From Fields to Climate Pathways: Climate-Smart Agriculture in Indian and Global Contexts

Abstract

Agriculture is vulnerable and a contributor to climate change. Climate-smart Agriculture (CSA) offers a strategic approach to achieve productivity, adaptation and mitigation goals. Through qualitative data analysis approach, this review includes basic literature reviews, policy and content analysis to understand the concept of climate change, it’s impact on agriculture, climate-smart agriculture and various initiatives taken by India and other countries to address the issue. Our review reveal that many countries are making efforts to achieve climate-smart agriculture goal, but major implementation gap persist. Case studies highlight major initiatives take by countries but there is always a need for a strategic approach. Globally, adaptation of CSA is uneven. Through this review, we summarise that policy framework for CSA exists in India and countries. However, in both cases, decentralised planning to overcome implementation barrier and capacity-building trainings should be in place for addressing information gap.

Keywords

Introduction

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Per Drop More Crop Case study:

In many semi-arid regions of India, sudden rainfall and groundwater depletion affect crop production. Traditional flood irrigation approach for wastes water often lacks cope with unpredictable climate-change patterns. Increasing demand for water in agriculture “requires innovative solutions”. Drip, sprinkler irrigation directly addresses these challenges: it delivers required quantity water to plant roots, minimize overuse, waterlogging and crop stress. By matching irrigation to soil, crop, and terrain conditions, drip techniques minimize water scarcity, enhance nutrient uptake and support in stabilize yields under climatic change.

As part of the implementation of program "Per Drop More Crop", the aim was to reduce water utilisation and building drought resilience in smallholder systems. To collect baseline data, field studies on soil type, water availability, crop variety, and agro-climatic parts to design tailored drip systems. In practice, this meant installing drip tubing and releases for key crops (onion, mango, banana, etc.) and scheduling irrigation properly. The support was equipped in framework designing, farmer capacity-building training, and after-sales service to ensure systems are properly manager. A demonstration trial on onion production in the Tapi River basin (Maharashtra) comparing drip vs. conventional irrigation was also curated. This approach quantified water savings and yield effects.  The implementation framework combined technology deployment (micro-irrigation hardware), capacity-building (training, extension bus), and value-chain support (market linkages, standards).

The intervention has shown substantial change. It was reported onion cultivation saved 1200 liters of water. More than 5 lakh farmers, out of which the participation of 50000 women in the India micro-irrigation market.  Notably, a positive effect on food security was also estimated.

Uganda, FAO Case study:

Agriculture is backbone for Uganda’s economic. It is estimated that 66 percent depend on agriculture, with 80 percent of the rural community. Only 1% of farming is irrigated, and around 96% of farming is dependent on rain. Ugandan agriculture faces multiple challenges. First, agriculture households lack the resources to adapt climate-smart practices. Their own most farmers have limited access to weather information, training or climate-smart technologies (e.g. drought-tolerant seeds, water-harvesting systems and improved livestock breeds). The agriculture infrastructure is fragile including, crop irrigation, storage and mobilize remain under-developed. Many communities are land-constrained (especially for women, youth and landless households) push backwards investment for long period (Asma, 2023). Women lack accessibility to inputs and decision-making, this makes gender equity both, a barrier and a priority.

As an integrated implementation part, FAO assisted with tools and technical guidance, UNDP offered adaptation planning expertise. On of the objective also to assist district governments to translate the national agricultural program. As a core intervention part, SCALA held two -week workshops on Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) tool for agriculture and land use. Apart from ths, tge progran focused on engaging private sector abd agribusiness. Many cattle- corridor districts were engaged in developing their local development policies. The key areas included multi-level partnership including 60+ multi-sector stakeholders, district, local government, planners, experts and private ensured adaptation plans are locally acceptable and stakeholders are ready to integrate. Secondly, the training and capacity building focused on highlighting women’s participation cannot be ignored. Lastly, the idea was to avoid duplicity of work, SCALA supported in aligning Uganda’s NAP, NDC and district planning process. Currently, the program has overcome the finance gaps. 

In conclusion, Uganda’s SCALA case demonstrates transformation through coordinated policy support, capacity building and community engagement can bring impact under climate stress. The cattle-corridor pilot is establishing a blueprint: systems assessments inform investment plans, gender- and context-appropriate CSA practices are promoted, and national targets are embedded in local budgets. These integrated interventions are expected to improve yields and resilience in the long run.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION:

While India is standing to its critical juncture of economic development, the country is making continuous efforts dedicated to CSA strategies through their implementation scope and vary. To address the climate change issue, Government of India introduced National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC). The plan consists of eight National Mission focused on climate change, adaptation and mitigation, energy efficiency and natural resource conservation. As a key initiative under the NAPCC, National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) focuses on improving livestock, crop seeds, fish culture, water conservation, pest management, accessibility to information and livelihood diversification. Whereas National Initiative on Climate Resilient Agriculture, NICRA prioritized rainfed farming, resouces management and livestock system. Another flagship program, such as Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana (PMKSY), “Per Drop-More Crop” have widely expanded micro-irrigation. During 2019-21, about 16 lakh farmers were benefited and 20.39 lakh hectare land has been covered under the scheme. FAO’s SHARP+ tool for district development plans embedding CSA. FAO along with development agencies have supported CSA globally through national adaptation plan. These all-global efforts including for achieving CSA goals have shown that the framework of a mix strategy including top-down and bottom-up plays emphasis for CSA framework. These efforts represent global CSA goals. As per World Bank’s “triple win” approach of productivity, climate resilience adaptation and lower emission, countries are continuously making efforts to maintain equilibrium (World Bank, 2024; Jumiyati, 2024).

Our review reveal that many countries are making efforts to achieve climate-smart agriculture goal, but major implementation gap persist. The above-mentioned case studies highlight major initiatives take by countries but there are always a need for a strategic approach. Globally, adaptation of CSA is uneven. Taking lessons from Uganda’s case study, district government still reported limited budget for implementation process. Weak institutions have become a common barrier across countries.

Due to resource scarcity, lack of capacity building trainings, and weak institutions, Indian states struggle to implement CSA state plans. India's efforts towards adoption of drip/sprinklers have certainly boost water conservation and increased crop production in semi-arid areas, but many smallholders still rely on flood irrigation due to high upfront costs. Similarly, while ICT-based technologies (weather forecasts, market apps) are becoming more accessible, but rural farmers still have limited access.

There are existing institutional gaps. Due to lack of decentralized planning, most of the projects often face insufficient extension resource person, poor department coordination and also lack of proper local tracking system. There is a requirement for NGOs and other grassroots agencies to focus on capacity-building for CSA. As per Barooah et al, both men and women involve in farming activities but gender different persist men holds responsibility of managing agricultural inputs like equipment, fertilisers, pesticides, and transportation to markets, while women are responsible for manual labour such as weeding, fodder collection, and crop maintenance without specialised equipment. Studies reveals that farmers are widely focus on including balanced fertilisers as women’s consistence involvement in husbandry they play crucial role in preparing this natural fertilizer. To enable women farmers to increase agricultural production and improve CSA practices, the burden of household work must be minimized. Women are responsible for domestic tasks, animal husbandry, and field management due to men's decreasing involvement in household chaos (Barooah et al., 2023).

Through this review, we summarise that policy framework for CSA exists in India and countries. However, in both cases, decentralised planning to overcome implementation barrier and capacity-building trainings should be in place for addressing information gap. Bottlenecks relate to implementation include limited budget, lack of accessibility of technologies, institutional limitations at the subnational level. It is important to provide training to local stakeholders for technology improvement and adoption of CSA. Farmer Field Schools and farmer cooperatives have emerged as viable co-learning and demonstration settings. Finally, any effective CSA endeavour must be inclusive: integrating gender (via SHGs, land rights, and participatory planning) and youth participation will increase impact and equity.

Recommendation:

India is an agrarian economy and climate change has its direct effect on the agriculture where climate smart agriculture will act as a shield from climatic effects. What is recommended is decentralized planning through which we can strengthen the local governance for effective implementation of CSA policies and programs. Any planning done to resist climate change should have inclusive approach ensuring it is not increasing gender and income gap. Rather the policy and implementation ensure that participation from diverse socio-economic group make the CSA initiatives more inclusive be it access to resources, training and decision-making.

Along with strengthening local institution we should consider exclusive focus on farmers focused organizations like FPOs and capacity building of local stakeholders such as farmers, extension workers to equip them with CSA based approach and knowledge which will support the CSA adoption. This can be well executed through common learning platform such as farm schools oriented completely on the lines of field learning.

One of the major challenges in Indian agriculture is traditional practice as maximum people who are practicing farming doesn’t possess basic education to be able to use the advance technology. India agriculture is not mechanized but, time is changing the technology is finding its way to rural India. With the concept of CSA the importance of technology is evident and among the many recommendation one which is very crucial to navigate climate change impact on agriculture is accessibility of technology which are climate-resilient and can support farmers in agriculture be it irrigation system, or identifying crop variety, or work as a weather forecasting or soil tester even for small farmers as India has more small and marginal farmers as compared to big farmers.

Any policy framework of climate smart agriculture should consider sustainable practices and a robust well-designed monitoring and evaluation systems to track progress, identify gaps, and inform policy and program improvements.

CONCLUSION:

Climate change poses significant threats to agricultural productivity, food security, and sustainability. Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) offers a promising approach to address these challenges by integrating adaptation, mitigation, and productivity enhancement strategies. India and other countries have initiated various policies and programs to promote CSA, but implementation gaps and institutional barriers persist.

REFERENCES

1. Abdelmordy, R. A., Hemdan, E. E., Shafai, W. E., & Ahmed, Z. A. (2022, June). Climate-smart agriculture using intelligent techniques, blockchain and Internet of Things: Concepts, challenges, and opportunities. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.4607
2. Abramoff, R. Z., Ciais, P., Zhu, P., Hasegawa, T., Wakatsuki, H., & Makowski, D. (2023). Adaptation strategies strongly reduce the future impacts of climate change on simulated crop yields. Earth’s Future, 11(3), e2022EF003190. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EF003190
3. Asma, K. M., Misu, F., & Islam, M. A. (2023). The impact of social safety net programs on poverty, food security and standard of living in Bangladesh. International Journal of Community and Social Development, 5(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/25166026221135328
4. Barooah, P., Alvi, M., Ringler, C., & Pathak, V. (2023). Gender, agriculture policies, and climate-smart agriculture in India. Agricultural Systems, 208, 103751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103751
5. Chandra, A., McNamara, K., & Dargusch, P. (2017). Climate-smart agriculture: Perspectives and framings. Climate Policy, 18(4), 518–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1316968
6. Department of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare. (2019). National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA). Government of India. https://nmsa.dac.gov.in/
7. Eriksen, S. H., Cramer, L., Vetrhus, I., & Thornton, P. K. (2019, December). Can climate interventions open up space for transformation? Examining the case of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) in Uganda. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00055
8. Goap, A., Sharma, D., Shukla, A., & Krishna, C. (2018, December). An IoT based smart irrigation management system using machine learning and open source technologies. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 155, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.09.040
9. Hal, O. V., van Zanten, H., Ziegler, F., Schrama, J. W., Kuiper, K., & de Boer, I. J. M. (2023). The role of fisheries and fish farming in a circular food system in the European Union. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 39, 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2023.10.017
10. Henry, B. K., Eckard, R. J., & Beauchemin, K. A. (2018). Adaptation of ruminant livestock production systems to climate changes. Animal, 12(s2), s445–s456. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1751731118001301
11. Indian Council of Agricultural Research. (2021). National Innovations in Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA). ICAR-Zonal Project Directorate. https://icarzcu3.gov.in/projects/nicra.html
12. Jumiyati, S. (2024, July). Development of climate smart agriculture based on empowering farmers around forests through triple-helix collaboration. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1370(1), 012018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1370/1/012018
13. Kabato, W. S., Getnet, G. T., Sinore, T., & Nemeth, A. H. (2025, February). Towards climate-smart agriculture: Strategies for sustainable agricultural production, food security, and greenhouse gas reduction. Agronomy, 15(3), 565. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15030565
14. Khan, S. (2025, February). The role of smart farming technologies in mitigating climate change and enhancing agricultural sustainability. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change, 15(2), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2025/v15i23082
15. Laible, G., Wei, J., & Wagner, S. (2015). Improving livestock for agriculture—Technological progress from random transgenesis to precision genome editing heralds a new era. Biotechnology Journal, 10(1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.201400193
16. Lehmann, J., Cowie, A., Masiello, C., Kammann, C., Woolf, D., Amonette, J., Cayuela, M., Camps-Arbestain, M., & Whitman, T. (2021). Biochar in climate change mitigation. Nature Geoscience, 14, 883–892. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00852-8
17. Lipper, L., & Zilberman, D. (2018). A short history of the evolution of the climate-smart agriculture approach and its links to climate change and sustainable agriculture debates. Climate-smart agriculture: Building resilience to climate change (pp. 13–30). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
18. Lobell, D., Burke, M., Tebaldi, C., & Mastrandrea, M. D. (2008, March). Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030. Science, 319(5863), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152339
19. Macusi, E. D., Neves, A., Tipudan, C. D., & Babaran, R. (2023, January). Closed season and the distribution of small-scale fisheries fishing effort in Davao Gulf, Philippines. World, 4(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/world4010004
20. Mahankuda, B., & Tiwari, R. (2024, January). Impact of climate change on honeybees and crop production. In Climate change and pollinators (pp. 149–166). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28142-6_8
21. Mancosu, N., Snyder, R. L., Kyriakakis, G., & Spano, D. (2015, March). Water scarcity and future challenges for food production. Water, 7(3), 975–992. https://doi.org/10.3390/w7030975
22. Mgendi, G. (2024, November). Unlocking the potential of precision agriculture for sustainable farming. Discover Sustainability, 5, 78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-024-00078-3
23. Mirzabaev, A., Kerr, R. B., Hasegawa, T., Pradhan, P., Wreford, A., Pahlen, M., & Gurney-Smith, H. (2022, December). Severe climate change risks to food security and nutrition. Global Food Security, 32, 100806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2022.100806
24. Mishra, A. K., Sinha, D. D., Grover, D., Roohi, Mishra, S., Tyagi, R., Sheoran, H. S., & Sharma, S. (2022, September). Regenerative agriculture as climate smart solution to improve soil health and crop productivity thereby catalysing farmers’ livelihood and sustainability. In Advances in organic farming (pp. 325–344). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06443-2_16
25. Muller, A., & Engel, S. (2016, November). Payments for environmental services to promote climate-smart agriculture? Potential and challenges. Environmental Development, 23, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2016.05.003
26. Nunes, L. J. R. (2023, April). The rising threat of atmospheric CO?: A review on the causes, impacts, and mitigation strategies. Environments, 10(4), 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10040066
27. Omokanye, A., Yamily, Z., Westerlund, D., & Liisa, J. (2022, January). Strategies to reduce inorganic fertilizer inputs in crop production through integrated crop–livestock systems. Sustainable Agriculture Research, 11(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.5539/sar.v11n1p45
28. Press Information Bureau. (2021, December 10). PM-KUSUM: Solar pumps and solarisation of agricultural feeders [Press release]. Government of India. https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData/specificdocs/documents/2021/dec/doc202112101.pdf
29. Press Information Bureau. (2022). Aims to increase water use efficiency through micro-irrigation [Press release]. Government of India. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleseDetailm.aspx?PRID=1797675
30. Press Information Bureau. (2024). PM-KUSUM component B aims to increase water-use efficiency [Press release]. Government of India. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1743354
31. Quandt, A., Neufeldt, H., & Gorman, K. (2023, February). Climate change adaptation through agroforestry: Opportunities and gaps. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 61, 101244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2022.101244
32. Ridoutt, B. G., Baird, D. L., Anastasiou, K., & Hendrie, G. (2021, January). An assessment of the water use associated with Australian diets using a planetary boundary framework. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 25, 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.07.002
33. Romero-Ruiz, A., Linde, N., Keller, T., & Or, D. (2018, December). A review of geophysical methods for soil structure characterization. Reviews of Geophysics, 56(4), 672–717. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000611
34. Sapkota, T. B., Jat, M. L., Aryal, J. P., Jat, R. K., & Khatri-Chhetri, A. (2015). Climate change adaptation, greenhouse gas mitigation and economic profitability of conservation agriculture: Some examples from cereal systems of Indo-Gangetic Plains. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(8), 1524–1533. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61093-0
35. Sen, P. N., Chug, S., & Bandgar, A. (2025, January). Journey of operational weather forecasting in India. Mausam, 76(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.54302/mausam.v76i1.6406
36. United Nations Development Programme. (2025). SCALA Uganda: Scaling up climate ambition in land-use & agriculture. UNDP. https://www.adaptation-undp.org/projects/scala-uganda
37. UNEP. (2024). Executive summary. In Emissions gap report 2024: No more hot air ... Please! With a massive gap between rhetoric and reality, countries draft new climate commitments. United Nations Environment Programme.
38. Upadhyay, A. P. (2015, February). Climate change adaptation: Services and role of information communication technology (ICT) in India. International Journal of Computer Applications, 111(14), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.5120/19567-1640
39. Wakweya, R. B. (2025, March). Impacts of climate change on crop production and food security in Ethiopia. Discover Sustainability, 6, 83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-00830-9
40. Wijk, M. V., Merbold, L., Hammond, J., & Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2020). Improving assessments of the three pillars of climate smart agriculture: Current achievements and ideas for the future. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4, 558483. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.558483
41. Wing, I. S., Cian, E. D., & Mistry, M. N. (2021). Global vulnerability of crop yields to climate change. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 109, 102503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2021.102503
42. World Bank. (2024, December 5). Climate-smart agriculture: From knowledge to implementation. https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2024/12/05/climate-smart-agriculture-from-knowledge-to-implementation
43. The World Bank. (2024). Climate-smart agriculture. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climate-smart-agriculture
44. Yang, X., Xiong, J., Du, T., Ju, X., Gan, Y., Li, S., Xia, L., Shen, Y., Pacenka, S., Steenhuis, T. S., Siddique, K., Kang, S., & Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2024, January). Diversifying crop rotation increases food production, reduces net greenhouse gas emissions and improves soil health. Nature Communications, 15, 238. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-44464-9.[1]