How Farmers Learn About Climate-Smart Agriculture Practices
Adopting climate-smart agriculture practices is critical for farmers’ resilience as climate change disrupts farming across Africa. Billions have been invested in promoting climate-smart agriculture. But if these practices are widely promoted, how are farmers learning them in real-world conditions? Drawing on our field research in the Western and Mount Kenya regions, this article explores how farmers learn through a mix of peer networks, lived experience, and emerging digital tools—and what that means for organisations designing programmes, products, and platforms to support them.
When your favourite fruit disappears from the market or suddenly doubles in price, it’s easy to blame supply chains or inflation. But there’s usually something bigger at play - a farmer waited for the rains that came late. Or a crop failed not because the farmer didn’t know what to do, but because the conditions had changed.
For farmers, agriculture is a series of daily decisions shaped by uncertainty, as they work to protect their yields amid increasingly unpredictable climate patterns.
This raises an important question: if climate-smart agriculture practices are widely promoted, how do African farmers learn and apply them in real-world conditions?
To explore this, we recently conducted field research across the Western and Mount Kenya regions for a leading microfinance institution that supports farmers across Africa. We surveyed 529 farmers and engaged 84 others in depth through interviews, participatory group sessions, and on-farm observations.
One thing became clear: while access to information varies, the bigger gap lies in how that information is interpreted, trusted, and applied in practice.
Climate change is not abstract - it’s lived daily
Farmers are experiencing climate change season by season; it’s no longer a distant concept.
For example, in the Western region, farmers described maize production cycles increasingly disrupted by erratic rainfall. Rains that once arrived predictably now come late, stop abruptly, or fall unevenly.
In the Mount Kenya region, horticultural farmers in particular spoke about water stress and prolonged dry spells becoming more frequent, directly threatening crop yields and quality in ways they had not experienced a generation ago. These shifts force farmers to constantly adjust how they plan, plant, and manage risk - even when the “rules of the game” they grew up with no longer hold.
How farmers are adapting to climate change
Despite these challenges, farmers are not passive; they are actively adjusting their farming practices in response to changing conditions and recurring climate shocks.
Across both regions, we observed clear patterns in the adoption of climate-smart agriculture practices. Farmers are:
- Adjusting planting schedules - in response to shifting rainfall windows
- Intercropping - maize and beans in Western Kenya, miraa alongside French beans, cabbage, or coffee in the Mount Kenya region - to spread risk and improve soil health.
- Experimenting with irrigation and soil management
These practices are shaped by what farmers observe, hear from others, and what they see work in their own fields. In other words, learning informs everyday decisions - from what to plant, to when to plant, to how to manage risk.
But these adaptations are often applied inconsistently. Practices are adopted partially or incorrectly, reducing their effectiveness - sometimes causing unintended harm. One of the most striking examples from our research was farmers tilling their land multiple times and leaving it fallow for months between seasons, believing this to be good for the soil. In reality, it degrades it.
The intention is to improve yields, but the supporting knowledge is incomplete, and the system has not effectively bridged that gap. This is where information gaps and design gaps intersect. Farmers are trying. But the knowledge reaching them is not always specific enough, trusted enough, or practical enough to be applied correctly. Both the content and how it is delivered matter.
(L)Simon, Agronomist at Spindle Design, interviewing Ann Nyawira in Kerugoya. (R) Newton Murimi at his farm in
How farmers learn about climate-smart agriculture practices
If we want to close the gap, understanding how farmers learn is essential to strengthening the adoption of climate-smart practices.
What we found is not a complete lack of information but a complex, layered system of learning. Farmers learn through a mix of human relationships, lived experience, traditional knowledge, and digital tools. These sources are not equally trusted or equally accessible. Trust, cost, relevance, and proximity all shape how information is received — and whether it is acted on.
Here are some ways Kenyan farmers learn climate-smart agriculture practices:
1. Human channels
Across both regions, the most trusted sources of information are still human. The following are some of the in-person learning channels where farmers are learning climate-smart agriculture in Kenya:
Peer-to-peer learning
This is the most common and trusted source of information for most farmers. It is built on shared experience, proximity and social trust. Farmers observe what neighbours are doing, notice which crops perform well, and ask questions informally.
Alexander Njue, a farmer from Chuka, described it this way:
“I’ve learned a lot from visiting other farmers’ farms, seeing how they manage pests or apply fertiliser and applying what I see on my own farm. I also trained at the Coffee Research Foundation in Ruiru, and I’m open to getting more information through my phone.”
However, peer-to-peer learning is often passive rather than structured. Discussions tend to focus on visible elements such as seeds or inputs - rather than broader systems or climate-smart practices as a whole.
As a result, knowledge can be partial or unevenly applied. And the knowledge circulating in peer networks is only as good as the knowledge that entered it.
Agrovets
Agrovets are a key touchpoint; they provide advice and recommend inputs. However, trust is mixed. Farmers are aware that advice may be influenced by what is being sold.
Government extension officers vs private agronomists
When it comes to expert support, farmers sit between two extremes.
Government extension officers are highly trusted but rarely accessible; most farmers reported little to no meaningful interaction with them. On the other hand, private agronomists offer tailored, high-quality advice, but at a cost (around KES 2,000 per visit). This puts them out of reach for most smallholder farmers.
Therefore, trusted expertise exists, but consistent, affordable access remains limited.
2. Demo farms and field days
Farmers do not learn climate-smart agriculture practices based on theory alone. They see and test through demo farms and field days. Farmers value them because:
- They see practices applied in real conditions
- They can ask questions
- They can directly purchase inputs
However, many demo farms are located far from farmers, thereby limiting access due to distance and cost.
3. Traditional media
Radio and television remain common sources of agricultural information. Examples include Inooro TV farming programmes and Seeds of Gold, which airs on Citizen TV.
These channels reach a wide audience and provide general awareness. But learning is largely passive, and translation into action is limited.
4. Digital channels
This is where the most interesting tension emerges. There is a growing push toward digital solutions - apps, platforms, and tools designed to deliver climate-smart agriculture information at scale. However, although digital access exists, its influence on farming decisions remains limited. Farmers have access to digital platforms, but their use for agricultural learning is limited.
From the 529 farmers that we surveyed and 84 that we conducted in-depth research with, we found:
- 54% use feature phones
- 45% use smartphones
- 1% have no phone
This immediately shapes what is possible. Nearly half of farmers are locked out of app-based solutions by default.
What about Internet usage among smartphone users?
- 75% use the internet weekly
- 14% use it less than weekly
- 11% do not use it at all
This suggests access is present, but usage is inconsistent or deeply embedded.
Farmers are increasingly using digital channels for communication and financial services, not for agricultural decision-making.
We’ll unpack how farmers use these digital tools to learn about and adopt climate-smart agricultural practices in an upcoming piece. Keep an eye on our blog.
5. Traditional and indigenous knowledge
Many farmers still rely on indigenous knowledge systems to predict seasons and make planting decisions. Examples include:
- Butterflies indicating drought
- Rainbows signalling rainfall patterns
- Locust movement as an indicator of rainfall
These systems are trusted. However, they are becoming less reliable as climate patterns shift.
It’s an ecosystem of learning
It’s evident that farmers do not rely on a single source of information; they rely on human advice, personal experience, digital tools, and community knowledge. And their learning is influenced by trust, access, cost, and lived experience.
This creates a blended learning ecosystem that is dynamic, contextual, and deeply social.
This insight aligns with findings from Greenpeace Africa’s Building Environmental Resilience (2015), which highlighted how Kenyan smallholder farmers learn through peer networks, demonstration sites and participatory learning environments.
Initiatives such as the climate-smart villages in Nyando and Farmer Field Schools in Bondo showed that farmers engage most deeply when learning is practical, collective, and grounded in real-world experimentation.
Similarly, community-led model farms, supported by extension officers, act as hubs for testing, sharing, and refining practices - mirroring what we observed in Juhudi Kilimo’s approach across Western and Mount Kenya regions.
In conclusion: Designing for how farmers learn
For organisations designing programmes and products in agriculture, climate, and rural livelihoods, these findings point to a huge opportunity to design systems that align with how farmers learn and make decisions. The question is no longer “How do we deliver information?” but “How do we design systems that farmers can trust, test, and use?”
This means:
- Combining human and digital touchpoints, recognising the role each plays
- Embedding learning in practical, real-world contexts where farmers can observe and test
- Designing with an understanding of decision-making constraints, not just knowledge gaps
- Continuously adapting approaches based on how farmers engage with information
Farmers are already observing, adapting, and making decisions under pressure. There’s an urgent need to strengthen the systems around them, ensuring the knowledge available is not only accessible but also actionable. Because ultimately, the effectiveness of any solution in this space is measured not only by how widely information is shared, but by how consistently it can be applied in practice.
If you’re building programmes or products in this space, we’d be glad to share more insights from our research and explore how these findings can inform your work. Reach out to us at hello@spindledesign.co.