Climate 11 00202 v2

climate
Review
Adaptation of Agriculture to Climate Change:
A Scoping Review
Elena Grigorieva 1, * , Alexandra Livenets 2 and Elena Stelmakh 2
1 Department of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin (HU), 10117 Berlin, Germany

2 Institute for Complex Analysis of Regional Problems, Far Eastern Branch Russian Academy of
Sciences (ICARP FEB RAS), 679016 Birobidzhan, Russia; [email protected] (A.L.);
[email protected] (E.S.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]
Abstract: Since agricultural productivity is weather and climate-related and fundamentally depends
on climate stability, climate change poses many diverse challenges to agricultural activities. The
objective of this study is to review adaptation strategies and interventions in countries around
the world proposed for implementation to reduce the impact of climate change on agricultural
development and production at various spatial scales. A literature search was conducted in June–
August 2023 using electronic databases Google Scholar and Scientific Electronic Library eLibrary.RU,
seeking the key words “climate”, “climate change”, and “agriculture adaptation”. Sixty-five studies
were identified and selected for the review. The negative impacts of climate change are expressed in
terms of reduced crop yields and crop area, impacts on biotic and abiotic factors, economic losses,
increased labor, and equipment costs. Strategies and actions for agricultural adaptation that can
be emphasized at local and regional levels are: crop varieties and management, including land
use change and innovative breeding techniques; water and soil management, including agronomic
practices; farmer training and knowledge transfer; at regional and national levels: financial schemes,
insurance, migration, and culture; agricultural and meteorological services; and R&D, including the
development of early warning systems. Adaptation strategies depend on the local context, region, or
country; limiting the discussion of options and measures to only one type of approach—"top-down”
Citation: Grigorieva, E.; Livenets, A.; or “bottom-up”—may lead to unsatisfactory solutions for those areas most affected by climate change
Stelmakh, E. Adaptation of but with few resources to adapt to it. Biodiversity-based, or “ecologically intensive” agriculture,
Agriculture to Climate Change: and climate-smart agriculture are low-impact strategies with strong ecological modernization of
A Scoping Review. Climate 2023, 11, agriculture, aiming to sustainably increase agricultural productivity and incomes while addressing
202. https://doi.org/10.3390/ the interrelated challenges of climate change and food security. Some adaptation measures taken
cli11100202
in response to climate change may not be sufficient and may even increase vulnerability to climate
Academic Editors: Evangelos change. Future research should focus on adaptation options to explore the readiness of farmers and
Hatzigiannakis and Dimitrios society to adopt new adaptation strategies and the constraints they face, as well as the main factors
Voulanas affecting them, in order to detect maladaptation before it occurs.
Received: 5 September 2023
Keywords: climate; climate change; agriculture; adaptation strategies; maladaptation
Revised: 26 September 2023
Accepted: 3 October 2023
Published: 6 October 2023
1. Introduction
Anthropogenic activities are contributing to current environmental problems such as
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
climate change, natural resource degradation, including soil degradation and biodiversity
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
loss, and environmental pollution. According to the World Economic Forum Global Risks
This article is an open access article
Perception Survey 2021–2022, “Climate action failure” and “Extreme weather” were iden-
distributed under the terms and
tified as holding the 1st and 2nd places among the most serious risks on the global scale
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
for the next 10 years [1]. The world’s population is currently increasing and is projected
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
to reach 9.5 billion by 2050 [2], which poses challenges for socio-economic progress and
4.0/). requires expanding the contributions of all resources to meet the necessities of a growing
Climate 2023, 11, 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli11100202 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/climate

Climate 2023, 11, 202 2 of 37
number of people [3]. Food security is one of the main problems in the 21st century, and
due to the growth of the population, agricultural production, both food and non-food
products, will have to increase by 60% by 2050 compared to 2005 [4].
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a universal call for global action aimed
to “protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity”. To ensure
their achievement, they are all interconnected and integrated, balancing the environmental,
social, and economic dimensions of sustainable development [5–8]. Seven out of 17 SDGs
are related to agriculture and climate change, namely: No Poverty (SDG1), Zero Hunger
(SDG2), Gender Equality (SDG5), Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG12),
Climate Action (SDG13), Life Below Water (SDG14), and Life on Land (SDG15) [6–11].
To achieve the goals while addressing current climate change problems, climate-smart
agriculture is needed, aimed at sustainable food production, climate adaptation, and
resilience [12–22].
1.1. Adaptation Strategies—Definitions for Agriculture

While mitigation means activities aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions [23–26],
adaptation refers to measures aimed at increasing the ability of people and communities to
adapt to climate change and related impacts that will occur in various sectors of human
life [23,26–30]. In the light of climate change, adaptation is recognized as actions aimed at
reducing vulnerability and/or benefiting opportunities resulting from current or future
changes [26,31–33]. In this context, Adaptation Strategy (AS) can be defined as “. . .a general
plan of action for addressing the impacts of climate change, including climate variability
and extremes. It will include a mix of policies and measures with the overarching objective
of reducing the country’s vulnerability. Depending on the circumstances, the strategy can
be comprehensive at a national level, addressing adaptation across sectors, regions and
vulnerable populations, or it can be more limited, focusing on just one or two sectors or
regions” ([34], p. 186). Considering the existence of a large number of definitions of the
term “strategy” [35,36], we use the above one with the addition of a local level.
Since the relevance of AS depends on the nature of incentives and the associated
vulnerability, discussion of adaptation strategies should begin with an overview of climate
and ongoing climate change, as well as their impact on agriculture, answering the question:
What is agriculture adapting to? For example, B. Smit and coauthors [37] emphasize that
“adaptation in agriculture may be in response to a sequence such as temperature and
precipitation conditions, which result in drought (magnitude and/or frequency) which
influences crop yield which has consequences for income” ([37], p. 230). At the same time,
no country or region has the same adaptation potential, especially depending on their
economic and/or social status, which is very important for developing countries, which
experience more restrictions compared to developed ones [27,38].
B. Smit and M. Skinner [39] determine the distinctive characteristics of adaptation in
agriculture, such as “intent and purposefulness; timing and duration; scale and responsi-
bility; and form” ([39], p. 93). Here “intent and purposefulness” means spontaneous or
specifically planned; “timing and duration” is related to anticipatory (proactive), concurrent
(during), or responsive (reactive) adaptations. “Scale and responsibility” characteristics are
very important in terms of decision-making and planning specific adaptation plans. “Scale”
is a spatial level where adaptation occurs, such as plant, plot, field, farm, region, and na-
tion [39]. In this context, “responsibility” means differentiation between the various actors
who implement or promote adaptation in the agricultural sector, including farmers as indi-
vidual producers, private enterprises integrated into agribusiness, and public institutions
referring to governmental decisions [37]. Consequently, adaptation “form” refers to the
diverse array of structures and procedures that vary depending on spatial and policy levels,
shaped by their administrative, financial, institutional, legal, managerial, organizational,
political, pragmatic, structural, and technological attributes [39]. At the same time, there
are various restrictions on adaptation, or factors affecting agricultural adaptation to climate
Climate 2023, 11, 202 3 of 37
change, with their different origins: physical, environmental, technological, economic,

political, institutional, psychological, or socio-cultural [28,30,40–43].
1.2. Adaptation Strategies: Scaling from National to Farmer Levels

Climate change effects on agricultural activities vary in different regions, depending on
economic, social, and environmental patterns, thus calling for a diverse mix of adaptation
actions across the regions [25]. They can differ depending on the scale of the system.
For instance, adaptation efforts vary at different levels of scale. At the farmer’s field
level, it might involve actions like planting new species or hybrids. At the farm level,
strategies could include diversification or obtaining insurance coverage. On regional or
national scales, adaptation may entail changes in the number of farms or adjustments to
compensatory programs. On a global level, it might necessitate shifts in international food
market patterns [37]. Numerous examples of adaptation plans at the regional level can
be found in the national communications submitted by the governments of developing
countries [44].
The impact of climate change on agriculture is felt both at the level of individual
producers and at the level of the entire population [45]. Two levels of agricultural adap-
tation are often discussed: farm-based measures, which are built on the rational personal
interests of farmers, and policy-driven adaptation with government involvement, based on
collective needs [46,47]. The most severe repercussions of these changes are felt within local
agricultural communities, as they directly affect employment, income sources, and agri-
cultural production. These communities heavily rely on the agricultural sector, rendering
them more susceptible to such impacts. The most vitally damaging effects are expressed
in reducing food security (availability, accessibility, stability, and use); aggravating water
shortages (availability and quality of freshwater); causing damage to vital infrastructure
(economic damage from floods and damage to infrastructure from the melting of polar ice
caps); intensifying droughts (desertification); and increasing poverty in local communi-
ties [43]. At the same time, the choice at the national level related to the national policy
in the field of agriculture and development is crucial [31]. According to Stage [48], the
main difference between them is that at the local level, private farms and households can
take autonomous adaptation decisions, while at the regional or national level, planned
adaptation decisions are made by institutional or governmental authorities [48].
1.3. Adaptation Strategies for Agricultural Development and Production at Different Levels
The literature review shows that a comprehensive discussion has unfolded in the
scientific community on the global impact of climate change and adaptation to it on var-
ious aspects of human life [19,27,28,37,38,43,49–56]. The multiple attempts are devoted
to research involving systematic analysis, categorization and documentation of agricul-
tural adaptation as a whole [23,25,32,39,45,57–59], as well some specific aspects, such as
adaptation features in different countries and regions of the world, e.g.,: the Mediter-
ranean region [60], Eastern Europe [61], Nordic countries [33], the USA [62], Canada [39],
developing countries [63], low- and middle-income countries [42], Asia [64–66], South
Asia [67], African countries [11,18,68], arid and semi-arid tropics of Asia, Africa, and Latin
America [69]; in various sectors of agriculture [70], depending on the effects for various
crops [71–77], and in different weather outcomes [16,21,58,78,79].
Despite this extensive discourse, there have been only a few studies conducted that
include research from countries and regions of the world, showing adaptation actions at
different levels of agricultural production, from regional and local farmers’ responses to
government involvement or national level [31]. Thus, in this study, an attempt is made
not to cover all the papers on the topic but more so to fill the above gap in research by
compiling a scoping review of the literature. The aim of the current study is to review
adaptation strategies and actions in countries around the world proposed for implemen-
tation in order to reduce the impact of climate change on their agricultural development
and production at different levels. The study was completed in three stages: (i) identifying
Climate 2023, 11, 202 4 of 37
the climate diversity and climate change patterns; (ii) determining the impact of climate
change on agricultural production; and (iii) recognizing adaptation strategies and actions
in the agricultural sector, including at the local (farms), regional (institutions), and national
(governments) levels. We believe that our results would benefit not only future research
aimed at studying the development of effective strategies for the adaptation of the agri-
cultural sector in different countries but also the influencing factors and barriers to the
adjustment of agriculture to climate change.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the Materials
and Methods of this study. Section 3 provides the Results of the main findings, including a
table that summarizes the outputs from all the papers selected for the review. Section 4,
Discussion, includes some additional aspects, such as: shortcomings and advantages that
arise from climate change to agriculture, in Section 4.1; discussion of the pros and cons of
the “bottom-up” and “top-down” approaches (Section 4.2); unique agricultural techniques
such as intercropping are considered in Section 4.3; involvement of Indigenous Knowledge
in the adaptation process is shown in Section 4.4; biodiversity-based agriculture and smart
agriculture are debated in Sections 4.5 and 4.6; and maladaptation concepts are discussed
in Section 4.7. In the final Section 5, we present the main conclusions and implications of
this study, including recommendations.
2. Materials and Methods

A literature search was conducted in June-August 2023 using electronic databases
Google Scholar and Scientific Electronic Library eLibrary.RU, the largest Russian infor-
mation and analytical portal in science, technology, medicine, and education, containing
abstracts and full texts. The following questions were identified prior to the review process
and subsequently taken into account when reviewing the literature: (i) What are current
or future climate changes? (ii) How does climate change affect and is projected to affect
agricultural production? (iii) What necessary adaptation actions (policies and measures)
are noted? We were seeking the key phrases “climate change” and “agriculture adaptation
measures” to search in Google Scholar and the key words “climate” and “agriculture
adaptation” to search in eLibrary. We also looked for studies cited in the recognized papers.
The scoping nature of the literature review does not require full coverage of all pa-
pers on this topic, but those enveloping all climate types over different continents. The
several first relevant studies were selected for the review, all of them published not earlier
than 1999. The review criteria stipulated that publications eligible for inclusion should
encompass countries with diverse climates, along with considerations of climate change
and its associated impacts or adaptation strategies, without bias in the selection. Ultimately,
our search identified 65 studies that were deemed suitable for the review, and we did not
impose any restrictions on the study design.
It is important to note that challenges associated with the effects of climate change
and the necessary adaptation measures are influenced not only by climatic factors but
also by other biophysical variables, such as agro-climatic zones, soil types, and others. In
this review, we do not classify our findings based on these specific assumptions. Instead,
we seek to clarify and consolidate the relevant challenges and opportunities, taking into
account a number of factors related to climate change. However, the results presented in
this document can be used in conjunction with the identified prerequisites to assess the
applicability of a particular task or opportunity in a particular context.
3. Results
From the reviewed papers, 59 in English and 6 in Russian were included in the
table. Most of the articles were from European countries (25) [33,47,71,80–102] and Asia
(21) [13,17,103–121], several from African countries (12) [11,68,69,122–130], also South
America (4) [131–134] and North America (2) [135,136], and one paper from Australia [137].
Of these papers, six [17,100,122,131,136,137] were published at the Special Issue of Climate
(MDPI) “Agroecological Approaches for Climate-Smart and Biodiverse Agriculture” (https:
Climate 2023, 11, 202 5 of 37
//www.mdpi.com/journal/climate/special_issues/ecosystem, accessed on 1 September

2023), which originally inspired us to conduct this review. The studied areas include a wide
range of climates, from equatorial to temperate, with various humidity variations (arid,
semi-arid, humid, monsoon, Mediterranean, maritime), organized as from the temperate
and subtropical climates of Europe (including Russia) to various climates in Asia, Africa,
the Southern and Northern Americas, and Oceania (Australia).
3.1. Climate Change

Most of the descriptions of the climate change in different regions include increase of
the mean annual or seasonal temperatures, changes in precipitation, both increase and/or
decrease depending on the study area, higher frequencies of extreme weather events [33,83–
85,89,99,133], such as heat waves, droughts and associated wild fires e.g., [71,81,82,98,101,
115,122,124,137] or floods [98,101], changing rainfall patterns [43]; changes in physical
and geographical zoning [93,94], changes in agroclimatic indices such as Growing Degree
Days [96,97] or Temperature-Humidity Index [135], growing season length of crops [118];
the sea level rise [118]; changes in coastal zones [110,116] or alteration of permafrost and
glaciers melting [47,113,116]. An increase in the frequency, duration, and intensity of
droughts as the most dangerous effects of climate change on agriculture has been detailed
globally, in all regions, and in many countries [47,68,69,71,80–82,89,99,101,102,112,115,116,
122,124].
Some studies note the changes that have already happened in the last 10–30 years (e.g.,
in [11,80,82,89,99,109,117,129]). Others, based on different models, describe the predicted
changes in the future by the years 2050–2100 according to various scenarios [71,86,87,90,98,
103,105,108,119,123,128,134,135] or degrees of warming, e.g., +1 ◦ C [93,104] or +2 ◦ C [69].
In some papers, both current (past years) and future projections of climate change are
discussed [114,125,126].
3.2. Changes in Agriculture Due to the Effect of Climate Change

Changes in climate can have different impacts on agriculture. Agricultural produc-
tivity is related to weather and climate, fundamentally depends on climatic stability, and,
consequently, leads to challenges for food potential. Higher temperatures and reduced
precipitation lead to growing aridity, water deficits, desertification, and increases in evapo-
transpiration, which lead to reduced yield potential, decreasing yields and the growing
areas [114,125,126], deterioration of livestock conditions [17,47,69,85,126,137], and reduced
reproduction and milk production [47,80]. Possible climate changes in the future may mean
that some plants, such as coffee plants, will no longer be able to recover from the effects of
natural disasters [131].
High temperatures and changes in precipitation also affect biotic factors, causing
indirect effects such as intense weed growth, the incidence of pests and diseases, the
introduction of new insects and diseases [13,47,111,112,122,131,134], or abiotic factors, such
as widespread loss of nutrients [97,119]. Sea intrusion in coastal agricultural areas leads to
agricultural land loss, pollutes freshwater resources, and increases salinity [11,47,109,110,
112,115]. Another outcome is soil erosion and a decrease in its fertility [11,13,47,69,83,90,94,
108,112,119,122]. Negative impacts are expressed in economic losses, increased labor, and
equipment costs [89,137].
However, in temperate climates, yield gains are potentiated by longer growing sea-
sons and the northward expansion of area for cereal cultivation, e.g., wheat, rice, and
maize [33,80,84,88,89,92,101] or cotton [101,106], increasing pasture lands [135]. An increase
in atmospheric CO2 concentrations can lead to yield growth due to CO2 fertilization [91].
Some countries and regions are shown to have both a negative effect in southern areas
(climate losers) and a positive impact in northern parts (climate winners) [71,93].
Climate 2023, 11, 202 6 of 37
3.3. Adaptation Strategies and Actions

Agricultural adaptation strategies and actions (ASA) can be grouped into different
categories, depending on the spatial scale of adaptation options. Of the 65 papers included
in the review, 22 consider adaptation actions at the local scale, or farmer’s level; 8 at
the regional scale, or institutional level; 4 at the national scale, discussing decisions and
solutions at the governmental level; and 31 studies provide a comprehensive range of
ASA scales, including Local-to-Region, Region-to-Nation, or Local-to-Nation strategies and
actions. Additionally, two papers referred to as “Local scale” discuss the adaptation of
plant species to possible climate changes [100,122].
3.3.1. Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions: Local Scale

Our results show that most studies focus on the local scale (Local), involve mainly
practical farmers’ decisions, and activate a vast massif of techniques and methods. Among
the farm production practices are often mentioned such as: (i) use of different crops or crop
varieties, and plant breeding or development of new crop varieties more suitable to the
changing climate—higher temperatures and/or reduced precipitation and hence, water
availability, in a given region; flood, landslides, and drought-resilient; salt water resistant;
insect and pest resistant [11,13,17,33,69,81,82,86–89,91,99,100,102–104,106–108,110,112,113,
116–118,120–123,126,128,133]; (ii) crop rotation and intercropping to improve soil quality
and fertility [69,83,84,119,124]; (iii) adjustments in planting dates such as changes in harvest
and sowing dates, e.g., later sowings, sowings to suit rainfall variability, etc. [13,17,47,81,
102,116,118,120,123,124,126,128,129]. Technologies are (can be) introduced for water and
soil management, among them: (i) the adoption of water saving technologies such as
efficient and sustainable irrigation practices including drip irrigation, micro irrigation
and others, and the optimization of an irrigation schedule [11,88,89,91,98,100,102,106,108,
110,112–114,117,120,124,126,129,132,136]; (ii) waste water reuse [109]; (iii) mulching and
contour plugging; the use of living barriers, which improves soil drainage and reduces
water-logging; and increasing the soil capacity of moisture-holding [11,47,99,118,131].
Adaptation strategies employed by farmers can significantly increase yields [112]. The
actual effects of climate change and variability largely hinge on farm characteristics such
as intensity, size, and land use. These factors influence farm management and adaptation
practices. Given that various farm types adapt differently, a greater diversity of farm types
can mitigate the impacts of climate variability at the regional level. Nevertheless, certain
farm types may still remain vulnerable.
3.3.2. Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions: Regional Level

Region-scale ASAs (Region) involve mainly formal decision-makers and employ meth-
ods and tools that include the same adaptation practices as at the local level, when these
strategies and options are managed by various institutions—Union Councils, private com-
panies, NGOs—at the regional level [71,85,95,118]. These ASAs include (i) farmers’ educa-
tion, knowledge transfer and management changes [103,104,107,115,118]; (ii) introduction
and running of regional early warning weather systems [85,115]; (iii) using modern weather
services by integrating them into various digital platforms [96]; (iv) improving agricultural
consulting, insurance and credit services [85,97,107,112,115,118,129,134]; (v) reducing the
agricultural dependence on chemicals and synthetic fertilizers [17,92,110,111,125]; (vi) modern-
ization of and investments in irrigation systems [11,13,101,102,107,110,112,118,129]; (vii) use
of agroforestry [13,85,111,125] and (viii) alternative agricultural techniques [121]; (ix) sequester
carbon support biodiversity through habitat and green corridor creation [85,119].
3.3.3. Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions: National Level

At the national level (Nation), governmental programs and insurance include the
provision of information to farmers about potential climate change impacts and adaptation
measures. The government support mechanism is generally response-focused. National
Action Plans for Adaptation [26] or National Strategic Plans [99] and National Agricul-
Climate 2023, 11, 202 7 of 37
tural Policies [121] to climate change are currently being developed and implemented in
many countries around the world, concerning the major vulnerabilities of each country.
Weather forecasts and information on climate change trends have public-good properties
of non-rival consumption and high costs of exclusion [137]. It should be supplied by the
government, not the competitive market, which can lead to the information being under-
provided. Government roles should also include: (i) investment in R&D [93,95,97,113,115];
(ii) provision of transport, irrigation, and other infrastructure, and provision of a safety
net for those who fail to successfully adapt to climate change [80,137]. Technological de-
velopments at the national scale include (iii) the development of early warning systems
for risk communication to prevent loss from natural disasters [68,113,115]. Anticipatory
disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation planning are at the national level,
as neither instrumental observation nor local awareness schemes alone are suitable for
adaptation planning [113]. Other important adaptation strategies are (iv) selection and
breeding of new drought/heat resistant/tolerant crop varieties [85,102,105]; (v) creating
relevant genebanks [134]; (vi) developing agroforestry systems [69]; (vii) developing and
implementing more efficient methods of irrigation [11,68]; and (viii) using renewable en-
ergy sources in modern agricultural systems [92]. Governmental support for (seasonal)
migrations and alternative livelihood opportunities could help improve the sustainability
of agriculture and its resistance to climate change and should be recognized as complemen-
tary to the current adaptation tactics and strategies [11,44,113,123]. National Agricultural
Policy [121] also addresses the issues of environmental protection in agriculture, which,
among others, implies developing farming systems and agro-technologies on a landscape
basis [93] and supporting natural and agricultural biodiversity through the creation of
habitat and green corridors [95]. Last but not least, Nation ASAs emphasize the importance
of developing the international agricultural market, taking into account the opportunities
and limitations of global change [91].
All results from the research studies mentioned above are listed in Table 1, where
the papers are arranged according to continents, from Europe to Asia, Africa, the Ameri-
cas, and Oceania, and inside the continents—according to the climate from temperate to
equatorial climate zones, including tropical and subtropical, and all varieties of humidity.
The following characteristics of studies involved in the review were extracted: study area
and its climate, climate change characteristics, consequent changes in agriculture, spatial
scale on which adaptation strategies and actions (ASAs) are proposed or executed, which
are Local, Region, and Nation, and agricultural ASAs suggested or already used in the
studied regions.
Climate 2023, 11, 202 8 of 37
Table 1. Climate change and Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions (ASAs). The periods are underlined for which the assessment of climatic changes was
conducted.
Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

## Study Study Area Climate Climate Change Effect on Agriculture ASAs Scale
Actions
1 [80] Europe Temperate 20th century: increase in surface air Area of cereal cultivation expands Nation Later sowings in northern Europe;
temperature (0.8 ◦ C), precipitation northward; reduced reproduction and shorter rotations and regular thinning in
(10–40%), drought in southern Europe milk production in dairy cows; for the forests; soil management and
(20%); reduced summer precipitation cooler regions: reduced feed planting techniques for the continental
requirements, increased survival, and Mediterranean forests
lower energy costs; lower yields due to
limited moisture supply
2 [81] Europe Temperate-to- Current and projected (by 2050) Negative effects on the continental Local Changing the timing of cultivation;
Subtropical changes: increased incidents of heat climate in the Pannonian zone selecting other crop species and cultivars
waves and droughts (Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, and
Romania)
3 [82] Europe Temperate-to- 1990 to 2003: increase in temperatures, Reduction of crop yields and the area Local-to- Changing crop rotations and inputs;
Subtropical water shortage, the incidence of for cropping; generally lower yields in Region irrigation management;
Mediterranean heatwaves and related droughts warmer climates fertilizer-intensive farmers; and higher
exposure to extreme conditions
stimulate adaptation
4 [47] Europe Boreal, Atlantic-to- Four climate change scenarios for 2080s: Disruption of zoning areas and Local Changing crop sowing days; growing
Temperate-to-Alpine, increased temperature and decreased crop productivity; increased heat-resistant cultivars; improving soil
Mediterranean precipitation (rainfall); increased risk area with the need for supplemental structure; contour plugging to improve
of floods, drought and water scarcity; irrigation; deterioration of water soil drainage and reduce waterlogging;
loss of glaciers and alteration of quality; deterioration of soil quality increasing the water-holding capacity of
permafrost and desertification; sea level rise soils; increasing the collection of winter
intrusion in coastal agricultural areas; rainwater to increase the supply for
increased risk of agricultural pests, subsequent irrigation; pests and diseases:
diseases, and weeds; deterioration of the introduction of resistant or
livestock conditions; improvement in less-susceptible varieties; vaccination as
livestock productivity a measure of adaptation to livestock
diseases
5 [83] Europe Temperate Scenario period 2040–2065 relative 2040–2065: Yield losses for current Region Crop rotations; crop residue
to baseline 1980–2005: warmer crop varieties; decrease in spring-sown management; re-initialization
temperatures and more frequent crops due to shortened growth
extreme weather events duration and intensified drought; soil
organic carbon decrease
Climate 2023, 11, 202 9 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
6 [33] Europe, Nordic Temperate Differences between 2071–2100 The vegetation period starts 10–50 Local Northward expansion of crops;
countries compared to 1961–1990: temperature days earlier and ends 5–50 days later, introduction of “new” crops and
increase 1–3 ◦ C during spring, increasing agricultural production varieties; crop-, soil-, and water
summer and autumn; stable or potential management; chemical plant protection;
increased precipitation, with 30% plant breeding
increase in northern Sweden during
spring; warmer and wetter conditions;
more frequent extreme weather events
7 [84] Finland Temperate The end of the 21st century: warming Potential impact on crop yields; Local Intercropping: mixing of forage crops
and lengthening of growing season; increasing pest risks; yield gains (grasses and legumes) and under-sowing
reduced time with snow cover; higher potentiated by longer growing seasons cereals with perennial grasses;
precipitation; potential increase in multi-species or cultivar-rich forage
weather variability and extremes mixtures; maintaining and improving
(windiness, heavy rains, warm spells) soil quality and fertility via
intercropping
8 [85] Great Britain Temperate Projections up to 2030, 2050, and 2100: Hotter, drier summers impact the Region-to- Adjusting planting and harvesting dates,
(Scotland) wetter and warmer winters, drier and current crop growth; opportunities for Nation selecting resilient crop types to
warmer summers, a higher frequency new types of crops in the future; the withstand extreme weather, altering
of extreme events negative impact of flooding and severe pasture and soil management practices,
storms; wetter and warmer weather facilitating knowledge transfer,
increases grass growth, supporting the implementing management changes
livestock industry in the west and such as providing advice, establishing
northern regions; extreme heat early weather warning systems, and
provides challenges for crops and promoting farmer cooperatives.
livestock Additionally, adaptations involve
changes in fertilizer application
frequency to enhance both inorganic and
organic fertilizer efficiency, improved
soil management techniques to respond
better to wetter and drier conditions,
which can support carbon sequestration
and retention, as well as the utilization
of agroforestry to sequester carbon,
stabilize at-risk soils, provide shade and
shelter to livestock, create diverse
income sources, and support
biodiversity by establishing habitats and
green corridors; and the provision of
transport, irrigation, and other
infrastructure
Climate 2023, 11, 202 10 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
9 [86,87] Netherlands Temperate maritime By 2050: 2 ◦ C increase in global Average climate change improves Local Combination of crop and farm level
Flevoland temperature, including changes in air farm performance in terms of farm adaptation: shift to (more) winter wheat
Province circulation resulting in drier summers; economic results; extreme events in systems dominated by root crops
1 ◦ C increase in global temperature, reverse the positive impacts of average
without changes in air circulation climate change and pose large risks
10 [88] Belgium, Loam Temperate maritime The end of the 21st century: a shift in The positive impact of warmer Local Land-use changes: expanding the area
Region climate conditions to drier summers temperatures on some crops, such as dedicated to less susceptible crops like
and wetter winters winter wheat, and the expected winter wheat; reducing the portion of
increase in extreme events such as land allocated to barley, sugar beet,
heatwaves and longer drought periods potatoes, and grain maize; farming
will negatively affect summer crop practices to mitigate crop stress:
yields, particularly sugar beet and irrigation and techniques for conserving
potatoes soil and water, such as drip irrigation for
potatoes; the cost-effectiveness of
irrigation practices may not be justified
due to the significant financial burdens
they would impose on farmers
11 [89] France, Paris Temperate Current climate change in seasonal Negative impacts on (i) vegetables Local Use of cover crops, mulching,
patterns (e.g., temperature, frost, wind) (e.g., increased pressure from agroforestry, and diversification;
and in extreme events (e.g., droughts, arthropods, metabolic disorders, alterations in crop planning;
heat waves) decrease in crop yield and quality), (ii) implementation of equipment to
farm management (e.g., increased and regulate or ameliorate climatic
more difficult labor, more complex conditions in enclosed environments like
crop planning), and (iii) profitability tunnels and efficient irrigation systems
(e.g., production losses, increased
labor, and equipment costs); positive
impacts (e.g., potential to extend the
growing season or grow tunnel crops
outside)
12 [90] Switzerland, Temperate 2050: model ETHZ-CLM: strong 2050: a decrease in productivity by Region Adjustments in crop distribution,
Swiss Central climate change signal in summer with 0–10 %, an increase in soil loss by including an increase in the proportion
Plateau +3.5 ◦ C and −24% in seasonal 25–35 %, and an increase in N-leaching of early-harvested winter cereals at the
precipitation; by 30–45 % expense of irrigated spring crops;
model SMHIRCA-HadCM3Q3: reduced tillage practices; irrigated areas
moderate changes for the summer should be directed toward soils with
season with +1.3 ◦ C and −11% in lower water retention capacity at lower
seasonal precipitation, but an elevations; some pre-alpine grasslands
important increase of +21% in seasonal may also be converted into croplands
precipitation during the fall
Climate 2023, 11, 202 11 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
13 [91] Austria Temperate Past 40 years: increase in annual Increasing forage yields; likely benefits Local-to- Development of the National
temperature (0.8–1.8 ◦ C); changes in for grassland from higher Nation Adaptation Strategy for Agriculture:
precipitation (−2.2% . . . +6.2%) temperatures and CO2 fertilization Robust adaptation measures should be
(i) founded on integrative systems
perspectives considering interplay
between soil, plants, and water; (ii)
sustainability considerations involving
farming inputs and natural production
factors are essential; (iii) incorporation of
global change dynamics, including
international market developments.
Farmers: adopting irrigation systems,
reducing tillage, implementing winter
cover crop planting
14 [92] Russia, European Temperate By 2030 (compared to 1990–2020): In the central strip, yields will improve Region Reducing the agricultural dependence
part sharp fluctuations in temperature; due to longer insolation, making it on chemicals and synthetic fertilizers;
heavy rains in the central part; the possible to grow agricultural plants creating incentives to promote the use of
onset of drought and dehydration of that were previously cultivated only in renewable energy sources in all modern
rivers in the south; southern part: the south agricultural systems
increase of water resources shortage
15 [93] Russia Temperate +1 ◦ C warming: precipitation increase The growth of aridity in the south of Nation Inventory and reassessment of
in the north and decrease in the south; the country. agricultural resources and the
changes in physical and geographical In the northern part, the thermal assortment of cultivated plants; revision
zoning regime is expected to improve. of the principles of environmental
In the whole country, climate change protection measures; formation of the
will not significantly affect the ecological framework of natural zones
agricultural sector. due to new agricultural technologies;
developing farming systems and
agro-technologies on a landscape basis
16 [94] Russia Temperate Current: changes in the annual and Soil degradation, strengthening of Region-to- Expanding the cultivation of
seasonal amplitudes of temperature erosion processes, and decrease in Nation drought-resistant crop varieties and
and humidity, contributing to the farmland fertility hybrids; undertaking land reclamation;
displacement of the boundaries of transitioning to minimal or zero tillage
bioclimatic zones to the north technologies to prevent soil erosion;
enhancing moisture retention; increasing
use of fertilizers and plant protection
products
Climate 2023, 11, 202 12 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
17 [95] Russia, Temperate 1961–2010: higher temperatures and Decrease in the yield of grain crops; Region-to- Expanding crops of later-ripening and
Ulyanovsk droughts; increase in climate change reduction of the area of grain and Nation higher-yielding varieties of cereals and
Region amplitudes fodder crops legumes, soybeans, and late-ripening
varieties of forage crops; investing in
R&D to develop crops that are more
resistant to changing climatic conditions,
especially high temperatures and
droughts
18 [96] Russia, Vologda Temperate Current: strengthening of regional Reducing the efficiency of the present Region Using modern weather services by
Region differentiation in Growing Degree system of agricultural production integrating them into various digital
Days, distribution of frost-free periods, platforms for farming and performing
precipitation mechanized work to increase the
efficiency of agricultural production
19 [97] Russia, Leningrad Temperate By 2030, compared to current: Intensive phosphorus and nitrogen Region-to- Improving state support for agricultural
Region increasing air and water temperature; leaching from agricultural lands Nation insurance, land reclamation, seed
duration of the frost-free period; causes a widespread loss of nutrients production, and the development of
Growing Degree Days, precipitation, biotechnologies that ensure the
frequency, and intensity of natural effectiveness of budgetary support and
anomalies accelerate the pace of adaptation of
agricultural production to climate
change
20 [98] Europe, Subtropical Changes by the 2050s compared to Crop productivity decrease caused by Local Conservation tillage; irrigation
Mediterranean 1961–1990: 1.5 ◦ C temperature shortening of the growing period; management
increase; up to 40% decrease in subsequent negative effects on grain
precipitation; increased evaporation; filling; in some regions, reduced water
reduced soil moisture; changes in the quality due to higher water
annual precipitation patterns temperatures and lower levels of
runoff
21 [99] Italy Subtropical Current: drought; wind; hail; flood Every year, potential damage to Italian Local Eight thematic groups: soil management;
events; late frost; damage by extreme crops from all climate events = 10–40% soil conditioners and fertilizers;
maximum and minimum of production (yield and income, in agronomic techniques; crop protection;
temperatures; intense precipitation; quantity and value); water resources management;
loss of suitability of the territory; 2009–2018 extreme events cost the engineering, digitization, and training;
saltwater intrusion; erosion; agricultural sector EUR 14 billion: innovative breeding techniques and
phytosanitary damage damage to structures, infrastructure, animal welfare; winemaking techniques
and production
Climate 2023, 11, 202 13 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
22 [100] Greece Subtropical Current: below-normal precipitation; Drought stress caused by water Local Reduced irrigation; pruning; grafting;
warmer temperatures scarcity and increased de-leafing; fertilization
evapotranspiration; plant damage;
increased risk of wildfires
23 [71] Greece Subtropical By 2050: temperature increase; Crops for which the effect of climate Region Adjustment of sowing dates to help
increase in duration and intensity of change is mostly negative (tomato, plants avoid extreme temperatures;
droughts, accompanied by significant pepper, potato, olive trees); mostly additional irrigation water through
reductions in summer soil moisture benefited (cabbage, tobacco); with increased irrigation rates or
mixed regional effects (barley, high-efficiency irrigation systems;
grapevine, cucumber); northern and increased N-fertilization necessary to
central Greece and Sterea Ellada and address nutrient deficiencies resulting
Attiki are climate winners, west and from reduced precipitation; vineyards:
southern Greece are climate losers changes in cultivation and management
practices or relocation
24 [101] Greece Subtropical 2010–2099: increase in annual mean Water cycle intensification, crop yield Region-to- Modernizing irrigation systems;
and maximum summer temperatures; reduction, soil losses, declining water Nation maintaining irrigation networks;
increase in evapotranspiration; resources, increase in irrigation needs, recycling treated water for irrigation;
decrease in annual precipitation; more a decrease in yield for some crops selecting heritage crop varieties that
intensive summer droughts, floods, (maize, sunflower, and beans); a exhibit drought and salt tolerance;
and soil erosion mostly negative effect for tomato, suitable summer pruning; incorporation
potato, and olive trees; increase in of shredded tree branches to enrich the
yield of rice, wheat, cotton, peach, and soil surface
orange trees
25 [102] Cyprus Subtropical 2031–2060: continual, gradual, and Yield loss up to 9%; increase of the Local-to- Green manure for vegetables; deficit
relatively strong warming; prolonged early winter sowing season (14–18%); Nation irrigation strategies (regulated reduced
droughts; reduction of annual tomato yield decrease (20–30%); irrigation) in olive groves; zero tillage
precipitation almost stable olive yield; higher yield and early sowing in wheat/barley crops;
losses (24–38%) for late-matured grape organic mulching for olive groves;
varieties artificial shading of vineyards;
integrated pest management;
intercropping with legumes; breeding
drought/heat-resistant/tolerant crop
varieties
Climate 2023, 11, 202 14 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
26 [103] Japan (Kazuno, Temperate humid By 2060: temperature increase Apple (Malus pumila var. domestica) Local-to- Farm: Kazuno: drastic change by
Nagano), South (Kazuno) farming in: Region introducing peaches (Prunus persica var.
Africa (Elgin) Subtropical humid • Kazuno: climatically well suited vulgaris), a species better suited to a
(Nagano, Elgin) and will be so in 2060; warm climate than apples;
• Nagano: negative effects of high Region:
temperatures, such as paler color Nagano: adopting technical remedies
and softening of fruits; against the poor coloring and changing
• Elgin: the climate is already close cultivars to those with lower chill unit
to the warmer margin with requirements and higher tolerance
insufficient winter chill units; against sunburn;
further warming will push this Elgin: maintaining apple production by
region beyond the critical changing cultivars
threshold, with apple production
no longer being commercially
viable
27 [104] Kazakhstan Temperate Different warming scenarios: (1) Dramatically change in spring wheat Local-to- Snow reserving; choice of planting date;
GFDL, (2) and (3) incremental; yields: Nation forecasts on agricultural pest and disease
increase in: (1) Significant drying of soils: outbreaks; informing farmers about
coping with climate change; regular local
(1) +4.9 ◦ C annual air temperature, increased evapotranspiration
from the higher temperatures workshops on different techniques for
+24% precipitation
growing wheat; sustainable seed banks
(2) +3 ◦ C annual air temperature, outweighs the increased
precipitation; the wheat with wide varieties available; change
+20% precipitation
land management to reduce soil erosion;
(3) +3 ◦ C annual air temperature, cultivating area could decrease
by >10% incorporating results into Kazakhstan’s
no change in precipitation
(2) Soil moisture increase National Action Plan
(3) Soil moisture decrease; reduce
the area suitable for wheat
cultivation by more than 50%
28 [105] China Tropical in the far south, B2 scenario, RCM projections by 2020s, Increased instability in agricultural Nation Strengthening agricultural infrastructure;
Subarctic in the far 2050s, and 2080s: mean temperature production since the 1980s; more breeding stress-resistant crop varieties;
north, Alpine in Tibetan increase by 1.2, 2.2, and 3.2; severe droughts and heat waves in developing new agricultural
Plateau precipitation increase by 4%, 7%, and some places; increased crop damage technologies (including biotechnology);
10%, respectively from spring frost; northward and promoting the large-scale planting of
westward movement of winter wheat superior crop varieties in suitable areas
plantations in Northeast China; for bolstering the agricultural sector’s
decrease (95%–10%) of crop resilience to disasters
productivity by 2030
Climate 2023, 11, 202 15 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
29 [106] China Tropical in the far south Current: temperature increase, Next 20–80 years: drop in rainfed Local-to- Nation: focus on smaller-scale irrigation
Subarctic in the far precipitation decrease yields of rice, wheat, and maize Nation and drainage projects; construction of
north (20–36%); increase in cotton yields water storage facilities; optimization of
Alpine in Tibetan water utilization; encouraging research
Plateau into seed varieties resistant to drought,
waterlogging, high temperatures,
diseases, and pests.
Local (farm): choosing more adaptive,
multi-functional, and high-yield crops;
embracing water-saving technologies
like plastic sheeting, drought-resistant
varieties, stubble retention, low-till
methods, and surface-level plastic
irrigation pipes
30 [107] China, Yongqiao Subtropical humid, dry Current: temperature increase, Future crop loss, heat waves during Local-to Region Planting new crop varieties and
District winter precipitation decrease the crop’s flowering phase in adopting new technologies; increasing
July/August, and rainfall shortages investments in irrigation systems;
affect stable crop harvests; more risky education and insurance adaptation
situations in the future practices
31 [108] China, Huai River Temperate semi-humid 2035s, RCP4.5, and RCP8.5 scenarios: Higher evapotranspiration from soil Local-to- Switching to a more efficient irrigation
Basin and monsoon mean temperatures increase by 1.34 and plants leads to a higher Region technique (e.g., drip irrigation);
and 1.65 ◦ C; ensemble mean magnitude of blue water footprint; switching to plant crops that require the
precipitation increases by 3.79% and lower precipitation increases the effect least amount of water but produce the
5.65%, respectively of temperature on blue water highest yields
consumption
32 [109] Vietnam, Can Tho Tropical 1999–2008: air temperature increase Saline water invasion in inland areas is Local-to- Wastewater reuse
City (0.2 ◦ C); solar radiation increase (by polluting freshwater resources and Region
200 h); air humidity decrease (5%); limiting agricultural production,
precipitation decrease particularly monocrop rice cultivation
(200 mm year−1 )
Climate 2023, 11, 202 16 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
33 [110] Vietnam, Ca Mau Tropical By 2030: rise of sea levels: risk of Effect on tree growth: trees are stunted, Local-to- Land use planning; transforming the
Peninsula further penetration of salt water with and the yield is low depending on the Region agricultural model by selecting rice
more severe intensity in coastal areas salt concentration varieties tolerant to salt; augmenting salt
tolerance by introducing rich Ca2+
fertilizers; adopting the alternate wetting
and drying technique to optimize
irrigation water usage and enhance the
irrigation system; conversion of paddy
land into aquaculture areas or the
implementation of a rice-shrimp rotation
model
34 [111] Indonesia, West Equatorial Current: changes in rainfall patterns, Decrease in productivity and quality Region Expanding the arable land area through
Java especially the onset of the dry season of crop yields; indirect effects: social forestry practices’ intensifying
and its duration increasing pests and diseases pesticide use and employing more
inorganic fertilizers. Alternatively, focus
on increasing organic farming or
transitioning to the cultivation of
perennial crops
35 [112] Nepal Tropical savanna Current: increased temperature; Reduction in the rice area planted, Local-to- Cultivating short-duration varieties;
change in the timing of rainfall, grain quality and yield; increased Region opting for insect and pest-resistant
including the late start of monsoons; evapotranspiration thus require more varieties; altering the planting locations
decreased availability of surface and irrigation; more infestation of insects of these varieties; improving irrigation
ground water; long-spell drought; less and diseases; introduction of new methods; increasing weed control efforts;
frequent but heavy rainfall causing insects and diseases; poor germination; employing additional pesticides;
floods and landslides water stress causing less tiller number, implementing soil conservation
delay panicle initiation, reduce grain techniques; reducing tillage; practicing
and panicle number; delay in seed priming; adjusting
transplantation; shortage of irrigation sowing/planting/harvesting dates;
water; loss of crop due to heavy adopting direct-seeded rice cultivation;
rainfall/hailstorm; destruction of raising seed rates; growing
water resources and irrigation canal; drought-tolerant varieties; enhancing the
soil erosion; degradation of soil quality use of chemical fertilizers; increasing the
application of farmyard manure;
establishing waterways to manage heavy
rainfall; cultivating flood-tolerant
varieties; transitioning to non-rice crops
Climate 2023, 11, 202 17 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
36 [17] Nepal, Terai Tropical savanna Current: abnormal changes in Decline in production of cereal crops, Local-to- Climate-smart practices for grain yield
temperature and precipitation; the attributed to increasing water stress Region improvement: no tillage; fertilizer (based
occurrence of extreme events: a that resulted from rising temperatures on crop sensor readings); residue; green
decrease in the number of rainy days and reduced rainy days; decline in manuring
and an increase in the intensity of agricultural production; and direct
monsoon precipitation, floods, and loss of agricultural land and livestock
landslide occurrences due to the increased incidence and
severity of climate-induced hazards
37 [113] Western Nepal Temperate-to-Tropical Current: rapid glacier melt and Negative impacts on water resource Local-to- Promotion of crop varieties resilient to
snowpack loss, extreme precipitation availability and agricultural Nation flood, landslides, and drought:
and temperature events, and alteration productivity transition to flood-resistant hybrid types
of water availability of rice and sugar cane plantations in the
flood-prone fields; use of bio-dams to
mitigate the effect of floods and
deforestation; methods of row spacing
(intercropping) and agroforestry;
provision of sustainable irrigation
facilities; reliable services for
dissemination of agricultural
information; introduction of rainwater
harvesting; spread of flood- and
drought-resistant types of crops; support
for alternative livelihood opportunities;
development of reliable early warning
systems to inform about risks
38 [114] Sri Lanka Tropical monsoon Ratnapura: Temperature rise leads to increased Local Five groups of adaptation measures:
1901–2000: mean annual temperature evapotranspiration, soil moisture loss, crop management, land management,
increase by 0.5 ◦ C and crop physiology; disturbance to irrigation management, income
By 2050s: rainfall decrease (9%–17%) the normal cropping calendar; diversification, and rituals; transition of
frequent crop failure and yield loss planting time to suit rainfall variability;
implementation of micro irrigation;
reduction of irrigation depth; and crop
diversification
Climate 2023, 11, 202 18 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
39 [115] Iran, Fars Temperate-to-Tropical Current: severe droughts Reduced quality and quantity of Local-to- Cost management; development and
Province agricultural water resources (saltiness Nation diversification of income sources; social
and bitterness) capital management (including use of
facilities and loans); environmental
stress management; use of educational
and consulting services; additional:
general and governmental adaptation
interventions such as infrastructure
development, removal of organizational
barriers, creation of information and
dissemination infrastructures
40 [116] Pakistan, Khyber Subtropical-to- Current: temperature increase; Great agricultural losses result in Local Change crop type, variety, and planting
Pakhtunkhwa Temperate, monsoon, prolonged summer seasons and short remarkable differences in expected dates; plant Eucalyptus on lands around
Province semiarid winters; fluctuating rainfall patterns, crop yields the river to reduce soil erosion as a result
frequent floods, severe droughts, of floods; change fertilizers, seed quality,
intense heat waves, melting of glaciers, and shaded trees; change the variety of
and rise in sea level; unpredicted crops
rainfall, disastrous floods, severe
droughts, and storms
41 [117] Pakistan Subtropical-to- 1980–2013: Significant increase in the B2 and A2 scenarios, decrease in Local Development of heat-resistant and
Temperate, summer and winter temperatures; productivity of main staple crops, drought-resistant varieties; irrigation
semiarid rainfall: (1) slight increase in both wheat and rice, by 6–8% and 16–19%, and soil conservation measures; and
summer and winter rainfall; (2) respectively crop insurance schemes informing and
significant decrease in both winter and training farmers on adequate strategies
summer rainfall; (3) slight decrease in for adaptation to climate change;
winter rainfall and an insignificant changing crop varieties, resource use,
increase in summer rainfall, with large adaptation of planting dates, and
fluctuations over the years planting shady trees
42 [118] Pakistan, Subtropical desert Past 10 years: decreased winter and Reductions in wheat yields; negative Local-to- Changing crop variety and type;
southern and summer rainfall; increased impact on productivity of cotton; Region planting dates; planting trees; increasing
central Punjab temperature; the growing season severe adverse impact of GSL and/or replacing fertilizer; rational use
length of crops; the sea level rise reduction on wheat and rice of soil and water; income from
non-agricultural activities; and
diversification
Climate 2023, 11, 202 19 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
43 [119] India Tropical-to-Sub- Projected climate change: increased Land degradation due to soil erosion Local-to- Conservation agriculture: reasonable
equatorial variability in summer monsoon and nutrient depletion Nation disturbance of soil cover; contiguous
precipitation crop rotation; conservation tillage, or
without tillage; preservation of plant
residues; organic farming; green manure
application; mixed crop-livestock
systems; biodiversity conservation
approach
44 [13] India, Uttar Subtropical humid with Current warming; increasing the Effect on agricultural productivity Local-to- Changes in agricultural and farming
Pradesh a dry winter incidence of strong winds; longer through physiological changes in Region practices as a passive response:
summers and shorter winters crops and reduce grain quality; effect transition of sowing and harvesting
on other factors of production dates, cultivation of short-duration
agriculture, such as water availability, varieties, inter-cropping, changes in the
soil fertility, and pests structure of crops, investment in
irrigation and agroforestry
45 [120] India Tropical-to-Sub- Projected increase in temperatures Damage to crops, with greater Local Adaptation between crops: types of
equatorial challenge to wheat; lower crops, e.g., for growing more
heat-induced yield losses heat-resistant varieties of rice;
cultivation of sorghum and maize, more
resistant to heat than rice; transition to
wheat as a crop that grows in cooler
seasons; intra-crop adaptations:
investments in irrigation to protect
against heat and drought stress;
transition of sowing dates to avoid heat
stress; application of fertilizer or other
agricultural resources for heat control;
shading trees and planting to protect
crops from high temperatures
46 [121] Bangladesh Subtropical monsoon Projected temperature increase Upset about rainfed rice crop choices Local-to- Change the choice of crop in favor of
Nation irrigation-based Boro, Aus, and other
crops; cultivate climate change-tolerant
crop varieties, e.g., from the traditional
rain-fed Aman variety to the
irrigation-dependent Boro rice; use
alternative farming practices (integrated
farming, floating gardens)
Climate 2023, 11, 202 20 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
47 [11] Africa Equatorial-to- Last 50–100 years: increased warming Food crises due to droughts, crop Local-to- Variations and management of crops;
Temperate trend of 0.5 ◦ C or more; increased heat; pests (i.e., desert locusts), poor soil Nation water and soil management; financial
semi-arid extreme weather events; droughts; fertility, high salinity, and increased schemes; migration, insurance, and
more rapid minimum temperature crop diseases and pests culture; agricultural and weather
warming than maximum temperature; services. Dominant strategies: crop
annual precipitation has decreased in diversification (51.5%), planting
the eastern and western Sahelian drought-tolerant varieties (45%),
regions; there has been an increase and changing planting dates (42%), planting
intensification of droughts due to early-maturing crops (22%). Building
reduced precipitation; there has been more infrastructure for irrigation, water,
increased evapotranspiration in and soil management; promotion of crop
Eastern and Southern Africa; and insurance; use of improved varieties;
heavy precipitation events have expansion of opportunities for
increased in East Africa diversification of livelihood, in addition
to the established adaptation practices
48 [122] Southwestern Subtropical-to Current: enhanced drought periods; Direct or indirect influence on Local Use of local crop varieties to mitigate the
Morocco, Agadir Temperate arid, increased temperatures vegetable crop production: water effects of drought due to fluctuations in
semi-arid, dry availability, temperature extremes water supplies
sub-humid during production cycles, soil fertility,
pest populations
49 [69] Asia, Africa, and Tropical arid and +2 ◦ C warming scenario: increasing Reduced grain yields; effect on forest Local-to- Utilization and processing of
Latin America semi-arid surface temperature; increase in distribution, productivity, and health; Nation agricultural and secondary products and
frequency and intensity of extreme a northward shift of tropical wet waste; cultivation of crops resistant to
rainfall events; higher drought forests into areas currently occupied saltwater; adoption of practices that
frequencies by tropical dry forests; soil erosion and integrate crops and livestock; adjustment
sedimentation in mountain regions; of crop varieties in response to shifting
negative impacts on sheep breeding climate conditions; implementation of
and lamb wool productivity agro-forestry techniques; adoption of
minimum or zero-tillage methods;
utilization of traditional
agro-silvi-pastoral systems; selection of
appropriate crop varieties; practice of
intercropping or relay cropping of grains
with legumes; establishment of mixed
systems combining trees, grasses, and
crops; crop rotation; use of organic
fertilizers with limited synthetic fertilizer
application; effective utilization of crop
residues
Climate 2023, 11, 202 21 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
50 [68] Sub-Saharan Equatorial-to-Tropical Current: increasing temperatures; 2050: effect on crop production Nation Changing crop dates; dam, well, and
Africa variable rainfall trends; increased 10–20%, up to 50% irrigation scheme construction;
droughts and flood frequencies; conservation agriculture; application of
prevalence of storms and forest fires optimum fertilizer; harvesting of
rainwater; crop diversification;
management of disease and pests; water,
irrigation, and flood management;
insurance based on weather index;
information and early-warning systems
51 [123] Kenya Tropical-to Temperate End of the 21st century: median 2050: significant yield losses (8–22%) Local-to- Alterations in agricultural practices:
Humid-to-Semi-arid temperature increase to 34 ◦ C of key staple crops Region modifications in field selection,
adjustments to planting dates,
alterations in planting density,
diversification of crop varieties;
enhancements in livestock handling
techniques, such as livestock selection,
feeding methods, and animal health
protection; changes in timing and
location of cattle herding; improvements
in land utilization strategies, including
fallow land treatment, tree planting or
safeguarding, irrigation, and water
harvesting; conservation measures for
soil and water resources; soil tillage
practices; soil fertility management;
livelihood strategies, encompassing the
combination of cultivated crops and
livestock production; blend of
agricultural and non-farm activities;
temporary or permanent migration
52 [124] Kenya Tropical-to Temperate Current: frequent droughts, periodic Threats to food and livelihood security Local Climate-smart agriculture: irrigation,
Humid-to-Semi-arid floods, and unpredictable rainfall changes in cultivation calendar; using
patterns certified seed; crop rotation; soil testing
Climate 2023, 11, 202 22 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
53 [125] Nigeria Tropical-to-Temperate 1971–2000: air temperatures increase Agricultural productivity declination Local-to- Mixed cropping or intercropping
with a faster increase in minimum Region practices; minimum or zero tillage
temperatures (0.8°C) methods; mixed farming and
Future: no specific trend in rainfall agroforestry; mixed
deviations crop-livestock-agroforestry system;
integrated soil nutrient management;
conservation tillage and slow-forming
terraces; mulching; using vaccines,
antibiotics, and anti-stress agents;
planting trees for shade and to serve as
windbreakers; proper water treatment;
use of feed with a high nutrient content,
crossing animals, and improving grazing
areas; reduce the size of the herd to
ensure adequate ventilation and
improve the livestock-keeping system
54 [126] Nigeria Tropical Past 30 years: increase in average Influence on crop and livestock Local Tree planting; mixed farming; mixed
minimum and maximum production, hydrologic balances, input cropping; soil conservation; using
temperatures by about 0.25 ◦ C and supplies, and other components of different crop varieties; transition of
0.15 ◦ C, respectively; very high agricultural systems planting dates and irrigation; mulching;
variability of rainfalls. zero tillage; making ridges; early or late
Future: temperatures will continue to planting operations
increase
55 [127] Nigeria, Enugu Tropical wet and dry Projections for humid regions of Increased temperatures and a decrease Local Using resistant crop and animal
State (savannah) southern Nigeria: increases in rainfall, in water availability reduce the length varieties/species; using organic manure;
cloudiness, and rainfall intensity. of growing seasons and yield potential; mixed farming; diversifying crop
Projections for the savannah areas of proliferation of pests and diseases; production enterprises
northern Nigeria: temperature agricultural land loss due to a rise in
increase; reductions in rainfall; and the sea level
soil moisture availability
56 [128] Ghana, Tropical Sub-humid By 2050: temperature increase by Long drought periods during the Local Diversification of crops; transition of
Sekyedumase 1.3–1.6; increase in inter-annual reproductive (particularly grain filling) crop planting dates
District rainfall variability; increase in the stage of crops affect grain size, weight,
intensity of rainfall events; decrease in and hence yield
the number of rainy days
Climate 2023, 11, 202 23 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
57 [129] South Africa, Subtropical-to- Past four decades: increase in average Floods destroy crops, infrastructure, Local-to- Efficient management of irrigation
Limpopo Temperate minimum and maximum monthly and the harvesting period Region systems; water-efficient crop cultivation;
Province temperatures; increase in the number optimization of irrigation scheduling;
of warmer days; decrease in the implementation of management
number of cooler days; increase in approaches to minimize water wastage;
average rainfall; increased frequency insurance and subsidies; resizing of land
and intensity of floods and droughts holdings; transitioning from crop
cultivation to livestock rearing;
shortening of crop growing period
58 [130] South Africa and Subtropical Projections: warming is expected to be Great threats to food and water Local Using different crops or crop varieties;
Ethiopia greater than the global average; security shade tree planting; soil conservation;
temperature increases mostly in the transition of planting dates; irrigation;
summer; precipitation decreases changing the area of cultivated land;
animal feed supplementing
59 [131] South-central Subtropical-to- Current: temperature increase; Coffee yield decreased by up to 34% Local Use of coffee agroforestry systems with
Mexico Temperate increase of warm nights and extreme due to changes in coffee growth, diversified species of multipurpose trees
minimum temperatures; decrease in flowering, and fruiting. Increases in and shrubs; use of shade cover to avoid
cold periods, cold nights, and cool the incidence rates of pests and water stress during heatwave periods;
days; changes in the quantity and diseases (rust and coffee berry borer). slowing down the speed of downstream
distribution of precipitation. The Damage to coffee plants from natural runoff water to reduce soil loss due to
rainfall pattern is more irregular, with disasters water erosion by using living barriers
more stormy events
60 [132] Mexico, State Subtropical-to- Climate change scenarios for the years Decrease in maize yields (Ceres-Maize Local Greenhouse construction; compost use;
Tlaxcala Temperate 2020 and 2050 compared to 1961–1990: model) dripping irrigation
increase in minimum temperature;
reduction of frost threats; severe
droughts
61 [133] Brazil Subtropical Temperate Current: increase in extreme More frequent heat stress; scarcity of Local Use of landraces tolerant to drought and
humid temperatures; decrease in average drinking water; damage to agricultural other climate extremes
precipitation; more frequent intense production and rural properties by
precipitation; intensification of increased flooding
extreme weather events
Climate 2023, 11, 202 24 of 37
Table 1. Cont.

Actions
62 [134] Colombia Tropical By 2050s: increase in annual mean Loss of plant genetic resources, Region-to- Postponement of harvesting and sowing
temperature by 2.5 ◦ C, with a desertification and salinization of Nation dates; construction of walls and barriers
maximum of 2.7 ◦ C in the Arauca agricultural lands, reductions in rice to prevent salinization and protect
department and a minimum of 2 ◦ C in yield, loss of coffee growing coastal ecosystems; adaptation subsidies
Chocó and Nariño; precipitation environments; increases in incidence and an agricultural insurance system for
increase by 2.5%, with a minimum of coffee berry borer; increase in the producers on mountain slopes and in
change of −1.4% in Cesar and a risk of Fusarium head blight in wheat; dry areas; placement of heat-resistant
maximum of 5.6% in Huila. The driest change in soil water availability, varieties in appropriate genebanks
periods throughout the year are likely enhancing drought in some regions
less dry, while the wettest periods are and flooding risks in others; change in
projected to become wetter precipitation affects biotic factors
(pests, diseases, weeds); increased pest
and disease prevalence
63 [135] USA Temperate-to-Tropical Three periods: 2010–2039, 2040–2069, Reducing crop land and increasing Region-to- Shift of land use from cropping to
and 2070–2099: temperature and pasture land Nation grazing; decrease of crop land and
summer temperature-humidity index increase of pasture land
increase; annual precipitation
increases; summer precipitation
decreases
64 [136] USA, IL, Subtropical humid Current: hotter and drier growing Drought is one of the most limiting Local Improvement of roof materials,
Carbondale season factors in extensive green roof systems; water-retaining gels, mulching, and
water deficiency leads to a decrease in subsurface irrigation systems to enhance
herb productivity but improves the management of extensive green roofs
essential oils and antioxidant potential for food production; supplemental
irrigation to maximize quality and yield
65 [137] Australia Tropical-to-Temperate Current: Southwest and southeast Changes in growth rates of different Local-to- Contributions from the government;
Semi-arid farming regions: average rainfall is plant and animal species; output Nation changes in personal subsidiary farms
falling and more variable. responses to different plant and animal
North: rainfall increase, increase in the production methods; changes to the
severity of cyclones. best times for planting and harvesting;
South: higher temperatures, less effects on comfort and productivity of
rainfall, more frequent and longer farm animals; decreased suitability of
drought periods, higher risks of bush farm labor working conditions in
fires many northern regions
Climate 2023, 11, 202 25 of 37
4. Discussion
Current climate change faces various challenges for the global community in all
spheres of livelihood, including agricultural development and production. Climate change
adaptation actions in agriculture incorporate a wide diversity of activities at different scales
linked to declining agricultural exposure and vulnerability to changes, such as technological
developments or changes in production practices [87].
Of the 65 papers included in the review, 48% consider adaptation measures at the
whole range of ASA scales, from Local to Region and Nation, emphasizing the fact that
all levels of decision-making should be involved and interconnected in the adaptation
process. Developments at one level can help in the implementation of plans at another
level, and vice versa, failures in the implementation of decisions at any level can lead to
maladaptation as a whole. For example, several studies show the need for regional-scale
measures such as investments in training and education, easier access to credits, which can
help to adopt local adaptation actions, and facilitating the adjustment process among the
poorest farmers at the local scale [128,130].
To describe the picture in “large strokes”, the results identify five groups of the
most relevant adaptation measures stimulated by the impacts of climate change. The
ASAs in agriculture that can be distinguished at the Local and Region scales are: (i)
crop varieties and management, including changes in land use and innovative breeding
techniques; (ii) water and soil management, including agronomic techniques; (iii) farmers’
education and knowledge transfer; at the Region and Nation scales: (iv) financial schemes,
insurance, migration, and culture; (v) agricultural and weather services, R&D, including
the development of early warning systems [11,99,138].
More considerations are addressed below, emphasizing additional aspects on the topic
of agricultural adaptation to climate change.
4.1. Climate Change and Agriculture: Shortcomings and Advantages

Climate change has a multiplicative effect on the climate system. In recent decades,
tropical Asian countries have reported increasing surface temperature trends and decreas-
ing trends in rainfall. Even with only small changes in climate, the frequency and intensity
of extreme events may change in Africa. In Latin America, the climate is affected by the El
Niño-southern oscillation, and depending upon the phases of the phenomenon, there is
a close relationship between the increase and decrease of precipitation. Local farmers in
these regions use crop cultivation strategies such as inter- or mixed cropping. They allow
minimal risks and ensure certain productivity even in lean years [69].
Droughts are one of the most dangerous consequences of climate change caused
by a decrease in precipitation and/or an increase in temperature, in terms of further
implications for agriculture. Drought stress leads to a water deficit, which is also caused
by increases in evapotranspiration under a warming climate [139]. Related to droughts,
water shortages are one of the key risks for agriculture in the future. Thus, it is essential to
research the capability of crops to grow in a water deficit. As it was shown by Sperdouli
with coauthors [100], some of the tomato cultivars have no difference in photochemical
efficiency under 50% less water. Such research is helpful for estimating minimum irrigation
levels for effective photosynthesis.
On the one hand, in the northern areas of temperate regions, climate change is an-
ticipated to increase the food production potential and expand suitable areas for crop
cultivation. As a result of prolonged growing seasons and higher CO2 concentrations,
increases in net primary productivity (35–54%) are projected in northern Europe [80,140].
Expansion to the North is often considered a decision to address the problems of agricul-
ture caused by climate change in lower-latitude countries [141]. On the other hand, there
might be an increased need for plant protection, a risk of nutrient leaching and speeded
decomposition in soil organic matter [33], or challenges for agricultural systems located on
arable permafrost-affected soils, such as equipment problems, waterlogging of soil, damage
to infrastructure, losing topsoil, and soil fertility [141]. Moreover, the reduced duration of
Climate 2023, 11, 202 26 of 37
snow cover and frost at the soil level may have a negative effect on forest production and
can decrease recreational possibilities. In southern areas, climate change is predicted to
bring more negative changes with limited benefits [80].
4.2. “Bottom-Up” and “Top-Down” Approaches: Pros and Cons

Generally speaking, “top-down” and “bottom-up” are two different approaches to
problem solving, analysis, and decision-making in various fields, including business, psy-
chology, and software development. The “top-down” approach starts with the big picture
and breaks it down into smaller parts, while the “bottom-up” approach starts with individ-
ual components and combines them into a larger whole [142]. In environmental science,
“top-down” approaches usually define critical parameters that relate to comprehensive
social benefits and more detailed goals of institutions or operations and denote observations
or activities planned in the context of a global, international, or national framework, often
with a focus on national and international assessments and scientific research. “Bottom-up”
approaches refer to surveillance or action initiatives defined and implemented at a lower
level and subsequently transferred to higher-level authorities, often with an emphasis on
achieving the results sought by the local communities [142].
Initially, in changing conditions, farmers adapt in their own way, mostly reactively
and independently, without having the required comprehension and financial resources to
operate for a long time. In order to avoid making wrong decisions, regional and national
administrations must respond properly. While “bottom-up” approaches with adaptation
options at the Local scale, or at the local level, are aimed at producing and realizing actions
to formulate and implement policies with the interest of the local community to fight
against recent past or present vulnerabilities [52], “top-down” approaches convey the
policies developed by the government at the Region-to-Nation scales with the involvement
of technical specialists and based on climate projections and modeled impacts [59].
In many cases, “bottom-up” approaches lag behind “top-down” approaches applied to
carbon emission budgets and targets suitable for climate change mitigation aimed at reduc-
ing greenhouse gas emissions [143]. As a rule, a “top-down” approach is preferable when
the difficulties faced by “bottom-up” approaches, such as the absence of information, in-
ducements, and resources, which are obstacles to effective policy realization, are found [144].
Adaptation actions, which were mainly carried out using a “top-down” approach, may
lead to actions that do not meet the actual demands of fragile communities [54,59,144,145].
The fight against climate change is a global problem, but adaptation measures should be
taken at the local scale and with the real participation of the community. “Bottom-up”
approaches are likely to be a crucial element of adaptation measures at the local level,
especially considering the areas’ variety, and should be implemented in accordance with
their specific conditions and vulnerabilities.
“Bottom-up” approaches are seen as an effective management method and a way to
ensure that local communities and marginalized groups of society have a voice in climate
policy. At the community level, they may be appropriate for some climate change adapta-
tion realities. However, for other climate change adaptation measures—for example, in the
field of infrastructure, “top-down” approaches may be preferable. At the same time, some
unpredictable threats from the “bottom-up” approaches can be raised. In countries with low
preparedness for the present climate change risks, local and individual countermeasures
can eventually increase societal disparities, lead to long-term maladaptation, and even
encourage the aggravation of the climate crisis [146].
Adaptation strategies depend on local conditions, region, or country; limiting the
discussion of possible options and measures to only one type of approach—"top-down”
or “bottom-up”—can lead to unsatisfactory solutions for those areas that have been most
affected by climate change but have insignificant resources to adjust to it [52,59].
Climate 2023, 11, 202 27 of 37
4.3. Intercropping as a Cultivation Technique

Adapting a crop system to weather variability and climate change is crucial for sustain-
able and durable food production. Resistance to unexpected weather conditions depends,
among other circumstances, on the intercropping or alternation of crops with the inventive
cultivation of many interacting crop species or genotypes together in time and space, which
enriches the diversity of the farming fields and landscapes [72,113,125]. It can serve as
a means of solving the problems of crop cultivation in northern agriculture caused by
climate change [84,102]. In a qualitative study in Finland, it was revealed that intercropping
leads to increased yield, self-sufficiency in nutrients and proteins, preservation and care
of soil, reduction of pathogen pressure, and regulation of water dynamics [84]. The most
notable intermediate crops are: nitrogen-fixing legumes; deep-rooted species, e.g., Lucerne
(Medicago sativa L.); special crops, e.g., herbs in feed mixtures; as well as winter oilseeds
and cereals sown in autumn [84].
Local crop varieties, or crop landraces, are heterogeneous mixtures of genotypes that
give plant phenotypes with small but important differences in field conditions [147]. The
genetic variety of such mixtures allows agricultural crops to adapt to drought, heat, saline
soil, or other extreme environmental conditions. Landraces with their high heterogeneity
can help mitigate such problems as crop failures, reduced yields, loss of quality, and an
increase in the number of problems with insects and disease, which can worsen under
climate change conditions [122]. The genetic diversity contained in landrace populations is
an important part of the global diversity of crops and is considered of primary significance
for future international agricultural production [69,122]. Thus, small landholders can use
landraces as a means of adaptation to changing climates [133].
Other multiple-purpose farming systems and strategies to combine a variety of crops
and animals will make more effective applications of natural resources, involving frame-
works and approaches to land management such as agroforestry, alley cropping, and
permaculture. Future systems will be spatially diverse and adjusted to certain local environ-
mental conditions and will include ecological design based on whole-system ecologically
based thinking.
4.4. Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge

Adaptation measures are most effective when they correspond to local conditions
and their incentives, opportunities, and resources, including the use of traditional knowl-
edge and community participation. Traditional knowledge (TK) is determined as the
local knowledge of a cultural group or a society, as opposed to the global, widespread
knowledge acquired by researchers at universities and private institutions [148]. TK is
a complex experience of local farmers collected over thousands of years and described
by high production capacity, conservation of biodiversity, low energy consumption, and
mitigation of climate change. It can serve as a guide in the development of sustainable
farming systems [119,149]. Traditional agriculture is usually located on small farms that
integrate crops and livestock, thus reducing their reliance on external inputs such as fossil
fuels, fertilizers, and pesticides [69,149,150]. Having experience farming in different ex-
treme weather events, traditional farms are also resistant to environmental changeability
with minimal external influences [151,152].
Traditional agriculture includes such practices as agroforestry, crop rotation, inter-
cropping, traditional organic composting, cover cropping, and integrated crop-animal
farming, which can be accepted as the model methods for climate-smart agriculture. These
practices enhance agricultural sustainability and help in mitigating climate change [153].
Highly productive traditional farming in marginal regions, for example, intercropping
integrated into animal husbandry and/or agroforestry, constitutes the potentially effective
farming skills of traditional farmers based on a deep appreciation of the natural environ-
ment laws [154]. Sharing the experience gained by local producers and integrating local
knowledge into regional and national adaptation policies will help develop more effective
adaptation strategies to decrease vulnerability to climate change [131].
Climate 2023, 11, 202 28 of 37
Looking further and deeper into TK practices, Indigenous TK describes ways of

learning and a comprehensive approach to living off the land and learning from it [10].
Indigenous peoples’ knowledge and adaptation are collective information and expertise
in the field of biodiversity, controlled by the community and improved from generation
to generation, performing a key role in the management of natural resources via tradi-
tional practices [154]. In the current unfavorable environmental scenarios, Indigenous TK
developed for generations in the process of a long interactive assimilation of Indigenous
peoples with their local environments after several trials and errors and is recognized as
scientific and consistent knowledge [119]. For example, in the Sakha Republic, Russia, local
Indigenous people have for centuries effectively used permafrost landscapes such as alases
(pools of a thaw lake) for hay production [155]. According to Shaffril and colleagues [65],
traditional Indigenous knowledge should be integrated into current adaptation strate-
gies as follows: (1) promote the recognition of TK and the role of Indigenous peoples in
policy design and formulation; (2) develop a strategic adaptation scheme that meets the
requirements, capabilities, and concerns of Indigenous peoples; and (3) announce particular
spheres and study content that future research should be focused on [65].
4.5. Biodiversity-Based Agriculture

Agricultural ecosystems, like other ecosystems, depend on biodiversity, and species
of animals and plants depend on sustainable agricultural landscapes [85]. But in the last
decades, due to intensive monoculture farming, agrobiodiversity has reduced, with the
main sown crops being corn, wheat, rice, soyabean, and others [156–158]. It is estimated that
in the 20th century, 75% of the world’s food crop diversity was lost due to the replacement
of local varieties by genetically uniform, high-yielding varieties [12].
Biodiversity-based, or “ecologically intensive agriculture”, is a strong ecological
modernization of agriculture that relies on high biological diversification of farming
systems [159] and intensification of ecological interactions between components of the
biophysical system that contribute to productivity, fertility, and resistance to external per-
turbations [160]. Biodiversity-based agriculture, as a way of adapting to current climate
change, addresses several agricultural aspects of the current climate crisis; it supports
ecosystem services and reduces the use of chemicals. Its inherent complexities are only
a little understood, which leads to a little awareness that can be used as an indication
supporting its regulation [85,119,161].
Providing the world with food depends on protecting our valuable ecosystems and
their biodiversity. Environmental protection actions in agriculture should be addressed
in existing NAPs [121]. In food production, preference should be given to ecosystem
rehabilitation and conservation, which requires a far-sighted rational management strategy
and fundamental changes in models and practices of economic development, products,
and production. Food systems must be restructured in such a way as to have a neutral and
positive impact on the environment, as well as to ensure healthy nutrition and food safety,
and strategies with a low impact on the environment should become a priority task [21].
4.6. Climate Smart Agriculture

To better adapt to climate change, farmers must develop or transform their agricul-
tural systems by replacing old procedures and practices with climate-smart agricultural
practices [162,163]. Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is an integrated agricultural approach
to agricultural management aimed at sustainable growth of agricultural productivity and
incomes, solving the interrelated problems of food security and climate change, reorienting
agricultural development for achieving mitigation and adaptation goals, and effectively
controlling agricultural growth [17,22,124,164,165]. CSA includes a range of adaptations
and climate change mitigation practices aimed at sustainably increasing productivity (food,
fiber, and fuel production), reducing GHG emissions, improving resilience, and promoting
national food security and development goals [12,22,124,166]. CSA considers not only
environmental but social and economic scope as well, to expand advantages and diminish
Climate 2023, 11, 202 29 of 37
compromises, consequently involving institutional, policy, and technological practices [165].

CSA activities are a combination of technologies and practices implemented in the agri-
cultural system at various scales [15,165]. They include both long-existing traditional
practices and innovative agricultural technologies known and promoted extensively, such
as agroforestry, conservation agriculture, biodiversity-based agriculture, water manage-
ment, and sustainable land management practices or technologies [16,18,165]. At the farm
level, the implementation of CSA practices depends on the social-economic environment,
which is influenced by institutional patterns, resource accessibility, and climatic condi-
tions. The use of a combination of methods allows farmers to expand the synergy between
CSA practices and technologies, increasing farms’ productivity in the face of intersecting
challenges [18,124,167].
While it is desirable to reach all the goals, in the real world of agriculture, trade-offs
will be necessary to find a compromise between the goals of productivity, sustainability,
and mitigation. Today, CSA is a key concept for many organizations working at the
nexus of climate change adaptation and agriculture. CSA is a set of guidelines that can
be used to identify successful agricultural production models among different methods.
Any agricultural technology compared to standard existing practices can ameliorate the
objectives of CSA and be indicated as climate-smart [168].
Just a decade ago, it was argued that the concept of CSA was vague and with no firm
criteria, with “no specific direction, no new science agenda, no ability to negotiate and
prioritize contentious, conflicting agendas, and no compelling reason to increase or shift
investment” [169]. Nowadays, we can justify the main directions of the future development
of the CSA as follows: (i) involvement of advanced Internet technologies to provide the
information security of agriculture; (ii) improvement of the crop structure and management
methods; (iii) provision of “Internet + weather” services; (iv) enhancement of the agricul-
tural service quality; and (v) development and use of agricultural weather insurance [22].
These ideas and strategies will consolidate ecological conservation, stimulate sustainable
advancements in agriculture, and extenuate the effects of climate change.
4.7. Catching Maladaptation before It Happens

The adaptation of farmers to climate change is facing many challenges of various
origins, such as physical, environmental, economic, institutional, technological, socio-
cultural, psychological, or political [28,30,41–43,114,130]. Some adaptation measures taken
in response to climate change may be insufficient and even elevate vulnerability to it. New
areas of concern arise, particularly maladaptation—a concept widely used to denote the
negative effects of adaptation to climate change [26], in farmers’ programs, and at regional
or national adaptation policies [58,170]. The term “maladaptation” is defined as “changes
in natural or human systems that inadvertently increase vulnerability to climatic stimuli; an
adaptation that does not succeed in reducing vulnerability but increases it instead” ([171],
p. 378). Some adaptation practices can serve short-term goals but involve future costs
for society from a long-term perspective, causing unpredictable negative changes. At the
same time, the review study conducted in South Asian countries shows that short-term
adaptation options, such as improved agricultural technologies, may fail without long-term
investments in institutional changes [67].
The bad tidings comprise the point that there is a dramatic ambiguity in the climate
forecasts themselves. The mysteries of uncertainty arise from knowing what future climate
to expect before communicating planned decisions. The solution may be to apply sensitivity
analysis, which can show areas with high sensitivity to climate change and the degree
of their potential impact [172]. These assumptions about the likely success of adaptation
can be made based on a very small amount of research. The potential for achieving some
degree of success on a global scale, even if entirely warranted, likely conceals noteworthy
variations at the regional level in terms of their effects, adaptability, and the underlying
assumptions regarding vulnerability. Exposure to multiple stresses and impacts leads to
Climate 2023, 11, 202 30 of 37
growing uncertainties and higher vulnerabilities [6,103]. In short, it is not easy to find the
right solution anyway, and unfortunately, there will be winners and losers [31,172].
The general assumption is that some incursions unintentionally exacerbate, reallocate,
or even generate new resources of vulnerability, which are caused by (i) superficial com-
prehension of “sensitivity” and “vulnerability” concepts; (ii) uneven involvement of the
interested participants in the development and fulfillment of the adaptation programs; (iii)
inclusion of adaptation strategies and actions into already operating development projects;
and (iv) lack of critical attitude to how to define an “adaptation success” [55]. Three types
of maladaptive consequences can be grouped as (i) restoring vulnerability; (ii) changing
vulnerability; and (iii) undermining sustainable development [173].
Future research should focus on adaptation options to examine farmers’ and societal
readiness and the difficulties they face in adopting new adaptation strategies, as well as
their essential influencing factors, to catch maladaptation before it happens [174].
5. Conclusions and Recommendations

The objective of this study is to review adaptation strategies and interventions in
countries around the world proposed for implementation to reduce the impact of climate
change on agricultural development and production at various levels. The attempt is not so
much to cover all works on the topic but rather to fill a gap in studies showing adaptation
actions at different levels of agricultural production, ranging from regional and local farmer
responses to government involvement or national level, by compiling a scoping review of
the literature. The study was completed in three stages: (i) identifying the climate diversity
and climate change patterns; (ii) determining the impact of climate change on agricultural
production; and (iii) recognizing adaptation strategies and actions in the agricultural sector,
including at the local (farms), regional (institutions), and national (governments) levels.
The search identified 65 studies that were selected for the review. The studied areas include
a wide range of climates, from equatorial to temperate, with various humidity variations
(arid, semi-arid, humid, monsoon, Mediterranean, maritime). Most descriptions of climate
change in different regions include increases in mean annual or seasonal temperatures,
changes in precipitation, both upward and downward, depending on the study area, and
increases in the duration, frequency, and intensity of extreme weather events, including
heat waves and droughts. The negative impacts of climate change are expressed in terms
of reduced crop yields and crop area; impacts on biotic and abiotic factors; economic losses,
increased labor, and equipment costs. However, there are positive impacts in temperate
climates, which are reflected in increased crop yields, enhanced by longer growing seasons
and the northward expansion of crops such as wheat, rice, and maize.
Recommended strategies and actions for agricultural adaptation that can be empha-
sized at local and regional levels are crop varieties and management, including land
use change and innovative breeding techniques; water and soil management, including
agronomic practices; farmer training and knowledge transfer; at regional and national
levels, financial schemes, insurance, migration, and culture; agricultural and meteorological
services; and R&D, including the development of early warning systems.
In many cases, measures to adapt agriculture to climate change are currently repre-
sented by guidelines based on administrative boundaries (Nation or Region scale). On
the contrary, it is necessary to develop recommendations based on climate realities that
are acceptable not for the country(ies) as a whole but for agricultural units (Local scale)
located in a certain climate. It is not entirely obvious whether the future climate will present
mainly challenges or opportunities, so the recommended measures may even oppose one
another. The adaptation choices are not easily made since they may lead to unknown or
even negative outcomes.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization and methodology, E.G. and E.S.; writing—original draft
preparation, E.G. and A.L.; writing—review and editing, E.G. and E.S. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Climate 2023, 11, 202 31 of 37
Funding: This research was funded within the framework of the State Task of ICARP FEB RAS No.
AAAA-A21-121011390018-3.
Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is
not applicable to this article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. McLennan, M. The Global Risks Report, 17th ed.; World Economic Forum: Cologny/Geneva, Switzerland, 2022; 116p.
2. Godfray, H.C.J.; Beddington, J.R.; Crute, I.R.; Haddad, L.; Lawrence, D.; Muir, J.F.; Pretty, J.; Robinson, S.; Thomas, S.M.; Toulmin,
C. Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 2010, 327, 812–818. [CrossRef]
3. Zeifman, L.; Hertog, S.; Kantorova, V.; Wilmoth, J. A World of 8 Billion; Policy Brief No140; UN DESA: New York City, NY,
USA, 2022.
4. Alexandratos, N.; Bruinsma, J. World Agriculture: Towards 2030/2050; ESA Working Paper No. 12-03; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2012.
5. Resolution A/RES/70/1. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In Proceedings of the
Seventieth United Nations General Assembly, New York, NY, USA, 25 September 2015; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015.
Available online: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E (accessed on 12 August 2023).
6. Pradhan, P.; Costa, L.; Rybski, D.; Lucht, W.; Kropp, J.P. A Systematic Study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interactions.
Earths Future 2017, 5, 1169–1179. [CrossRef]
7. Soergel, B.; Kriegler, E.; Weindl, I.; Rauner, S.; Dirnaichner, A.; Ruhe, C.; Hofmann, M.; Bayer, N.; Bertram, C.; Bodirsky, B.L.;
et al. A sustainable development pathway for climate action within the UN 2030 Agenda. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2021, 11, 656–664.
[CrossRef]
8. Fuldauer, L.I.; Thacker, S.; Haggis, R.A.; Fuso-Nerini, F.; Nicholls, R.J.; Hall, J.W. Targeting climate adaptation to safeguard and
advance the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 3579. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Lal, R. Advancing climate change mitigation in agriculture while meeting global sustainable development goals. In Soil and Water
Conservation: A Celebration of 75 Years; Soil and Water Conservation Society: Ankeny, IA, USA, 2020.
10. Shahmohamadloo, R.S.; Febria, C.M.; Fraser, E.D.G.; Sibley, P.K. The sustainable agriculture imperative: A perspective on the
need for an agrosystem approach to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. Integr. Environ. Assess.
Manag. 2022, 18, 1199–1205. [CrossRef]
11. Magesa, B.A.; Mohan, G.; Matsuda, H.; Melts, I.; Kefi, M.; Fukushi, K. Understanding the farmers’ choices and adoption of
adaptation strategies, and plans to climate change impact in Africa: A systematic review. Clim. Serv. 2023, 30, 100362. [CrossRef]
12. Climate-Smart Agriculture: Policies, Practices and Financing for Food Security, Adaptation and Mitigation; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010.
13. Tripathi, A.; Mishra, A.K. Knowledge and passive adaptation to climate change: An example from Indian farmers. Clim. Risk
Manag. 2017, 16, 195–207. [CrossRef]
14. Gosnell, H.; Gill, N.; Voyer, M. Transformational adaptation on the farm: Processes of change and persistence in transitions to
‘climate-smart’ regenerative agriculture. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019, 59, 101965. [CrossRef]
15. Amadu, F.O.; McNamara, P.E.; Miller, D.C. Understanding the adoption of climate-smart agriculture: A farm-level typology with
empirical evidence from southern Malawi. World Dev. 2020, 126, 104692. [CrossRef]
16. Arif, M.; Jan, T.; Munir, H.; Rasul, F.; Riaz, M.; Fahad, S.; Adnan, M.; Mian, I.A.; Amanullah. Climate-Smart Agriculture:
Assessment and Adaptation Strategies in Changing Climate. In Global Climate Change and Environmental Policy; Venkatramanan,
V., Shah, S., Prasad, R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2020. [CrossRef]
17. Gairhe, J.J.; Adhikari, M.; Ghimire, D.; Khatri-Chhetri, A.; Panday, D. Intervention of Climate-Smart Practices in Wheat under
Rice-Wheat Cropping System in Nepal. Climate 2021, 9, 19. [CrossRef]
18. Ariom, T.O.; Dimon, E.; Nambeye, E.; Diouf, N.S.; Adelusi, O.O.; Boudalia, S. Climate-Smart Agriculture in African Countries: A
Review of Strategies and Impacts on Smallholder Farmers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11370. [CrossRef]
19. Azadi, H.; Siamian, N.; Burkart, S.; Moghaddam, S.M.; Goli, I.; Dogot, T.; Lebailly, P.; Teklemariam, D.; Miceikienė, A.; Van Passel,
S. Climate smart agriculture: Mitigation and adaptation strategies at the global scale. In Climate-Induced Innovation: Mitigation and
Adaptation to Climate Change; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 81–140. [CrossRef]
20. Bazzana, D.; Foltz, J.; Zhang, Y. Impact of climate smart agriculture on food security: An agent-based analysis. Food Policy 2022,
111, 102304. [CrossRef]
21. Çakmakçı, R.; Salık, M.A.; Çakmakçı, S. Assessment and Principles of Environmentally Sustainable Food and Agriculture Systems.
Agriculture 2023, 13, 1073. [CrossRef]
22. Zhao, J.; Liu, D.; Huang, R. A Review of Climate-Smart Agriculture: Recent Advancements, Challenges, and Future Directions.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 3404. [CrossRef]
23. Smith, P.; Olesen, J. Synergies between the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change in agriculture. J. Agric. Sci. 2010, 148,
543–552. [CrossRef]
24. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2021. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/
report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM_final.pdf (accessed on 10 August 2023).
Climate 2023, 11, 202 32 of 37
25. Malhi, G.S.; Kaur, M.; Kaushik, P. Impact of Climate Change on Agriculture and Its Mitigation Strategies: A Review. Sustainability
2021, 13, 1318. [CrossRef]
26. Orlove, B. The Concept of Adaptation. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2022, 47, 535–581. [CrossRef]
27. Abbass, K.; Qasim, M.Z.; Song, H.; Murshed, M.; Mahmood, H.; Younis, I. A review of the global climate change impacts,
adaptation, and sustainable mitigation measures. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 42539–42559. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28. Goonesekera, S.M.; Olazabal, M. Climate adaptation indicators and metrics: State of local policy practice. Ecol. Indic. 2022, 145,
109657. [CrossRef]
29. Schoenefeld, J.J.; Schulze, K.; Bruch, N. The diffusion of climate change adaptation policy. WIREs Clim. Chang. 2022, 13, e775.
[CrossRef]
30. Singh, C.; Iyer, S.; New, M.G.; Few, R.; Kuchimanchi, B.; Segnon, A.C.; Morchain, D. Interrogating ‘effectiveness’ in climate change
adaptation: 11 guiding principles for adaptation research and practice. Clim. Dev. 2022, 14, 650–664. [CrossRef]
31. Burton, I.; Lim, B. Achieving Adequate Adaptation in Agriculture. Clim. Chang. 2005, 70, 191–200. [CrossRef]
32. Howden, S.M.; Soussana, J.-F.; Tubiello, F.N.; Chhetri, N.; Dunlop, M.; Meinke, H. Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 19691–19696. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Wiréhn, L. Nordic agriculture under climate change: A systematic review of challenges, opportunities and adaptation strategies
for crop production. Land Use Policy 2018, 77, 63–74. [CrossRef]
34. Niang-Diop, I.; Bosch, H. Formulating an adaptation strategy. In Adaptation Policy Frameworks for Climate Change: Developing
Strategies, Policies and Measures; Lim, B., Spanger-Siegfried, E., Huq, S., Malone, E.L., Burton, I., Eds.; Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK, 2005; pp. 185–204.
35. Burton, I.; Malone, E.L.; Huq, S. Adaptation Policy Frameworks for Climate Change. Developing Strategies, Policies and Measures;
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2005.
36. Biesbroek, G.R.; Swart, R.J.; Carter, T.R.; Cowan, C.; Henrichs, T.; Mela, H.; Morecroft, M.D.; Rey, D. Europe adapts to climate
change: Comparing national adaptation strategies. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2010, 20, 440–450. [CrossRef]
37. Smit, B.; Burton, I.; Klein, R.J.T.; Wandel, J. An Anatomy of Adaptation to Climate Change and Variability. In Societal Adaptation to
Climate Variability and Change; Kane, S.M., Yohe, G.W., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000. [CrossRef]
38. Iancu, T.; Tudor, V.C.; Dumitru, E.A.; Sterie, C.M.; Micu, M.M.; Smedescu, D.; Marcuta, L.; Tonea, E.; Stoicea, P.; Vintu, C.; et al. A
Scientometric Analysis of Climate Change Adaptation Studies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12945. [CrossRef]
39. Smit, B.; Skinner, M. Adaptation options in agriculture to climate change: A typology. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2002, 7,
40. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. Available online:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml (accessed on 12 August 2023).
41. Dang, H.L.; Li, E.; Nuberg, I.; Bruwer, J. Factors influencing the adaptation of farmers in response to climate change: A review.
Clim. Dev. 2019, 11, 765–774. [CrossRef]
42. Acevedo, M.; Pixley, K.; Zinyengere, N.; Meng, S.; Tufan, H.; Cichy, K.; Bizikova, L.; Isaacs, K.; Ghezzi-Kopel, K.; Porciello, J. A
scoping review of adoption of climate-resilient crops by small-scale producers in low- and middle-income countries. Nat. Plants
2020, 6, 1231–1241. [CrossRef]
43. Karimi, V.; Valizadeh, N.; Rahmani, S.; Bijani, M.; Karimi, M. Beyond Climate Change: Impacts, Adaptation Strategies, and
Influencing Factors. In Climate Chang.; Bandh, S.A., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 49–70. [CrossRef]
44. Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Second National Communication of the Republic of Uzbekistan under the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change; Centre of Hydrometeorological Service under the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of
Uzbekistan: Tashkent, Uzbekistan, 2009; 189p.
45. Sterie, C.M.; Dragomir, V. Global trends on research towards agriculture adaptation to climate change. Sci. Pap. Ser. Manag. Econ.
Eng. Agric. Rural Dev. 2023, 23, 759–766.
46. Iglesias, A.; Garrote, L.; Quiroga, S.; Moneo, M. Impacts of Climate Change in Agriculture in Europe; Office for Official Publications
of the European Communities: Luxembourg, 2009. [CrossRef]
47. Iglesias, A.; Garrote, L.; Quiroga, S.; Moneo, M. From climate change impacts to the development of adaptation strategies:
Challenges for agriculture in Europe. Clim. Chang. 2012, 112, 143–168. [CrossRef]
48. Stage, J. Economic valuation of climate change adaptation in developing countries. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2010, 1185, 150–163.
[CrossRef]
49. Füssel, H.M. Adaptation planning for climate change: Concepts, assessment approaches, and key lessons. Sustain. Sci. 2007, 2,
50. Dasgupta, P.; Morton, J.F.; Dodman, D.; Karapinar, B.; Meza, F.; Rivera-Ferre, A.; Sarr, T.; Vincent, K.E. Rural areas. In Climate
Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects; Contribution of Working Group. II to the
Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Field, C.B., Barros, V.R., Dokken, D.J., Mach, K.J.,
Mastrandea, M.D., Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K.L., Estrada, Y.O., Genova, R.C., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 613–657. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WGIIAR5-Chap9
_FINAL.pdf (accessed on 1 September 2023).
51. Castells-Quintana, D.; del Pilar Lopez-Uribe, M.; McDermott, T.K. Adaptation to climate change: A review through a development
economics lens. World Dev. 2018, 104, 183–196. [CrossRef]
Climate 2023, 11, 202 33 of 37
52. Conway, D.; Nicholls, R.J.; Brown, S.; Tebboth, M.G.L.; Adger, W.N.; Ahmad, B.; Biemans, H.; Crick, F.; Lutz, A.F.; De Campos,
R.S.; et al. The need for bottom-up assessments of climate risks and adaptation in climate-sensitive regions. Nat. Clim. Chang.
2019, 9, 503–511. [CrossRef]
53. Hügel, S.; Davies, A.R. Public participation, engagement, and climate change adaptation: A review of the research literature.
WIREs Clim. Chang. 2020, 11, e645. [CrossRef]
54. Berrang-Ford, L.; Siders, A.R.; Lesnikowski, A.; Fischer, A.P.; Callaghan, M.W.; Haddaway, N.R.; Mach, K.J.; Araos, M.; Shah,
M.A.R.; Wannewitz, M.; et al. A systematic global stocktake of evidence on human adaptation to climate change. Nat. Clim.
Chang. 2021, 11, 989–1000. [CrossRef]
55. Eriksen, S.; Schipper, E.L.F.; Scoville-Simonds, M.; Vincent, K.; Adam, H.N.; Brooks, N.; Harding, B.; Khatri, D.; Lenaerts, L.;
Liverman, D.; et al. Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help, hindrance or
irrelevance? World Dev. 2021, 141, 105383. [CrossRef]
56. Nightingale, A.J.; Gonda, N.; Eriksen, S.H. Affective adaptation = effective transformation? Shifting the politics of climate change
adaptation and transformation from the status quo. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 2022, 13, e740. [CrossRef]
57. Ricart, S.; Castelletti, A.; Gandolfi, C. On farmers’ perceptions of climate change and its nexus with climate data and adaptive
capacity. A comprehensive review. Environ. Res. Lett. 2022, 17, 083002. [CrossRef]
58. Karimi, V.; Bijani, M.; Hallaj, Z.; Valizadeh, N.; Fallah Haghighi, N.; Karimi, M. Adaptation and Maladaptation to Climate Change:
Farmers’ Perceptions. In Strategizing Agricultural Management for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation; Bandh, S.A., Ed.;
Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023. [CrossRef]
59. Marques, F.; Alves, F.; Castro, P. Climate Change Perceptions and Adaptation Strategies in Vulnerable and Rural Territories. In
Climate Change Strategies: Handling the Challenges of Adapting to a Changing Climate. Climate Change Management; Leal Filho, W.,
Kovaleva, M., Alves, F., Abubakar, I.R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 427–439. [CrossRef]
60. Aguilera, E.; Diaz-Gaona, C.; Garcia-Laureano, R.; Reyes-Palomo, C.; Guzmán, G.I.; Ortolani, L.; Sánchez-Rodríguez, M.;
Rodríguez-Estévez, V. Agroecology for adaptation to climate change and resource depletion in the Mediterranean region. A
review. Agric. Syst. 2020, 181, 102809. [CrossRef]
61. Gaeva, D.V.; Barinova, G.M.; Krasnov, E.V. Adaptation of Eastern Europe Regional Agriculture to Climate Change: Risks and
Management. In Climate Change Adaptation in Eastern Europe. Climate Change Management; Leal Filho, W., Trbic, G., Filipovic, D.,
Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [CrossRef]
62. Ishtiaque, A. US farmers’ adaptations to climate change: A systematic review of the adaptation-focused studies in the US
agriculture context. Environ. Res: Clim. 2023, 2, 022001. [CrossRef]
63. Mertz, O.; Halsnæs, K.; Olesen, J.E.; Rasmussen, K. Adaptation to Climate Change in Developing Countries. Environ. Manag.
2009, 43, 743–752. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
64. Shaffril, H.A.M.; Krauss, S.E.; Samsuddin, S.F. A systematic review on Asian’s farmers’ adaptation practices towards climate
change. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 644, 683–695. [CrossRef]
65. Shaffril, H.A.M.; Ahmad, N.; Samsuddin, S.F.; Samah, A.A.; Hamdan, M.E. Systematic literature review on adaptation towards
climate change impacts among indigenous people in the Asia Pacific regions. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 258, 120595. [CrossRef]
66. Nguyen, T.-H.; Sahin, O.; Howes, M. Climate Change Adaptation Influences and Barriers Impacting the Asian Agricultural
Industry. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7346. [CrossRef]
67. Aryal, J.P.; Sapkota, T.B.; Khurana, R.; Khatri-Chhetri, A.; Rahut, D.B.; Jat, M.L. Climate change and agriculture in South Asia:
Adaptation options in smallholder production systems. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 22, 5045–5075. [CrossRef]
68. Muchuru, S.; Nhamo, G. A review of climate change adaptation measures in the African crop sector. Clim. Dev. 2019, 11, 873–885.
[CrossRef]
69. Sivakumar, M.V.K.; Das, H.P.; Brunini, O. Impacts of Present and Future Climate Variability and Change on Agriculture and
Forestry in the Arid and Semi-Arid Tropics. Clim. Chang. 2005, 70, 31–72. [CrossRef]
70. Naulleau, A.; Gary, C.; Prévot, L.; Hossard, L. Evaluating Strategies for Adaptation to Climate Change in Grapevine Production—
A Systematic Review. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 11, 607859. [CrossRef]
71. Georgopoulou, E.; Mirasgedis, S.; Sarafidis, Y.; Vitaliotou, M.; Lalas, D.P.; Theloudis, I.; Giannoulaki, K.-D.; Dimopoulos, D.;
Zavras, V. Climate change impacts and adaptation options for the Greek agriculture in 2021–2050: A monetary assessment. Clim.
Risk Manag. 2017, 16, 164–182. [CrossRef]
72. Francis, C.A. Crop Production Resilience through Biodiversity for Adaptation to Climate Change. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia
of Environmental Science; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2019. [CrossRef]
73. Fatima, Z.; Ahmed, M.; Hussain, M.; Abbas, G.; Ul-Allah, S.; Ahmad, S.; Ahmed, N.; Ali, M.A.; Sarwar, G.; ul Haque, E.; et al.
The fingerprints of climate warming on cereal crops phenology and adaptation options. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 18013. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
74. Sloat, L.L.; Davis, S.J.; Gerber, J.S.; Moore, F.C.; Ray, D.K.; West, P.C.; Mueller, N.D. Climate adaptation by crop migration. Nat.
Commun. 2020, 11, 1243. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75. Khan, A.; Ahmad, M.; Ahmed, M.; Iftikhar Hussain, M. Rising Atmospheric Temperature Impact on Wheat and Thermotolerance
Strategies. Plants 2021, 10, 43. [CrossRef]
76. Minoli, S.; Jägermeyr, J.; Asseng, S.; Urfels, A.; Müller, C. Global crop yields can be lifted by timely adaptation of growing periods
to climate change. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 7079. [CrossRef]
Climate 2023, 11, 202 34 of 37
77. Yadav, M.R.; Choudhary, M.; Singh, J.; Lal, M.K.; Jha, P.K.; Udawat, P.; Gupta, N.K.; Rajput, V.D.; Garg, N.K.; Maheshwari, C.;
et al. Impacts, Tolerance, Adaptation, and Mitigation of Heat Stress on Wheat under Changing Climates. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23,
2838. [CrossRef]
78. Auffhammer, M.; Schlenker, W. Empirical studies on agricultural impacts and adaptation. Energy Econ. 2014, 46, 555–561.
[CrossRef]
79. Iglesias, A.; Garrote, L. Adaptation strategies for agricultural water management under climate change in Europe. Agric. Water
Manag. 2015, 155, 113–124. [CrossRef]
80. Maracchi, G.; Sirotenko, O.; Bindi, M. Impacts of Present and Future Climate Variability on Agriculture and Forestry in the
Temperate Regions: Europe. Clim. Chang. 2005, 70, 117–135. [CrossRef]
81. Olesen, J.E.; Trnka, M.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Skjelvåg, A.O.; Seguin, B.; Peltonen-Sainio, P.; Rossi, F.; Kozyra, J.; Micale, F. Impacts
and adaptation of European crop production systems to climate change. Eur. J. Agron. 2011, 34, 96–112. [CrossRef]
82. Reidsma, P.; Ewert, F.; Lansink, A.O.; Leemans, R. Adaptation to climate change and climate variability in European agriculture:
The importance of farm level responses. Eur. J. Agron. 2010, 32, 91–102. [CrossRef]
83. Faye, B.; Webber, H.; Gaiser, T.; Müller, C.; Zhang, Y.; Stella, T.; Latka, C.; Reckling, M.; Heckelei, T.; Helming, K.; et al. Climate
change impacts on European arable crop yields: Sensitivity to assumptions about rotations and residue management. Eur. J.
Agron. 2023, 142, 126670. [CrossRef]
84. Himanen, S.J.; Mäkinen, H.; Rimhanen, K.; Savikko, R. Farmers in Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Assessing Intercropping
as a Means to Support Farm Adaptive Capacity. Agriculture 2016, 6, 34. [CrossRef]
85. Jenkins, B.; Avis, K.; Willcocks, J.; Martin, G.; Wiltshire, J.; Peters, E. Adapting Scottish Agriculture to a Changing Climate-Assessing
Options for Action; Ricardo Energy & Environment: London, UK, 2023. [CrossRef]
86. Reidsma, P.; Wolf, J.; Kanellopoulos, A.; Schaap, B.F.; Mandryk, M.; Verhagen, J.; van Ittersum, M.K. Climate change impact and
adaptation research requires integrated assessment and farming systems analysis: A case study in the Netherlands. Environ. Res.
Lett. 2015, 10, 045004. [CrossRef]
87. Mandryk, M.; Reidsma, P.; van Ittersum, M.K. Crop and farm level adaptation under future climate challenges: An exploratory
study considering multiple objectives for Flevoland, the Netherlands. Agric. Syst. 2017, 152, 154–164. [CrossRef]
88. De Frutos Cachorro, J.; Gobin, A.; Buysse, J. Farm-level adaptation to climate change: The case of the Loam region in Belgium.
Agric. Syst. 2018, 165, 164–176. [CrossRef]
89. Morel, K.; Cartau, K. Adaptation of organic vegetable farmers to climate change: An exploratory study in the Paris region. Agric.
Syst. 2023, 210, 103703. [CrossRef]
90. Klein, T.; Holzkämper, A.; Calanca, P.; Seppelt, R.; Fuhrer, J. Adapting agricultural land management to climate change: A
regional multi-objective optimization approach. Landsc. Ecol. 2013, 28, 2029–2047. [CrossRef]
91. Martin, S.; Mitter, H.; Schmid, E.; Heinrich, G.; Gobiet, A. Integrated Analysis of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation
Measures in Austrian Agriculture. Ger. J. Agric. Econ. 2014, 3, 156–176.
92. Shaitura, S.V.; Sumzina, L.V.; Tomashevskaya, N.G.; Filimonov, S.L.; Minitaeva, A.M. The agricultural sector in the context of
global climate change. Bull. Kursk. State Agric. Acad. 2021, 4, 18–24. (In Russian)
93. Ivanov, A.L. Global climate change and its impact on agriculture in Russia. Agriculture 2009, 1, 3–5. (In Russian)
94. Gordeev, A.V.; Kleshchenko, A.D.; Chernyakov, B.A. Bioclimatic Potential of Russia: Adaptation Measures in a Changing Climate;
Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation: Moscow, Russia, 2008; 278p. (In Russian)
95. Nemtsev, S.N.; Sharipova, R.B. Problems of increasing the sustainability of agriculture in the Ulyanovsk region in terms of
adaptation to modern climate change. Proc. Samara SC RAS 2018, 20, 363–369. (In Russian)
96. Kipriyanov, F.A.; Savinykh, P.A. Territorial and climatic zoning of the Vologda region and prospects of its use in agriculture. Perm.
Agrar. Bull. 2019, 2, 64–71. (In Russian)
97. Surovtsev, V.N.; Ponomarev, M.A.; Nikulina, Y.N.; Payurova, E.N. Risk Assessment and Directions of Adaptation of Agriculture
in the North-West of Russia under Climate Change. Reg. Ecol. 2015, 6, 13–21. Available online: http://www.ecosafety-spb.ru/
images/stories/Publications/RegionalEcology/2015_6(41).pdf (accessed on 15 August 2023). (In Russian).
98. Iglesias, A.; Mougou, R.; Moneo, M.; Quiroga, S. Towards adaptation of agriculture to climate change in the Mediterranean. Reg.
Environ. Chang. 2011, 11, 159–166. [CrossRef]
99. De Leo, S.; Di Fonzo, A.; Giuca, S.; Gaito, M.; Bonati, G. Economic Implications for Farmers in Adopting Climate Adaptation
Measures in Italian Agriculture. Land 2023, 12, 906. [CrossRef]
100. Sperdouli, I.; Mellidou, I.; Moustakas, M. Harnessing Chlorophyll Fluorescence for Phenotyping Analysis of Wild and Cultivated
Tomato for High Photochemical Efficiency under Water Deficit for Climate Change Resilience. Climate 2021, 9, 154. [CrossRef]
101. Kourgialas, N.N. A critical review of water resources in Greece: The key role of agricultural adaptation to climate-water effects.
Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 775, 145857. [CrossRef]
102. Markou, M.; Moraiti, C.A.; Stylianou, A.; Papadavid, G. Addressing Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture: Adaptation
Measures For Six Crops in Cyprus. Atmosphere 2020, 11, 483. [CrossRef]
103. Fujisawa, M.; Kobayashi, K.; Johnston, P.; New, M. What Drives Farmers to Make Top-Down or Bottom-Up Adaptation to Climate
Change and Fluctuations? A Comparative Study on 3 Cases of Apple Farming in Japan and South Africa. PLoS ONE 2015, 10,
e0120563. [CrossRef]
Climate 2023, 11, 202 35 of 37
104. Mizina, S.V.; Smith, J.B.; Gossen, E.; Spiecker, K.F.; Witkowski, S.L. An evaluation of adaptation options for climate change
impacts on agriculture in Kazakhstan. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 1999, 4, 25–41. [CrossRef]
105. Erda, L.; Yinlong, X.; Shaohong, W. China’s national assessment report on climate change (II): Climate change impacts and
adaptation. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. 2007, 3, 6.
106. Wang, J.X.; Huang, J.K.; Jun, Y. Overview of impacts of climate change and adaptation in China’s agriculture. J. Integr. Agric.
2014, 13, 1–17. [CrossRef]
107. Jianjun, J.; Yiwei, G.; Xiaomin, W.; Nam, P.K. Farmers’ risk preferences and their climate change adaptation strategies in the
Yongqiao District, China. Land Use Policy 2015, 47, 365–372. [CrossRef]
108. Dai, C.; Qin, X.S.; Lu, W.T.; Huang, Y. Assessing Adaptation Measures on Agricultural Water Productivity under Climate Change:
A Case Study of Huai River Basin, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 721, 137777. [CrossRef]
109. Trinh, L.T.; Duong, C.C.; Van Der Steen, P.; Lens, P.N. Exploring the Potential for Wastewater Reuse in Agriculture as a Climate
Change Adaptation Measure for Can Tho City, Vietnam. Agric. Water Manag. 2013, 128, 43–54. [CrossRef]
110. Nhung, T.T.; Le Vo, P.; Van Nghi, V.; Bang, H.Q. Salt Intrusion Adaptation Measures for Sustainable Agricultural Development
under Climate Change Effects: A Case of Ca Mau Peninsula, Vietnam. Clim. Risk Manag. 2019, 23, 88–100. [CrossRef]
111. Sumaryanto; Nurfatria, F.; Astana, S.; Erwidodo. Perception and adaptation of agroforestry farmers in Upper Citarum Watershed
to climate change. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 917, 012020. [CrossRef]
112. Khanal, U.; Wilson, C.; Hoang, V.N.; Lee, B. Farmers’ adaptation to climate change, its determinants and impacts on rice yield in
Nepal. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 144, 139–147. [CrossRef]
113. Shrestha, R.; Rakhal, B.; Adhikari, T.R.; Ghimire, G.R.; Talchabhadel, R.; Tamang, D.; KC, R.; Sharma, S. Farmers’ Perception of
Climate Change and Its Impacts on Agriculture. Hydrology 2022, 9, 212. [CrossRef]
114. Esham, M.; Garforth, C. Agricultural adaptation to climate change: Insights from a farming community in Sri Lanka. Mitig. Adapt.
Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2013, 18, 535–549. [CrossRef]
115. Moayedi, M.; Hayati, D. Identifying strategies for adaptation of rural women to climate variability in water scarce areas. Front.
Water 2023, 5, 1177684. [CrossRef]
116. Ullah, W.; Nafees, M.; Khurshid, M.; Nihei, T. Assessing farmers’ perspectives on climate change for effective farm-level
adaptation measures in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2019, 191, 547. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
117. Abid, M.; Scheffran, J.; Schneider, U.A.; Elahi, E. Farmer Perceptions of Climate Change, Observed Trends and Adaptation of
Agriculture in Pakistan. Environ. Manag. 2019, 63, 110–123. [CrossRef]
118. Mustafa, G.; Alotaibi, B.A.; Nayak, R.K. Linking Climate Change Awareness, Climate Change Perceptions and Subsequent
Adaptation Options among Farmers. Agronomy 2023, 13, 758. [CrossRef]
119. Srivastava, P.; Singh, R.; Tripathi, S.; Raghubanshi, A.S. An urgent need for sustainable thinking in agriculture—An Indian
scenario. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 67, 611–622. [CrossRef]
120. Taraz, V. Can farmers adapt to higher temperatures? Evidence from India. World Dev. 2018, 112, 205–219. [CrossRef]
121. Moniruzzaman, S. Crop choice as climate change adaptation: Evidence from Bangladesh. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 118, 90–98. [CrossRef]
122. Walters, S.A.; Abdelaziz, M.; Bouharroud, R. Local Melon and Watermelon Crop Populations to Moderate Yield Responses to
Climate Change in North Africa. Climate 2021, 9, 129. [CrossRef]
123. Bryan, E.; Ringler, C.; Okoba, B.; Roncoli, C.; Silvestri, S.; Herrero, M. Adapting agriculture to climate change in Kenya: Household
strategies and determinants. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 114, 26–35. [CrossRef]
124. Kangogo, D.; Dentoni, D.; Bijman, J. Adoption of climate-smart agriculture among smallholder farmers: Does farmer entrepreneur-
ship matter? Land Use Policy 2021, 109, 105666. [CrossRef]
125. Onyeneke, R.U.; Nwajiuba, C.A.; Emenekwe, C.C.; Nwajiuba, A.; Onyeneke, C.J.; Ohalete, P.; Uwazie, U.I. Climate change
adaptation in Nigerian agricultural sector: A systematic review and resilience check of adaptation measures. AIMS Agric. Food
2019, 4, 967–1006. [CrossRef]
126. Apata, T.G. Factors influencing the perception and choice of adaptation measures to climate change among farmers in Nigeria.
Evidence from farming households in Southwest Nigeria. Environ. Econ. 2011, 2, 74–83.
127. Ozor, N.; Nnaji, C. The role of extension in agricultural adaptation to climate change in Enugu State, Nigeria. J. Agric. Ext. Rural.
Dev. 2011, 3, 42–50.
128. Fosu-Mensah, B.Y.; Vlek, P.L.G.; MacCarthy, D.S. Farmers’ perception and adaptation to climate change: A case study of
Sekyedumase district in Ghana. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2012, 14, 495–505. [CrossRef]
129. Maponya, P.; Mpandeli, S. Climate change and agricultural production in South Africa: Impacts and adaptation options. J. Agric.
Sci. 2012, 4, 48. [CrossRef]
130. Bryan, E.; Deressa, T.T.; Gbetibouo, G.A.; Ringler, C. Adaptation to climate change in Ethiopia and South Africa: Options and
constraints. Environ. Sci. Policy 2009, 12, 413–426. [CrossRef]
131. Ruiz-García, P.; Conde-Álvarez, C.; Gómez-Díaz, J.D.; Monterroso-Rivas, A.I. Projections of Local Knowledge-Based Adaptation
Strategies of Mexican Coffee Farmers. Climate 2021, 9, 60. [CrossRef]
132. Conde, C.; Ferrer, R.; Orozco, S. Climate change and climate variability impacts on rainfed agricultural activities and possible
adaptation measures. A Mexican case study. Atmósfera 2006, 19, 181–194.
133. Vasconcelos, A.C.F.; Bonatti, M.; Schlindwein, S.L.; D’Agostini, L.R.; Homem, L.R.; Nelson, R. Landraces as an adaptation strategy
to climate change for smallholders in Santa Catarina, Southern Brazil. Land Use Policy 2013, 34, 250–254. [CrossRef]
Climate 2023, 11, 202 36 of 37
134. Ramirez-Villegas, J.; Salazar, M.; Jarvis, A.; Navarro-Racines, C.E. A way forward on adaptation to climate change in Colombian
agriculture: Perspectives towards 2050. Clim. Chang. 2012, 115, 611–628. [CrossRef]
135. Mu, J.E.; McCarl, B.A.; Wein, A.M. Adaptation to climate change: Changes in farmland use and stocking rate in the U.S. Mitig.
Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2013, 18, 713–730. [CrossRef]
136. Walters, S.A.; Gajewski, C.; Sadeghpour, A.; Groninger, J.W. Mitigation of Climate Change for Urban Agriculture: Water
Management of Culinary Herbs Grown in an Extensive Green Roof Environment. Climate 2022, 10, 180. [CrossRef]
137. Freebairn, J. Adaptation to Climate Change by Australian Farmers. Climate 2021, 9, 141. [CrossRef]
138. Ricart, S.; Gandolfi, C.; Castelletti, A. Climate change awareness, perceived impacts, and adaptation from farmers’ experience
and behavior: A triple-loop review. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2023, 23, 82. [CrossRef]
139. Bouabdelli, S.; Zeroual, A.; Meddi, M.; Assani, A. Impact of temperature on agricultural drought occurrence under the effects of
climate change. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2022, 148, 191–209. [CrossRef]
140. Olesen, J.E.; Carter, T.R.; Díaz-Ambrona, C.H.; Fronzek, S.; Heidmann, T.; Hickler, T.; Holt, T.; Minguez, M.I.; Morales, P.; Palutikof,
J.P.; et al. Uncertainties in projected impacts of climate change on European agriculture and terrestrial ecosystems based on
scenarios from regional climate models. Clim. Chang. 2007, 81, 123–143. [CrossRef]
141. Ward Jones, M.K.; Schwoerer, T.; Gannon, G.M.; Jones, B.M.; Kanevskiy, M.Z.; Sutton, I.; Pierre, B.S.; Pierre, C.S.; Russell, J.;
Russell, D. Climate-driven expansion of northern agriculture must consider permafrost. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2022, 12, 699–703.
[CrossRef]
142. Eicken, H.; Danielsen, F.; Sam, J.M.; Fidel, M.; Johnson, N.; Poulsen, M.K. Connecting Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches in
Environmental Observing. BioScience 2021, 71, 467–483. [CrossRef]
143. Carter, J.G. Climate change adaptation in European cities. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2011, 3, 193–198. [CrossRef]
144. McNamara, K.E.; Buggy, L. Community-based climate change adaptation: A review of academic literature. Local Environ. 2017,
22, 443–460. [CrossRef]
145. Fenton, A.; Gallagher, D.; Wright, H.; Huq, S.; Nyandiga, C. Up-scaling finance for community-based adaptation. Clim. Dev. 2014,
6, 388–397. [CrossRef]
146. Qamar, M.U.; Archfield, S.A. Consider the risks of bottom-up approaches for climate change adaptation. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2023,
13, 2–3. [CrossRef]
147. Walters, S.A. Essential Role of Crop Landraces for World Food Security. Mod. Concepts Dev. Agron. 2018, 1, 1–4. [CrossRef]
148. Pulido, J.S.; Gerardo, B. The Traditional Farming System of a Mexican Indigenous Community: The Case of Nuevo San Juan
Parangaricutiro, Michoacán, Mexico. Geoderma 2003, 111, 249–265. [CrossRef]
149. Anex, R.P.; Lynd, L.R.; Laser, M.S.; Heggenstaller, A.H.; Liebman, M. Potential for Enhanced Nutrient Cycling through Coupling
of Agricultural and Bioenergy Systems. Crop Sci. 2007, 47, 1327–1335. [CrossRef]
150. Schiere, H.; Loes, K. Mixed Crop-Livestock Farming: A Review of Traditional Technologies Based on Literature and Field Experiences; FAO
Animal Production and Health Paper 152; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2001.
151. Altieri, M.A.; Nicholls, C.I.; Henao, A.; Lana, M.A. Agroecology and the design of climate change-resilient farming systems.
Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 35, 869–890. [CrossRef]
152. Denevan, W.M. 2 Prehistoric agricultural methods as models for sustainability. Adv. Plant Pathol. 1995, 11, 21–43. [CrossRef]
153. Singh, R.; Singh, G.S. Traditional agriculture: A climate-smart approach for sustainable food production. Energy Ecol. Environ.
2017, 2, 296–316. [CrossRef]
154. Rai, S. Traditional ecological knowledge and community-based natural resource management in northeast India. J. Mt. Sci. 2007,
4, 248–258. [CrossRef]
155. Crate, S.; Ulrich, M.; Habeck, J.O.; Desyatkin, A.R.; Desyatkin, R.V.; Fedorov, A.N.; Hiyama, T.; Iijima, Y.; Ksenofontov, S.;
Mészáros, C.; et al. Permafrost livelihoods: A transdisciplinary review and analysis of thermokarst-based systems of indigenous
land use. Anthropocene 2017, 18, 89–104. [CrossRef]
156. Sardaro, R.; Girone, S.; Acciani, C.; Bozzo, F.; Petrontino, A.; Fucilli, V. Agro-biodiversity of Mediterranean crops: Farmers’
preferences in support of a conservation programme for olive landraces. Biol. Conserv. 2016, 201, 210–219. [CrossRef]
157. Evenson, R.E.; Gollin, D. Assessing the Impact of the Green Revolution, 1960 to 2000. Science 2003, 300, 758–762. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
158. Matson, P.A.; Parton, W.J.; Power, A.G.; Swift, M.J. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 1997, 277,
504–509. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
159. Kremen, C.; Iles, A.; Bacon, C. Diversified farming systems: An agroecological, systems-based alternative to modern industrial
agriculture. Ecol. Soc. 2012, 17, 44. [CrossRef]
160. Malézieux, E. Designing Cropping Systems from Nature. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 32, 15–29. [CrossRef]
161. Duru, M.; Therond, O.; Martin, G.; Martin-Clouaire, R.; Magne, M.-A.; Justes, E.; Journet, E.-P.; Aubertot, J.-N.; Savary, S.; Bergez,
J.-E.; et al. How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2015,
35, 1259–1281. [CrossRef]
162. Shackleton, S.; Ziervogel, G.; Sallu, S.; Gill, T.; Tschakert, P. Why is socially-just climate change adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa
so challenging? A review of barriers identified from empirical cases. WIREs Clim. Chang. 2015, 6, 321–344. [CrossRef]
Climate 2023, 11, 202 37 of 37
163. Rippke, U.; Ramirez-Villegas, J.; Jarvis, A.; Vermeulen, S.J.; Parker, L.; Mer, F.; Diekkrüger, B.; Challinor, A.J.; Howden, M.
Timescales of transformational climate change adaptation in sub-Saharan African agriculture. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 605–609.
[CrossRef]
164. Ogisi, O.D.; Begho, T. Adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices in sub-Saharan Africa: A review of the progress, barriers,
gender differences and recommendations. Farming Syst. 2023, 1, 100019. [CrossRef]
165. Teklu, A.; Simane, B.; Bezabih, M. Multiple adoption of climate-smart agriculture innovation for agricultural sustainability:
Empirical evidence from the Upper Blue Nile Highlands of Ethiopia. Clim. Risk Manag. 2023, 39, 100477. [CrossRef]
166. Steenwerth, K.L.; Hodson, A.K.; Bloom, A.J.; Carter, M.R.; Cattaneo, A.; Chartres, C.J.; Hatfield, J.L.; Henry, K.; Hopmans, J.W.;
Horwath, W.R.; et al. Climate-smart agriculture global research agenda: Scientific basis for action. Agric. Food Secur. 2014, 3, 11.
[CrossRef]
167. Zilberman, D.; Goetz, R.; Garrido, A.; Lipper, L.; Mccarthy, N.; Asfaw, S.; Editors, G.B. Identifying Strategies to Enhance the
Resilience of Smallholder Farming Systems: Evidence from Zambia. In Climate-Smart Agriculture—Building Resilience to Climate
Change; Lipper, L., McCarthy, N., Zilberman, D., Asfaw, S., Branca, G., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 425–441.
[CrossRef]
168. Taylor, M. Climate-Smart Agriculture: What Is It Good For? J. Peasant. Stud. 2018, 45, 89–107. [CrossRef]
169. Neufeldt, H.; Jahn, M.; Campbell, B.M.; Beddington, J.R.; DeClerck, F.; De Pinto, A.; Gulledge, J.; Hellin, J.; Herrero, M.; Jarvis, A.;
et al. Beyond Climate-Smart Agriculture: Toward Safe Operating Spaces for Global Food Systems. Agric. Food Secur. 2013, 2, 12.
[CrossRef]
170. Juhola, S.; Käyhkö, J. Maladaptation as a concept and a metric in national adaptation policy—Should we, would we, could we?
PLos Clim. 2023, 2, e0000213. [CrossRef]
171. Houghton, J.T.; Ding, Y.; Griggs, D.J.; Noguer, M.; van der Linden, P.J. (Eds.) Climate Change 2001: Mitigation of Climate Change;
The Scientific Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001.
172. Grigorieva, E. Evaluating the Sensitivity of Growing Degree Days as an Agro-Climatic Indicator of the Climate Change Impact: A
Case Study of the Russian Far East. Atmosphere 2020, 11, 404. [CrossRef]
173. Juhola, S.; Glaas, E.; Linnér, B.O.; Neset, T.S. Redefining maladaptation. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 55, 135–140. [CrossRef]
174. Schipper, E.L.F. Catching maladaptation before it happens. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2022, 12, 617–618. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Climate 11 00202 v2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Climate 11 00202 v2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Climate 11 00202 v2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

climate

1 Department of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin (HU), 10117 Berlin, Germany

Climate 2023, 11, 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli11100202 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/climate

1.1. Adaptation Strategies—Definitions for Agriculture

change, with their different origins: physical, environmental, technological, economic,

1.2. Adaptation Strategies: Scaling from National to Farmer Levels

2. Materials and Methods

//www.mdpi.com/journal/climate/special_issues/ecosystem, accessed on 1 September

3.1. Climate Change

3.2. Changes in Agriculture Due to the Effect of Climate Change

3.3. Adaptation Strategies and Actions

3.3.1. Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions: Local Scale

3.3.2. Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions: Regional Level

3.3.3. Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and Actions: National Level

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

Agricultural Adaptation Strategies and

4.1. Climate Change and Agriculture: Shortcomings and Advantages

4.2. “Bottom-Up” and “Top-Down” Approaches: Pros and Cons

4.3. Intercropping as a Cultivation Technique

4.4. Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge

Looking further and deeper into TK practices, Indigenous TK describes ways of

4.5. Biodiversity-Based Agriculture

4.6. Climate Smart Agriculture

compromises, consequently involving institutional, policy, and technological practices [165].

4.7. Catching Maladaptation before It Happens

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

You might also like