The perceptions and attitudes of small-scale farmers toward climate change in eThekwini Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal

Abstract

Climate change poses substantial risks to small-scale agricultural production and rural livelihoods, yet evidence on how farmers perceive and respond to these risks remains limited in South Africa’s rural–urban–per-urban agricultural settings. This study examined small-scale farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change in withering Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal, and assessed the socioeconomic and institutional factors associated with these outcomes. Using a cross-sectional quantitative design, primary data were collected through structured interviews with 296 small-scale farmers. Descriptive statistics, composite perception and attitude indices, independent-samples t-tests, and Tobit regression models were employed. Most farmers reported substantial climate-related challenges: 93% perceived negative effects of climate change on crop yields, 97% reported that changing rainfall patterns had made farming more difficult, and 87% identified water shortages as a major production challenge. Although 69.7% of farmers reported awareness of climate change and 70.3% had access to climate information, only 15.8% reported access to agricultural credit. Perceptions did not differ significantly between farmers who reported being aware of climate change and those who did not (p = 0.603), nor did attitudes (p = 0.186). In the Tobit model, marital status (β = 0.045; p = 0.049) and access to climate information (β = 0.060; p = 0.046) were positively associated with perception scores at the 5% significance level. Attitude scores were positively associated with farmer-organization membership (β = 0.060; p = 0.018) and access to climate information (β = 0.066; p = 0.022) at the 5% level, while gender (β = 0.058; p = 0.080), farming experience (β = 0.003; p = 0.087), and agricultural training (β = 0.021; p = 0.100) were associated at the 10% level; extension visits were negatively associated with attitudes (β = −0.003; p = 0.083). These findings suggest that climate-risk recognition is widespread, but awareness alone may be insufficient to support effective adaptation. Policy should therefore priorities accessible, location-specific climate information, strengthened extension and farmer-organization platforms, targeted agricultural training, and improved access to adaptation finance and climate-resilient technologies.

1 Introduction

Climate change has emerged as one of the most pressing global environmental challenges of the twenty-first century, with far-reaching implications for ecosystems, economies, and human livelihoods (IPCC, 2023). Global temperatures have increased by approximately 1.1 °C above per-industrial levels, contributing to more frequent and intense droughts, floods, heatwaves, and other extreme weather events (IPCC, 2023). These changes pose significant risks to agricultural production, particularly in developing countries where agriculture remains highly dependent on climatic conditions and natural resources. In South Africa, climate-related shocks to agriculture and other climate-sensitive sectors are projected to reduce national GDP by around 1.5% by 2050, highlighting the broader economic significance of climate risks for growth and employment (Jordaan, 2025). Climate change therefore represents an important challenge for food security, poverty reduction, and sustainable development.

Agriculture is particularly vulnerable because production depends directly on temperature, rainfall, humidity, and seasonal variability (Ortiz-Bobea, 2021). Climate change is projected to reduce agricultural productivity in many regions, particularly in tropical and subtropical areas where small-scale farmers already face multiple production constraints (IPCC, 2023). In South Africa, drought events have resulted in substantial crop and employment losses, while rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts, and flooding threaten crop yields, livestock productivity, water availability, and agricultural sustainability (Jordaan, 2025; IPCC, 2023). Small-scale farmers are especially vulnerable because they often have limited access to financial capital, irrigation infrastructure, agricultural technologies, extension services, climate information, and markets (Ricart et al., 2023). These constraints can limit their capacity to respond effectively to climatic risks.

Understanding how farmers recognise and interpret climate change is therefore important. Climate change is experienced not only as a biophysical phenomenon but also through farmers’ social, economic, cultural, and psychological contexts (Ricart et al., 2023). Evidence from South Africa indicates that many smallholder farmers recognise observable changes in temperature and rainfall and associate these changes with shifts in planting dates, pest incidence, and agricultural yields (Gidi et al., 2024). Within this context, awareness, perceptions, and attitudes represent related but distinct dimensions of farmers’ understanding of climate change. Awareness refers to knowledge and recognition of climate change and its consequences; perception concerns how farmers interpret observed climatic changes and their implications, while attitudes reflect their evaluations, concerns, beliefs, and predispositions toward climate change and related responses (Gonzalez and Sanchez, 2021; Ricart et al., 2023; Ricart et al., 2023). Importantly, awareness does not necessarily imply that farmers perceive climate change in the same way or hold favourable attitudes toward adaptation.

Farmers’ perceptions and attitudes are shaped by their experiences and the socioeconomic and institutional environments in which they operate. Factors such as exposure to climatic events, farming experience, access to information, education, extension services, and institutional support influence how farmers interpret climate-related risks (Gonzalez and Sanchez, 2021; Tesfamariam et al., 2020; Gidi et al., 2024). The Risk Perception–Adaptation Framework, informed by Protection Motivation Theory, provides a useful basis for understanding these processes by emphasizing the role of perceived threat and perceived capacity to respond (Ricart et al., 2025; Reddy et al., 2022). Farmers may recognise climate change as a serious threat but still face constraints in accessing the resources and support required to respond. Thus, understanding perceptions and attitudes requires attention not only to awareness but also to the informational, socioeconomic, and institutional conditions surrounding farmers.

In South Africa, existing research has generated substantial evidence on climate vulnerability, adaptation practices, and the determinants of adaptation among smallholder farmers. However, comparatively less attention has been given to farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change, particularly within metropolitan agricultural settings that combine rural, urban, and per-urban farming systems. Much of the available evidence in KwaZulu-Natal originates from predominantly rural districts such as uMkhanyakude, Harry Gwala, and Ugu, where social, economic, environmental, and institutional conditions differ from those in eThekwini Municipality. Consequently, existing findings may not adequately capture how farmers in rural, urban, and per-urban settings understand and evaluate climate-related risks.

eThekwini Municipality provides an important context for examining these issues because agricultural activities occur alongside rapid urbanisation, infrastructure development, competing land uses, and diverse socioeconomic conditions. Small-scale farmers are exposed to climate-related challenges, including flooding, erratic rainfall, rising temperatures, and periodic droughts, while also facing institutional and economic pressures associated with farming within a metropolitan environment. These characteristics may shape farmers’ perceptions and attitudes differently from those observed in predominantly rural areas. Despite this context, empirical evidence on small-scale farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change in eThekwini remains limited. Generating context-specific evidence is important for informing climate communication, extension services, agricultural support programmed, and locally appropriate adaptation planning.

Against this background, the purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions and attitudes of small-scale farmers toward climate change in eThekwini Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal Province. The study specifically examines farmers’ perceptions of climate change and its implications for agricultural production and livelihoods; their attitudes toward climate change and climate-related responses; differences in perceptions and attitudes according to climate change awareness; and the socioeconomic, farm-level, and institutional factors associated with these outcomes. By generating context-specific evidence on how small-scale farmers understand and interpret climate change and climate-related risks, the study contributes to a better understanding of the human dimensions of climate change within small-scale agricultural systems. The findings are expected to support policymakers, extension practitioners, and development stakeholders in designing more responsive and locally relevant interventions that strengthen the resilience and sustainability of small-scale farming systems amid increasing climate uncertainty.

2 Theoretical framework: the risk perception-adaptation framework

This study is underpinned by the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework, which provides a useful theoretical lens for understanding how small-scale farmers interpret climate-related risks and develop responses to climate change. The framework is premised on the understanding that farmers’ responses to climate change are shaped not only by objective climatic conditions but also by how they perceive, interpret, and evaluate the risks associated with those conditions (Reddy et al., 2022). Climate change is therefore understood not only as a biophysical phenomenon characterised by rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, droughts, and floods, but also as a social and cognitive process through which individuals interpret environmental changes according to their experiences, knowledge, beliefs, and local circumstances. Consequently, farmers exposed to similar climatic conditions may perceive the severity and implications of climate risks differently and may consequently develop different attitudes toward climate change and possible responses.

At the centre of the framework is risk perception, which refers to an individual’s subjective assessment of the likelihood, severity, and potential consequences of climate-related threats to agricultural production, livelihoods, and household well-being (Belle et al., 2024). Risk perception provides an important conceptual link between observed climatic changes and farmers’ evaluations of whether these changes constitute a significant threat to their livelihoods. Farmers do not respond simply to droughts, floods, rising temperatures, or erratic rainfall; rather, their responses are shaped by how these events are experienced, interpreted, and evaluated. Farmers’ observations are therefore filtered through existing knowledge, farming experience, social interactions, and access to information, resulting in differences in the way climate risks are understood. Risk perception consequently represents a critical cognitive stage through which environmental changes acquire meaning and become relevant to agricultural decision-making.

The framework draws primarily on Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), which provides a basis for explaining how individuals cognitively evaluate threats and possible responses (Ricart et al., 2025). PMT distinguishes between two interrelated appraisal processes: threat appraisal and coping appraisal. Threat appraisal concerns the perceived severity of a threat and an individual’s susceptibility to its consequences, whereas coping appraisal concerns the perceived effectiveness, feasibility, and costs of available responses (Ricart et al., 2025; Reddy et al., 2022). In the agricultural context, threat appraisal may involve farmers’ assessment of the extent to which climate change threatens crop production, livestock, household income, food security, and water availability. Coping appraisal, in contrast, concerns whether farmers believe that available adaptation measures, such as changing planting dates, adopting drought-tolerant varieties, diversifying production, improving soil management, or investing in water-management practices, can effectively reduce these risks and are feasible within their resource constraints. The framework therefore provides an important distinction between recognising a climate risk and having the perceived capacity to respond to it.

This distinction is particularly important for understanding the relationship between awareness, perceptions, attitudes, and adaptation. Climate-change awareness represents farmers’ knowledge or recognition that climate change is occurring and may have consequences for agriculture. However, awareness does not necessarily imply that farmers perceive climate change as an immediate or significant threat, nor does it necessarily result in favourable attitudes toward adaptation. Perception involves the interpretation and evaluation of the risk, while attitudes reflect farmers’ beliefs, evaluations, concerns, and predispositions toward climate change and possible responses. Thus, awareness may provide an informational foundation for risk recognition, but the transition from awareness to perception and, subsequently, to attitudes is shaped by farmers’ experiences, information environments, perceived vulnerability, and assessments of available response options (Reddy et al., 2022; Belle et al., 2024).

Attitudes represent an important evaluative dimension within this process. They reflect how farmers assess climate change and climate-related responses, including their perceived benefits, concerns, willingness to support adaptation, and evaluation of whether responses are worthwhile. Farmers who perceive climate change as a serious threat may nevertheless hold less favourable attitudes toward adaptation if they consider available responses costly, ineffective, inaccessible, or beyond their control. Conversely, farmers who perceive adaptation measures as effective and feasible may develop more favourable attitudes toward climate-related responses. Attitudes, therefore, provide an important conceptual link between risk appraisal and potential adaptive behaviour, while recognising that favourable attitudes do not necessarily translate automatically into actual adaptation.

The framework further recognises that these cognitive processes are embedded within broader socioeconomic, informational, institutional, and environmental contexts. Factors such as age, gender, education, farming experience, household circumstances, access to climate information, extension services, agricultural training, financial resources, farmer organisations, and exposure to climatic events can shape how farmers recognise and evaluate climate risks (Belle et al., 2024; Reddy et al., 2022). These factors can operate through different pathways. For example, farming experience may provide opportunities for experiential learning; climate information can strengthen farmers’ understanding of climatic changes; extension and training can improve knowledge of available responses; farmer organisations can facilitate social learning and collective problem-solving; and financial resources can affect the perceived feasibility of implementing adaptation measures. The framework therefore situates farmers’ perceptions and attitudes within the institutional and resource environments that enable or constrain their capacity to respond.

This contextual dimension is particularly relevant to small-scale farmers, whose adaptation decisions are often constrained by limited access to land, finance, technology, markets, water infrastructure, extension services, and reliable climate information. Consequently, the same level of climate awareness may not yield the same perceptions or attitudes among farmers facing different resource and institutional conditions. The Risk Perception–Adaptation Framework therefore helps explain why climate adaptation should not be understood as a linear process in which awareness automatically leads to action. Rather, farmers’ responses emerge from the interaction between what they know about climate change, how they perceive the associated risks, how they evaluate possible responses, and the resources and institutional support available to them (Reddy et al., 2022).

The framework is particularly relevant to this study because it provides a coherent basis for examining the relationships between climate-change awareness, perceptions, attitudes, and the socioeconomic and institutional conditions surrounding small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality. The framework informs the expectation that socioeconomic and farm-level characteristics, access to climate information, and institutional support may be associated with farmers’ perceptions and attitudes. It also provides a basis for distinguishing between factors associated with farmers’ recognition and interpretation of climate risks and those associated with their evaluation of climate-related responses. This distinction is important because the empirical findings may demonstrate that the factors associated with perceptions are not necessarily the same as those associated with attitudes.

The framework also provides a basis for interpreting the study’s empirical findings. In particular, the significance of climate information can be understood in relation to threat appraisal and the interpretation of climatic changes, while farming experience can be understood as a potential source of experiential learning. Farmer-organisation membership and agricultural training can strengthen social learning, knowledge, and perceived response capacity, whereas extension services can provide technical and institutional support. Access to financial resources, meanwhile, may be more closely related to the feasibility of implementing adaptation than to the formation of perceptions or attitudes themselves. These distinctions allow the empirical results to be interpreted in relation to specific theoretical mechanisms rather than simply as statistical relationships.

Accordingly, the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework provides the theoretical foundation for examining the human dimensions of climate change among small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality. It enables the study to move beyond a narrow focus on whether farmers are aware of climate change by examining how they interpret climate-related risks, evaluate their implications for agriculture and livelihoods, and assess potential responses within their socioeconomic and institutional circumstances. The framework ultimately supports the study’s objective of generating context-specific evidence to inform climate communication, strengthen extension and agricultural support systems, and promote farmer-centred interventions that enhance the capacity and resilience of small-scale farming systems under increasing climate uncertainty.

3 Methodology

3.1 Description of the study area

The study was conducted in the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality, located in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. Geographically, the municipality is situated at approximately 29.8120° S and 30.8039° E and covers an area of about 2,291 km² [Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), 2016]. It is bordered by the iLembe District to the north, the Indian Ocean to the east, the Ugu District to the south, and the uMgungundlovu District to the west. As the economic hub of KwaZulu-Natal, eThekwini is home to approximately 3.98 million people and is characterised by a diverse mix of urban, peri-urban, and rural communities (Bolarinwa and Boikhutso, 2022). The municipality experiences high levels of poverty, inequality, and unemployment, which have contributed to the growing importance of small-scale agriculture as a livelihood and food security strategy among many households (CoGTA, 2020).

Agriculture plays a significant role in supporting livelihoods and local food systems within the municipality. Farming activities include the production of crops such as maize, beans, cabbage, spinach, tomatoes, and sugarcane, as well as livestock, poultry, aquaculture, and horticultural enterprises (Nyawo and Mubangizi, 2021; Hlomendlini, 2022). Small-scale farmers contribute substantially to household food security through both rural and urban agricultural initiatives, including home gardens, community gardens, hydroponic systems, and greenhouse production (Ogundeji, 2022; Khumalo et al., 2024). Despite their importance, many small-scale farmers operate under challenging conditions characterised by limited access to irrigation infrastructure, agricultural inputs, formal credit, extension services, secure land tenure, and reliable markets. These constraints often reduce their capacity to respond effectively to environmental and economic shocks.

The municipality experiences a humid subtropical climate, with warm temperatures and summer-dominant rainfall that have traditionally supported agricultural production (Busari et al., 2020). However, increasing climate variability has become a major concern for farming communities. Rising temperatures, declining and more erratic rainfall patterns, recurrent droughts, flooding events, and extreme weather conditions have negatively affected crop yields, water availability, and overall agricultural productivity (South African Weather Service (SAWS), 2022; Olabanji and Chitakira, 2025). The vulnerability of small-scale farmers is further exacerbated by limited adaptive resources and institutional support, making climate change a significant threat to livelihoods and food security. Given these challenges, eThekwini Municipality provides an appropriate setting for examining how small-scale farmers perceive climate change, how they experience its impacts, and how their attitudes may influence adaptation responses within a rapidly changing environmental and socio-economic context. Figure 1 shows the study sites.

Figure 1

3.2 Research design

This study employed a cross-sectional quantitative research design to examine the perceptions and attitudes of small-scale farmers toward climate change in eThekwini Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal. The cross-sectional design was deemed appropriate because it enabled the collection of data from many farmers at a single point in time, providing a comprehensive assessment of their perceptions and attitudes toward climate change and its implications for agricultural production and livelihoods. The quantitative approach facilitated the systematic collection and analysis of numerical data, allowing for the identification of patterns, trends, and relationships among demographic, socio-economic, institutional, and farm-level characteristics. To address the study objectives, descriptive statistical techniques were used to summarise the socio-economic characteristics of farmers, as well as their perceptions and attitudes toward climate change. Furthermore, econometric models were employed to examine the factors associated with small-scale farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change.

3.3 Sampling procedure and sample size

This study employed a multi-stage stratified random sampling technique to ensure the representative selection of small-scale farmers across the four administrative regions of eThekwini Municipality, namely the Central, Outer West, North, and South regions. These regions were selected because they differ in terms of agricultural activities, environmental conditions, and exposure to climate-related risks, thereby providing a suitable basis for examining farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change.

The sampling procedure consisted of three stages. In the first stage, the four regions of eThekwini Municipality were purposively selected for their active participation in small-scale agricultural production and their exposure to climate-related challenges, including droughts, flooding, erratic rainfall, and water scarcity. In the second stage, lists of small-scale farmers were obtained from relevant agricultural stakeholders and local extension offices. Farmers were then stratified by geographic location within the municipality to ensure adequate representation across the four regions. In the third stage, farmers were selected using simple random sampling from the sampling frame within each stratum. This approach minimised selection bias and enhanced the representativeness of the sample by ensuring that all eligible farmers had an equal chance of being selected.

The sample size was determined using Cochran's (1977) formula for estimating sample size for large populations:

Substituting these values into the formula:

Due to incomplete questionnaires, 296 valid responses were retained for analysis, representing 77.1% of the initially targeted sample. The sample obtained provided sufficient observations for the descriptive, comparative, and multivariable analyses conducted in the study. Nevertheless, a smaller sample size than the initial target may increase sampling uncertainty and limit the precision of estimates, particularly when detecting small associations. Furthermore, as the sampling frame was compiled from farmer lists obtained through agricultural stakeholders and extension offices, farmers not included in these lists may be underrepresented. Accordingly, the findings are interpreted in the context of the sampled small-scale farming population in eThekwini Municipality, with caution when extending them beyond this population.

3.4 Data collection

Primary data were collected from 296 small-scale farmers across the four regions of eThekwini Municipality using a structured questionnaire administered through face-to-face interviews. The questionnaire was developed based on the study objectives, relevant literature, and the Risk Perception–Adaptation Framework. The questionnaire covered demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, farming characteristics, climate change awareness, perceptions, attitudes, and access to institutional support. Perception and attitude items were measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“Strongly Disagree”) to 5 (“Strongly Agree”). Prior to the main survey, the questionnaire was pilot tested with 38 small-scale farmers, representing approximately 10% of the calculated sample size of 384 respondents. The pilot participants were not included in the final analytical sample. The pilot exercise assessed the clarity, sequencing, and comprehensibility of the questionnaire, and feedback was used to refine the instrument before the main survey. Internal consistency was subsequently assessed using Cronbach’s alpha based on the 296 observations included in the final analysis. The perception scale demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.923), while the attitude scale also demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.916), supporting the reliability of the constructs used in the analysis.

3.5 Data analysis

Following data collection, responses were coded, cleaned, and captured in Microsoft Excel before being exported to Stata version 19 for statistical analysis. Perception and attitude indices were constructed from Likert-scale statements and aggregated into composite measures capturing farmers’ overall perceptions of climate change and attitudes toward climate-related risks. These indices were subsequently used as dependent variables in the econometric analysis. Given the censored nature of the constructed indices, Tobit regression models were employed to identify factors associated with farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change. The use of the Tobit model enabled the examination of both the direction and magnitude of the relationships between explanatory variables and the perception and attitude indices, thereby providing insights into the factors shaping farmers’ views and responses to climate change.

3.5.1 Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics were employed to summarise the demographic, socio-economic, institutional, and farm-level characteristics of the small-scale farmers. The descriptive analysis included frequency distributions, percentages, means, and standard deviations, which were used to provide an overview of the characteristics of the farmers and key study variables. The results were presented using tables and figures to facilitate interpretation and enhance the visual presentation of the findings. In addition, descriptive statistics were used to assess farmers’ awareness of climate change, perceptions of climate-related risks, attitudes toward climate change, and observations of climatic changes within the study area. This analysis provided insights into how farmers perceived changes in temperature, rainfall patterns, drought occurrence, flooding events, water availability, and their implications for agricultural production and livelihoods. Furthermore, the descriptive analysis examined the distribution of responses across the various perception and attitude statements measured on Likert scales, thereby providing an initial understanding of farmers’ views regarding climate change.

3.5.2 Perception and attitude indices analysis

A comparative analysis was conducted to examine differences in perception and attitude indices between farmers who were aware of climate change and those who were not. The analysis was undertaken to determine whether climate change awareness was associated with variations in farmers’ perceptions of climate-related risks and their attitudes toward climate change. The perception and attitude indices were first computed from the Likert-scale statements presented in Table 1. Thereafter, farmers were classified into two groups based on their awareness of climate change: those who reported being aware and those who reported not being aware. Mean index scores and standard deviations were calculated for each group to facilitate comparison.

An independent-samples t-test was employed to assess whether statistically significant differences existed between the two groups in their perception and attitude indices. The t-test was considered appropriate because it compares the means of a continuous variable between two independent groups. The null hypothesis stated that there was no significant difference in perception and attitude indices between farmers who were aware of climate change and those who were not aware, while the alternative hypothesis stated that significant differences existed between the two groups.

To examine farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change, composite perception and attitude indices were constructed from the Likert-scale statements presented in Table 1. Farmers indicated their level of agreement with each statement using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree.” The perception statements captured farmers’ observations and experiences of climate change and its impacts on agricultural production and livelihoods, while the attitude statements assessed farmers’ beliefs, concerns, and predispositions toward climate change and climate-related risks. The responses to the Likert-scale statements were aggregated to generate composite indices of perception and attitude. The perception index measured the extent to which farmers recognised and understood climate-related changes and their impacts, while the attitude index measured the degree of concern, awareness, and responsiveness toward climate change. The resulting indices provided quantitative measures that facilitated the systematic assessment of farmers’ perceptions and attitudes and enabled subsequent econometric analysis.

3.5.3 The factors associated with farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change

To identify the factors associated with farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change, Tobit regression models were estimated. The Tobit model, originally developed by Tobin (1958), is designed for limited dependent variables that are restricted at specified lower and/or upper bounds. In this study, the perception and attitude indices were constructed from Likert-scale responses and normalised to values between 0 and 1. Importantly, both indices contained observations exactly equal to 0 and 1. Thus, the dependent variables were not only bounded within the unit interval but also exhibited observations at both boundaries, which was an important consideration in selecting the appropriate estimation approach.

The choice of the Tobit model was therefore based on the empirical distribution and measurement properties of the indices, rather than solely on their 0–1 range. The indices were treated as observed manifestations of underlying latent propensities for climate-risk perception and attitudes, subject to lower and upper limits. The Tobit specification provides a framework for modelling these limited outcomes while accounting for observations occurring at the boundary values (Tobin, 1958; Papke and Wooldridge, 1996). This specification was considered appropriate for the constructed indices because the study seeks to examine the socioeconomic, informational, farm-level, and institutional characteristics associated with variation in farmers’ underlying perceptions and attitudes.

Alternative approaches were considered based on the characteristics of the dependent variables. OLS with robust standard errors provides a useful linear specification but does not explicitly account for the restricted support of the indices and may generate predicted values outside the feasible 0–1 range. Fractional regression is specifically designed for dependent variables expressed as proportions or fractions within the unit interval (Papke and Wooldridge, 1996). Beta regression is also suitable for continuous outcomes defined strictly between 0 and 1 (Ferrari et al., 2004); however, standard beta regression does not accommodate observations exactly equal to 0 or 1 without modification. Given that both indices contain observations at these boundary values, the standard beta-regression specification was not directly applicable. The Tobit model was therefore retained as the principal specification because it accommodates the limited range of the indices and the observed boundary values within the modelling framework.

The use of Tobit models is also consistent with previous agricultural and climate-change studies examining bounded measures of farmers’ perceptions, attitudes, adaptation, and related behavioural outcomes (Belay et al., 2017; Reddy et al., 2022; Belle et al., 2024). The coefficients are interpreted as associations between the explanatory variables and farmers’ perception and attitude indices, rather than as causal effects, consistent with the study’s cross-sectional design.

The explanatory variables were selected based on the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework and previous empirical evidence. These included age, gender, marital status, education level, household size, household income, farming experience, farm size, distance to the farm, access to climate information, access to agricultural credit, membership in farmer organisations, access to extension services, agricultural training, and awareness of climate change. These variables capture key dimensions of farmers’ socioeconomic circumstances, human capital, farming experience, information access, and institutional support that may be associated with their perceptions and evaluations of climate-related risks (Reddy et al., 2022; Belle et al., 2024).

The Tobit model can be specified as follows:

Table 2 summarises the explanatory variables included in the Tobit regression models used to analyse the factors associated with small-scale farmers’ perceptions and attitudes toward climate change in eThekwini Municipality. The selected variables comprise demographic, socio-economic, farm-level, and institutional characteristics, including gender, age, marital status, household size, household income, education level, years of schooling, farming experience, distance to farm, access to climate information, access to agricultural credit, membership in farmer organisations, access to extension services, participation in agricultural training programmes, and awareness of climate change.

4 Results and discussion

4.1 Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the small-scale farmers

Understanding the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of small-scale farmers is important for interpreting the factors that are associated with their perceptions and attitudes toward climate change. These characteristics provide insights into farmers’ access to resources, exposure to information, farming experience, and capacity to respond to climate-related challenges. Table 3 presents the demographic, socio-economic, and institutional characteristics of the sampled small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality.

The socio-economic profile of small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality is characterised by a relatively high mean age of 53 years and long farming experience (14 years). These findings align with the study of Mthembu (2019), which revealed that smallholder and subsistence agriculture is dominated by older household heads, with average ages in the mid-50s in former homeland and peri-urban areas. This age structure suggests limited generational renewal in the sector and is consistent with concerns raised in national studies about low levels of youth participation in agriculture despite policy efforts to attract young farmers.

The study also revealed a relatively low average of 7.8 years of schooling among small-scale farmers, indicating that most respondents had not progressed beyond basic or lower secondary education. This finding is consistent with previous studies on smallholder farmers in South Africa, which have reported low levels of formal education among farming households (Gbetibouo, 2009; Elum et al., 2017). Limited educational attainment may constrain farmers’ ability to access, interpret, and utilise technical information related to climate change, agricultural innovations, and market opportunities. Furthermore, lower levels of education can reduce farmers’ capacity to engage effectively with extension services, adopt knowledge-intensive agricultural technologies, and make informed decisions regarding climate change adaptation. Consequently, educational attainment remains an important factor influencing the adaptive capacity and resilience of small-scale farming households.

Moreover, the large average household size of seven members reflects patterns reported in rural and peri-urban farming communities, where extended family structures provide labour for agricultural activities but simultaneously increase dependency burdens and demand on limited resources (Maziya et al., 2024; Ndlovu et al., 2020). Taken together, these parallels indicate that the demographic and socio-economic characteristics observed in eThekwini are broadly consistent with national smallholder trends, reinforcing the interpretation that age, education and household structure are key contextual factors shaping both farmers’ climate risk perceptions and their capacity to respond.

Small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality operate under tight and uneven resource conditions, with an average monthly household income of R3,581.60 and a high standard deviation of R5,171.77, indicating generally low incomes and significant inequality among households. This pattern aligns with broader evidence from South Africa showing that many smallholders and emerging farmers are clustered in the lowest income brackets and often cite a lack of finance as a major barrier to investing in inputs, technology, and climate adaptation measures (Aliber and Hall, 2012; Sebopetsa, 2018). Additionally, the average cultivated area of 1.35 hectares confirms the small-scale nature of farming in the area, consistent with national profiles that describe most smallholders as managing plots under 2 hectares, with limited economies of scale and increased vulnerability to climatic and market shocks. The average distance of 2.4 km between homesteads and fields indicates most farmers manage land close to their homes, reflecting findings from peri-urban and communal regions where land is nearby but scarce and often of marginal quality (Mthembu, 2019; Ndlovu et al., 2020). However, the average of 8.7 extension visits, with a large standard deviation of 8.5, shows highly unequal access to advisory services: some farmers receive frequent support from extension officers, while others get little or none, highlighting ongoing issues with public extension services in South Africa that remain inconsistent and inadequate for resource-poor smallholders (Sebopetsa, 2018). Limited income, small landholdings, and uneven extension support collectively hinder their ability to invest in and sustain effective climate change adaptation measures.

Regarding employment status, the results show that a large majority of farmers (83.50%) were unemployed, while only 16.50% reported being formally employed, underscoring the importance of small-scale agriculture as a primary livelihood and food security strategy in the study area. This pattern is consistent with Aliber and Hall (2012) and Pienaar and Traub (2015), indicating that smallholder agriculture frequently serves as a safety net and the primary source of income in the absence of formal employment opportunities. Moreover, the educational profile of farmers indicates that 48.65% had completed secondary education, 26.69% had attained only basic education, approximately 17% had never attended school, and just 6.76% possessed tertiary qualifications. This distribution suggests that, although most farmers have some formal schooling that supports basic literacy and numeracy, the very low proportion with tertiary education may constrain access to specialised agricultural and climate-related knowledge and limit their ability to interpret complex technical information, a concern echoed in studies linking limited education to lower uptake of information-intensive technologies and climate-smart practices among smallholders (Elum et al., 2017). Furthermore, the combination of high unemployment and modest education levels reinforces farmers’ dependence on agriculture while simultaneously restricting their human capital base for engaging with advanced adaptation options, mirroring broader findings that resource-poor smallholders often rely heavily on farming yet face significant constraints in responding to climate risks (Sebopetsa, 2018; Aliber and Hall, 2012). However, the relatively high share of farmers with at least secondary education also suggests a potential opportunity: with appropriately tailored extension, training and communication strategies that match farmers’ literacy levels, this educational base could be leveraged to enhance understanding and uptake of improved agronomic and climate adaptation practices, thereby strengthening adaptive capacity despite structural labour market and educational limitations (Sebopetsa, 2018).

Land tenure results show that most farmers (88.55%) own their land outright, while smaller proportions report owning land that is not fully paid off (3.03%), holding Permission to Occupy (PTO) rights (3.03%), renting land (0.67%), or accessing land through other arrangements (4.71%). This pattern indicates a relatively high level of tenure security among small-scale farmers in the area, which, as the literature suggests, is generally linked to a greater willingness to invest in long-term agricultural improvements and climate adaptation measures, as farmers are more confident, they will see future benefits from their investments (Cousins, 2013; Aliber and Cousins, 2013). Additionally, access to agricultural credit is notably low, with only 15.82% of farmers reporting access, implying that even with secure tenure, financial constraints can significantly hinder investments in improved technologies, inputs, and adaptation strategies such as irrigation infrastructure, drought-tolerant crops, or soil and water conservation practices, challenges often noted in studies of South African smallholders (Aliber and Hall, 2012; DAFF, 2013). Furthermore, a substantial portion of farmers (76.01%) have participated in agricultural training programs, indicating that training plays a vital role in enhancing farmers’ knowledge and skills and may help offset financial and institutional gaps by boosting their capacity to interpret climate information and implement low-cost adaptation options. This aligns with evidence that training and extension services are essential enablers of climate-smart agriculture among resource-poor farmers (Sebopetsa, 2018; Makate et al., 2019). However, the coexistence of high land ownership with limited access to credit and partial training coverage highlights a key policy gap: without mechanisms that convert secure land tenure and acquired skills into affordable finance and practical support, farmers’ ability to undertake more capital-intensive and transformative adaptation measures may remain limited.

The results show that 70.27% of farmers have access to climate-related information, while 29.73% do not. This indicates that a large majority are at least partially connected to sources like extension services, media, or farmer networks. Such access is vital because timely and clear climate information can help farmers make better-informed decisions, enhance their understanding of climate risks and opportunities, and promote the adoption of adaptation practices (Ziervogel et al., 2014). Additionally, about 69.70% of farmers are aware of climate change, compared to 30.30% who are unaware, showing that awareness is increasing among small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality, consistent with studies indicating rising climate-change awareness among South African smallholders (Nhemachena and Hassan, 2007; Elum et al., 2017). However, a significant portion of farmers either lack access to climate information or remain unaware of climate change, highlighting ongoing communication and knowledge gaps. This aligns with evidence that many resource-poor farmers are still underserved by formal climate services and extension efforts (Aliber and Hall, 2012; Sebopetsa, 2018). Therefore, there is an ongoing need for targeted climate communication, education, and extension programs that not only raise awareness but also translate climate information into locally relevant, actionable advice for agricultural practices and livelihoods.

4.2 Sources of climate information

Figure 2 presents the sources of climate information accessed by small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality.

Figure 2

The results reveal that access to climate information remains uneven across the farming population, with 29.7% of farmers reporting no access, making this the largest category. This suggests that a substantial proportion of small-scale farmers lack information that could help them understand climate variability, anticipate weather-related risks, and make informed agricultural decisions, echoing broader findings that many African smallholders still do not receive relevant climate information services (Moyo et al., 2023). Among those with access, television emerged as the most important source (21.9%), followed by the internet (19.5%) and farmer organisations (13.5%), indicating that mass media, digital platforms and social networks are central channels through which climate-related information reaches farmers. Moreover, the prominence of television and internet-based sources suggests that many farmers rely on broadly framed, often national or regional information, which can raise general awareness of climate change but may not provide the location-specific, management-oriented recommendations needed for farm-level decision-making, a limitation highlighted in studies showing that broadcast climate information is often too generic for operational use by smallholders (Zuma-Netshiukhwi et al., 2013; Clarkson et al., 2023). Farmer organisations, used by 13.5% of farmers, serve as important platforms for knowledge sharing, collective learning, and peer exchange, yet their relatively modest use suggests an underutilised opportunity to strengthen the dissemination of climate information and co-learning processes (Makate et al., 2019).

Of particular concern is the limited role of formal agricultural advisory services: only 7.7% of farmers identified extension services as a source of climate information, and 7.4% relied on radio. This is troubling given that extension and community media are widely recognised as key intermediaries for translating scientific climate information into context-specific, actionable advice for smallholders (Kalala, 2025). The low utilisation of extension services, therefore, raises questions about the reach, accessibility and perceived relevance of existing agricultural support systems in promoting climate awareness and resilience among small-scale farmers, in line with critiques that extension systems often lack capacity, resources or appropriate communication strategies to meet farmers’ climate information needs (Sebopetsa, 2018). These findings suggest that gaps in access to climate information contribute to variation in awareness and perceptions in the study area. Strengthening dissemination through extension services, better-resourced farmer organisations, and tailored digital and broadcast platforms could improve farmers’ understanding of climate change and their capacity to respond effectively to risks (Moyo et al., 2023).

4.3 Perceptions of climate change awareness among small-scale farmers

The findings presented in Table 4 provide insights into small-scale farmers’ perceptions of climate change and its effects on agricultural production in eThekwini Municipality. Understanding farmers’ perceptions is important because they shape how farmers interpret climate-related risks, respond to environmental changes, and make decisions about agricultural production and adaptation. The results indicate that most farmers perceive climate change as a significant challenge affecting their farming activities, although there are variations in how they view specific climate-related issues.

The statement “Climate change has negatively affected crop yields in my farming activities” assessed farmers’ perceptions of climate change’s impact on agricultural productivity. The results show that 83% of farmers agreed and 10% strongly agreed with the statement, while only 1% disagreed and 6% remained neutral. This means that 93% of farmers perceived climate change as negatively affecting crop yields. The high level of agreement suggests that farmers have experienced declining productivity, which they attribute to changing climatic conditions, including irregular rainfall, heat stress, and prolonged dry periods. These findings indicate a strong awareness among farmers of the adverse effects of climate change on agricultural production and livelihoods.

The statement “Changes in rainfall patterns have made farming more difficult over the past 10 years” assessed farmers’ perceptions of rainfall variability and its influence on farming operations. The results reveal overwhelming agreement: 91% strongly agree, 6% agree, 2% strongly disagree, and 1% remain neutral. Overall, 97% of farmers acknowledged that changes in rainfall patterns have increased farming challenges. This finding suggests that farmers are highly aware of rainfall variability and regard it as one of the most significant manifestations of climate change. Erratic rainfall patterns can disrupt planting schedules, reduce crop establishment, increase crop failures, and negatively affect overall farm productivity, thereby reinforcing farmers’ perceptions of climate-related risks.

The statement “Water shortages caused by climate change are affecting agricultural production in my area” examined farmers’ perceptions regarding the impact of water scarcity on agricultural activities. The results show that 68% of farmers agreed and 19% strongly agreed, while 13% remained neutral. Notably, no farmers disagreed with the statement. Therefore, 87% of the farmers perceived water shortages as a major challenge affecting agricultural production. Water availability is a critical factor for crop and livestock production, particularly among small-scale farmers who depend largely on rainfall. The findings suggest that farmers recognise increasing water scarcity because of climate variability and perceive it as a threat to agricultural productivity and household food security.

Although the primary focus of this study is on perceptions and attitudes toward climate change, farmers were also asked whether “climate-smart agriculture practices can help farmers adapt to climate variability.” This statement assessed farmers’ attitudes toward adaptation measures that may reduce climate-related risks. The results indicate that 50% of farmers agreed with the statement, while 42% disagreed, 2% strongly disagreed, and 6% remained neutral. These findings reveal mixed opinions regarding the effectiveness of climate-smart agricultural practices. While half of the farmers viewed such practices positively, a substantial proportion expressed scepticism. This may reflect limited awareness, inadequate access to information and training, or uncertainty regarding the benefits and practicality of implementing climate-smart agricultural practices under local conditions.

The statement “The occurrence of droughts has increased in my community in recent years” measured farmers’ perceptions of changes in drought frequency. The results show that 14% agreed and 10% strongly agreed, while 25% disagreed and 15% strongly disagreed. Furthermore, 37% of farmers were neutral. These findings suggest that perceptions of increasing drought occurrence are less consistent than perceptions of rainfall variability and water shortages. The high proportion of neutral responses may indicate uncertainty among farmers about long-term drought trends or differences in experiences across locations within the municipality. This variation may also be attributed to the diverse agroecological conditions in eThekwini Municipality, where some communities experience more frequent droughts than others.

The results demonstrate that small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality generally perceive climate change as a significant threat to agricultural production. Most farmers associated climate change with declining crop yields, changing rainfall patterns, and increasing water shortages. These findings suggest a relatively high level of awareness of climate-related challenges among farmers. However, perceptions regarding drought occurrence and the effectiveness of climate-smart agricultural practices were more varied, highlighting the need for improved climate information dissemination, extension support, and farmer education programmes. Enhancing farmers’ understanding of climate change and adaptation options may strengthen their capacity to respond effectively to climate-related risks and improve the resilience of small-scale farming systems in the municipality.

4.4 Comparative analysis of farmers’ perceptions of climate change

To further examine farmers’ perceptions of climate change, a composite perception index was constructed using responses to the perception statements presented in Table 5. The index provided an aggregate measure of farmers’ perceptions regarding the impacts of climate change on agricultural production and livelihoods, with higher values indicating stronger perceptions of climate-related risks and impacts. Given that awareness is often considered an important precursor to risk perception and adaptation behaviour, an independent-samples t-test was conducted to determine whether there were significant differences between farmers who were aware of climate change and those who were not. Comparing perception scores between these two groups provides insights into whether climate change awareness is associated with stronger perceptions of climate-related risks among small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality.

The perception index results indicate that both climate-change-aware and non-aware farmers in the sample exhibit relatively high perceived climate risk, with mean scores of 0.679 and 0.694, respectively, and an overall mean of 0.683. The small difference between the two groups suggests that self-reported awareness of “climate change” as a concept is not a prerequisite for recognising its impacts in day-to-day farming. This pattern resonates with other studies showing that smallholder and emerging farmers widely report warmer temperatures, shifting or shorter rainy seasons, more frequent droughts and declining yields, even where formal climate-change knowledge is uneven (Benhin, 2006; Elum et al., 2017; Gbetibouo, 2009). The study by Makate et al. (2019) finds that most farmers perceive decreased or poorly distributed rainfall, later onset and earlier cessation of rains, and associate these trends with crop failure, reduced income and heightened livelihood vulnerability. Similarly, the study by Aliber and Cousins (2013) shows that a large proportion are aware of climate change and report experiencing more frequent droughts and heat stress and highlights that access to information and extension services shapes how this awareness is articulated. Taken together, these consistencies between the current results and South African evidence suggest that the high perception indices observed in this study likely reflect farmers’ repeated exposure to water scarcity, crop stress, yield instability and income fluctuations, which make climate-related risks highly salient in their production decisions, regardless of whether they explicitly label these experiences as “climate change” in a scientific sense.

The mean difference between farmers who were aware of climate change and those who were not was relatively small (0.016), indicating only a marginal difference in perceptions of climate change between the two groups. To determine whether this observed difference was statistically significant, an independent-samples t-test was conducted. The results yielded a t-value of 0.521 and a p-value of 0.603. Since the p-value is greater than the conventional significance level of 0.05, the null hypothesis of no difference in perception between the two groups cannot be rejected. This implies that there is no statistically significant difference in climate change perceptions between farmers who reported being aware of climate change and those who reported not being aware.

The absence of a statistically significant difference in perception indices between climate-change-aware and non-aware farmers suggests that perceptions of climate-related risks are relatively widespread among small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality, regardless of their self-reported awareness of climate change. This implies that both groups recognise and experience the adverse effects of changing climatic conditions in broadly similar ways, despite differences in formal climate-change knowledge or terminology. Similar patterns are reported by Mpandeli and Maponya (2014) and Elum et al. (2017), with high proportions of smallholder farmers perceiving declining rainfall reliability, rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, flooding events, and reduced agricultural productivity, even when many have limited exposure to formal climate-change information or support programmes. These findings point to the central role of direct, repeated experiences of climatic variability and extreme weather events in shaping farmers’ risk perceptions: farmers who do not identify as being “aware of climate change” in a scientific sense may nonetheless have observed erratic rainfall, more frequent dry spells and crop failures, leading them to perceive climate-related risks in a manner comparable to those who report being aware (Ncube et al., 2023). In this context, the current results from eThekwini Municipality reinforce the argument that experiential learning and lived exposure to climate shocks can generate strong perceptions of climate risk independently of formal awareness campaigns, underscoring the need for interventions that connect scientific climate information to the realities farmers already observe on their fields.

In relation to the study title, “The Perceptions and Attitudes of Small-Scale Farmers Toward Climate Change,” these findings demonstrate that perceptions of climate change are generally high across the farming population and are not significantly differentiated by awareness status. The results suggest that climate-related challenges are commonly experienced and recognised by farmers within the municipality, irrespective of whether they explicitly identify these experiences as climate change. This finding supports the argument that lived experiences of environmental change play an important role in shaping climate risk perceptions among small-scale farmers.

From a policy perspective, the findings imply that increasing awareness alone may not necessarily lead to stronger perceptions of climate-related risks, as many farmers already recognise the impacts of changing climatic conditions through their everyday farming experiences. Consequently, climate communication and extension programmes should move beyond simply raising awareness and focus on improving farmers’ understanding of the causes, long-term implications, and appropriate responses to climate change. Strengthening access to climate information, extension support, agricultural training, and adaptation resources may therefore be more effective in enhancing farmers’ adaptive capacity and promoting climate-resilient agricultural systems in eThekwini Municipality.

4.5 Attitudes of small-scale farmers toward climate change

The findings presented in Table 6 provide insights into small-scale farmers’ attitudes toward climate change and climate-related adaptation in eThekwini Municipality. Attitudes toward climate change are important because they are associated with how farmers evaluate climate-related risks, perceive the need for adaptation, and respond to environmental challenges. Positive attitudes are often associated with a greater willingness to seek information, support adaptation initiatives, and implement measures to reduce vulnerability to climate-related shocks. The results indicate that most farmers recognise climate change as an important issue affecting agricultural production and livelihoods and acknowledge the need for actions to strengthen resilience and sustainability within farming systems.

The results in Table 6 indicates that small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality generally hold high levels of concern about climate change, but this concern does not always translate into a clear willingness to act. Most farmers perceived climate change as a serious threat to agricultural production, with 59% either agreeing or strongly agreeing, and a similar proportion (61%) agreed or strongly agreed that climate change poses a significant risk to their households’ livelihoods. This aligns with studies showing that many African smallholders increasingly perceive climate change as a major risk to both production and household welfare (Nhamo et al., 2019). Farmers’ concern about the future is also evident, as 60% expressed worry about the long-term impacts of climate change on farming, with only 18% disagreeing, reflecting findings that farmers often view climate change as a persistent and escalating threat rather than a short-term shock (Below et al., 2012).

Furthermore, 61% of farmers agreed or strongly agreed that farmers should take action to reduce the impacts of climate change, and 60% felt that farmers should receive climate change information, indicating a generally positive and proactive attitude toward adaptation, consistent with evidence that awareness of climate risks often coexists with a stated willingness to adapt. However, only 48% expressed willingness to adopt measures to reduce the impacts of climate change on their farms, while 36% disagreed, indicating a clear attitude–behaviour gap. Similar gaps have been documented in other smallholder contexts, where structural constraints such as limited access to finance, land, labour, information, and institutional support inhibit the translation of concern and positive attitudes into concrete adaptation practices (Gbetibouo, 2009; Antwi-Agyei et al., 2015). Finally, 59% of farmers agreed or strongly agreed that addressing climate change is important for improving food security and agricultural sustainability, demonstrating awareness of the links between climate change, agricultural productivity and household food security, in line with studies that highlight farmers’ recognition of climate change as a key threat to sustainable livelihoods (Bryan et al., 2013; Elum et al., 2017). The findings suggest that farmers in eThekwini are “climate-concerned but constrained”: they recognise climate risks, value information, and support the idea of adaptation, yet face barriers that prevent these attitudes from consistently translating into adaptation behaviour.

4.6 Comparative analysis of farmers’ attitudes toward climate change

To further examine farmers’ attitudes toward climate change, an independent samples t-test was conducted using a composite attitude index. The attitude index was constructed from a series of statements that measured farmers’ views regarding the seriousness of climate change, its impacts on agricultural production and livelihoods, the need for adaptation, and the importance of taking actions to reduce climate-related risks. Attitudes toward climate change are important because they shape how farmers respond to environmental challenges, evaluate adaptation options, and make decisions about climate risk management. Comparing attitude indices between farmers who were aware of climate change and those who were not aware provides valuable insights into whether awareness is associated with farmers’ attitudes toward climate-related issues.

The results presented in Table 7 indicate that farmers who were not aware of climate change had a mean attitude index of 0.574 (SD = 0.135), whereas those who were aware of climate change had a mean attitude index of 0.538 (SD = 0.240). The overall mean attitude index for the sample was 0.549 (SD = 0.214). These mean values suggest that, on average, farmers held moderately positive attitudes toward climate change and recognised its implications for agricultural production and livelihoods.

The mean difference between the two groups was relatively small (0.036), indicating only limited variation in attitudes toward climate change between aware and non-aware farmers, a pattern also reported in studies where farmers who do not explicitly identify as “climate-change aware” nonetheless express great concern about changing weather conditions and their impacts (Antwi-Agyei et al., 2015). The independent samples t-test yielded a t-value of 1.327 and a p-value of 0.186, and because this p-value exceeds the conventional 0.05 threshold, the null hypothesis of no difference in attitudes between the two groups cannot be rejected; in other words, there is no statistically significant difference in attitudes toward climate change across awareness levels. This absence of a significant difference suggests that positive attitudes toward climate change are relatively widespread among small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality, regardless of whether they explicitly identify themselves as being aware of climate change, echoing findings that lived experience of climate variability can generate concern even in the absence of formal climate literacy (Bryan et al., 2013).

Although farmers classified as unaware recorded a slightly higher mean attitude score, this difference is not statistically meaningful, implying that farmers’ attitudes are shaped not only by formal awareness but also by direct experiences of climatic variability, such as changing rainfall patterns, droughts, water shortages and declining agricultural productivity (Nhemachena and Hassan, 2007; Moyo et al., 2012). Consequently, even farmers who do not explicitly label these phenomena as “climate change” may still appreciate the importance of addressing environmental challenges that affect their farming activities. Taken together with the perception results, the findings indicate that climate-related concerns and generally positive attitudes toward addressing climate risks are shared by both aware and non-aware farmers, underscoring the central role of lived experience and risk exposure in shaping attitudes toward climate-related risks and challenges.

The findings provide support for the Risk Perception–Adaptation Framework underpinning this study. While the framework suggests that awareness may be associated with attitudes and subsequent behavioural responses, the results indicate that awareness alone may not be sufficient to explain differences in farmers’ attitudes. Other factors, such as farming experience, exposure to climate-related shocks, access to information, socio-economic conditions, and institutional support, may also play important roles in shaping attitudes toward climate change.

From a policy perspective, the findings imply that efforts to strengthen climate resilience should extend beyond raising awareness alone. While awareness remains important, interventions should also focus on enhancing farmers’ access to climate information, extension services, training programmes, and adaptation resources. Such measures can help translate generally positive attitudes toward climate change into practical adaptation actions, thereby strengthening the resilience and sustainability of small-scale farming systems in eThekwini Municipality.

4.7 Factors associated with farmers’ perception towards climate change

The model was estimated using 296 observations and produced a likelihood ratio chi-square statistic of 21.043, which was statistically significant at the 5% level (Prob > χ² = 0.035). This indicates that the explanatory variables included in the model jointly explain variation in farmers’ perceptions of climate change and that the model provides a better fit than a model with no explanatory variables. The mean perception index was 0.685, with a standard deviation of 0.233, suggesting that farmers generally exhibited relatively strong perceptions of climate change and its impacts on agricultural production and livelihoods. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) values were −10.612 and 52.009, respectively. These information criteria provide useful measures for evaluating model adequacy and for comparing alternative model specifications, with lower values generally indicating a more parsimonious and better-fitting model (see Table 8).

The statistically significant chi-square likelihood ratio statistic suggests that the Tobit model was appropriate for examining the factors associated with small-scale farmers’ perceptions of climate change in eThekwini Municipality. The model, therefore, provides a reliable basis for interpreting the effects of the explanatory variables on farmers’ perception levels.

Marital status was positively associated with farmers’ perception scores (β = 0.045; p = 0.049). Although marital status is not a direct measure of climate exposure, it may capture differences in household responsibilities, livelihood priorities, and the consequences attached to agricultural losses. Small-scale farming in eThekwini is embedded within household livelihood systems, where agricultural production can contribute to food consumption, income generation, and household security. Farmers responsible for supporting spouses and other household members may therefore attach greater importance to changes in rainfall, drought, water availability, and crop productivity because the consequences of production shocks extend beyond the individual farmer. The relationship may consequently reflect differences in the salience of climate risk, rather than differences in physical exposure. This is consistent with the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework, which conceptualises risk perception as a process through which individuals evaluate environmental threats in relation to their circumstances and potential consequences (Böhm and Tanner, 2018). Within this framework, the same environmental change may be evaluated differently depending on the perceived consequences for livelihood security. Reddy et al. (2022) and Belle et al. (2024) similarly emphasise that farmers’ responses to climate risks are embedded within socioeconomic and institutional conditions. The finding therefore suggests that household-level circumstances may form part of the context through which climate risks acquire meaning for farmers.

Access to climate information was also positively associated with perceptions (β = 0.060; p = 0.046). This relationship provides stronger evidence for the informational mechanism underlying climate-risk perception. Farmers do not necessarily interpret individual weather events as evidence of broader climatic change without access to information that helps them contextualise their experiences. Climate information can provide farmers with information about rainfall patterns, temperature trends, drought conditions, seasonal forecasts, and expected agricultural risks, allowing them to compare their own experiences with broader climatic signals. In this respect, information can strengthen the threat-appraisal component of the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework by improving farmers’ ability to recognise, interpret, and evaluate climate-related risks (Bryan et al., 2013). This finding is particularly important because the study population does not uniformly experience access to climate information. Approximately 70.27% of farmers reported having access to climate-related information, while 29.73% reported no access. Moreover, television and internet-based sources were more prominent than formal agricultural extension services. This creates an important distinction between information availability and information usability. Farmers may have access to general information about climate change without receiving information that is sufficiently localised or specific to support agricultural decision-making. Zuma-Netshiukhwi et al. (2013) and Moyo et al. (2023) similarly highlight the importance of climate information services in improving farmers’ understanding of climate variability but also point to challenges surrounding the accessibility and usefulness of such information.

These results indicate that farmers’ understanding of climate change in eThekwini is associated more closely with access to information and household circumstances than with age, income, education, or financial access alone. The results therefore provide a more nuanced picture than a simple awareness-based explanation of climate perception. Farmers interpret climate risks within particular livelihood contexts, drawing on information as well as their own observations and experiences. This supports the Risk Perception–Adaptation Framework and suggests that climate-risk communication should integrate formal climate information with farmers’ experiential knowledge and locally specific agricultural realities.

4.8 Factors associated with farmers’ attitudes towards climate change

The model was estimated using 296 observations and produced a likelihood ratio chi-square statistic of 30.650, which was statistically significant at the 1% level (Prob > χ² = 0.010) (see Table 9). This indicates that the explanatory variables included in the model jointly explained variation in farmers’ attitudes toward climate change. The mean attitude index was 0.550, with a standard deviation of 0.212, suggesting that farmers generally exhibited moderately positive attitudes toward climate change and climate-related adaptation measures. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) values were 22.835 and 85.456, respectively, providing measures of model adequacy and benchmarks for comparison with alternative model specifications. The statistically significant chi-square statistic indicates that the Tobit model was appropriate for analysing the factors associated with small-scale farmers’ attitudes toward climate change in eThekwini Municipality.

The results presented in Table 3 show that several demographic, experiential, informational and institutional factors significantly shape farmers’ attitudes toward climate change in eThekwini Municipality.

Gender was positively associated with farmers’ attitudes toward climate change at the 10% significance level (β = 0.058; p = 0.080). This relationship may reflect differences in access to agricultural resources, climate information, decision-making opportunities, and institutional support. Gender can shape the resources and information available to farmers and, consequently, how they assess both the seriousness of climate risks and the feasibility of responding to them. Bryan et al. (2013) show that differences in access to resources and information can contribute to differentiated climate adaptation responses among smallholder farmers. Within the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework, these differences are relevant to coping appraisal, as farmers evaluate whether they possess the resources, knowledge, and opportunities required to respond to perceived climate threats (Budhathoki et al., 2020). The positive association therefore suggests that gender-related differences in the institutional and resource environment may contribute to differences in attitudes toward climate-related responses.

Farming experience was positively associated with farmers’ attitudes (β = 0.003; p = 0.087). Farming experience provides an important channel through which farmers accumulate knowledge of local environmental conditions and production risks. Farmers with longer experience are more likely to have encountered droughts, irregular rainfall, flooding, changes in planting seasons, pest pressures, and fluctuations in crop productivity. Repeated exposure to such events can strengthen farmers’ understanding of the consequences of climate variability and increase the salience of adaptation as a farm-management concern. This is consistent with findings that farming experience is associated with farmers’ recognition of climate change and their adaptation responses (Deressa et al., 2011; Belay et al., 2017). The finding is particularly relevant when considered alongside the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework. Experience can contribute to threat appraisal by allowing farmers to recognise recurring climatic signals, while simultaneously contributing to coping appraisal by providing practical knowledge of which responses may be feasible under local farming conditions (Budhathoki et al., 2020). Farming experience should therefore not be viewed simply as an indicator of age or accumulated years in agriculture; it represents an important source of experiential learning through which farmers develop their understanding of climate-related risks.

Access to climate information was positively associated with attitudes (β = 0.066; p = 0.022). This was one of the more important findings because climate information was also significantly associated with farmers’ perceptions. The consistency across the two models suggests that information may operate across different stages of the climate-risk appraisal process. Information can initially help farmers recognise and interpret climatic changes and subsequently help them evaluate the seriousness of these risks and the potential value of available responses. This closely aligns with the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework, in which information contributes to both threat and coping appraisals (Bryan et al., 2013). The eThekwini context is particularly important here. Although 70.27% of farmers reported access to climate-related information, 29.73% reported no access, and formal extension services represented only a relatively small proportion of reported information sources. This uneven information environment may limit farmers’ ability to translate climate knowledge into informed agricultural responses. More importantly, the finding suggests that the value of climate information depends on whether it is relevant to farmers’ actual decisions. General information about climate change may increase understanding of the problem, whereas timely information on seasonal rainfall, drought risk, water availability, planting conditions, and appropriate agricultural practices may be more relevant to farmers’ adaptation decisions. Evidence from South Africa similarly highlights the role of climate information in strengthening farmers’ capacity to interpret climate variability and respond to associated agricultural risks (Zuma-Netshiukhwi et al., 2013; Moyo et al., 2023).

Membership in a farmer organisation was positively associated with attitudes (β = 0.060; p = 0.018). This finding highlights the importance of the social and institutional dimensions of climate adaptation. Farmer organisations can provide platforms for farmers to exchange information, share experiences, learn from peers, access agricultural support, and collectively respond to production challenges. Such interactions may reduce uncertainty surrounding climate risks and increase farmers’ awareness of practical adaptation options. From the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework, farmer organisations may strengthen coping appraisal by increasing access to knowledge, social support, and institutional resources. A farmer who observes other members successfully implementing climate-smart practices may develop greater confidence in the feasibility of similar responses. Collective organisations can therefore connect individual perceptions of climate risk with practical opportunities for action. This is consistent with evidence that farmer organisations and collective approaches can facilitate knowledge exchange and the uptake of climate-smart agricultural practices (Makate et al., 2019).

Agricultural training was positively associated with attitudes at the 10% significance level (β = 0.021; p = 0.100). Training may strengthen attitudes by increasing farmers’ knowledge of available adaptation measures and their understanding of how to implement such practices under local production conditions. Its role can therefore be interpreted primarily in terms of coping appraisal. Farmers may recognise climate change as a threat but remain uncertain about what actions are appropriate, affordable, or technically feasible. Training can help reduce this uncertainty by providing practical knowledge and strengthening farmers’ confidence in potential responses (Budhathoki et al., 2020; Reddy et al., 2022). The relationship between training and attitudes is also important in light of the study’s broader finding that awareness alone was not sufficient to distinguish farmers’ attitudes. This suggests that climate-change communication needs to be connected to practical agricultural knowledge. Training that demonstrates climate-smart practices, water-management options, soil-management techniques, crop diversification, and other locally appropriate responses may be more likely to strengthen farmers’ orientation toward adaptation than information that focuses exclusively on the causes and consequences of climate change.

The negative association between the frequency of extension visits and farmers’ attitudes (β = −0.003; p = 0.083) is noteworthy and may reflect the nature and targeting of extension support rather than a detrimental role of extension services. Farmers experiencing greater production difficulties may receive more frequent visits because they require additional assistance, while the frequency of contact does not necessarily capture the quality, climate relevance, or practical usefulness of the advice provided. Extension services may also focus primarily on immediate production challenges, with limited emphasis on climate-risk management and adaptation. Previous research has identified constraints in the provision of climate-related information and support through agricultural extension systems (Davis and Terblanche, 2016; Zuma-Netshiukhwi et al., 2013). The finding therefore highlights the distinction between extension contact and extension effectiveness, suggesting that strengthening climate adaptation requires extension services to provide targeted climate information, practical adaptation guidance, and sustained technical support rather than simply increasing the frequency of farmer contacts.

These significant associations indicate that farmers’ attitudes toward climate change are closely linked to farming experience, access to climate information, collective organisation, training, and institutional engagement. Within the Risk Perception-Adaptation Framework, these factors represent complementary pathways through which farmers develop experiential knowledge, assess climate-related threats, evaluate available responses, and build confidence in their capacity to adapt. The findings therefore suggest that strengthening climate adaptation in eThekwini requires interventions that move beyond awareness-raising towards an enabling institutional environment that combines locally relevant climate information, practical adaptation training, effective extension support, and stronger farmer organisations. Such integrated support can strengthen farmers’ knowledge, social learning, and perceived capacity to respond to climate risks, thereby providing more credible pathways for building adaptive capacity and resilient small-scale farming systems

5 Conclusion and recommendations

The findings of this study demonstrate that small-scale farmers in eThekwini Municipality possess a high level of awareness and understanding of climate change, primarily shaped by their direct experiences of declining crop yields, erratic rainfall patterns, and increasing water shortages. Farmers generally perceive climate change as a serious threat to agricultural productivity, household livelihoods, and long-term food security, and acknowledge the importance of adaptation as a necessary response. However, the study reveals that positive perceptions and attitudes do not automatically translate into adaptive action. The relatively low willingness to adopt climate change adaptation measures highlights significant institutional, financial, technological, and informational barriers that constrain farmers’ adaptive capacity. Furthermore, the absence of significant differences in perceptions and attitudes between climate change-aware and less-aware farmers suggests that experiential knowledge of climate variability may be more strongly associated with farmers’ responses than awareness campaigns alone. The Tobit regression analysis further confirms that access to climate information, agricultural training, farmer organisations, farming experience, gender, and marital status are important determinants influencing how farmers perceive and respond to climate change.

Based on these findings, the study recommends a transition from awareness-centred interventions to integrated, farmer-centred adaptation strategies that address the practical constraints that limit climate resilience. Policymakers should prioritise strengthening climate information services, climate-smart agricultural extension, farmer training programmes, and institutional support systems that provide timely, location-specific, and actionable climate information. Equally important is improving farmers’ access to adaptation finance, climate-resilient technologies, water harvesting and irrigation infrastructure, and well-functioning farmer organisations that facilitate collective learning and knowledge exchange. Climate change adaptation should be mainstreamed into municipal and agricultural development planning through coordinated partnerships involving government departments, research institutions, municipalities, extension services, non-governmental organisations, financial institutions, and the private sector. Such collaborative and evidence-based interventions will enhance the adaptive capacity of small-scale farmers, promote sustainable agricultural production, strengthen rural livelihoods, and contribute significantly to long-term food security and climate resilience in eThekwini Municipality and other vulnerable farming communities across South Africa.

References

• 1

  AliberM.CousinsB. (2013). Livelihoods after land reform in South Africa. J. Agrar. Chang.13, 140–165. doi: 10.1111/joac.12012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AliberM.HallR. (2012). Support for smallholder farmers in South Africa: challenges of scale and strategy. Dev. South. Afr.29, 548–562. doi: 10.1080/0376835X.2012.715441

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  Antwi-AgyeiP.DougillA. J.StringerL. C. (2015). Barriers to climate change adaptation: evidence from Northeast Ghana in the context of a systematic literature review. Clim. Dev.7, 297–309. doi: 10.1080/17565529.2014.951013

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  BelayA.RechaJ. W.WoldeamanuelT.MortonJ. F. (2017). Smallholder farmers’ adaptation to climate change and determinants of their adaptation decisions in the central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Agric. Food Secur.6:24. doi: 10.1186/s40066-017-0100-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  BelleJ.MapingureT.OwolabiS. T. (2024). Factors influencing rural women’s adoption of climate change adaptation strategies: evidence from the Chivi district of Zimbabwe. Climate12:191. doi: 10.3390/cli12110191

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  BelowT. B.MutabaziK. D.KirschkeD.FrankeC.SieberS.SiebertR.et al. (2012). Can farmers’ adaptation to climate change be explained by socio-economic household-level variables?Glob. Environ. Chang.22, 223–235. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.11.012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  BenhinJ. K. (2006). Climate change and South African Agriculture: Impacts and Adaptation Options, vol. 21Pretoria, South Africa: CEEPA discussion paper.

  • Google Scholar

• 8

  BöhmG.TannerC. (2018). “Environmental risk perception,” In L. Steg and J.I.M. de Groot, eds. Environmental psychology: An introduction, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 13–25.

  • Google Scholar

• 9

  BolarinwaO. A.BoikhutsoT. (2022). A mixed-method analysis of inequalities associated with adverse sexual and reproductive health outcomes and the requisite interventions among young women in Durban informal settlements. Front. Public Health10:810216. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.810216,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  BryanE.RinglerC.OkobaB.RoncoliC.SilvestriS.HerreroM. (2013). Adapting agriculture to climate change in Kenya: household strategies and determinants. J. Environ. Manag.114, 26–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.10.036,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  BudhathokiN. K.PatonD.LassaJ. A.ZanderK. K. (2020). Assessing farmers’ preparedness to cope with the impacts of multiple climate change-related hazards in the terai lowlands of Nepal. Int. J. Dis. Risk Reduct.49:101656. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101656

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  BusariA. O.OladeleO. I.MatthewsN. (2020). Climate change adaptation among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa: a review of adaptation strategies and determinants. Sustainability12, 1–18. doi: 10.17159/wsa/2020.v46.i2.8235

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  ClarksonD.EastoeE.LeesonA. (2023). Authors’ reply to the Discussion of ‘The importance of context in extreme value analysis with application to extreme temperatures in the USA and Greenland’ at the first meeting on ‘Statistical aspects of climate change’. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C: Applied Statistics, 72, 869–871. doi: 10.1093/jrsssc/qlad059

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  CochranW. G. (1977). Sampling Techniques. 3rd Edn New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Google Scholar

• 15

  CousinsB. (2013). Smallholder irrigation schemes, agrarian reform and ‘accumulation from above and from below in South Africa. J. Agrar. Chang.13, 116–139. doi: 10.1111/joac.12000

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  DavisK. E.TerblancheS. E. (2016). Challenges facing the agricultural extension landscape in South Africa, quo Vadis?South African J. Agric. Extens.44, 231–247. doi: 10.17159/2413-3221/2016/v44n2a428,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  Department of Forestry and Fishery Sector (DAFF). (2013). Quarterly Economic Overview of the Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery Sector. Pretoria

  • Google Scholar

• 18

  DeressaT. T.HassanR. M.RinglerC. (2011). Perception of and adaptation to climate change by farmers in the Nile basin of Ethiopia. J. Agric. Sci.149, 23–31. doi: 10.1017/S0021859610000687

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  ElumZ. A.ModiseD. M.MarrA. (2017). Farmer’s perception of climate change and responsive strategies in three selected provinces of South Africa. Clim. Risk Manag.16, 246–257. doi: 10.1016/j.crm.2016.11.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  FerrariS. L.CysneirosA. H.Cribari-NetoF. (2004). An improved test for heteroskedasticity using adjusted modified profile likelihood inference. J. Stat. Plan. Infer.124, 423–437. doi: 10.1016/S0378-3758(03)00210-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  GbetibouoG. A. (2009). Understanding Farmers’ Perceptions and Adaptations to Climate Change and Variability: The Case of the Limpopo Basin, South Africa. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

  • Google Scholar

• 22

  GidiL. S.MdodaL.Ncoyini-ManciyaZ.MdiyaL. (2024). Climate change and small-scale agriculture in the eastern Cape Province: investigating the nexus of awareness, adaptation, and food security. Sustainability16:9986. doi: 10.3390/su16229986

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  GonzalezJ. B.SanchezA. (2021). What shapes climate change perceptions in Africa? A random forest approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.07867. Available online at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.07867

  • Google Scholar

• 24

  Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (CoGTA). (2020). KwaZulu-Natal Spatial Development Framework. Pietermaritzburg: KwaZulu-Natal Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

  • Google Scholar

• 25

  HlomendliniP. H. (2022). The impact of global risks on agriculture in South Africa. Farmer’s Weekly, 202222017. Available online at: https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-farmweek_v2022_n22017_a5

  • Google Scholar

• 26

  IPCC (2023) in Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. LeeH.RomeroJ. (Geneva: IPCC), 184.

  • Google Scholar

• 27

  JordaanA. C. (2025). Global and regional risks causing uncertainty in South Africa. AfricaGrowth Agenda22, 8–12. Available online at: https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-afgrow_v22_n2_a2

  • Google Scholar

• 28

  KalalaT. C. (2025). Mapping Farmers’ Social Networks to Understand Climate Information Flow in Diarani and Niamanasso Villages, Mali: Clark University.

  • Google Scholar

• 29

  KhumaloN. Z.SibandaM.MdodaL. (2024). Implications of a climate-smart approach to food and income security for urban sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Sustainability16:1882. doi: 10.3390/su16051882

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  MakateC.MakateM.MangoN.SizibaS. (2019). Increasing resilience of smallholder farmers to climate change through multiple adoption of proven climate-smart agriculture innovations. Lessons from southern Africa. J. Environ. Manag.231, 858–868. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.10.069,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  MaziyaM.Nkonki-MandleniB.MbizanaN.TirivanhuP. (2024). The perceived impact of climate change on the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. Sustainability16:3013. doi: 10.3390/su16073013,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  MoyoE.NhariL. G.MoyoP.MurewanhemaG.DzinamariraT. (2023). Health effects of climate change in Africa: A call for an improved implementation of prevention measures. Eco-Environment & Health, 2, 74–78. doi: 10.1016/j.eehl.2023.04.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  MoyoM.MvumiB. M.KunzekwegutaM.MazvimaviK.CraufurdP.DorwardP. (2012). Farmer perceptions on climate change and variability in semi-arid Zimbabwe in relation to climatology evidence. Afr. Crop. Sci. J.20, 317–335. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v20i2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  MpandeliS.MaponyaP. (2014). Constraints and challenges facing the small-scale farmers in Limpopo Province, South Africa. J. Agric. Sci.6:135. doi: 10.5539/jas.v6n4p135

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  MthembuA. (2019). Reflections on expropriation-based land reform in southern Africa. Town Reg. Plan.75, 54–65. doi: 10.18820/2415-0495/trp75i1.7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  Municipal Demarcation Board. (2024). Ward Delimitation 2024/2026. KwaZulu-Natal. Available online at: https://www.demarcation.org.za/ward-delimitation-2024-2026/

  • Google Scholar

• 37

  NcubeB.NdlovuT.MoyoS. (2023). Smallholder farmers’ perceptions of climate variability and adaptation responses in southern Africa. Clim. Dev.15, 322–334.

  • Google Scholar

• 38

  NdlovuE.PrinslooB.Le RouxT. (2020). Impact of climate change and variability on traditional farming systems: farmers’ perceptions from south-west semi-arid Zimbabwe. Jàmbá12:742. doi: 10.4102/jamba.v12i1.742,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  NhamoG.NhemachenaC.NhamoS. (2019). Is 2030 too soon for Africa to achieve the water and sanitation sustainable development goal?Sci. Total Environ.669, 129–139. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.109,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  NhemachenaC.HassanR. (2007). Micro-level Analysis of Farmers Adaption to Climate change in Southern Africa. Washington, DC, USA: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

  • Google Scholar

• 41

  NyawoM.MubangiziB. C. (2021). Rural livelihoods and agricultural sustainability in KwaZulu-Natal: implications for local economic development. Afric. J. Dev. Stud.11, 89–105.

  • Google Scholar

• 42

  OgundejiJ. (2022). Adaptation to climate change and impact on smallholder farmers’ food security in South Africa. Agriculture, 12:589. doi: 10.3390/agriculture12050589

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  OlabanjiM. F.ChitakiraM. (2025). The adoption and scaling of climate-smart agriculture innovation by smallholder farmers in South Africa: A review of institutional mechanisms, policy frameworks and market dynamics. World6:51. doi: 10.3390/world6020051

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  Ortiz-BobeaA. (2021). “The empirical analysis of climate change impacts and adaptation in agriculture,” in Handbook of Agricultural Economics, vol. 5 (Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier), 3981–4073.

  • Google Scholar

• 45

  PapkeL. E.WooldridgeJ. M. (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401 (k) plan participation rates. J. Appl. Econ.11, 619–632. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(199611)11:6<619::AID-JAE418>3.0.CO;2-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  PienaarL.TraubL. (2015). Understanding the smallholder farmer in South Africa: towards a sustainable livelihoods classification. Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) 2015 Conference, Milan, Italy, 9–14 August. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.212633

  • Google Scholar

• 47

  ReddyK. V.ParameshV.ArunachalamV.DasB.RamasundaramP.PramanikM.et al. (2022). Farmers’ perception and efficacy of adaptation decisions to climate change. Agronomy12:1023. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12051023

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  RicartS.GandolfiC.CastellettiA. (2023). Climate change awareness, perceived impacts, and adaptation from farmers’ experience and behavior: a triple-loop review. Reg. Environ. Chang.23:82. doi: 10.1007/s10113-023-02078-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  RicartS.GandolfiC.CastellettiA. (2025). What drives farmers’ behavior under climate change? Decoding risk awareness, perceived impacts, and adaptive capacity in northern Italy. Heliyon11:e41328. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41328,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  RichardG.IzahS. C.IbrahimM. (2023). Air pollution in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria: sources, health effects, and strategies for mitigation. J. Environ. Stud.29, 1–15. doi: 10.21608/jesj.2023.182647.1037

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  SebopetsaM. P., (2018). Development of an extension framework for smallholder farming in the Western Cape Province of the Republic of South Africa. PhD thesis. Durban University of Technology, Durban. doi: 10.51415/10321/3323

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  SheziZ.NgcoyaM. (2016). Land access, food production and rural livelihoods in KwaZulu-Natal. J. Rural. Stud.47, 341–349.

  • Google Scholar

• 53

  South African Weather Service (SAWS) (2022). State of the Climate in South Africa Report. Pretoria: SAWS.

  • Google Scholar

• 54

  Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) (2016). Improving Lives through Data Ecosystems, Women in Agriculture: Six key Facts. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.

  • Google Scholar

• 55

  TesfamariamE. H.OgbazghiZ. M.AnnandaleJ. G.GebrehiwotY. (2020). Cost–benefit analysis of municipal sludge as a low-grade nutrient source: a case study from South Africa. Sustainability12:9950. doi: 10.3390/su12239950

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  TobinJ. (1958). Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica26, 24–36. doi: 10.2307/1907382

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  ZiervogelG.NewM.Archer van GarderenE.MidgleyG.TaylorA.HamannR.et al. (2014). Climate change impacts and adaptation in South Africa. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang.5, 605–620. doi: 10.1002/wcc.295,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  Zuma-NetshiukhwiG.StigterK.WalkerS. (2013). Use of traditional weather/climate knowledge by farmers in the South-Western Free State of South Africa: agrometeorological learning by scientists. Atmos.4, 383–410. doi: 10.3390/atmos4040383

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar