Abstract
As a fundamental pillar of food security in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), ensuring seed security is critical to empowering farmers in cultivating food and livestock feed, thereby fostering income generation from agricultural outputs. Among the crops cultivated by smallholders, legumes have the potential to deliver multifaceted benefits. Legumes are nutrient-dense and enhance soil health through their nitrogen-fixing qualities. However, in many instances, the development, release, and supply of improved legume varieties are insufficient to meet the needs of smallholder farmers in SSA. Here, we systematically reviewed the literature to (i) identify and categorize existing legume seed systems, (ii) map legume varieties available to smallholders, (iii) identify barriers hindering the adoption of various legume varieties, and (iv) identify potential strategies and opportunities for strengthening legume seed systems in SSA. Our results demonstrate the coexistence of formal and informal seed systems within legume seed supply chains in SSA, each employing unique seed distribution channels. Smallholders, however, are shown to predominantly depend on the informal seed system to source most legume seeds except for commercially available varieties. We also identified a diverse range of legume varieties available to smallholders in the region, with farmers having varying trait preferences based on crop type and gender. Notably, high yield and abiotic stress tolerance were the most preferred traits. The adoption of these varieties, however, is influenced by various factors, including lack of timely access to seeds in adequate quantities from the formal seed system, high seed costs, and limited information on new varieties. The reviewed literature highlighted that utilizing improved legume varieties had a positive effect on smallholders, leading to improved welfare, food security, dietary diversity, and income. We conclude that the effective scaling of legume systems in SSA is contingent upon the presence of supportive policy frameworks and well-established technical support structures.
Graphical Abstract
Packets of legume seeds within a legume germplasm and breeding program at the University of Zambia (Photo by Caitlin Breen, 2022).
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Contents
-
1. Introduction
-
2. Methodology
-
2.1 Search strategy
-
3.3 Informal seed networks drive legume diffusion among smallholders
-
3.5 Challenges in the adoption of legume varieties and attainable adoption benefits in SSA
-
3.6 Enabling support for strengthening legume seed systems in SSA
-
4. Conclusion
-
Author declarations
-
References
2 Introduction
Access to improved legume seed is a key element in assuring food security and climate resilience for smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Legumes have significant benefits for use in smallholder farming systems in SSA, often being touted as “climate-smart crops” (Dutta et al. 2022) for the role they play in enhancing agricultural resilience in the face of climate change. Most importantly, their nitrogen-fixing ability facilitates the development of more sustainable cropping systems (Stagnari et al. 2017). The nitrogen-fixing ability of legumes holds a significant value for smallholder farms in SSA, characterized by nutrient-deficient and degraded soils (Kamanga et al. 2014; Kimutai et al. 2023; Ndlovu et al. 2022), especially considering the limited use of inorganic fertilizers due to their high prices. In addition to their agroecological benefits, legumes are an important nutrient-dense food staple item and are considered beneficial for both human health and the health of the planet (Aiking 2011; Foyer et al. 2016; Kumar and Pandey 2020; Shitta et al. 2021; Stagnari et al. 2017). Legumes are high in protein, important minerals (P, Ca, K, Mg, Fe, Zn, Cu, Mn, and Se), vitamins (B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, choline, E, and folate), and fiber contents (Ojiewo et al. 2015; Snapp et al. 2019). In this regard, the upscaling of legume variety adoption among smallholder farmers could serve as a pivotal factor in enhancing household food and nutrition security (Asfaw et al. 2012; Larochelle and Alwang 2022). However, despite the known benefits of legumes for both human nutrition and cropping systems, the legume seed supply systems in SSA remain underdeveloped (Rubyogo et al. 2019), particularly in comparison to well-established seed systems for major cereals like maize.
Legume seed systems in SSA operate both formally and informally, with intersections and interactions between both modes of seed delivery and access for smallholders. In most cases, formal and informal seed systems tend to exist in parallel, where the extent to which a smallholder farmer uses each system can differ depending on their geographical location (e.g., core vs peripheral region), size of the farm, cropping system, their purchasing power, social networks, ethnicity, and gender, among other factors. For most legumes, except for cash legume crops (such as soybean and common bean), smallholders rely on the informal seed system. Drawing from surveys involving more than 2500 smallholders in SSA (Malawi, Kenya, Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, and Zimbabwe), McGuire and Sperling (2016) and Sperling et al. (2021) estimated that 90% of legumes are grown using seed sourced through informal seed systems. The reliance of smallholders on the informal system for their seed supplies can occur by design or default. In the former case, it arises because of inherent attributes of the informal seed system, while in the latter case, it can arise because the formal system does not provide adequate seed supply for the farmers.
Strengthening and “design for synergy” of the legume seed systems has the potential to enhance food and seed security for smallholder farmers. However, it is considered necessary to build upon the strengths of the informal seed system, without placing undue pressure on it (Wattnem 2016). Most importantly, farmer preferences can inform formal breeding programs, to help develop varieties that are preferable to smallholders as they can be high-yielding while also retaining some of the preferred traits of the local varieties such as taste or adaptation to certain soils. While significant farmer participation may not be present in all breeding programs, there have been several initiatives in SSA that involved farmers in legume variety development (Ceccarelli and Grando 2020). Despite this, a notable gap exists in the market for affordable improved legume varieties tailored for smallholder farmers. Furthermore, investments for intensifying efforts in legume breeding and enhancing the legume seed supply are currently inadequate.
Multiple reasons are cited as to why legume seed systems have not seen as much private sector investment as other crops. One reason mentioned in multiple studies is that most legume crops are self-pollinating (McGuire and Sperling 2016; Rubyogo et al. 2010; Tripp et al. 2007), similar to rice. Self-pollinated crops breed “true” where the saved seed will recapitulate the same traits as the parental lines from which the seed was collected (assuming the seed saved is not diseased and has been stored properly to maintain seed viability). Saving the seed of a proportion of the legumes planted can be used as a basis for generating seeds for the next planting season. This self-sufficiency reduces the demand for purchasing seeds each planting season, diminishing the potential market for private seed companies. While farmer-saved seed is important and has a strong intuitive appeal, it must be recognized that there are labor, capital, and “opportunity cost” inputs associated with seed saving and challenges in harvesting and storage of farmer-saved seed that maintain high germination rates and are clean (phytosanitary consideration) of pests and diseases that can suppress yields or decrease palatability. There are also significant differences between crop species, where seed saving by farmers can be more effective in some crops compared to others due to the differences in seed biology, longevity, and perishability between different crops. Furthermore, the nature of the smallholder legume market (i.e., the limited purchasing power of smallholders, costly distribution channels, diversity of legume trait needs, the reproductive biology of the crop, and lack of return on private investment) constrains legume variety development and seed dissemination via the formal system. This contrasts with the major cereal staples: maize and rice.
Given the current and strategic importance of legumes to smallholder farming systems in SSA, the objectives of this systematic review were to (i) identify and categorize existing legume seed systems, (ii) map legume varieties available to smallholders, (iii) identify barriers hindering the adoption of various legume varieties, and (iv) identify potential strategies and opportunities for strengthening legume seed systems in SSA which have been proposed to date. We achieved our objectives by conducting a thorough literature review and subsequently performing an empirical analysis, utilizing existing research to inform our study and derive meaningful insights on legume seed systems in SSA. This study is intended to inform ongoing work aimed at strengthening legume seed supply systems by identifying areas that require development and key actors who should be engaged in the strengthening of legume seed systems (Fig. 1).
3 Methodology
A systematic literature review on legume seed systems in SSA was conducted. Prior to beginning the review, a protocol was developed for the search strategy, screening, exclusion/inclusion, and data analysis to reduce bias. Databases used in the search were selected based on a preliminary search using keywords, and those giving the highest number of results were chosen. The process was recorded and reported using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) flowchart (Moher et al. 2015). PRISMA provides a standard structure for researchers to report reviews and meta-analyses in a transparent way (Sarkis-Onofre et al. 2021).
3.1 Search strategy
The electronic databases (1) Web of Science, (2) Science Direct, (3) PubMed Central, (4) ProQuest, and (5) Google Scholar were chosen to search for peer-reviewed research articles published from 2002–2022 (last search on 30th of May 2022). Key search terms were identified before beginning the advanced search. These include but are not limited to:
-
(i)
(Legumes OR pulses) AND (seed OR varieties) AND (sub-Saharan Africa OR Africa)
-
(ii)
(Seed systems OR seed system) AND (formal and informal) AND (seed policies OR legislature) AND (stakeholders) AND (sub-Saharan Africa OR Africa)
-
(iii)
(Scaling OR scale) AND (barriers OR constraints) AND (legume seed OR seed systems) AND (sub-Saharan Africa OR Africa)
The number of results (retrieved papers) obtained from each search was documented. Three searches were performed within each of the 5 databases (the first search was carried out on the 16th of May 2022 and the final search on the 30th of May 2022). The first search focused on “legume seed(s)” in SSA, the second one looked at existing “legume seed systems and policies/regulatory frameworks,” and the last search was on “options” and “barriers” to scaling legume seed systems in SSA. A range of search terms and combinations of Boolean operators were used. The search queries used in each database are presented in Table 1.
3.2 Literature screening and validity assessment
Following the initial search, the title and abstract of each article were screened. Documents meeting inclusion criteria for this systematic review were peer-reviewed research articles that reported on various aspects related to legume seed systems, smallholder legume farmers, barriers to the adoption of improved varieties, outcomes of successful legume variety adoption, and opportunities for strengthening existing legume seed systems. Additionally, inclusion was limited to papers focusing on sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We also excluded non-peer-reviewed publications such as pamphlets, reports, proceedings, or any publications not in the English language. Using this approach, the relevant subset of papers was then extracted. Papers were excluded through a screening process involving the evaluation of titles and abstracts, as well as the removal of duplicate entries. This process was performed for each database. Articles were exported to EndNote 20 (Clarivate Analytics) to identify and remove duplicates. The removal of duplicates was done using the “Find Duplicates” function of the EndNote referencing software. Any duplicates not identified by the software were removed manually when encountered.
Screening of the full-text of each peer-reviewed article was then performed by reading the paper and identifying the study design, key findings, and recommendations of the paper (Supplementary Materials). Papers found not to be relevant (i.e., not based in SSA, based outside timeframe (2002–2022) and findings not related to legume seed systems) at this point were excluded. Papers of the wrong type (i.e., review articles, reports, discussion papers, pamphlets, proceedings, bulletins) were also excluded. The number of articles excluded based on full-text screening was documented. Data and findings were extracted from the full-text articles and inserted into tables. The final number of papers used in this review was presented on the PRISMA flowchart. Supplementary Tables 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 display the study design, key findings, and recommendations of all papers used in the review. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tool (Munn et al. 2014) was used for quality control.
4 Results and discussion
Seed security is essential in achieving food and nutrition security in SSA. Presently, smallholder farmers source their legume seeds predominantly from the informal seed system, with some smallholders having access to legume seeds from the formal system. However, access to improved legume varieties is inconsistent and unevenly distributed. In SSA, both the formal and informal seed systems are vulnerable to disruptions (such as climate change, economic shocks, the COVID-19 pandemic, and conflicts), leaving smallholders at risk of both seed and food insecurity. Strengthening the resilience of legume seed systems that serve smallholder farmers is, therefore, critical for implementing effective adaptation measures within the SSA agricultural sector. Our systematic review analyzes the barriers to legume seed adoption and options/opportunities for scaling the efficiency of existing legume systems in SSA.
4.1 Characterization of reviewed studies
In total, searches across 5 databases using the search strings outlined in Table 1 yielded 26,838 results (Web of Science, n = 9111, Science Direct, n = 8450, ProQuest, n = 3861, PubMed Central, n = 4217, and Google Scholar n = 1199). Following title and abstract screening based on predefined criteria, 26,433 results were excluded, leaving 405 studies for further analysis. An additional 86 duplicates were identified and removed. A total of 319 papers were initially screened using the search strategy outlined in Fig. 2. After a thorough full-text screening, 190 papers were excluded: 58% (n = 114) were deemed irrelevant, and 42% (n = 76) were of an incorrect article type (e.g., review papers, reports, or conference papers). This process resulted in 129 papers being included in the final systematic review. Specifically, in the scope of the reviewed articles (n = 129), 28% (n = 36) focused on the current status of seed systems in SSA (Supplementary Table 2). More than half (n = 18) of these 36 papers analyzed seed systems generally, 2 papers examined the operating policy mechanisms in seed systems, 12 articles looked at local seed exchanges/seed networks, and 4 papers reported on seed security.
Figure 3 illustrates the primary countries of focus in the reviewed research articles. The predominant focus within SSA was Ethiopia (n = 15), closely followed by Malawi with 14 research articles. Conversely, only one study was identified in Zambia, Namibia, Gabon, Niger, and Guinea. The distribution of research work on legume seed systems indicates a concentration of studies in Eastern Africa based on our findings
4.2 Key stakeholders in legume seed systems across SSA
Our findings indicate that seed systems in SSA are characterized by a combination of formal and informal structures, with some evidence pointing to integrated systems that amalgamate elements from both systems. To some extent, each of these systems depends on the other to operate, and there are connections between both systems. The connections between formal and informal legume seed systems in SSA materialize as farmers procure improved crop varieties, often on a small scale (e.g., for soybean and common bean), through purchases or seed aid/input support schemes, preserving them for future use within their traditional informal seed systems. Furthermore, informal seed systems can act as reservoirs of diversity and resilience, providing locally adapted traditional varieties that complement the formal system and enhance overall seed system sustainability and resilience. These legume seed systems in SSA are characterized by a diverse range of stakeholders operating at various levels and across multiple legume crops.
In this region, the formal seed system usually includes government entities such as Ministries of Agriculture, National Agriculture Research Systems (NARS), professional breeding programs, varietal release and seed certification bodies, national extension systems, and seed companies (McGuire and Sperling 2016; Alemu 2015; Wattnem 2016). The informal seed system, on the other hand, typically involves the distribution and exchange of seed or planting materials outside of the formal seed system. This encompasses seeds of varieties (registered or unregistered, including landraces) saved and used by farmers or informal rural entrepreneurs. Our analysis identified farmers, traders, NGOs, extension agents, cooperatives, and companies (e.g., seed companies or agro-dealers) (Ayenan et al. 2017b; Branca et al. 2021) as key stakeholders in both the formal and informal legume seed systems. Generally, our analysis revealed that formal seed systems are characterized by the involvement of stakeholders such as seed companies, government agencies, and research institutions, while informal seed systems are predominantly constituted by smallholder farmers, community seed banks, and local markets.
Some stakeholders in the seed system, such as genebanks, breeding programs, and seed quality control and certification agencies, were not prominently emphasized in the literature reviewed. Nevertheless, they were encompassed in the seed system mapping diagram depicted in Fig. 1, underscoring their roles within the system. However, it is noteworthy that none of the studies in the review primarily focused on seed system stakeholders. We also identified agro-dealers and farmers’ organizations as crucial in linking the formal and informal seed systems. However, there is a knowledge gap within the literature surrounding the needs of key stakeholders and value chain actors across legume seed systems. This area could be researched further to assist in strengthening legume seed systems for the future. Our results also indicated that legume seed distribution in the formal sector is done mainly by agro-dealers, seed companies, and cooperatives. Informal channels for accessing seed, on the other hand, include farmers’ own saved seed stocks, local markets, and social networks such as exchanges with other farmers or gifts (Sperling et al. 2021). The seed policy mechanisms in SSA, however, were reported to be more concentrated on all system processes (i.e., seed production, processing, and distribution) of the formal seed system. In addition, most operating seed regulatory frameworks in SSA do not recognize informal seed production and distribution channels.
4.3 Informal seed networks drive legume diffusion among smallholders
Our results indicated that the informal system is the primary source of legume seed for the vast majority of smallholders in the region (Mulesa et al. 2021; Ayenan et al. 2017b; Kilwinger et al. 2021; Marimo et al. 2021; McGuire and Sperling 2016; Nordhagen and Pascual 2013). It is, however, essential to underscore that this scope excludes cash legumes (e.g., soybean and common bean), as their seed supply is primarily controlled by the formal sector and influenced by market demand, government policies, and interest from research institutes. The dominance of the informal seed sector has been documented in a range of reports focusing on SSA (Rubyogo et al. 2016; McGuire and Sperling 2016; Sperling et al. 2020). For instance, according to Alemu (2015), during the 2009/2010 cropping season (as per Central Statistical Agency data), approximately 84.75% of the cultivated land for all crops in Ethiopia was sown using locally sourced seed. What is not clear are the reasons for the predominant reliance of smallholders on the informal seed system for legume seed supply. It is most likely that such reliance arises from a lack of access by smallholders to improved varieties from the formal seed system. This has been acknowledged by several studies (van Niekerk and Wynberg 2017; Nordhagen and Pascual 2013), emphasizing that informal seed systems act as a safety net during periods of shocks or disasters, especially when the formal system falls short of meeting seed demands. Given the choice of accessing legume seeds from formal and informal systems, it remains unclear whether smallholders would choose to source from one or indeed from both systems. While it has been shown that smallholders use more locally sourced varieties than improved varieties, particularly for legumes, the barriers to accessing improved legume seeds remain a key challenge (Snapp et al. 2019). However, this applied mostly to legumes that are commonly grown in smallholder farmer communities (such as cowpea, Bambara nut, and groundnut).
One common factor (and challenge) across the informal seed system is that there is no legal certification requirement regarding the quality (e.g., germination rate, identity) of the seed supplied or exchanged (Sisay et al. 2017). Despite this, the informal system (where it is functioning) can provide farmers with seed at the time and place they require it, when seed cannot (for whatever reason) be accessed through the formal system. Conversely, situations could arise where the informal seed supply system is constrained (e.g., during a lean period or conflict when seed stocks may have to be consumed), and formal seed systems may be necessary for the provision of replacement of planting materials. While local seed markets are considered by some commentators to be a more flexible, sustainable, and reliable way to source seed (Sisay et al. 2017; Alemu 2015), the resilience of both formal and informal seed systems to shocks needs to be considered. Indeed, a more integrated formal and informal seed system may serve as a more resilient system, compared to either system on its own.
Our findings also showed that legume seed access via the informal seed system in SSA is influenced by a range of factors. These include infrastructure (i.e., roads to access rural areas), gender inequality, and access to credit facilities (Mulesa et al. 2021; de Boef et al. 2021; Madin et al. 2022). Social capital (i.e., relationship networks) was also seen to be very important in accessing seed informally (Ricciardi 2015). Sisay et al. (2017) highlighted that while some of the varieties exchanged between farmers will be “local” varieties (e.g., landraces), others will be “improved” varieties that have previously been obtained through the formal system. On the patterns of legume seed access, our findings showed this to be influenced by farmers’ social networks, marriage systems (matrilineal vs patrilineal), and ethnicity (Almekinders et al. 2020; Delêtre et al. 2011; Labeyrie et al. 2016). For example, some studies suggest that female farmers depend to a greater extent on their social networks than male farmers, as they may have less access to key actors within the formal system, such as agro-dealers (Marimo et al. 2021; Otieno et al. 2021). It is considered important to strengthen connections and enhance collaboration between the formal and informal seed systems (Kuhlmann and Dey 2021; Ayenan et al. 2017b). Although the results of this study show that the informal seed system can be resilient in the face of shocks and can provide seed following crisis periods (van Niekerk and Wynberg 2017; Nordhagen and Pascual 2013), the informal system is not inherently reliable as a consistent source of improved seed. In addition, while social capital can be considered an asset, it is important to consider how marginalized individuals or groups that lack social capital can as a result have more limited access to seeds from an informal seed system (Cleaver 2005).
In principle, informal seed systems can be a less expensive way of accessing seed, in situations when seed costs (and possibly profit margins) are lower than what seed companies are charging or where farmers can purchase seed in smaller quantities. Access to smaller unit quantities of seed can allow farmers to sow a smaller piece of land or to test out a crop without having to commit to the scale of bags supplied by some seed companies or large-scale seed programs (Sisay et al. 2017; Alemu 2015; Rubyogo et al. 2016). The decentralized nature of the informal system is also an important consideration as it can mean that farmers in peripheral rural areas can potentially have local access to seed, which they would not have if they depended solely on any formal system that is unnecessarily centralized. Due to its unregulated nature and lack of formal investment, the perception that the informal seed system can operate reliably and consistently over time, geography, and communities may not be true and needs to be considered in relation to resilience, food, and livelihood security. There are also risks of fraud that need to be considered, e.g., through the sale of seeds that are not the varieties claimed or of seeds with low germination rates. Indeed, the promotion of a fully decentralized informal seed system where farmers and their communities are expected to finance and produce their seed can be seen as a form of “rolling back the state” where the responsibilities and roles for seed production, quality control, and dissemination are no longer a responsibility of government (Cook et al. 2021).
Despite the benefits that the informal system has for smallholder farmers, there are also challenges associated with the informal system (Snapp et al. 2019). The yield potential goes down each year when farmers reuse saved seeds or recycled seeds from the informal seed system. Furthermore, the informal seed systems are not necessarily considered an efficient mechanism for the distribution of new varieties (McGuire and Sperling 2016) and can lack the capacity to deliver both the quality and quantity of seed needed (Shiferaw et al. 2008). In this respect, improved coordination of legume seed systems is urgently needed as neither the informal nor the formal system is fully meeting the seed demands of farmers in SSA. A closer look at the operating legume seed systems indicated that there are some connections between the formal and informal seed systems, which should be further strengthened (Kuhlmann and Bhramar 2021; Ayenan et al. 2017b) to ensure legume seed security in SSA.
4.4 Farmer trait preferences and available legume varieties
Legume varieties encompass both formally released varieties, which have undergone multi-locational yield trials at the national level before being recommended for release to farmers, as well as those accessible through the informal system, obtained via purchase, exchange, or farmer-saved seed. The latter can also include “landrace” varieties. Irrespective of the source of the variety, the litmus test for consistent farmer adoption of any legume variety will be its performance in the farmer’s field and the marketability of its produce (whether for household consumption and/or income). Hence, a focus on specific legume varieties is important for studies to be relevant to smallholder farmers’ lived realities. Over the years, legume breeding programs in SSA have released several legume varieties conferring improved climate resilience, nutrition, and yielding capacity (Varshney et al. 2019). Such released varieties have been selected for desirable traits and should have undergone rigorous testing and trials to ensure their quality before they are commercialized. However, there are also “local” varieties or landraces grown by farmers which may have never been registered and are saved by farmers. It is possible that some locally “named” varieties may have originated as registered seeds purchased by a farmer or obtained from an input scheme. Regardless of the source of the seed, farmers choose to grow varieties that have traits they desire and which they can access. In this respect, seed system innovations are needed to ensure that new legume traits and varieties reach smallholder farmers (Westengen et al. 2023).
In our study, only 15% (n = 19) of the total reviewed papers listed the names of legume varieties used in their studies (Supplementary Table 3). Of these, only 10% (n = 2) discussed legume varieties generally, while 42% (n = 8) listed legume traits preferred by farmers, and 53% (n = 9) specified particular legume variety names. Our study identified a greater number of released groundnut varieties (n = 5 (29%) than any other crop, followed by cowpea. This may be due to greater market demands for groundnut or due to efforts to reduce losses faced by farmers because of aflatoxin contamination. Multiple papers reported on common bean (n = 3) and cowpea, Bambara nut, and pigeonpea (with two papers each). Soybean, navy bean, lablab, faba bean, and garden pea were each the subject of a single study. Overall, 28 legume varieties were identified by our review study (Table 2): groundnut (n = 11), common bean (n = 4), pigeonpea (n = 5), and cowpea (n = 8). Most (n = 12) of the identified legume varieties are available for farmers in Tanzania. Groundnut varieties, BaHajidu, Bulki-01, Werer-963, and Werer-963 are available for farmers in Ethiopia, with BaHajidu being the highest yielder. Also available in Ethiopia are the common bean varieties, Nasir and Goberesha. In Tanzania, five pigeonpea varieties (ICP 7035, ICPL 90094, Kat 50, QP37, and ICP 86005) were reported to be available to farmers along with the six groundnut varieties (Johari 1985, Pendo 1998, Naliendele 2009, Mnanje 2009, Mangaka 2009, and Nachi 2015). In Nigeria, four cowpea varieties, IT8ID-699, TVx3236, IT82E-18, and IT84S-2246-4, were identified in our analysis. For studies focusing on South Sudan, four cowpea varieties were identified: IT90K-277-2, ACC004, IT07K-211-1-8, and Mading Bor II. In South Africa and Kenya, the ICGV 03796 (groundnut) and Nyota (common bean) varieties are available on the market. The literature we reviewed also demonstrated that the absence of any of these varieties in the market at the beginning of the agricultural season can hinder the uptake of these varieties (Nchanji et al. 2021b; Mwalongo et al. 2020).
Based on a number of breeding program pipelines, a range of legume varieties are being developed and released throughout SSA. Typically, the processes of professional plant breeding, varietal release and registration, seed certification, and supply channels of certified seed from formally released varieties constitute the formal system. Through the processes of germplasm collection, characterization, and use in breeding programs, the formal system also has a relationship with germplasm (e.g., of landraces or traditional varieties) that ultimately has its origins in the informal seed system (Wattnem 2016). The legume seed supply system for SSA is inherently connected to the breeding and varietal pipelines (whether formal or informal) that provide improved legume varieties to farmers across the region. The formal breeding programs typically combine the public sector breeding activities of the CGIAR with those of National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS), with some private sector breeding for selected legume crops (e.g., soybean and common bean). For instance, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) has been working closely with national programs via the Pan-Africa Bean Research Alliance (PABRA) to develop biofortified common bean varieties with high iron and zinc content (Ojiewo et al. 2015). Most of the breeding activities to develop improved legume varieties for the region are derived from CGIAR and NARS efforts and are predominantly focused on major legumes such as common bean, soybean, pigeonpea, lentil, cowpea, chickpea, and groundnut. In comparison, there are limited breeding efforts to develop improved varieties of minor and underutilized legumes such as Bambara nut, winged bean, African yam bean, and grasspea (Olanrewaju et al. 2021).
On legume traits, our results indicate that farmers generally prioritize high yield when choosing a legume variety to grow but may also consider other secondary traits (such as taste and nutritional value) in legumes. Other traits of interest include early maturity, disease/pest resistance, drought/heat stress tolerance, low labor requirements, and taste (Ayenan et al. 2017a; Mutari et al. 2021). We also found evidence indicating that while yield stood out as the primary preferred trait among both male and female farmers, other trait inclinations may be influenced by gender (Mwalongo et al. 2020; Tabe-Ojong et al. 2021). It is posited that male farmers tend to have market-oriented preferences for varieties that are affordable and accessible (Nchanji et al. 2021b; Mwalongo et al. 2020). Female farmers, on the other hand, were reported to prefer landraces or varieties with low labor requirements (Nchanji et al. 2021b). However, whether there exist specific traits unique to landraces that are favored remains unclear.
For all these crops, our analysis suggests that, for an improved legume variety to be successfully adopted in SSA, it must be high-yielding and have additional traits that match farmer preferences. A key challenge for the improvement of minor and underutilized legume crops is the market failure where the purchasing power of the consumers (i.e., smallholders and poorer rural communities) is insufficient to warrant significant investment in improvement programs for minority crops (e.g., germplasm collection, curation, crossing/breeding programs, multi-locational and multi-annual trials). Initiatives such as the African Orphan Crop Consortium are developing genomic resources and engaging in the training of young breeders that can provide a basis for the improvement of 101 African orphan crops (of which 11 are legume crops). By strengthening breeding and seed systems of minor and underutilized legume crops, the erosion of the genepool of orphan legume species can be abated, while generating new improved legume varieties of orphan legume species, which if adopted more widely can help promote resilience across farming systems.
4.5 Challenges in the adoption of legume varieties and attainable adoption benefits in SSA
Scaling legume production in SSA is hinged on the large-scale and sustained adoption of legume varieties that smallholders consider and value as important to their farming and livelihoods (Shilomboleni et al. 2022). This significant increase in adoption by farmers must be enabled by improving the performance of the existing seed systems, both formal and informal. Our findings consistently showed that both the impacts of adopting legume varieties and the challenges hindering their adoption were recurring themes across reviewed studies (Table 4 and Supplementary Table 4). Most of the analyzed studies (67%, n = 86) focused on strategies to promote the widespread adoption of legume varieties, highlighting both obstacles and potential pathways for scaling up legume variety adoption among farmers. However, only one paper addressed the topic of strengthening legume seed systems, while 34% (n = 29) of the papers focused on the adoption of improved varieties, encompassing associated perceptions, constraints, and impacts. Barriers to the adoption of improved legume varieties were highlighted in 15% (n = 13) of these papers, and potential options for strengthening legume seed systems were highlighted in 48% (n = 41) papers (Table 3).
The predominant constraints identified in the reviewed literature included inadequate and untimely access to seeds in sufficient quantities from the formal seed system (n = 7), as well as a shortage of information regarding available improved legume cultivars (n = 4) (Agyeman et al. 2021; Asfaw et al. 2012; David et al. 2002; Dessalegn et al. 2022). According to Dessalegn et al. (2022), lack of access in terms of timing and quantity to improved legume seeds makes farmers rely on saved seeds. In most cases, studies have shown that there are inefficiencies in estimating or predicting farmers’ demand for legume seed and communicating this to seed suppliers to ensure a functioning seed supply value chain. The result of this is that legume seeds regularly do not arrive in time for the planting season, leading to the situation where even the willing buyers of improved seed have to depend on recycled seed or seed exchanged with other farmers (Dessalegn et al. 2022). Our review also identified high seed cost (for legumes such as common bean and soybean), inefficient demand estimation mechanisms for formal seed supply, poor quality seed from the informal, and lack of high-yielding and pest/disease resistant varieties due to poor investment in legume breeding. In some cases, cultural norms were seen to contribute significantly to adoption rates—especially for crops such as chickpea and pigeonpea. Furthermore, adoption rates for some legume crops (e.g., groundnut) were reported to differ due to the farmer’s gender. Poor soil quality in SSA was recognized as a key limiting factor to the adoption and demand of legume seeds (making the seed business unviable). Shocks such as extreme weather (affects seed production) and the COVID-19 pandemic (and its effects on seed trade) were also reported in some studies. Furthermore, it was observed that policy or regulatory mechanisms within the region impose limitations on the operation of seed systems, which in turn can affect the adoption of legumes (Ali and Awade 2019; Mulesa and Westengen 2020; Nchanji et al. 2021a).
In our analysis, we identified a small subset of papers (Supplementary Table 5) that focused on the adoption of orphan/underutilized legume varieties, rather than the more commonly cultivated legumes. These papers underscored analogous barriers to adoption and benefits associated with improved varieties, akin to the studies focusing on commonly cultivated legumes. Although this is a small number of studies, these findings demonstrate that these benefits/barriers exist for orphan/underutilized legume seed systems. As for major legume crops, most of the studies reporting on orphan/underutilized legumes reported that male and female farmers have different crop preferences.
Multiple papers reported on the impacts that the adoption of improved legume varieties has on smallholder farming communities in SSA (n = 11). Our findings indicate that the adoption of improved legume varieties can have positive impacts on smallholder households. While most farmers are aware that improved seed varieties are important and valuable additions to a cropping system, without access to the required quantity of new or improved seed varieties at the right time, most farmers are dependent on saved seed obtained through the informal system. The benefits of improved varieties which were highlighted in this review include improved welfare, food security, dietary diversity, and increased income (Ahmed et al. 2016; Asfaw et al. 2012; Larochelle and Alwang 2022) (Table 4). Noteworthy, positive outcomes of legume seed adoption were only associated with the fair cost of seed, farmer age (with younger farmers willing to try new varieties) and gender, and improved yield and income (Dionco-Adetayo et al. 2002; Mwalongo et al. 2020; Tufa et al. 2019).
4.6 Enabling support for strengthening legume seed systems in SSA
The improvement of legume seed systems encompasses all the processes aimed at enhancing the production and availability of improved varieties. Our review indicated that several factors affect the successful development of existing legume seed systems in SSA (Table 5 and Supplementary Table 6). These include unequal access to extension services and credit between men and women (which can influence the total demand for improved varieties), poor soil quality, restrictive governance, and in recent years the COVID-19 pandemic (Ali and Awade 2019; Mulesa and Westengen 2020; Nchanji et al. 2021a). Lack and high cost of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers were also mentioned as barriers but less frequently than the previous barriers mentioned. In addition, anti-nutritional compounds/factors are a barrier existing in the production of some legume crops, particularly aflatoxin in relation to groundnuts (Boni et al. 2021) and ODAP (causing lathyrism) in relation to grasspea (Girma et al. 2011). Most of these constraints primarily impact production; however, their effect on the demand for legume seed has been extensively reported, impeding heightened interest from the private sector to invest in legume seed systems.
Our study also identified a range of options for enabling the scaling of seed systems (Table 6 and Supplementary Table 7). These options focused more on social, commercial, and economic aspects such as the support and development of seed enterprises, the use of local knowledge (in the development and delivery of seed), and the encouragement and enabling of greater market participation by smallholders (Akpo et al. 2020; Hillyer et al. 2006; Manda et al. 2020; David 2004). Périnelle et al. (2021) looked at the implementation of a more participatory approach to seed systems that could allow smallholders to be involved in the system outside of only cultivation. This could be important for promoting higher adoption rates and maintaining high seed demands which makes the legume seed business viable. Some of the papers (n = 4) suggested that specific training (for seed value chain actors and farmers) on newly introduced varieties or technologies increases adoption (and seed demand which is important in enhancing seed system performance) (Boadu et al. 2018; Mahama et al. 2020; Olatunde et al. 2021; Oyetunde-Usman et al. 2021). Two papers (n = 2) outlined improved storage methods to reduce losses (Baoua et al. 2012; Koona et al. 2007). This is important in ensuring that seed is not lost to insects and diseases—thereby ensuring seed access and availability.
For smallholders, food security is a main priority, and therefore, high yield cannot be sacrificed for other secondary traits (e.g., early flowering). The key challenges for strengthening legume seed systems revolve around demonstrating how legumes can benefit livelihoods when adopted by a farmer. Intercropping of legumes with cereals is one option to produce legumes, which was raised multiple times as a practice that can have positive impacts on yield and cropping systems (Gwenambira-Mwika et al. 2021; Rusinamhodzi et al. 2012; Haileyesus and Mekuriaw 2021). Another farming practice that is highlighted for legumes is the use of ridge tillage (Akinyemi et al. 2003). If post-harvest losses are affecting farmers, options for improved storage methods have been identified which can facilitate the adoption of legume seed in areas where it was previously limited (Baoua et al. 2012; Koona et al. 2007). Support for seed enterprises is another important option to improve seed access. Market participation has also been shown to be beneficial to both farmers buying and selling seeds as it can increase incomes and access to improved varieties (Akpo et al. 2020; Hillyer et al. 2006; Manda et al. 2020; David 2004). It has also been highlighted that the adoption of improved varieties increases when specific training is provided. Offering participatory approaches to training, using extension services and demonstrations along with local knowledge could increase trust in new varieties and improve levels of adoption (Boadu et al. 2018; Mahama et al. 2020; Olatunde et al. 2021; Oyetunde-Usman et al. 2021; Périnelle et al. 2021).
Another entry point to strengthening legume seed systems is creating an environment that promotes investments in the legume seed development space by private companies. To achieve this, we must look at the barriers to investments. On the breeding side, some challenges are inherent to the biology of legume crops (e.g., difficulty in crossing for some species due to their reproductive biology), while the seed multiplication ratio can act as an obstacle to increasing seed quantities for some legumes (e.g., groundnut 1:8, soybean 1:16, peas 1:19, cowpea 1:40). In addition, profit margins along the legume breeding and seed supply value chain (especially where the target market are smallholders) are not sufficient to sustain investment in legume breeding and seed systems. These factors act as a disincentive for private sector investment in legumes. Indeed, Rubyogo et al. (2016) highlight that the supply of new bean varieties has been generally left to NGOs, farmer organizations, and government bodies, with the private sector tending to focus on more profitable crops (e.g., maize, soybean, commodity crops). Furthermore, the provision of free or subsidized seed by NGOs and government bodies are two additional barriers that can discourage the commercial sector from investing time and capital in supplying seed directly to smallholder farmers (Tripp and Rohrbach 2001). However, market opportunities for seed companies can arise from input subsidy schemes run by government bodies and some NGOs. Supply of legume seeds to these organizations can provide an opportunity for sales of larger quantities of legume seeds and repeat sales.
Policy and regulatory environments were also a focus of some studies (n = 2) (Branca et al. 2021; Kuhlmann and Dey 2021). Seed policies can act as either a barrier or an enabler for smallholder legume seed access (Poku et al. 2018; Okry et al. 2011)—depending on the nature and flexibility of regulations around varietal selection, varietal identity, varietal breeding, release, certification, and sale. Where a flexible regulatory approach is taken (e.g., the use of quality declared seed is accepted), this can create opportunities to increase seed access for smallholders (Branca et al. 2021; Kuhlmann and Dey 2021). In relation to seed system scaling, some similar barriers to adoption arise continuously throughout the studies in this review, with access to seed and improved varieties being the most significant. We also noted that smallholder households are usually positively impacted by the adoption of an improved legume variety, and therefore, it is important that seed systems are strengthened. In addition, options for the scaling of seed systems which are mentioned in the literature generally focus on making legume cultivation more lucrative and communicating to farmers the benefits of producing legumes, particularly improved varieties. Indeed, regulatory frameworks are required to better support community seed networks (Abebe and Alemu 2017). Some consider that seed laws favor the private sector which generates tensions and trade-offs with the informal seed system (Wattnem 2016). For effective legume system scaling, it is necessary to consider the seed laws for each country to investigate how they are enabling smallholders to access seeds of improved legume varieties.
5 Conclusion
We systematically reviewed 129 research articles that focused on legume seed systems in SSA. Our results indicated that, although both formal and informal seed systems exist in SSA, there is a strong reliance on the informal system by smallholder farmers in sourcing seeds of non-cash crop legumes. The adoption of legume varieties, as identified in this study, was found to be influenced by various factors including seed costs, gender preferences, limited access to new variety information, inadequate and untimely availability of seeds in sufficient quantities from the formal seed system, inefficient demand estimation mechanisms within the formal seed supply chain, suboptimal seed quality within the informal system, and lack of high-yielding varieties that are tolerant to insect pests and diseases due to insufficient investments in legume breeding. In scaling legume seed systems, we identified several constraints including restrictive policy structures, limited investment in legume seed research, climatic vulnerabilities, and health shocks (such as the COVID-19 pandemic). Options identified to tackle some of these constraints included the provision of specific training (to breeders/seed scientists and farmers), incorporating farmer knowledge in seed development (to boost seed adoption rates), supporting local seed enterprises (technically and financially), and enacting more flexible policy instruments that support non-staple crop production. We consider that legume system scaling hinges upon the availability of an enabling policy environment and technical support structures. Our findings show that despite the increased interest in legumes, there are still some notable research gaps that require further investigation. These include a lack of research that explores the legume value chains and market dynamics in SSA. These two issues are important in improving the viability and profitability of legume seed production. There is also a need to assess the policy and institutional mechanisms that may need adjustments to create a more enabling environment for the existing legume seed systems in SSA. Lastly, future research must consider gender dynamics in seed systems—as access to legume seeds can be segregated by gender roles.
Data availability
The datasets (or search results) generated and analyzed in this review article are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Code availability
Not applicable.
References
Abebe G, Alemu A (2017) Role of improved seeds towards improving livelihood and food security at ethiopia. Int J Res Granthaalayah 5(2):338–356. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v5.i2.2017.1746
Agyeman K, Asante BO, Berchie JN, Sarkodie-Addo J, Marno P, Adabah R (2021) Farmers’ perceptions, constraints and preferences for improved Bambara groundnut varieties in Ghana. J Agric Food Res 3:100097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2020.100097
Ahmed MH, Mesfin HM, Abady S, Wendmagegn M, Kebede A (2016) Adoption of improved groundnut seed and its impact on rural households’ welfare in Eastern Ethiopia. Cogent Econ 4(1):1268747. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2016.1268747
Aiking H (2011) Future protein supply. Trends Food Sci 22(2–3):112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.04.005
Akinyemi JO, Akinpelu OE, Olaleye AO (2003) Performance of cowpea under three tillage systems on an Oxic Paleustalf in southwestern Nigeria. Soil Tillage Res 72(1):75–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(03)00066-7
Akpo E, Feleke G, Fikre A, Chichaybelu M, Ojiewo CO, Varshney RK (2020) Analyzing pathways of nurturing informal seed production into formal private ventures for sustainable seed delivery and crop productivity: experiences from Ethiopia. Sustainability 12(17):6828. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176828
Alemu K (2015) Seed production and dissemination systems analyses: The case of ethiopia. Food Sci Quality Mgt 35:25–37. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/FSQM/article/viewFile/19173/19383/
Ali E, Awade NE (2019) Credit constraints and soybean farmers’ welfare in subsistence agriculture in Togo. Heliyon 5(4):e01550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01550
Almekinders CJ, Ronner E, van Heerwaarden J (2020) Tracing legume seed diffusion beyond demonstration trials: an exploration of sharing mechanisms. Outlook Agric 49(1):29–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727020907646
Anago FN, Agbangba EC, Oussou BTC, Dagbenonbakin GD, Amadji LG (2021) Cultivation of cowpea challenges in West Africa for food security: analysis of factors driving yield gap in Benin. Agronomy 11(6):1139. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11061139
Asfaw S, Shiferaw B, Simtowe F, Lipper L (2012) Impact of modern agricultural technologies on smallholder welfare: evidence from Tanzania and Ethiopia. Food Policy 37(3):283–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.02.013
Ayenan MAT, Ofori K, Ahoton LE, Danquah A (2017a) Pigeonpea [(Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.)] production system, farmers preferred traits and implications for variety development and introduction in Benin. Agric Food Sec 6:48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0129-1
Ayenan MAT, Sewade PL, Agboton SM (2017b) Towards effective soybean seed systems in Benin: current situation and prospects for production and delivery of good quality seed. J Crop Improv 31(3):379–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427528.2017.1304479
Baoua IB, Amadou L, Margam V, Murdock LL (2012) Comparative evaluation of six storage methods for postharvest preservation of cowpea grain. J Stored Prod Res 49:171–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2012.01.003
Belayneh DB, Chondie YG (2022) Participatory variety selection of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in Taricha Zuriya district of Dawuro Zone, southern Ethiopia. Heliyon 8(3):e09011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09011
Boadu P, Aidoo R, Ohene-Yankyera K, Kleih U, Abdoulaye T, Maroya N, Orchard J, Bekoe S (2018) Farmers’ perception about quality of planted seed yam and their preferences for certified seed yam in Ghana. Int J Food Agric Econ 6(3):71–83. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.283870
Boni SB, Beed F, Kimanya ME, Koyano E, Mponda O, Mamiro D, Kaoneka B, Bandyopadhyay R, Korie S, Mahuku G (2021) Aflatoxin contamination in Tanzania: quantifying the problem in maize and groundnuts from rural households. World Myco J 14(4):553–564. https://doi.org/10.3920/wmj2020.2646
Branca G, Cacchiarelli L, Valentina DA, Dakishoni L, Lupafya E, Magalasi M, Perelli C, Sorrentino A (2021) Cereal-legume value chain analysis: a case of smallholder production in selected areas of Malawi. Agric 11(12):1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11121217
Ceccarelli S, Grando S (2020) Participatory plant breeding: who did it, who does it and where? Exp Agric 56(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479719000127
Cleaver F (2005) The inequality of social capital and the reproduction of chronic poverty. World Dev 33(6):893–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.09.015
Cook BR, Satizábal P, Curnow J (2021) Humanising agricultural extension: a review. World Dev 140:105337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105337
David S (2004) Farmer seed enterprises: a sustainable approach to seed delivery? Agric Human Val 21(4):387–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-004-1247-5
David S, Mukandala L, Mafuru J (2002) Seed availability, an ignored factor in crop varietal adoption studies: a case study of beans in Tanzania. J Sust Agric 21(2):5–20. https://doi.org/10.1300/J064v21n02_03
de Boef WS, Borman GD, Gupta A, Subedi A, Thijssen MH, Ayana Aga A, Hassena Beko M, Thein SZM, Thein W, Okelola F, Olusegun O, Ojo OP, Agbara C, Otim G, Ssemwogerere C, Ntare B, Oyee P (2021) Rapid assessments of the impact of COVID-19 on the availability of quality seed to farmers: advocating immediate practical, remedial and preventative action. Agric Syst 188:103037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.103037
Delêtre M, McKey DB, Hodkinson TR (2011) Marriage exchanges, seed exchanges, and the dynamics of manioc diversity. Proc Nat Acad Sci 108(45):18249–18254. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1106259108
Dessalegn B, Asnake W, Tigabie A, Le QB (2022) Challenges to adoption of improved legume varieties: a gendered perspective. Sustainability 14(4):2150. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042150
Dionco-Adetayo EA, Olaniyan OF, Ogunba BO (2002) Factors influencing soybean utilization in the household consumer market. Technovation 22(2):129–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(00)00076-6
Dutta A, Trivedi A, Nath CP, Gupta DS, Hazra KK (2022) A comprehensive review on grain legumes as climate-smart crops: challenges and prospects. Env Challenges 7:100479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100479
Foyer CH, Lam HM, Nguyen HT, Siddique KH, Varshney RK, Colmer TD, Cowling W, Bramley H, Mori TA, Hodgson JM, Cooper JW, Miller AJ, Kunert K, Vorster J, Cullis C, Ozga JA, Wahlqvist ML, Liang Y, Shou H, Shi K, Yu J, Fodor N, Kaiser BN, Wong FL, Valliyodan B, Considine MJ (2016) Neglecting legumes has compromised human health and sustainable food production. Nat Plants 2:16112. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2016.112
Giami SY (2005) Compositional and nutritional properties of selected newly developed lines of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp). J Food Comp Analysis 18(7):665–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2004.06.007
Girma A, Tefera B, Dadi L (2011) Grass pea and neurolathyrism: farmers’ perception on its consumption and protective measure in North Shewa Ethiopia. Food Chem Tox 49(3):668–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2010.08.040
Grabowski P, Schmitt Olabisi L, Adebiyi J, Waldman K, Richardson R, Rusinamhodzi L, Snapp S (2019) Assessing adoption potential in a risky environment: the case of perennial pigeonpea. Agric Syst 171:89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.01.001
Gwenambira-Mwika CP, Snapp SS, Chikowo R (2021) Broadening farmer options through legume rotational and intercrop diversity in maize-based cropping systems of central Malawi. Field Crops Res 270:108225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108225
Haileyesus D, Mekuriaw A (2021) The adoption impact of wheat-chickpea double cropping on yield and farm income of smallholder farmers in Central Highlands of Ethiopia: the case of Becho district. Heliyon 7(6):e07203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07203
Hillyer AEM, McDonagh JF, Verlinden A (2006) Land-use and legumes in northern Namibia—the value of a local classification system. Agric Ecosystems Env 117(4):251–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.04.008
Hoffmann MP, Odhiambo JJO, Koch M, Ayisi KK, Zhao G, Soler AS, Rötter RP (2018) Exploring adaptations of groundnut cropping to prevailing climate variability and extremes in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Field Crops Res 219:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2018.01.019
Kamanga BC, Kanyama-Phiri GY, Waddington SR, Almekinders CJ, Giller KE (2014) The evaluation and adoption of annual legumes by smallholder maize farmers for soil fertility maintenance and food diversity in central Malawi. Food Secur 6(1):45–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-013-0315-3
Kilwinger F, Mugambi S, Manners R, Schut M, Tumwegamire S, Nduwumuremyi A, Bambara S, Paauwe M, Almekinders C (2021) Characterizing cassava farmer typologies and their seed sourcing practices to explore opportunities for economically sustainable seed business models in Rwanda. Outlook Agric 50(4):441–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270211045408
Kimutai C, Ndlovu N, Chaikam V, Ertiro BT, Das B, Beyene Y, Kiplagat O, Spillane C, Boddupalli P, Gowda MS (2023) Discovery of genomic regions associated with grain yield and agronomic traits in bi-parental populations of maize (Zea mays. L) under optimum and low nitrogen conditions. Front Genetics 14:1266402. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2023.1266402
Konja DT, Mabe FN, Oteng-Frimpong R (2019) Profitability and profit efficiency of certified groundnut seed and conventional groundnut production in Northern Ghana: a comparative analysis. Cogent Econ 7(1):1631525. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2019.1631525
Koona P, Tatchago V, Malaa D (2007) Impregnated bags for safer storage of legume grains in West and Central Africa. J Stored Products Res 43(3):248–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2006.06.005
Kuhlmann K, Dey B (2021) Using regulatory flexibility to address market informality in seed systems: a global study. Agronomy 11(2):377. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11020377
Kumar S, Pandey G (2020) Biofortification of pulses and legumes to enhance nutrition. Heliyon 6(3):e03682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03682
Labeyrie V, Thomas M, Muthamia ZK, Leclerc C (2016) Seed exchange networks, ethnicity, and sorghum diversity. Proc Nat Academy Sci 113(1):98–103. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1513238112
Larochelle C, Alwang J (2022) Impacts of improved bean varieties adoption on dietary diversity and food security in Rwanda. Eur J Dev Res 34(2):1144–1166. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-021-00376-2
Madin MB, Nyantakyi-Frimpong H, Inkoom DKB (2022) Seed security among smallholder farmers in semi-arid Ghana. Environ Chall 6:100438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2021.100438
Mahama A, Awuni JA, Mabe FN, Azumah SB (2020) Modelling adoption intensity of improved soybean production technologies in Ghana - a generalized Poisson approach. Heliyon 6(3):e03543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03543
Manda J, Alene AD, Tufa AH, Abdoulaye T, Wossen T, Chikoye D, Manyong V (2019) The poverty impacts of improved cowpea varieties in Nigeria: a counterfactual analysis. World Dev 122:261–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.05.027
Manda J, Alene AD, Adane Hirpa T, Feleke S, Tahirou A, Omoigui LO, Manyong V (2020) Market participation, household food security, and income: the case of cowpea producers in northern Nigeria. Food Energy Secur 9(3):e211. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.211
Marimo P, Otieno G, Njuguna-Mungai E, Vernooy R, Halewood M, Fadda C, Mulumba JW, Desterio Ondieki N, Mollel M (2021) The role of gender and institutional dynamics in adapting seed systems to climate change: case studies from Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Agriculture 11(9):840. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11090840
Martey E, Etwire PM, Mockshell J (2021) Climate-smart cowpea adoption and welfare effects of comprehensive agricultural training programs. Technol Soc 64:101468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101468
McGuire S, Sperling L (2016) Seed systems smallholder farmers use. Food Security 8(1):179–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0528-8
Merga JT (2020) Evaluation of common bean varieties (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different row-spacing in Jimma. South Western Ethiopia. Heliyon 6(8):e04822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04822
Mligo JK, Craufurd PQ (2005) Adaptation and yield of pigeonpea in different environments in Tanzania. Field Crops Res 94(1):43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2004.11.009
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Rev 4(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
Mulesa TH, Westengen OT (2020) Against the grain? A historical institutional analysis of access governance of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture in Ethiopia. J World Intellect Prop 23(1–2):82–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12142
Mulesa TH, Sarah Paule D, Makate C, Haug R, Westengen OT (2021) Pluralistic seed system development: a path to seed security? Agronomy 11(2):372. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11020372
Munn Z, Moola S, Riitano D, Lisy K (2014) The development of a critical appraisal tool for use in systematic reviews addressing questions of prevalence. Int J Health Pol Management 3(3):123. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2014.71
Mutari B, Sibiya J, Bogweh Nchanji E, Simango K, Gasura E (2021) Farmers’ perceptions of navy bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) production constraints, preferred traits and farming systems and their implications on bean breeding: a case study from South East Lowveld region of Zimbabwe. J Ethnobio Ethnomed 17(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-021-00442-3
Mwalongo S, Akpo E, Lukurugu GA, Muricho G, Vernooy R, Athanas M, Ojiewo C, Njuguna E, Otieno G, Varshney R (2020) Factors influencing preferences and adoption of improved groundnut varieties among farmers in Tanzania. Agronomy 10(9):1271. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10091271
Nassary EK, Baijukya F, Ndakidemi PA (2020) Intensification of common bean and maize production through rotations to improve food security for smallholder farmers. J Agric Food Res 2:100040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2020.100040
Nchanji EB, Lutomia CK (2021) Regional impact of COVID-19 on the production and food security of common bean smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa: implication for SDG’s. Global Food Secur 29:100524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100524
Nchanji EB, Lutomia CK, Chirwa R, Templer N, Rubyogo JC, Onyango P (2021a) Immediate impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on bean value chain in selected countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Agric Syst 188:103034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.103034
Nchanji EB, Lutomia CK, Odhiambo Collins A, Karanja D, Kamau E (2021b) Gender-responsive participatory variety selection in Kenya: implications for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) breeding in Kenya. Sustainability 13(23):13164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313164
Ndlovu N, Spillane C, McKeown PC, Cairns JE, Das B, Gowda M (2022) Genome-wide association studies of grain yield and quality traits under optimum and low-nitrogen stress in tropical maize (Zea mays L.). Theor Appl Gen 135(12):4351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-022-04224-7
Ngalamu T, Meseka S, Galla JO, Tongun NJ, Ochanda NW, Ofori K (2020) Yield performance stability of adapted and improved cowpea in the Equatoria region of South Sudan. Legume Res 43(2):247–252. https://doi.org/10.18805/lr-463
Nord A, Bekunda M, McCormack C, Snapp S (2021) Barriers to sustainable intensification: overlooked disconnects between agricultural extension and farmer practice in maize-legume cropping systems in Tanzania. Int J Agric Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2021.1961416
Nordhagen S, Pascual U (2013) The impact of climate shocks on seed purchase decisions in Malawi: implications for climate change adaptation. World Dev 43:238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.08.002
Ojiewo C, Keatinge DJDH, Hughes J, Tenkouano A, Nair R, Varshney R, Siambi M, Monyo E, Ganga-Rao N, Silim S (2015) The role of vegetables and legumes in assuring food, nutrition, and income security for vulnerable groups in sub-Saharan Africa. World Med Health Pol 7(3):187–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/wmh3.148
Okry F, Van Mele P, Nuijten E, Struik PC, Mongbo RL (2011) Organizational analysis of the seed sector of rice in Guinea: stakeholders, perception and institutional linkages. Exp Agric 47(1):137–157. https://doi.org/10.1017/s001447971000089x
Olanrewaju OS, Oyatomi O, Babalola OO, Abberton M (2021) Breeding potentials of Bambara groundnut for food and nutrition security in the face of climate change. Front Plant Sci 12:798993. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.798993
Olatunde OA, Peter OF, Oluseye OO, Olatunji AR (2021) Determinants of soybean farmers’ adoption of green revolution technologies in Oyo State Nigeria. J Dev Areas 55(3):365–376. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2021.0069
Otieno G, Zebrowski WM, Recha J, Reynolds TW (2021) Gender and social seed networks for climate change adaptation: evidence from bean, finger millet, and sorghum seed systems in East Africa. Sustainability 13(4):2074. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042074
Oyetunde-Usman Z, Olagunju KO, Ogunpaimo OR (2021) Determinants of adoption of multiple sustainable agricultural practices among smallholder farmers in Nigeria. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 9(2):241–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2020.10.007
Périnelle A, Meynard J-M, Scopel E (2021) Combining on-farm innovation tracking and participatory prototyping trials to develop legume-based cropping systems in West Africa. Agric Syst 187:102978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102978
Poku AG, Birner R, Gupta S (2018) Why do maize farmers in Ghana have a limited choice of improved seed varieties? An assessment of the governance challenges in seed supply. Food Secur 10(1):27–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-017-0749-0
Ricciardi V (2015) Social seed networks: identifying central farmers for equitable seed access. Agric Syst 139:110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.07.002
Ronner E, Descheemaeker K, Almekinders CJM, Ebanyat P, Giller KE (2018) Farmers’ use and adaptation of improved climbing bean production practices in the highlands of Uganda. Agric Ecosyst Environ 261:186–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.09.004
Rubyogo J-C, Sperling L, Muthoni R, Buruchara R (2010) Bean seed delivery for small farmers in sub-Saharan Africa: the power of partnerships. Soc Nat Res 23(4):285–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920802395297
Rubyogo JC, Magreta R, Kambewa D, Chirwa R, Mazuma E, Andrews M (2016) Using subsidised seed to catalyse demand-driven bean seed systems in Malawi. Dev Practice 26(1):15–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2016.1117579
Rubyogo JC, Akpo E, Omoigui L, Pooran G, Chaturvedi SK, Fikre A, Haile D, Hakeem A, Monyo E, Nkalubo S, Fenta B, Binagwa P, Kilango M, Williams M, Mponda O, Okello D, Chichaybelu M, Miningou A, Bationo J, Sako D, Kouyate Z, Diallo S, Oteng-Frimpong R, Yirzagla J, Iorlamen T, Garba U, Mohammed H, Ojiewo C, Kamara A, Varshney R, Nigam SN, Janila P, Nadaf HL, Kalemera S, Downes A (2019) Market-led options to scale up legume seeds in developing countries: experiences from the Tropical Legumes project. Plant Breed 138(4):474–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12732
Rusinamhodzi L, Corbeels M, Nyamangara J, Giller KE (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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2012.07.014
Sarkis-Onofre R, Catala-Lopez F, Aromataris E, Lockwood C (2021) How to properly use the PRISMA Statement. Syst Rev 10(1):117. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01671-z
Sauer CM, Mason NM, Maredia MK, Mofya-Mukuka R (2018) Does adopting legume-based cropping practices improve the food security of small-scale farm households? Panel survey evidence from Zambia. Food Secur 10(6):1463–1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-0859-3
Shiferaw BA, Kebede TA, You L (2008) Technology adoption under seed access constraints and the economic impacts of improved pigeonpea varieties in Tanzania. Agric Econ. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2008.00335.x
Shilomboleni H, Recha J, Radeny M, Osumba J (2022) Scaling climate resilient seed systems through SMEs in Eastern and Southern Africa: challenges and opportunities. Climate Dev 15:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2022.2073956
Shitta NS, Abtew WG, Ndlovu N, Oselebe HO, Edemodu AC, Abebe AT (2021) Morphological characterization and genotypic identity of African yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst ex. A. Rich. Harms) germplasm from diverse ecological zones. Plant Gen Resources 19:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262121000095
Sidibe A, Meldrum G, Coulibaly H, Padulosi S, Traore I, Diawara G, Sangare AR, Mbosso C (2020) Revitalizing cultivation and strengthening the seed systems of fonio and Bambara groundnut in Mali through a community biodiversity management approach. Plant Gen Resources 18(2):31–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1479262120000076
Sinare B, Miningou A, Nebié B, Eleblu J, Kwadwo O, Traoré A, Zagre B, Desmae H (2021) Participatory analysis of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) cropping system and production constraints in Burkina Faso. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 17(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-020-00429-6
Sisay DT, Verhees FJHM, van Trijp HCM (2017) Seed producer cooperatives in the Ethiopian seed sector and their role in seed supply improvement: a review. J Crop Improv 31(3):323–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427528.2017.1303800
Snapp SS, Cox CM, Peter BG (2019) Multipurpose legumes for smallholders in sub-Saharan Africa: Identification of promising ‘scale out’options. Global Food Secur 23:22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2019.03.002
Sperling L, Gallagher P, McGuire S, March J, Templer N (2020) Informal seed traders: the backbone of seed business and African smallholder seed supply. Sustainability 12(17):7074. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177074
Sperling L, Birachi E, Kalemera S, Mutua M, Templer N, Mukankusi C, Radegunda K, William M, Gallagher P, Kadege E (2021) The informal seed business: focus on yellow bean in Tanzania. Sustainability 13(16):8897. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168897
Stagnari F, Maggio A, Galieni A, Pisante M (2017) Multiple benefits of legumes for agriculture sustainability: an overview. Chem Biol Technol Agric 4(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-016-0085-1
Tabe-Ojong MP Jr, Molua EL, Ngoh SB, Beteck SE (2021) Production, consumption and market diversification of grain legumes in the humid forest agroecology of cameroon. Sustain Prod Consum 27:193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.023
Tripp R, Rohrbach D (2001) Policies for African seed enterprise development. Food policy 26(2):147–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(00)00042-7
Tripp R, Louwaars N, Eaton D (2007) Plant variety protection in developing countries. A report from the field. Food Policy 32(3):354–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.09.003
Tufa AH, Alene AD, Manda J, Akinwale MG, Chikoye D, Feleke S, Wossen T, Manyong V (2019) The productivity and income effects of adoption of improved soybean varieties and agronomic practices in Malawi. World Dev 124:104631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104631
van Niekerk J, Wynberg R (2017) Traditional seed and exchange systems cement social relations and provide a safety net: a case study from KwaZulu-Natal. South Africa. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 41(9–10):1099–1123. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2017.1359738
Varshney RK, Ojiewo C, Monyo E (2019) A decade of Tropical Legumes projects: development and adoption of improved varieties, creation of market-demand to benefit smallholder farmers and empowerment of national programmes in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Plant Breed 138(4):379–388. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12744
Verkaart S, Munyua BG, Mausch K, Michler JD (2017) Welfare impacts of improved chickpea adoption: a pathway for rural development in Ethiopia? Food Policy 66:50–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.11.007
Wattnem T (2016) Seed laws, certification and standardization: outlawing informal seed systems in the Global South. J Peasant Stud 43(4):850–867. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2015.1130702
Westengen OT, Dalle SP, Mulesa TH (2023) Navigating toward resilient and inclusive seed systems. Proc Nat Acad Sci 120(14):e2218777120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2218777120
Acknowledgements
The authors are sincerely grateful to the reviewers for their invaluable feedback and constructive suggestions, which have significantly enhanced the overall quality of our paper.
Funding
Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium. This research was supported by funding from the European Commission DESIRA funded LEG4DEV Project [FOOD/2020/418-901] and the Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) Principal Investigator Grant [13/IA/1820].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization, C.B., N.N., P.C.M., and C.S.; methodology, C.B., N.N., P.C.M., and C.S.; data collection, C.B., and N.N.; writing (original draft), C.B., and N.N.; writing (review and editing), P.C.M., N.N., and C.S.; funding acquisition, C.S.; supervision, P.C.M. and C.S.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Breen, C., Ndlovu, N., McKeown, P.C. et al. Legume seed system performance in sub-Saharan Africa: barriers, opportunities, and scaling options. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 44, 20 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-024-00956-6
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-024-00956-6