Figure 1 depicts the annual trends in CSA publications, as indexed in Scopus, illustrating a significant increase in research output and its citation impact over the past 14 years.

The number of publications has grown markedly since 2010, beginning with just two articles and reaching a peak of 158 articles in 2022. This growth reflects the increasing importance of CSA as a research area, fueled by the global imperative to mitigate climate change impacts on agriculture. A notable surge in output is evident from 2016 onwards, indicating heightened scholarly and policy interest.

The citation impact, measured by the average total citations per year, demonstrates variability over the years. Earlier publications (2010–2015) had higher citation averages, suggesting their foundational importance in framing CSA’s conceptual and methodological approaches, that set the stage for subsequent research. However, as publication volumes surged in later years, the average total citation declined, with a notable decrease after 2019. This trend could reflect both the recency of publications and a possible saturation effect, where newer studies may be contributing incremental rather than groundbreaking insights.

Figure 2 shows the global distribution of CSA scientific output using gray, green, and dark blue shades, where gray indicates no publications and dark blue signifies a high number of publications.

The data shows a notable concentration of research in developed nations, with the United States leading with 276 publications, underscoring its significant role in advancing CSA knowledge and prioritizing sustainable agriculture to enhance food security. India (218) and Kenya (178) follow as substantial contributors from the developing world, reflecting their proactive engagement in addressing agricultural challenges amid climate change. These countries prioritize food security to meet the nutritional needs of their growing populations while mitigating climate change’s adverse effects on agriculture. Kenya’s leading publications highlight its prominent role in CSA research within Africa. The United Kingdom (121), Ethiopia (112), China (110), and South Africa (93) also show robust research outputs, indicating diverse regional interests and priorities in CSA strategies. Contributions from the Netherlands (89), Australia (77), and Germany (70) further emphasize a global commitment to sustainable agricultural practices across varying environmental contexts.

Figure 3 presents the 20 most influential journals in CSA research, as indexed in Scopus. The analysis was based on the number of documents and citations, which reflect the productivity and impact of journals in disseminating CSA-related knowledge. Journals highlighted in dominant red represent those with the highest publications and citations, signifying their significant influence in the CSA domain.

The journal Sustainability (Switzerland) leads with 37 documents, followed by Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems with 32, and Agricultural Systems with 28. Heliyon and the Journal of Cleaner Production each have 14 documents, while Agricultural and Food Security, Land Use Policy, and the International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management each hold 10 documents. This distribution reflects a diverse academic interest in CSA, spanning themes of sustainability, policy, and practical implementation.

The prominence of journals such as Sustainability (Switzerland) and Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems highlights the interdisciplinary nature of CSA research, which intersects with environmental science, agricultural systems, and policy frameworks. Similar observations are noted by Wu et al. (2023), who identified leading journals in environmental science and studies, such as Sustainability and Global Environmental Change - Human and Policy Dimensions. These findings suggest that CSA research often aligns with broader sustainability and climate-related objectives, reinforcing the relevance of these journals in addressing the global challenges of climate change and agricultural transformation.

Additionally, identifying leading journals provides critical guidance for early-career researchers and scholars seeking to publish in impactful outlets within the CSA domain (Gutiérrez-Salcedo et al., 2018). By focusing on journals that publish diverse and high-impact CSA research, this study underscores their role in shaping the conceptual and performance structures of CSA scholarship.

The results in Table 2 highlight the most globally cited documents in CSA research. Šūmane et al. (2018) lead with 370 total citations, demonstrating a high annual citation rate of 52.86 and a normalized citation score of 6.51, emphasizing the integration of local and formal knowledge in enhancing agricultural sustainability. Long et al. (2016) follow closely with 312 citations, featuring a comparable annual citation rate (34.67) and normalized score (6.52), focusing on barriers to adopting climate-smart agricultural innovations in Europe. Other notable papers include Harvey et al. (2014), Khatri-Chhetri et al. (2017), and Bai et al. (2019), each contributing significantly to the discourse on climate-smart agriculture through their respective insights on climate-smart landscapes, farmer prioritization of CSA technologies, and soil carbon sequestration practices. These papers collectively underscore diverse approaches and critical challenges in advancing sustainable agricultural practices globally.

Figure 4 illustrates the bibliographic coupling network of documents. While the bibliographic coupling of documents reflects the overlap in the reference lists of documents, it also enhances in understanding the several core themes in CSA research. CSA research from 2010 to 2023 highlights various themes. Khatri-Chhetri et al. (2017) and Thornton et al. (2018) emphasize the critical need to integrate CSA into agricultural practices, focusing on its prioritization. In contrast, Sain et al. (2017) and Mutenje et al. (2019) provide detailed economic analyses that underscore the financial benefits of CSA. Research on CSA adoption, such as Aryal et al. (2018) and Teklewold et al. (2019), addresses practical implementation, whereas studies by Murray et al. (2016) and Harvey et al. (2014) highlight barriers including technology constraints and labor productivity issues.

While substantial attention is given to the benefits and adoption of CSA, there is less focus on integrating diverse knowledge systems. Šūmane et al. (2018) advocate for incorporating local knowledge into CSA strategies, a perspective that is less prevalent compared to economic and adoption-centric studies. Furthermore, critiques of CSA efficacy, as discussed by Taylor (2018), contrast with the generally positive outlook in most research, revealing a gap in addressing CSA’s limitations and potential shortcomings. The research robustly explores economic aspects and adoption challenges but lacks a comprehensive examination of CSA’s socio-political dimensions. Newell and Taylor (2018) analyse the global political economy’s impact on CSA, yet these insights are not sufficiently integrated into practical CSA implementations.

The focus on economic benefits and adoption challenges often overshadows nuanced critiques of CSA’s assumptions and effectiveness. Taylor (2018) critical perspectives are valuable but underrepresented in broader research discussions. The connection between CSA’s economic benefits and adoption is well-established, linking cost–benefit analyses with implementation challenges. Gosnell et al. (2019) on CSA transitions and Westermann et al. (2018) on scaling-up strategies reflect an integrated view of theoretical and practical aspects. However, there is limited integration with broader socio-political and ecological contexts.

CSA research highlights key themes such as prioritisation (Khatri-Chhetri et al., 2017; Thornton et al., 2018), economic analysis (Sain et al., 2017; Mutenje et al., 2019), adoption barriers (Aryal et al., 2018; Murray et al., 2016), and sustainability (Sarkar et al., 2020; Brouziyne et al., 2018). Critical perspectives (Taylor, 2018) and socio-political analyses (Newell and Taylor, 2018) reveal the need for a more holistic understanding of CSA’s impacts. Future research should address these gaps to offer a more nuanced view of CSA’s role in climate change mitigation.

Figure 5 and Table 3 show the co-occurrence network map and the frequency of keywords within each cluster. Keywords with larger nodes representing the most occurred words.

The “Environmental Sustainability and Agricultural Productivity” cluster integrates themes like agroforestry, carbon management, and forest management, reflecting a focus on sustainable practices and climate resilience. The “Agroecology and Resilience” cluster emphasizes agroecology, agricultural extension, resilience, and sustainability, focusing on long-term impacts of sustainable agricultural practices. The resilience aspect here is crucial as it ties directly to adaptation. By promoting agroecological practices, this cluster explores how CSA can improve the resilience of agricultural systems to changing climatic conditions, which are vital for maintaining food security and sustainable livelihoods. Future research in this area should further explore how specific agroecological practices can be tailored to local climatic challenges to enhance adaptive capacity.

In contrast, the “Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation” cluster emphasizes adaptive capacity, resilience, and vulnerability, with particular emphasis on regions like West Africa. This cluster highlights the importance of developing climate adaptation strategies that improve farmers’ ability to cope with climate variability. However, while the focus is on adaptation, future studies should investigate how different CSA strategies can be customized to enhance resilience in vulnerable regions, especially those most affected by climate change, such as Sub-Saharan Africa. The “Regional Implementation and Drought Resilience” cluster offers practical insights into how CSA can be tailored to improve drought resilience and adapt agricultural practices to climate change. The focus on climate-smart villages, conservation agriculture, drought resilience, water productivity, and poverty alleviation provides a roadmap for strengthening the adaptive capacity of vulnerable regions like Ethiopia and India, where water availability is increasingly erratic due to climate change. However, the integration of local knowledge, tailored policies, and the strengthening of extension services remains key to effectively scaling up CSA practices.

The “CSA practices and Adoption” cluster, while primarily focused on the adoption of CSA practices, also integrates gender considerations and the role of advanced statistical models (such as the multivariate probit model) in assessing CSA adoption. This cluster indirectly contributes to adaptation by providing a clearer understanding of the factors influencing farmers’ decisions to adopt CSA practices. The “Extension Services and Technology Adoption” cluster emphasizes the role of agricultural extension services in promoting CSA adoption. It is crucial to improve adaptation strategies by ensuring that farmers have access to the knowledge, tools, and technologies necessary to implement CSA practices. While this cluster highlights the importance of extension services, it should expand on how these services can be tailored to address specific adaptation needs in different regions and climate zones.

Meanwhile, the “CSA and Smallholder farmers” cluster centers on climate-smart agriculture as a climate adaptation strategy among smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting refinements in prioritization and region-specific adaptations. Meanwhile, the “Impact of CSA on household welfare” cluster investigates the impacts of CSA on food security and household income through econometric models such as endogenous switching regression model and propensity score matching. The “Integration of Adaptation and Mitigation” cluster explores balancing adaptation and mitigation strategies within CSA.

The research strongly emphasizes the adoption of CSA by smallholder farmers and climate change impacts and adaptation. However, this contrast with the more practical focus of the “Regional Implementation and Drought Resilience” cluster. The practical, region-specific approach contrasts with the theoretical focus on integration and broader impacts in other clusters. Despite the comprehensive focus on, CSA for adaptation and practical implementation, there is limited exploration of socio-economic dimensions and critical perspectives on CSA. For instance, while the “impact of CSA on household welfare” cluster offers insights into household income and food security, it lacks a critical evaluation of CSA’s broader socio-economic impacts and effectiveness. Similarly, the “Extension Services and Technology Adoption” cluster points to the need for more detailed analyses of how technology adoption influences CSA outcomes.

The clusters demonstrate strong interconnections between CSA practices, environmental sustainability, and regional implementation. The “Integration of Adaptation and Mitigation” cluster links with the “Environmental Sustainability and Agricultural Productivity” cluster, indicating a comprehensive approach to balancing adaptation and mitigation strategies. The practical insights from the “Regional Implementation and Drought Resilience” cluster connect with the broader adaptation strategies discussed in the “CSA and Smallholder farmers” cluster.

The results highlight a need for future research to address socio-economic dimensions and critical perspectives of CSA. Studies should focus on integrating socio-economic impacts with practical CSA implementations and enhancing the balance between adaptation and mitigation strategies. The clusters provide a roadmap for developing targeted research that addresses current gaps and strengthens the overall understanding of CSA’s role in climate resilience.

Figure 6 illustrates the thematic evolution in CSA research from 2010 to 2023, illustrating a dynamic shift in focus reflecting both the maturation of the field and emerging practical needs.

From 2010 to 2019, CSA research primarily focused on foundational themes aimed at understanding and addressing the impacts of climate change on agriculture. Key topics included climate change, ecosystem services, climate-resilient agriculture, conservation tillage, sustainable development, irrigation, and agricultural extension. These themes were particularly significant in African contexts, notably in Ethiopia, where climate variability poses substantial risks to agricultural productivity. Research during this period concentrated on identifying sustainable agricultural practices, enhancing resilience, and leveraging ecosystem services to mitigate climate-related challenges.

Between 2020 and 2023, research on climate-smart agriculture (CSA) evolved significantly, prioritizing integrated and solution-oriented approaches. The central theme shifted towards a more holistic strategy, combining adaptation, mitigation, and productivity goals to address the interconnected challenges of climate change and food security. During this period, emphasis grew on the adoption and scaling of CSA practices, climate change mitigation, and the role of technology in enhancing agricultural resilience.

Earlier themes such as sustainability, low-carbon agriculture, and carbon sequestration transitioned into more specific focuses on greenhouse gas emissions, soil organic carbon, and global warming potential. This evolution reflects the integration of CSA practices with broader sustainability and mitigation priorities, demonstrating a global trend toward implementing practical, science-driven solutions that directly address pressing agricultural and environmental challenges. Scholars like Steenwerth et al. (2014) and Zheng et al. (2024) have long emphasized the importance of integrating adaptation, mitigation, and food security goals within CSA research. More recent findings by Zheng et al. (2024) highlight that CSA practices can improve farm productivity, enhance incomes, and build resilience while simultaneously reducing environmental impacts. However, despite these advancements, the CSA discourse remains skewed towards global policy agendas and scientific approaches, often overlooking the nuanced experiences of developed countries (Chandra et al., 2018). This bias presents a gap in CSA research, underscoring the need for localized studies that capture diverse agricultural contexts. By addressing these gaps, future research could further enhance the scalability and inclusiveness of CSA practices, contributing to both global climate adaptation efforts and regional food security solutions.

Several earlier themes transformed or fragmented into more specialized areas. For instance, topics like irrigation, adaptive capacity, and sustainability were consolidated into the broader CSA framework, reflecting the need for integrated approaches to managing water resources and enhancing resilience (Steenwerth et al., 2014). Agricultural extension evolved into more targeted research on CSA dissemination and technology adoption, highlighting the growing importance of farmer engagement and knowledge transfer in scaling climate-resilient practices.

Additionally, climate change research diversified into specific subfields such as technology adoption, drought management, and mitigation strategies, reflecting a nuanced understanding of how different factors interact within the agricultural system. The focus on ecosystem services gradually shifted toward climate change mitigation, underlining their role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing environmental sustainability. Climate-resilient agriculture has remained a consistent theme throughout both periods, underscoring its enduring relevance in developing systems capable of withstanding climate shocks.

Notably, conservation tillage research transitioned toward addressing greenhouse gas emissions, aligning with global efforts to quantify and mitigate agriculture’s environmental footprint. The thematic evolution reflects the interdisciplinary nature of CSA, blending agronomy, ecology, and socioeconomics while balancing global priorities with local relevance. This thematic shift from foundational research to more practical, policy-relevant studies underscore the field’s maturation and adaptability to emerging global priorities.

This thematic evolution underscores several critical implications for future research and policy in CSA. One key area for future exploration is the integration of innovative technologies, such as precision agriculture, remote sensing, and digital advisory services, into CSA practices. These technologies have the potential to enhance adoption and scalability, particularly in addressing localized climate challenges. To realize this potential, policies must prioritize investment in digital infrastructure and the diffusion of innovations, especially in rural areas, ensuring that smallholder farmers have access to these advancements.

As the emphasis on practical implementation grows, research should prioritize the development of context-specific CSA interventions. These interventions must account for the unique socio-economic and environmental conditions of different regions, addressing localized needs while promoting sustainability. Policymakers, in turn, need to develop regionally tailored strategies that enhance farmers’ adaptive capacity. By focusing on local contexts, both research and policy can contribute to more effective and equitable climate-smart solutions.

The shift in research focus towards greenhouse gas emissions and climate mitigation further highlights the need for robust frameworks to measure and monitor the environmental impacts of CSA practices. This requires refining sustainability indicators that can accurately assess the effectiveness of these practices in reducing emissions. Policies must align with these developments by incentivizing low-emission agricultural practices, ensuring that sustainability goals are achievable and impactful for farmers on the ground.

The fragmentation of agricultural extension into themes of technology adoption and CSA dissemination reflects the growing need for effective knowledge-sharing mechanisms. Research should address how to strengthen these platforms, ensuring that they are accessible and beneficial to farmers. Policies must complement this by supporting capacity-building programs and farmer-led innovation systems, creating an enabling environment for knowledge transfer and practical application of CSA practices.

Moreover, the integration of themes like water productivity and sustainable land use into CSA emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration. Research in agriculture, water management, and environmental sustainability should work in tandem to address interconnected challenges and develop comprehensive solutions. Policies must actively encourage such collaboration, fostering partnerships that bridge disciplines and sectors to tackle the complexities of climate adaptation.

By recognizing these evolving research trends and aligning them with strategic policy frameworks, stakeholders can better support the widespread adoption of CSA practices. Such alignment will not only contribute to addressing global food security challenges but also strengthen climate resilience and promote sustainable agricultural development. In this way, the thematic evolution of CSA research can drive meaningful progress toward a more sustainable and equitable agricultural future.

Figure 7 presents the composite thematic map of authors’ keywords over an extended period 2010–2023. The thematic map provides an overview of the current landscape of climate-smart agriculture research, outlining four distinct categories of themes: niche, motor, emerging, and basic. Niche themes reveal the specialized research areas such as decision-making for adaptation, carbon storage, cost–benefit analysis, smart cities, and maize water use efficiency. These themes, while less extensively explored, offer critical insights into specific aspects of CSA. For example, research on carbon storage is essential for understanding how agricultural practices can contribute to climate change mitigation by sequestering carbon in soil and vegetation (Smith et al., 2020). Similarly, cost–benefit analyses are pivotal for evaluating the economic viability of climate-smart practices (Gattinger et al., 2012). The focus on smart cities and maize water use efficiency reflects an emerging interest in integrating agricultural practices with broader urban and resource management strategies (Rosenzweig et al., 2018).

The motor themes, which are central to the field, well-developed and highly relevant topics such as greenhouse gas emissions, minimum tillage, yield improvements, climate-smart agriculture, drought management, and climate adaptation as shown in Figure 7. These motor themes are foundational to advancing climate-smart agriculture. Greenhouse gas emissions and minimum tillage, for instance, are critical for understanding the impact of agricultural practices on climate change and for identifying mitigation strategies (Wang et al., 2022). The emphasis on climate-smart agriculture and drought management highlights ongoing efforts to enhance agricultural resilience and productivity in the face of increasing climate variability (Pal et al., 2022; Samuel et al., 2024).

The thematic map also points to new research directions that are gaining prominence, including technology adoption, agricultural extension, global warming potential, and water productivity (Emerging themes). These emerging themes underscore the importance of technological innovation and efficient resource management in climate-smart agriculture. Research on technology adoption and agricultural extension is crucial for understanding how new practices and innovations can be effectively integrated into farming systems (Xu et al., 2023). The focus on global warming potential and water productivity reflects an increasing recognition of the need to assess and optimize the environmental impacts of agricultural practices (Rockström et al., 2009).

Finally, the basic themes cover foundational yet less developed areas such as climate-resilient agriculture, climate change mitigation, conservation agriculture, carbon sequestration, and the relationship between climate-smart practices and food security. These themes form the basis of current research but require further exploration to fully realize their potential. For instance, conservation agriculture and carbon sequestration are key strategies for enhancing soil health and mitigating climate change, yet they remain areas where more comprehensive research is needed (Pretty, 2011). The relationship between climate-smart practices and food security is another critical area that warrants deeper investigation to ensure that agricultural strategies contribute to both environmental sustainability and food security (Wakweya, 2023; Ogisi and Begho, 2023).