1 Introduction
Climate-induced natural disasters such as cyclones, flash floods, and landslides led to crop damage across over 36 million hectares of land in India between 2016 and 2021, resulting in approximately $3.75 billion in financial losses for farmers (Hindu
2022). Projections indicate that a 1.5 °C temperature increase could amplify annual damages from river flooding by about 49%, and cyclone-induced damages are expected to rise by 5.7% (Hindu
2022). Given this state of heightened vulnerability, adopting climate-smart agriculture (CSA) technology emerges as a potent strategy because it is likely to enhance productivity, reinforce resilience against climatic shocks, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions while ensuring food and income security for farmers (FAO
2011; Lipper et al.
2014; Rahut et al.
2021; Aryal et al.
2022; Tanti et al.
2022). CSA practices yield a dual advantage for private and public stakeholders and play a pivotal role in alleviating poverty among rural communities (Pretty
2008; Branca et al.
2021). A multitude of studies highlight the triple-win dynamic inherent in CSA practices: enhanced agricultural productivity and crop yields; promotion of environmental sustainability; and, lastly, socio-economic gains, bolstering the livelihoods of farmers in both developing and developed nations (Xiong et al.
2014; Challinor et al.
2014; Mungai et al.
2016; Makate et al.
2017; Lan et al.
2018).
There has been a growing interest in CSA practices and their impact on agricultural productivity and income (Mizik
2021; Shahzad and Abdulai
2021). Sain et al. (
2017) demonstrate that various CSA practices, including the use of heat- and water-tolerant maize varieties and pest- and disease-resistant bean varieties, conservation tillage, agroforestry, and irrigation, have yielded a favorable financial return for Guatemalan farmers. Mango et al. (
2018) ascertain that implementing CSA practices, such as small-scale irrigated farming and improved seed varieties, substantially increases agricultural revenue and net income. Makate et al. (
2019) confirm that the joint adoption of multiple CSA practices has a more positive impact on productivity and income for smallholder farmers than single adopters. Sardar et al. (
2021) conducted interviews with 420 farmers across three agroecological zones in Pakistan and discovered that farmers adopting multiple CSA show a 48% increase in farm revenue per hectare compared to non-adopting farmers. Another notable example of CSA’s positive effects on farmers’ livelihoods is from Tanzania, where Tripathi et al. (
2022) have found that intercropping maize and beans with wide inter-row spacing significantly boost production and annual income. A study in Ghana by Agbenyo et al. (
2022) shows that smart irrigation techniques, crop insurance, and organic fertilizers increase household income by 11%.
CSA practices such as mulching and trench-building have shown the potential to boost biodiversity and biocontrol, contributing to sustainable land management and carbon sequestration (Branca et al.
2021). In certain southern African contexts, such as Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia, Mutenje et al. (
2019) explore the cost-benefit analysis of implementing a blend of strategies encompassing soil conservation, crop diversification, improved seed varieties, and water conservation, all of which yielded positive economic and environmental outcomes. Similarly, Branca et al. (
2021) highlight the economic advantages of minimum soil disturbance (MSD) farming over traditional tillage-based methods in Malawi and Zambia. In Ethiopia, Zerssa et al. (
2021) highlight the multiple benefits of Integrated Nutrient Management (INM), agroforestry, and water-smart adoption techniques, which encompassed increased income, productivity, carbon sequestration, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and enhanced resilience to climate change. In India, many farmers have incorporated CSA techniques, such as superior crop varieties, laser land levelling, and zero tillage, leading to an increase in farm production and lower production costs (Lopez-Ridaura et al.,
2018). Furthermore, implementing soil-enhancing practices, such as regular soil bunds, has decreased crop failure risk (Kumar et al.
2020). Overall, these collective findings emphasize the transformative potential of CSA practices in enhancing agricultural sustainability and environmental resilience.
Employing methodologies such as endogenous switching regression (ESR), propensity score matching (PSM), and marginal treatment effects (MTE), past studies have illustrated the various positive impacts of CSA adoption on food security, agriculture production, and farm income across different regions. Fentie and Beyene (
2019) use data from Ethiopia, affirming the positive relationship between row planting and agricultural income and food security. Habtewold (
2021) conduct research in Ethiopia and highlighted that multidimensional poverty reduction is achievable by synergizing the row planting method and chemical fertilizers. Awotide et al. (
2022) conduct a study in Mali and found that the most poor farmers can reap the higher benefits from CSA adoption. Bazzana et al. (
2022) employ an agent-based model to investigate the influence of CSA on rural households’ welfare. Shahzad and Abdulai (
2021) find that CSA practice adoption improves food security in Pakistan by enhancing dietary diversity and reducing poverty among households. In Pakistan, Ali and Rahut (
2018) find a positive impact of a CSA, i.e., land laser levelling, on water use, crop yield, and household income. Pal and Kapoor (
2020) demonstrate that CSA practices ensure better income and food security in semi-arid regions of India. Finally, Agarwal et al. (
2022) conclude that the adoption of CSA practices had a range of benefits in that Indian state of Bihar, including a reduction in out-migration by 21% and a narrowing of the knowledge gap between genders, highlighting the multifaceted advantages of CSA practices in the context of rural development.
Odisha, an eastern Indian state, has been suffering from the growing adverse impact of climate change, such as floods and droughts, resulting in unpredictable agricultural yields (Mishra et al.
2016). This climatic uncertainty has posed various challenges to farmers, including crop losses, poor harvests, and unpaid bank loans, with some even resorting to suicide (Pattanayak and Mallick
2016; Mohanty and Lenka
2019). Rice production, especially in the rainfed lowlands of Odisha, faces a critical issue of flash floods that submerge rice plants for 10 to 15 days (Dar et al.
2017). Moreover, inconsistent rainfall and delayed monsoons in inland districts also lead to paddy crop failures. In response to these challenges, Odisha’s agricultural landscape is transforming from traditional farming methods to more adaptive climate-smart agriculture practices (Tanti et al.
2022). This shift involves embracing various CSA strategies, such as adjusting planting schedules, diversifying crops, rotating crops, using drought-resistant seeds, and implementing smart soil management techniques (Sahu and Mishra
2013). Given the current state of affairs, this study seeks to address the central research question: How does the adoption of CSA practices influence paddy yield and farm income in rural Odisha?
The present study examines the impact of two CSA practices on crop yield and farm income of small and marginal farmers in Odisha. The study adds valuable insights to the existing body of knowledge on the economic advantages of climate adaptation (Rahut and Ali
2017; Guntukula
2020; Branca et al.
2021; Rahut et al.
2021). The contribution of the study is threefold. First, this study examines the adoption of major climate-smart agricultural (CSA) practices prevalent in the study area, specifically crop rotation and integrated soil management. Second, the study offers a thorough impact evaluation of the adoption of CSA in the study area. Assessing the impact on income and yield provides a comprehensive understanding of the welfare of farmers who adopt CSA practices in comparison to those who do not. Third, two prime impact evaluation methods, propensity score matching (PSM) and two-stage least squares (2SLS), are employed to address unobserved selection bias, and to control for endogeneity issues by accounting for both observable and unobservable heterogeneities, thereby yielding more robust estimates.
The subsequent sections are structured as follows: The materials and methods in Sect.
2 outline the study area, sampling methodology, variable selection, and the econometric techniques employed for estimation. Sections
3 and
4 present and discuss the results, encompassing descriptive and regression analyses. The paper culminates in Sect.
5, which presents concluding remarks, policy recommendations, and limitations of the study.
4 Discussion
Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practices have undergone substantial innovation at the farm level, aimed at adapting to and mitigating the repercussions of climate change and other challenges linked to agricultural production. The uptake of these practices effectively diminishes the detrimental impacts of climate change and increases food output and farmers’ earnings (Eitzinger et al.
2014; Andati et al.
2023; Li et al.
2024; Singh et al.
2024). Mizik (
2021) and Ishtiaque et al. (
2024) revealed that the adoption rates of CSA practices remain low in developing nations. Among the reasons cited by these studies, the following factors stand out: a lack of awareness and training in these practices, weak organizational capacities, CSA technologies inadequately incentivized, limited monitoring and follow-up, lack of information dissemination, and financial incentives stemming from adopting them (Siedenburg et al.
2012). In this context, the current study holds immense significance. Our research reveals that farm households in Odisha are actively adopting various climate-smart agriculture practices, and these practices, in turn, have implications for their potential income and crop yields in the prevailing climate change conditions. As observed in the study areas, integrated soil management and crop rotation practices are popular practices within the CSA basket. These practices significantly impact economic aspects such as crop productivity and farm incomes, serving as primary drivers for resource-constrained farmers. We used standardized and rigorous impact evaluation techniques such as 2SLS and PSM to bolster the credibility of these findings. This conclusion is reaffirmed by both propensity score matching (PSM) and instrumental variable (IV) regression analyses performed in the study. Both the methods triangulated in the study have a synchronized result: they show the positive impact of CSA practices on income and yield.
The study region features a soil composition characterized by salinity and acidity. Coastal agricultural areas contend with salinity challenges due to their proximity to shorelines, while inland crop regions grapple with soil acidity. Integrated soil health management practices are designed to counter these issues by incorporating suitable anti-saline and anti-acidic agents like gypsum and lime. This approach aids in soil treatment and enhances productivity. The farmers of the study regions use a balanced fertilizer combination of bio- and chemical fertilizers. Consequently, adopters of integrated soil management practices enjoy relatively elevated yields. Both PSM and 2SLS models show that adopters of ISM have 32–58% higher income than non-adopters. A notable past study by Bhattacharyya et al. (
2016) showed that the mean annual income per family increased by 43% by adopting soil and water conservation practices in India. Tiwari et al. (
2010) also identified a positive impact of soil and crop management on farmers’ income and yields in Nepal. The study conducted by Bravo-Ureta et al. (
2006) suggested that soil conservation practices demonstrate a positive and statistically significant association with farm income. In the drought-prone areas of India, households that adopted CSA practices had higher incomes of INR 54,717 versus the non-adopters during a drought year (Vatsa et al.
2023; Samuel et al.
2024).
Our results show that the adoption of ISM has a positive impact of 70 kg to 1.75 quintals per acre. Adolwa et al. (
2019) demonstrated that adopting integrated soil fertility management (ISFM) boosted maize yields by 16–27% in Ghana. Similar findings resonate in studies conducted by Khatri-Chhetri et al. (
2016) in the Indian Indo-Gangetic plains, as well as by Sardar et al. (
2021) in Pakistan. Gathala et al. (
2022) demonstrate a 10% increase in crop production through adopting conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification (CASI). Our result is also in line with Khan et al. (
2007) and Zhao et al. (
2020) that ISM has a positive impact on crop yields in the rice–wheat cropping system. Soil nutrient management, crop improvement practices, seed management, and crop protection techniques have been enhanced by 41%, 40%, and 39% of crop yield, respectively (Andati et al.
2023). Moreover, households implementing CSA practices experienced a 20–30% increase in average annual farm income per hectare compared to those who did not adopt such practices (Belay et al.
2023). The adoption of CSA practices helped smallholder vegetable farmers increase their crop yields, net farm returns, and per capita consumption expenditures by 21%, 15%, and 13%, respectively (Torsu et al.
2024). Conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification improves technical efficiency by 8% and 9% in productivity and technical efficiency, respectively (Paz et al.
2024). The uptake of climate-smart agricultural practices (CAPs) has a significant and positive impact on household income, net farm income, and income diversity (Sang et al.
2024).
Similarly, our findings highlight the significant benefit reaped by adopters of crop rotation practices, with a 42–45% higher agricultural income and 1.39 to 2.08 quintals of more rice yield per acre. Given the region’s vulnerability to climatic shifts, this outcome holds particular importance regarding extreme weather adaptation. Frequent droughts in the inland areas and floods along the coast make crop rotation a vital strategy. By alternating crops season-to-season, farmers can selectively cultivate crops suited to extreme climatic conditions, thus meaningfully enhancing their climate resilience and livelihood. In Africa, Kuntashula et al. (
2014) reveal that crop rotation led to a maize productivity improvement of approximately 21–24% in Zambia. Wang et al. (
2019) provide evidence that rice-wheat rotation with reduced fertilizer application results in significantly higher crop yield and economic benefits in People’s Republic of China. Our findings align with He et al. (
2021) and Jena et al. (
2023), which show that enhancing agricultural diversity via crop rotations has led to substantial improvements in the social, economic, and ecological advantages of rice production. Our findings are in line with the results of Zhao et al. (
2020) that crop yields experienced a mean augmentation of 20% through the implementation of crop rotation, in contrast to the persistent monoculture methodology.
However, considerable heterogeneity within farming communities impedes the deep penetration of CSA practices, thereby limiting potential benefits. Adopting technology necessitates an awareness of its potential benefits, available technical extension support, and adequate financial backing, either through formal credit institutions or government subsidies (Tanti and Jena
2023). The Indian Government has sought to reinforce its farm subsidy policy through various input subsidy programs, encompassing provisions like stress-tolerant seeds, mechanized tool subsidies, biofertilizers, and subsidized soil testing facilities under the flagship “soil health program.”
2 Therefore, to enhance scalability in climate-smart agriculture (CSA), we advocate for tailored government programs; capacity building through comprehensive training; financial incentives; practical demonstrations; and community involvement through a bottom-up, region-specific, and collaborative approach.
From focus group discussions (FGDs), we gleaned that around half of the farmers who were approached displayed little interest in soil tests. Widespread lack of primary education in rural parts of India often results in farmers’ aversion to new practices. Moreover, rough geographical terrains hinder extension agents’ access to these hinterlands, impeding the effectiveness of extension services. Challenges persist during subsidy disbursement drives, where funds are often unavailable when farmers require them. These incidents foster mistrust toward officials and government schemes, leading to adverse selection and moral hazard issues. Insights from expert group interviews with extension officials reveal that interested and dedicated farmers often withdraw from government subsidy schemes due to a lack of timely subsidy availability for seeds, fertilizer, and machinery. Conversely, less-committed farmers eventually obtain subsidies once they become available, often channeling them into non-agricultural activities. Such occurrences are prevalent across various parts of the country.
5 Conclusion, policy implications, and limitations
5.1 Conclusion
This study systematically examined the impact of adopting climate-smart agriculture (CSA) on both farmers’ income and yield per acre. The primary dataset utilized in this analysis was collected through a comprehensive survey conducted during 2019–2020 involving 494 farm households in three of Odisha’s climate-vulnerable districts. Our investigation specifically focused on evaluating the impact of two widely embraced CSA techniques—crop rotation and integrated soil management practices—on these farm households’ productivity and income levels. The results demonstrated that adopting CSA practices increases agricultural income and paddy yield. Notably, the robustness of the findings across various model specifications emphasizes the effectiveness of the instruments in providing accurate insights into the impact of CSA practice adoption. In conclusion, this study substantiates the positive influence of CSA adoption on farmers’ economic outcomes, shedding light on the potential benefits of incorporating climate-smart practices in agriculture.
Farmers are generally motivated by the potential for increased income even though they express a preference for environmental preservation. The crucial factor determining the adoption of CSA practices is the income-enhancing potential that can transform subsistence farming into a profoundly ingrained farming culture. Thus, it is essential to disseminate awareness about the benefits of CSA practices, particularly among small and marginal farmers who rely on continuous revenue generation. The findings strongly advocate for the upscaling of CSA adoption. Notably, the results highlight significant policy implications, emphasizing the influential role of economic gains and positive income effects in driving technology adoption.
5.2 Policy implications
Based on our key findings, we have outlined recommendations to promote adopting climate-smart agricultural (CSA) practices. By implementing these, policymakers can create an enabling environment that supports CSA adoption, enhances agricultural resilience, and contributes to sustainable development goals. Our suggestions are strategically designed to address the diverse challenges and opportunities associated with fostering CSA adoption. First, targeted extension services, which emphasize the importance of disseminating information about CSA practices effectively, should be promoted. Extension programs should prioritize outreach to subsistence and marginalized farmers with limited access to information and resources. Thus, by providing tailored training and support, extension services can enhance awareness and facilitate the adoption of CSA practices among these communities. Second, there is a critical need for investment in agricultural infrastructure to support CSA adoption. This includes improving access to irrigation systems, promoting sustainable land management practices, and enhancing storage and processing facilities. Policymakers can create an enabling environment that encourages farmers to adopt CSA practices and enhance agricultural productivity by investing in infrastructure upgrades. Third, financial incentives and support mechanisms to incentivize CSA adoption and scaling it up should be provided. This may include subsidies for CSA technologies, access to credit facilities, and insurance schemes to mitigate risks associated with climate variability. Thus, by providing financial support, policymakers can help alleviate the initial costs associated with adopting CSA practices and encourage widespread adoption among farmers. Fourth, the empowerment of farmers’ cooperatives, exemplified by India’s Farmer Producer Organization (FPO) system, serves as a linchpin in driving holistic climate change adaptation efforts. These cooperatives necessitate active involvement from farmers, supported by governmental financial and technical aid. Continuous financial backing is imperative to unlock the full potential of such initiatives. Fifth, capacity building and training programs are crucial in empowering farmers with the knowledge and skills needed to adopt CSA practices effectively. We recommend investing in training programs focusing on climate-smart farming techniques, sustainable land management practices, and risk mitigation strategies. By building farmers’ capacity, policymakers can equip them with the tools and resources to adapt to changing climatic conditions and improve agricultural resilience. Finally, we recommend the establishment of monitoring mechanisms. Despite the initiation of CSA practices by governments and non-governmental organizations, post-adoption monitoring and evaluation often fall by the wayside. A robust monitoring mechanism is critical to gauge the extent of CSA adoption and ensure sustained technology uptake. Stakeholders must be educated about the enduring benefits of CSA practices, recognizing that some practices require time to yield significant results. There is a need for a monitoring and evaluation mechanism to assess the continuation of CSA technology adoption. There is a need to educate farmers regarding the long-term benefits of CSA practices as some practices need a long time to get benefits.
5.3 Limitations and scope for future studies
This study provides valuable insights, but it is imperative to acknowledge its limitations. First, the scope of the research is constrained by the available resources and time frame, both in terms of finances and human resources, which restricted the study to only three districts and a sample size of just over 400 households. The dynamic nature of farmers’ adoption practices and their impact might not have been fully captured due to the lack of a panel dataset. The feasibility of repeated surveys is hindered by the time and resource constraints associated with collecting more primary data and also, farmers self-reported income data might affect estimations. The study also did not address the mitigation impact of CSA adoption and the environmental implications that should have been assessed. The agricultural production might have been shaped by factors other than climate change, such as climate variability and the rise in post-monsoon rainfall. Conducting a trend analysis and examining the impacts explicitly associated with climate change are imperative and not captured in this study. Furthermore, the geographical specificity of the primary data collection, limited to specific locations of rural settings, may need to be revised to allow the generalizability of findings to larger populations, rural-urban mixed setups, and community-based programs.
To address these limitations and enhance the study’s depth, a subsequent survey round could be conducted to assess the continuous and long-term impact of CSA adoption over the years. This approach would provide a more robust evaluation of the sustained effects of CSA practices. Furthermore, exploring the institutional dimension of CSA practices, particularly monitoring farmers’ relationships with various institutions, could offer valuable insights into how these relationships are constructed, maintained, strengthened, or dissolved over time. Future research endeavors could also look into the mitigation impact of CSA practices within the study area, offering a more comprehensive understanding of environmental implications, which would contribute to a more nuanced comprehension of the multifaceted aspects of CSA adoption.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.