Our understanding of food security in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has been hampered by limitations in the temporal and spatial representativeness of data. Food balance sheets provide scalable estimates of per capita food availability, but fail to represent food access, stability and their causal linkages. In contrast, rural household surveys represent detailed conditions for one or multiple points in time, but are influenced by survey timing and are often limited in geographical coverage. This study draws on a large sample of rural land-holding households in SSA (n = 6,353) to identify household level food access deficiencies and to understand the associations with rural livelihoods and food sourcing behavior throughout the year. Food access deficiencies were identified using food security of access and diet diversity indicators. Dietary diversity and channel of access (farm or purchased) were enumerated for the “flush” and “lean” periods and food security of access was enumerated for the lean period only - making the results of this study independent of survey timing. As many as 39% of households were classified as severely food insecure (in terms of food access) and as many as 49% of households were likely to be deficient in micronutrients in the lean period. Vulnerability to food insecurity and micronutrient deficiencies differed by household composition, agricultural livelihood characteristics and agro-ecological zone. Dairy, fruit and vitamin A-rich produce were predominantly accessed through the farm channel. Households with a livestock component to their farm had a lower prevalence of severe food insecurity and higher diet diversity scores. These findings have implications for the development of nutrition-sensitive and nutrition-specific interventions. Interventions need to be tailored to agro-ecological zone, household composition, scale of operation and production mix. Increasing income will not necessarily result in improved diet diversity or healthy dietary choices. Interventions focused on income generation should monitor and promote crop and livestock production diversity and provide nutrition education.

Low and declining soil fertility has been recognized for a long time as a major impediment to intensifying agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Consequently, from the inception of international agricultural research, centres operating in SSA have had a research programme focusing on soil and soil fertility management, including the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). The scope, content, and approaches of soil and soil fertility management research have changed over the past decades in response to lessons learnt and internal and external drivers and this paper uses IITA as a case study to document and analyse the consequences of strategic decisions taken on technology development, validation, and ultimately uptake by smallholder farmers in SSA. After an initial section describing the external environment within which soil and soil fertility management research is operating, various dimensions of this research area are covered: (i) ‘strategic research’, ‘Research for Development’, partnerships, and balancing acts, (ii) changing role of characterization due to the expansion in geographical scope and shift from soils to farms and livelihoods, (iii) technology development: changes in vision, content, and scale of intervention, (iv) technology validation and delivery to farming communities, and (v) impact and feedback to the technology development and validation process. Each of the above sections follows a chronological approach, covering the last five decades (from the late 1960s till today). The paper ends with a number of lessons learnt which could be considered for future initiatives aiming at developing and delivering improved soil and soil fertility management practices to smallholder farming communities in SSA.

The proponents of the entrepreneurial motivation dichotomy have argued that opportunity-driven entrepreneurs are more likely to succeed and sustain in entrepreneurship, unlike people who start-up businesses out of necessity. However, disagreement still exists on why and under which conditions the former might outperform the latter. This research contributes to this debate by examining the mediation role of psychological capital in the relationship between entrepreneurial motivation and business success among youths. This study relied on a random sample of 295 young entrepreneurs surveyed from Bukavu in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). We applied partial least squares to analyze the hypothesized relationships. Evidence for the positive effect of opportunity-led motivation on psychological capital was found, but the findings did not support any direct effect of entrepreneurial motivation on business success. Instead, psychological capital positively and significantly mediated the relationship between entrepreneurial motivation and business success. This paper makes a distinctive new contribution to the understanding of the intriguing and controversial entrepreneurial motivation dichotomy—a business success relationship. To this end, we have found out that opportunity entrepreneurs have 3% more chance of succeeding in businesses compared to necessity entrepreneurs, because the former outperform the latter by 4% in the dimensions of psychological capital. This paper has new policy implications, as it reveals the great importance of psychological capital in promoting business success, thus reducing unemployment among youths, and offers tips from which psychological capital can be built or improved.

The Rural Household Multiple Indicator Survey (RHoMIS) is a standardized farm household survey approach which collects information on 758 variables covering household demographics, farm area, crops grown and their production, livestock holdings and their production, agricultural product use and variables underlying standard socio-economic and food security indicators such as the Probability of Poverty Index, the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale, and household dietary diversity. These variables are used to quantify more than 40 different indicators on farm and household characteristics, welfare, productivity, and economic performance. Between 2015 and the beginning of 2018, the survey instrument was applied in 21 countries in Central America, sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. The data presented here include the raw survey response data, the indicator calculation code, and the resulting indicator values. These data can be used to quantify on- and off-farm pathways to food security, diverse diets, and changes in poverty for rural smallholder farm households.