Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aimed to systematically review the literature to provide an understanding of the transformative potential of m-Agriculture services in smallholder farming in SSA. The systematic literature review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. The search yielded 380 articles. In total, 240 articles and 52 duplicates were excluded. The remaining 98 studies were included in the eligibility analysis. Finally, 34 articles were eligible for inclusion. We show that m-Agriculture services used by smallholder farmers can be broadly classified into digital financial services, digital extension and advisory services, digital farm management, and digital marketing services. We classify the impact of m-Agriculture on smallholder farmers into four categories: enhanced market access and information, improved access to financial services, increased productivity, and knowledge-sharing facilitated by extension services. The challenges faced by smallholder farmers in utilising m-services were categorised into financial, infrastructural, human, and social factors. We conclude that m-Agriculture holds promise in addressing the multifaceted challenges faced by smallholder farmers, most of whom live in underserved areas. The practical contribution of this study is for developers of m-Agriculture services to consider providing solutions in local languages and for governments to develop policies that promote digital literacy and rural connectivity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mahlangu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: