Rapid urban growth due to unprecedented rural–urban migration is putting pressure on urban food systems. The general impression is that households engaged in urban agriculture experience improved nutritional status, higher health standards and provide towards income and employment. However, empirical research findings are limited and inconsistent. This study provides empirical knowledge on the urban agriculture–food security nexus. Data was gathered from a sample of 220 households comprising of those with small household (backyard) garden projects funded by the Department of Agriculture in the Western Cape, South Africa, and a control group. Propensity score matching was used to determine the contribution of urban agriculture to household food security. The findings indicated that households engaged in urban agriculture were benefiting from dietary diversity and the generation of income through the production of various food products. There was, however, no indication of a significant positive contribution of urban agriculture towards food security.

Experiential learning and discovery through farmer field schools (FFS) have the potential to empower smallholder livestock farmers who face heightened vulnerability to climate change. However, there are various levels of learning and discovery in FFS that can inform smallholder livestock farmer knowledge and perception. Understanding this is vital, as farmers’ perceptions influence their readiness to adopt climate-smart practices, informing effective resilience-building strategies. Therefore, this study sought to investigate and assess the impact of the FFS approach on smallholder livestock farmers’ perceptions of climate change, taking Raymond Local Municipality in South Africa as a case. The design followed by the study was a longitudinal survey, with three pools each signifying various FFS intervention points. The study utilized simple random sampling to collect data from 80 smallholder livestock farmers using structured questionnaires in each of the three cross-sectional pools, while descriptive statistics, Min–Max Normalization, and t-tests were used for analysis. The results show that there was an increase in the awareness of climate change due to the interventions of the FFS. Furthermore, there are cumulative differences between the knowledge and perception towards climate change between the three pooled cross-sections. In conclusion, participating in FFS had a significant impact on farmers’ level of understanding and adaptation to climate change. The study recommends that the government and policymakers extensively promote FFS and support them financially so that they can provide more support to rural farmers as well as enhance knowledge on climate change. This study recommends the provision of workshops and awareness campaigns on climate change for farmers through FFS as this will assist farmers to be more sustainable on their farming systems and production.

Agricultural extension is one of the essential services that are offered by the South African Department of Agriculture, Land Reform, and Rural Development (DALRRD), to facilitate agricultural development in rural communities. The significance of agricultural extension is that it offers new knowledge to farmers and allows space for growth through various interventions such as agrarian transformation and improving livelihoods through the promotion of agriculture as a vehicle for ‘pro-poor’ economic growth. However, there is a concern that extension services are invisible in resource-restricted and previously marginalised rural communities. The study presented in this paper examined farmer’s experiences with extension practitioners and the impact of a lack of extension services on the development of impoverished rural communities. The researchers adopted a qualitative design wherein six focus group discussions were held to gather data from the farmers. Data were analyzed using ATLAS.ti22, a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS). Four themes of extension services that have a direct linkage to livelihood development, namely, the impact on rural livelihoods, production challenges, marketability, and economic impact, and the invisibility of extension services, were the central point of discussion.

Different food security (FS) indicators were used to determine the level of FS on all dimensions of FS in the informal settlement areas of the Western Cape Metropole in South Africa. With regards to food access, 78% of households are severely food insecure, while just more than 50% of households earn more than the US$ 2 per capita per day food poverty line and with 21% of the households that fall below the critical point of US$ 1.25 per capita per day. The average total household expenditure on food is R338.26, whereto the share of income spent is an average of 52.5% of household income. Households experience 4.3 hungry months during a year, meaning challenges are experienced concerning food availability. The household diet diversity score (HDDS) was used to measure utilisation and it was found that 10.4 out of 18 different food groups/categories were consumed. Most significant differences can be seen for FS indicators between areas, but no significant differences were measured between farming and non-farming households. This means that households involved in farming are not more food secure than those not involved in farming. Bonteheuwel and Kraaifontein were the two areas most severely affected by food insecurity according to Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS), Household Diet Diversity Score (HDDS) as well as Months of Adequate Household Food Provisioning (MAHFP) and the food poverty measures. Gugulethu and Khayelitsha on the other hand seem to be the most food secure of all these areas.