Food insecurity remains the main challenge for many developing countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where over 60% of the population depends on agriculture for their livelihoods (1, 2). Despite global efforts to address this issue, the region continues to face persistent challenges related to low agricultural productivity, climate variability, and environmental degradation, which threaten food security across the continent.

Within SSA, agriculture is predominantly characterized by smallholder farmers whose livelihoods depend primarily on rainfed farming. Low adoption of conservation agricultural technologies across many SSA countries hampers food production, yet many scholars recognize technological adoption as a critical pathway for eradicating food insecurity, reducing poverty, and improving living standards (3). Rogers (4) defines technology adoption as a decision to fully utilize an innovation as the best course of action available. Technologies such as improved seeds, fertilizers, irrigation, and conservation agriculture have been widely adopted globally to boost yields and reduce harvest losses (5).

In this context, practices like mulching, intercropping, crop rotation, and the use of crop residues on the soil surface are considered environmentally beneficial strategies. These practices are recommended for smallholder farmers as safe and sustainable responses in this era of climate change, particularly in semi-arid regions (6–8).

A recent study examining the effect of conservation agriculture (CA) adoption on household food security among smallholder maize farmers in Ghana found that CA practices significantly enhance food security, influenced by socio-economic factors such as farmer age, gender, education, household size, and access to extension services (9). Another by Wagstaff and Harty (10) examined the impact of conservation agriculture (CA) on food security in three low veldt districts of Zimbabwe. Their evaluation of Concern Worldwide’s CA program demonstrated that, even in semi-arid regions characterized by environmental challenges, the adoption of CA practices could positively influence household food security by improving crop yields and enhancing dietary diversity. This evidence underscores the potential of CA as a resilient and sustainable farming system in similar vulnerable environments, emphasizing its relevance for regions facing climate variability and resource constraints (10).

Focusing specifically on Malawi, despite efforts by the government and development partners such as the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and Civil Society Agriculture Network (CISANET)—food insecurity remains high, affecting nearly 50% of the population who live below the poverty line and face recurrent shortages (11). The country’s low agricultural productivity results from multiple challenges, including environmental degradation, limited access to farm inputs, low mechanization, poor market linkages, and restricted irrigation options (12). To sustainably feed its growing population, Malawi must increase agricultural productivity amidst climate shocks, small landholdings, and rising land degradation levels (13). These factors hinder smallholder farmers’ ability to produce stable food supplies (12, 14).

Several studies provide strong evidence that the adoption of specific agricultural technologies can significantly enhance food production and household food security. For example, the use of fertilizer trees has been shown to improve soil fertility and maize yields in six districts in Malawi (15). Similarly, sustainable intensification practices such as maize-legume intercropping, crop rotation, and minimum tillage have led to improved food security outcomes at the household level (16, 17). In addition, recent innovations such as drone technology have enhanced farm knowledge and decision-making, enabling farmers to increase productivity with fewer inputs (18). Improved bean varieties have also demonstrated benefits, including higher grain yield and reduced losses under environmental stress (19). The introduction of the Farm Input Subsidy Program (FISP) has significantly increased national cereal production, especially maize (11). Prior to FISP, the Starter Pack Program (SPP), launched in 1998, aimed to improve access to improved seeds, legumes, and fertilizers for smallholder farmers, although its impact was limited (12). These interventions reflect broader efforts to promote technology adoption as a means to boost productivity.

Despite these challenges, increasing and sustaining agricultural productivity remains essential for achieving food security in Malawi (20). Promoting the adoption of sustainable farming practices like conservation agriculture (CA) appears vital, especially considering the impacts of climate change. According to Kassam et al. (21), CA is “a farming system that promotes maintenance of a permanent soil cover, minimum soil disturbance, and diversification of plant species.” It enhances biodiversity and biological processes both above and below ground, leading to better water and nutrient efficiency and improved crop yields (21). CA principles include minimal soil disturbance, permanent soil cover, and crop rotation, with technologies such as agroforestry, intercropping, box ridging, manure application, permanent planting basins, and swales (22). Despite these promising findings, the benefits of technology adoption are not uniform across regions or farming systems. Factors such as soil quality, access to markets, and availability of extension services significantly influence outcomes. Farmers with better access to extension services report higher yields due to improved understanding and implementation of technologies (23). Moreover, participation in season-long extension programs leads to greater adoption compared to short-term training events (24). However, the adoption of CA technologies in Malawi among smallholder farmers remains limited, mainly due to limited credit facilities, inadequate extension services, and low education levels, especially in rural areas where subsistence farming dominates (25). A study by Jew et al. (26) examining the constraints faced by smallholder farmers in Malawi during climate shocks highlights the potential of conservation agriculture (CA) as a resilient and adaptable solution. The research underscores how systemic issues such as household health, access to inputs, labor shortages, and institutional support significantly influence the adoption of CA and overall agricultural productivity. Despite its agronomic benefits, adoption remains low due to socio-economic, structural, and institutional barriers, emphasizing the need for holistic approaches that address these underlying challenges alongside technological promotion (26).

In Malawi CA is one of the major agricultural development policies; however, adoption of CA remains as low as 10 percent (27). Previous efforts to improve adoption of CA in Malawi and other African settings have remained futile (28). While previous studies have examined the impact of conservation agriculture technologies (CATs) on food security at regional or national scales [e.g., (26, 29)], this study provides localized evidence from Vibangalala EPA in Mzimba district, Northern Malawi a historically prioritized area for CAT promotion. The current research contributes by exploring how socio-economic disparities, farm size, and environmental conditions shape the relationship between technology adoption and food security outcomes. The study aimed to bridge the gap in understanding the relationship between conservation agricultural technologies adoption and its effects on food production and household food security among smallholder farmers in the Vibangalala Extension Planning Area (EPA), Mzimba district. Specifically, it addresses the lack of detailed knowledge on how the level of technology adoption influences food output and household wellbeing, as well as the factors that drive adoption. This fills an important gap by clarifying the connections and causality among these variables within this particular context.

This study is part of the broader research project introduced in Chidimbah Munthali et al. (30), where the first objective was focused on documenting and analyzing the diversities of conservation agriculture technologies (CATs) adopted by smallholder farmers in Vibangalala EPA. The current work extends this effort by focusing on effects of CAT adoption on food production and household food security, building upon the findings previously reported.

Significant differences between those who adopt and those who do not adopt conservation agricultural technologies in Malawi are uncovered by the descriptive analysis in Table 1. Gender plays a pivotal role, as the majority of adopters (58%) are male farm managers. In comparison, only 39.1% of non-adopters hold this role, indicating potential gender-based disparities in resource access and decision-making processes. Farm size also proves to be a crucial factor, as the average adopter manages 1.68 hectares while the average non-adopter manages only 1.04 hectares, showcasing how resource availability impacts adoption rates. Adopters whose households tend to be larger may benefit from the contribution of family labor in adopting new practices. Adopters also exhibited higher levels of education and exposure to conservation agriculture technologies (CAT) training, underscoring the crucial role of disseminating knowledge and increasing capacity in fostering adoption. Furthermore, adopters reported better access to extension services and improved environmental conditions due to slight improvements in soil quality, potentially enhancing the practicality and advantages of implementing these technologies. The results highlight the dynamic relationship among socio-economic, institutional, and environmental elements in influencing the implementation of agricultural advancements, offering valuable perspectives on methods for fostering sustainable food cultivation and stability in Malawi.

The negative occupation coefficient (−0.022) at a significance of 5% suggests the likelihood of non-farming occupations reducing food production Table 2. The level of food security (0.565, 1%) positively impacts food production; families who have food are likely to venture into more food production, unlike families who are deprived of food. Environmental variables, such as temperature (−0.099, 1%), soil quality (−0.187, 1%), and the type of soil (−0.043, 1%), indicate that higher temperatures, poor soil quality, and sandy soil type reduce food production. Social factors like marital status (0.036, 5%) and distance to markets (0.034, 5%) highlight the role played by social stability and proximity to economic hubs in improving food productivity; married farmers are more likely to engage in farming activities, unlike single farmers. Moreover, the complexity of working with CATs (0.196, 1%), more so on a moderate level, promotes food production.

From Table 3, households that adopted technologies experienced lower food insecurity frequencies as compared to non-adopters. About 94.4% of adopters indicated having rarely had a limited variety of foods, while non-adopters had slightly higher percentages in the “sometimes” (6.9%) and “rarely” (5.6%) categories, suggesting adopters have better dietary variety. Similarly, 94.4% of adopters rarely ate undesired foods, compared to 5.6% of non-adopters. Additionally, 95.6% of adopters reported rarely eating smaller meals than needed. On the other hand, 93.6% of adopters are rarely worried about having enough food, while 91.4% are sometimes worried, showing that adopters are slightly less anxious about food supplies.

The results show that a high proportion of households who “sometimes” and even “often” experienced food insecurity still adopted Climate-smart Agricultural Technologies (CAT). Among those who “often” had to eat a limited variety of foods, 96.2% adopted CAT, and among those who “often” went to sleep hungry, 98.5% were adopters. This trend is consistent across several indicators, suggesting that CAT adopters are not exclusively in the “rarely” food-insecure group. This pattern implies that CAT adoption is not only a result of being food secure but also a response to food insecurity. Households facing frequent food stress (“sometimes” and “often”) may be more motivated to adopt CAT as a coping or resilience strategy to improve food availability and reduce vulnerability. In this context, these groups are “unique” because, despite their exposure to food insecurity, they are still proactive in seeking out adaptive technologies—perhaps even more so than food-secure households. Therefore, these households are not categorized as “rarely” food insecure because they have faced chronic or recurring food access challenges, which might stem from factors such as climate variability, land degradation, or poverty. Their adoption of CAT reflects a need-driven decision rather than a capacity-driven one, underscoring how food-insecure households are not passive victims but active agents in improving their food systems.

The percentages for adopters are generally higher for rare cases across the variables. These results consistently indicate that most households adopting CATs experience food security challenges compared to non-adopters.

To check the significance of each of the household characteristics in Table 2 to food security, the ratings were summed up for each respondent, and the frequencies were determined as shown in Table 4. Since the rates were in three categories, they were multiplied by the nine questions to find a maximum of 27, with the minimum standing at nine. Nine indicates the highest level of food security, while 27 indicates food insecurity among adopters and non-adopters. From Table 4, a good percentage of the adopters fell in the list rating (73, 19.9%), showing that food insecurity was not a problem after adopting the techniques. To find out the factors that influence a better rating, an ordinal regression has been carried out, and the results are recorded in Table 5.

Table 5 presents the results of ordinal Logistic regression. The ordinal logistic regression model results indicate a good model fit and significant overall explanatory power. The −2 Log Likelihood value for the final model (1570.550) is substantially lower than that of the intercept-only model (1876.642), and the Chi-square test for model improvement is statistically significant (Chi-square = 306.092, df = 53, p < 01), suggesting that the predictors included in the model significantly improve its fit over the null model. The pseudo-R-square values further support this conclusion: Cox and Snell R² = 0.544, Nagelkerke R² = 0.548, and McFadden R² = 0.162. These values indicate that the model explains a moderate proportion of the variance in the dependent variable, with Nagelkerke R² suggesting that about 55% of the variation in the ordinal outcome is explained by the predictors. Regarding goodness-of-fit, the Deviance statistic (1563.383) has a high p-value (10), indicating no significant difference between the observed and predicted values and thus a good fit of the model. However, the Pearson statistic is significant (p < 01), which may suggest some discrepancies in model fit under certain assumptions, although this test can be overly sensitive in large samples.

Furthermore, an endogeneity test was carried out, and no endogeneity was found in the variables. The robustness test was carried out by removing insignificant covariates, and the results are as recorded in Table 6. From the test, income after adoption, age group, size of the farm, distance to the nearest market, farming decision-makers, farming experience, CAT training, and rainfall were found to be significantly affecting food security.

As shown in Table 5, income after adoption of below 28 USD and 28–57 USD shows a negative and statistically significant (−1.899, −1.067), meaning that low income even after adoption of a technique is likely to lead to more food insecurity, while higher income of more than 57 USD is likely to lead to stable food security. Being in the age group of 18–25 years positively influences food security (0.548). Youths aged 18–25 are more energetic, and when they participate in farming, food insecurity levels reduce. A farm size of less than one acre also increases food security levels (0.571); this is because of the ease of applying CAT in smaller farms than in larger farms. A moderate food production level affects food security negatively (−3.771); this would mean that experiencing highly impactful food production leads to stronger food security. Having an occupation in crop farming, livestock keeping, and trading highly impacts food security, unlike being in piecework and formal employment. Being in the said occupation increases food security by 20.681, 21.027, and 21.071 times, respectively. Similarly, being less than 1 km away from the nearest marketplace and a distance between 1 and 2 km promotes food security by 17.218 and 3.502 times, respectively; having a marketplace 2 km or more away increases food insecurity. Moreover, adopting CATs that are less complicated promotes food security 4.941 times more than the complex CATs. Gender of decision-maker, farming experience, CATs training, rainfall, and social influence also promote food security at [1.051, −0.542, −1.234, (4.655, 1.067), 0.749], respectively.

Agricultural performance, together with food safety, benefits from the effects of implementing agricultural technology methods, including crop rotation, intercropping, and mulching alongside no-tillage systems. The study results show that implementing these conservation agriculture technologies generates sustainability issues that need detailed evaluation, especially regarding economic sustainability, environmental sustainability, and social sustainability. This paper examines the relationship between agricultural technology benefits and challenges and their impact on raising levels of awareness and informed adoption decisions based on sustainability findings from scholarly works.

Conservation agriculture technologies that include crop rotation, intercropping, mulching, and no-tillage create valuable prospects for better food security and sustainable farming, yet their adoption faces multiple hurdles. The adoption of sustainable technology requires solutions to environmental, economic, and social problems to achieve enduring positive outcomes. The sustainable intensification of agriculture requires farmers to get well-informed about technology complexities while receiving specific policy support and sustainability training to make sustainable choices. Multi-sectoral collaboration between agricultural research services, policy development teams, and market access experts is essential to provide farmers with the tools they need to tackle sustainability problems that emerge during new technology adoption.

The study significantly found the differences between those who adopted and those who did not adopt conservation agricultural technologies in Malawi and uncovered the disparities. Among the disparities, gender is a potential factor in the accessibility of resources and the decision-making process. Furthermore, farm size also proves to be a crucial factor, as the average adopters have higher land per hectare compared to non-adopters. This study uniquely identifies the role of motivational drivers behind CAT adoption among food-insecure households, underscoring the need for targeted interventions such as enhanced extension services, accessible credit facilities for women, and training on complex technologies. These findings offer actionable insights for policymakers aiming to bridge equity gaps while promoting sustainable agricultural practices in similar agro-ecological zones

In addition, farmers with larger household sizes tend to benefit from the contribution of family labor in adopting new practices. Households that adopted technologies experienced lower food insecurity frequencies than non-adopters. Environmental variables such as soil and soil quality, and the type of soil, also influence output; higher temperatures result in poor soil quality, which reduces food production.

This study found that social factors like marital status also play a crucial role in improving food production, as married farmers are more likely to engage in farming activities, unlike single farmers. Therefore, this study recommends educating farmers through training and the best practices to enhance the adoption rate. Thus, investment in agricultural extension programs becomes critical in ensuring that farmers receive the needed training that would enhance the adoption of conservation agricultural technologies. Furthermore, there is also a need to improve access to low-interest credit facilities for female farmers by developing gender-sensitive credit packages specifically targeting female farmers. Moreover, the study highlight the role of social capital such that through information sharing as a family may empower married farmers to engage in CA adoption suggesting that family based farming operations are critical to improve farm management.

The study is not without drawbacks. First, the subjective nature of the data collection instrument predisposes the study findings to recall bias; in order to reduce the bias, the authors pretested the instrument to make sure that it was inclusive. Furthermore, the study was conducted in one district of Malawi; hence, the findings cannot be generalized to the whole country based to some other factors. In addition, the cross-sectional nature of the study makes it impossible to estimate the temporal effects on the variables.

Furthermore, the study recommends an integrated policy approach that promotes sustainability in the adoption of agricultural technology by balancing food security outcomes with economic, social, and environmental factors that influence technology adoption.