arable farmers in selected
locations in Southwestern Nigeria. In: Leal FW, Eds., Handbook of Climate Change Resilience,
Cham: Springer, 1–18.
145. Solomon E, Edet OG (2018) Determinants of climate change adaptation strategies among farm
households in Delta State, Nigeria. Curr Invest Agric Curr Res 5: 615–620.
146. Tanko L, Muhsinat BS (2014) Arable crop farmers’ adaptation to climate change in Abuja,
Federal Capital Territory, Nigeria. J Agric Crop Res 2: 152–159.
147. Usman MN, Ibrahim FD, Tanko L (2016) Perception and adaptation of crop farmers to climate
change to in Niger State, Nigeria. Nig J Agric Food Environ 12: 186–193.
148. Uzokwe UN, Okonkwo JC (2012) Survival strategies of women farmers against climate change
in Delta State and implication for extension services. Banat J Biotechnol 3: 97–103.

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.

 1006

149. Weli VE, Bajie S (2017) Adaptation of Root crop farming system to climate change in Ikwerre
Local Government Area of Rivers State, Nigeria. Am J Clim Chang 6: 40–51.
150. Chah JM, Odo E, Asadu AN, et al. (2013) Poultry farmers’ adaptation to climate change in
Enugu North Agricultural Zone of Enugu State, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 17: 100–114
151. Chah JM, Attamah CO, Odoh EM (2018) Differences in climate change effects and adaptation
strategies between male and female livestock entrepreneurs in Nsukka Agricultural Zone of
Enugu State, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 22: 105–115
152. Ibrahim FD, Azemheta T (2016) Climate change effects and perception on smallholder poultry
farms in Lokoja Local Government Area of Kogi State: Implications for Policy Intervention.
Nig J Agric Food Environ 12: 164–173.
153. Tologbonse EB, Iyiola-Tunji AO, Issa FO, et al. (2011) Assessment of climate change adaptive
strategies in small ruminant production in rural Nigeria. J Agric Ext 15: 40–57.
154. Ume SI, Ezeano CI, Anozie R (2018) Climate change and adaptation coping strategies among
sheep and goat farmers in Ivo Local Government Area of Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Sustain Agri
Food Environ Res 6: 50–68.
155. Adeleke ML, Omoboyeje VO (2016) Effects of climate change on aquaculture production and
management in Akure Metropolis, Ondo State, Nigeria. Nig J of Fish Aquacult 4: 50–58.
156. Aphunu A, Nwabeze GO (2012) Fish farmers’ perception of climate change impact on fish
production in Delta State, Nigeria. J Agric Ext 16: 1–13.
157. Owolabi ES, Olokor J (2016) Climate change and fish farmers adaptation: A case study of New
Bussa fishing population. J Natur Sci Res 6: 123–141.
158. Amusa TA, Okoye CU, Enete AA (2015) Determinants of climate change adaptation among
farm households in Southwest Nigeria: A heckman’s double stage selection approach. Rev Agric
Appl Econ 18: 3–11.
159. NEST, Woodley E (2012) Learning from experience: Community-based adaptation to climate
change in Nigeria. Ibadan, Nigeria: Building Nigeria’s response to climate change.
160. BNRCC, FederalMinistry of Environment (2011) National Adaptation Strategy and Plan of
Action on Climate Change for Nigeria (NASPA-CCN). Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Ministry of
Environment (Climate Change Department).
161. Oladipo E (2010) Towards enhancing the adaptive capacity of Nigeria: A Review of the
Country’s state of preparedness for climate change adaptation. Abuja, Nigeria: Report
Submitted to Heinrich Böll Foundation Nigeria.
162. Tijjani AR, Chikaire JU (2016) Fish farmers perception of the effects of climate change on
water resource use in Rivers State, Nigeria. J Sci Eng Res 3: 347–353.

© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access

article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

AIMS Agriculture and Food Volume 4, Issue 4, 967–1006.