Shocks, Adaptation Strategies, and Climate Resilience of Smallholder Households in Busia, Kenya

Introduction: Smallholder farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa are increasingly exposed to climatic variability, pest outbreaks, and market fluctuations, with significant implications for household resilience. Understanding how households experience shocks and build resilience is essential for designing effective interventions. This study examined farming systems, shock exposure, adaptation strategies, ecological and socio-economic resilience among smallholder households in Busia County, Kenya, with emphasis on gender, agroecological farming practice (AFP) adoption, and livelihood characteristics. Methodology: A quantitative household-level survey was conducted in March 2022 with 156 households across four sub-counties—Budalangi, Matayos, Nambale, and Teso-South, using an adapted FAO Self-evaluation and Holistic Assessment of climate Resilience of farmers and Pastoralists (SHARP) tool. Five resilience indicators—ecological self-regulation, profitability, exposure to disturbance, reflective and shared learning, and social self-organization— were assessed following the SHARP resilience framework. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, Chi-square tests, Pearson correlation, and multiple linear regression. Results: Households exhibited predominantly medium resilience across ecological self-regulation, profitability, learning, and disturbance exposure, while social self-organization was comparatively high. No statistically significant differences in resilience or AFP adoption were observed between male-and female-headed households. In contrast, AFP adoption intensity was positively associated with ecological self-regulation, reflective and shared learning, and profitability. Social group membership was strongly linked to social self-organization and learning-related resilience but not to ecological or economic resilience outcomes. Non-farm income significantly enhanced economic resilience, whereas land access alone showed limited effects. All households reported market shocks, alongside widespread abiotic and biotic shocks, and adopted context-specific adaptation strategies aligned with shock type. Discussion: Enhancing resilience of smallholder households requires integrated approaches that promote agroecological practices, strengthen farmer groups, and support income diversification. Policies should prioritize agroecological extension services, inclusive rural finance, and context-specific, shock-responsive interventions to improve smallholder resilience.