Current Horticultural Crop Production Technologies in Ethiopia: A Comprehensive Review

Current Horticultural Crop Production Technologies in Ethiopia: A Comprehensive Review | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Systematic Review Current Horticultural Crop Production Technologies in Ethiopia: A Comprehensive Review Semahegn Geremew Abate This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9716817/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Horticultural crop production is central to Ethiopia’s agricultural transformation, contributing to food and nutrition security, employment, diversification and exports. Although the country has favourable agro-ecological conditions and expanding markets, the sector faces persistent constraints, including weak seed systems, climate variability, limited irrigation access, postharvest losses, certification barriers, digital infrastructure gaps, and gender disparities. This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of horticultural production technologies in Ethiopia based on peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2024. It examines improvements in seed and planting materials, climate-resilient practices, soil and nutrient management, integrated pest management, protected cultivation, information communication technology–based solutions, quality standards, and value addition systems. Based on the literature, improvements in varieties, drip irrigation, greenhouse production, and integrated pest management enhance yields, water-use efficiency, and product quality. However, there has been uneven adoption due to high investment costs, limited extension services, low digital literacy, infrastructure deficits, and compliance expenses. There are gaps in linking technology adoption to long-term productivity, income stability, and export competitiveness. There is the need for coordinated, gender-responsive, and context specific strategies to strengthen innovation systems and promote sustainable, inclusive horticultural development in Ethiopia. Horticulture adoption climate-smart agriculture Ethiopia horticulture ICT Figures Figure 1 INTRODUCTION Agriculture is the backbone of Ethiopia’s economy, contributing substantially to the gross domestic product (GDP), employment, and foreign exchange earnings. The sector employs nearly three-quarters of the labour force and supports the livelihoods of the majority of the rural population. However, Ethiopian agriculture is predominantly based on smallholders and characterised by rain-fed production systems, low input use, limited mechanisation, and high vulnerability to climate variability, all of which constrain productivity and food security outcomes (Abate et al., 2016 ; Gebrehiwot and van der Veen, 2013). Given these structural challenges, agricultural diversification and technological advancement are needed to enhance resilience and to ensure sustainable growth. Horticulture is particularly important to Ethiopia’s agricultural sector, as it contributes to the country’s food security and provides livelihoods for the rural population (FAO, 2021). The diverse agro-ecological zones and fertile soils of Ethiopia offer favourable conditions for cultivating fruits, vegetables, flowers, spices, roots, and tubers. In recent years, there has been a notable surge in horticultural crop production in the country, driven by growing domestic demand and more export opportunities. Horticultural crops provide essential vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and dietary fibre necessary for a balanced diet, improving food and nutrition security and reducing micronutrient deficiencies (Ruel et al ., 2005). Compared with staple cereals, horticultural crops generally generate higher returns per unit area, contributing to income diversification, poverty reduction, and livelihood resilience among smallholder farmers (Bellemare and Novak, 2017). The horticulture sector is an important driver of both employment and export revenue. The rapid growth of floriculture, for example, has established Ethiopia as a leading exporter of cut flowers, highlighting how targeted investment, adoption of new technologies, and integration into global markets can support structural changes in agriculture (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010 ). However, the sector continues to face challenges, including gaps in productivity, pest and disease pressures, postharvest losses, limited irrigation, and weak coordination along the value chain. Overcoming these issues through improved farming techniques, integrated pest management, expanded irrigation, and stronger postharvest systems is key to unlocking the full potential of Ethiopia’s horticultural industry. In recent decades, Ethiopia has experienced a gradual transition from subsistence-oriented production towards greater commercialisation and market integration. Historically, smallholder farmers primarily produced staple crops for household consumption and had limited interaction with output markets. However, as the population has increased and the country has become more urbanised, policy reforms have influenced stronger market participation among smallholders (Barrett, 2008; Carletto et al., 2017 ). Agricultural commercialisation is widely recognised as a key pathway for improving farm productivity, raising rural incomes, and enhancing economic transformation, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa (Pingali, 2012 ). In Ethiopia, commercialisation has been closely associated with the expansion of high-value crops, particularly horticultural commodities. The rapid growth of Ethiopia’s floriculture and export-oriented vegetable sectors demonstrates how technological adoption, foreign investment, and institutional coordination can accelerate the shift towards commercial agriculture (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010 ). Nevertheless, commercialisation remains uneven throughout the country, as smallholders continue to face constraints related to access to irrigation, improved inputs, credit, extension services, and reliable market information. Therefore, it is crucial to strengthen horticultural production technologies and value chain integration to sustain Ethiopia’s transition towards a more market-oriented and competitive agricultural system. Knowledge gap Despite Ethiopia’s substantial potential in horticultural crop production, there are significant gaps in the knowledge and practical adoption of advanced technologies among both smallholders and commercial producers. Most existing studies tend to describe individual technologies – such as improved seed varieties, irrigation systems, integrated pest management, protected cultivation, and information and communications technology (ICT) applications – without providing a comprehensive, comparative, and context-specific analysis of their adoption, effectiveness, and limitations. There are key challenges that must be addressed, including inefficiencies in seed systems, limited access to climate-resilient varieties, postharvest losses, certification and quality compliance issues, inadequate infrastructure, low digital literacy, gender disparities, and weak market linkages. Moreover, most previous research has not measured the impacts of technology adoption on yield stability, resource use efficiency, income generation, or export performance, and has rarely examined trade-offs, scalability, or readiness for implementation. There is also a lack of integrated studies connecting climate-resilient practices, ICT adoption, value addition, and market diversification across Ethiopia’s diverse agro-ecological zones. Without this information, policymakers, researchers, and practitioners are limited in their ability to design evidence-based, technically feasible, economically viable, and socially inclusive interventions. Consequently, a comprehensive, analytical, and context-sensitive review is urgently needed. It should describe the current technologies; evaluate adoption constraints; and identify practical strategies for smallholders, commercial producers, and policymakers. This effort would help bridge research-to-practice gaps and support the sustainable development of Ethiopia’s horticultural sector. Objective The objective of this review is to critically examine horticultural crop production technologies in Ethiopia and to evaluate how they contribute to enhance productivity, commercialisation, and sustainable agricultural development. Specifically, the review identifies and synthesises major horticultural crop production technologies currently practiced in Ethiopia, including improved varieties, irrigation systems, nutrient management, integrated pest and disease management (IPM), protected cultivation, and postharvest handling techniques; evaluates the reported impacts of these technologies on yield performance, production efficiency, income generation, and export competitiveness based on available empirical studies; assesses existing constraints and adoption gaps limiting the effective implementation of horticultural technologies among smallholder farmers; and highlights research gaps and future directions for enhancing technological innovation, sustainability, and commercialisation. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data sources and search strategy This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines (Snyder, 2019). Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were searched using combinations of keywords related to horticultural production technologies, including “horticultural crops” and “Ethiopia”; “production technologies” and “horticulture”; “Ethiopia”, “irrigation systems”, and “horticulture”; “Ethiopia”, “integrated pest management”, and “horticulture”; “Ethiopia”, “postharvest handling”, and “vegetables”; “Ethiopia” and “protected cultivation”; and “greenhouse production” and “Ethiopia” Boolean operators (and, or) were used to refine and expand the search results. Articles were screened for relevance to Ethiopia’s horticultural sector, production technologies, commercialisation, and challenges. Two published reviews and sector syntheses – those by Ashine et al . (2019) and Zigene (2023) – guided the search strategy. These articles reviewed horticultural research and development, horticultural constraints and opportunities, and sector growth in Ethiopia. Inclusion and exclusion criteria Table 1 describes the inclusion and exclusion criteria used to select the studies included in the review. Screening and selection process Table 2 summarizes the study selection process. Initially, 330 records were identified, of which 46 duplicates were removed. This left 284 records for screening based on titles and abstracts. Subsequently, 148 records that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. After full-text assessment, 136 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 60 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Figure 1 shows the PRISMA flowchart for study selection. The final studies were grouped into six thematic categories for further analysis: varietal improvement, irrigation technologies, IPM, protected cultivation, postharvest technologies, and commercialisation/ value chains. Thematic categorisation of technologies The 60 included studies were organised thematically to allow a comparative evaluation of performance, adoption constraints, and context-specific effectiveness across Ethiopia’s horticultural production systems. Table 3 summarises the six themes and lists the number of studies for each theme. Table 1 – Inclusion and exclusion criteria used for this review Category Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria Type of publication Peer-reviewed journal articles, review papers, and research articles indexed in Scopus or Web of Science Editorials, opinion papers, newsletters, unpublished theses (unless highly relevant), and non-peer-reviewed sources Geographical scope Studies conducted in Ethiopia or directly addressing Ethiopian horticultural systems Studies conducted outside Ethiopia without clear relevance to Ethiopian horticulture Subject focus Research addressing horticultural crops (fruits, vegetables, spices, ornamentals, and root and tuber crops) and related production technologies Studies focusing solely on non-horticultural crops without linkage to horticulture Thematic coverage Studies on improved varieties, irrigation systems, nutrient management, integrated pest and disease management, protected cultivation, postharvest handling, value chains, and commercialisation Articles not addressing production technologies, adoption, productivity, sustainability, or commercialisation aspects Time frame Publications from 2000 to 2024 Publications before 2000 unless considered foundational or highly cited Language Articles published in English Articles published in other languages without an accessible English translation Methodological quality Studies with clearly defined objectives, transparent methodology, and scientifically sound analysis Studies lacking methodological clarity, insufficient data, or unclear analytical procedures Accessibility Full-text articles accessible through institutional or public databases Abstract-only articles without accessible full text Source: Snyder (2019) Comparative performance of horticultural technologies Effectiveness is context-dependent: technologies with lower capital requirements and simpler management are more widely adopted. On the other hand, high-input technologies are usually limited to commercial farms. Table 4 presents a comparison of horticultural technologies. Adoption determinants and constraints Adoption of horticultural technologies in Ethiopia is influenced by financial issues, including high input costs and limited access to credit (Abate et al. , 2015; Ashine et al. , 2019). Moreover, a lack of extension services reduces adoption of IPM and protected cultivation (Ashine et al. , 2019; Zigene, 2023). Other factors that affect horticulture in Ethiopia include infrastructure limitations such as inadequate irrigation networks, storage, and transport (Ashine et al. , 2019; Zigene, 2023); socio-economic elements, including farm size, risk aversion, and market access (Lemma et al. , 2015; Tadele, 2017); and institutional barriers, namely fragmented value chains and weak coordination (Abate et al. , 2015; Tadele, 2017). Table 2 – Study inclusion based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines PRISMA step Description Number of records Notes/reasons Identification Records identified through searching Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar 312 Comprehensive searches using predefined keywords and Boolean operators Additional records identified through other sources 18 Reference lists of key review articles and related studies Total records identified 330 Combined database and manual searches Duplicate records removed 46 Duplicates across databases Records after duplicates removed 284 Records forwarded to the screening stage Screening Records screened based on title and abstract 284 Screening based on relevance to Ethiopian horticulture and production technologies Records excluded 148 Not relevant to Ethiopia, non-horticultural focus, or lacking technological aspect Records retained for full-text assessment 136 Met initial screening criteria Eligibility Full-text articles assessed for eligibility 136 Evaluated using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria Full-text articles excluded 76 See reasons below Not focused on production technologies 32 Did not address core thematic areas Outside geographical scope (not the Ethiopian context) 21 Studies conducted outside Ethiopia Insufficient methodological quality 14 Lack of clear methods or weak analysis Full text not accessible 9 Abstract-only or inaccessible sources Total excluded 76 Based on strict application of the criteria Included Studies included in qualitative synthesis 60 Final studies used for thematic analysis Source: Adapted from Snyder (2019) and Page et al . (2021) Technologies that require small investments and simpler management are more readily adopted, particularly among smallholder farmers. Research gaps and future directions This systematic review revealed several research gaps: a lack of long-term and large-scale studies to assess sustainability and scalability (Snyder, 2019); limited integration of agronomic, economic, and social analyses (Abate et al. , 2015; Ashine et al. , 2019; Lemma et al. , 2015); insufficient cost–benefit evaluations for adoption potential (Ashine et al. , 2019; Zigene, 2023); understudied policy and institutional factors influencing adoption (Abate et al. , 2015; Tadele, 2017); and the need for context-specific technology adaptation across agro-ecological zones (Gebremeskel et al. , 2019; Lemma et al. , 2015; Zigene, 2023). Addressing these gaps is critical for improving the adoption, impact, and sustainability of horticultural technologies in Ethiopia. Table 3 – The six thematic areas considered in this review Theme Focus Number of studies References Varietal improvement Improved varieties, yield, and pest resistance 12 Ashine et al . (2019); Lemma et al . (2015) Irrigation technologies Drip irrigation, surface irrigation, and water-use efficiency 10 Gebremeskel et al . (2019) Integrated pest and disease management (IPM) Pest control and environmental sustainability 8 Zigene (2023) Protected cultivation Greenhouses and high tunnels 7 Zigene (2023) Postharvest technologies Storage, handling, and packaging 9 Ashine et al . (2019); Zigene (2023) Commercialisation and value chains Market access and adoption determinants 14 Abate et al . (2015); Tadele (2017) Table 4 – Comparative performance of horticultural technologies Technology Reported benefits Limitations Context-specific notes References Varietal improvement Higher yield, pest resistance, better quality Limited seed access and poor extension Genotype × environment interactions; performance varies across agro-ecologies Ashine et al . (2019); Lemma et al. (2015) Irrigation technologies Increased yield and cropping intensity High cost, water scarcity, and management challenges Most effective in arid/semi-arid zones Gebremeskel et al . (2019) Integrated pest and disease management (IPM) Reduced chemical use and improved sustainability Knowledge/training limitations, local pest variability Adoption higher where there is extension support Zigene (2023) Protected cultivation High yield and quality; off-season production possible High capital and technical requirements Mainly adopted by commercial/ peri-urban farms Zigene (2023) Postharvest technologies Reduced losses (20%-40%) and better market value Weak infrastructure and low awareness High returns if markets accessible Ashine et al . (2019); Zigene (2023) Commercialisation and value chains Improved profitability Fragmented value chains and institutional weakness Adoption constrained for smallholders Abate et al . (2015); Tadele (2017) Added value of the study Systematic synthesis of evidence: Using a PRISMA-guided approach, 60 relevant studies were critically analysed across six thematic areas: varietal improvement, irrigation technologies, IPM, protected cultivation, postharvest technologies, and commercialisation/ value chains. This thematic organisation allows for comparative assessment of technology performance, adoption constraints, and context-specific effectiveness in Ethiopia. Context-specific insights: Based on the included studies, the effectiveness of horticultural technologies is highly dependent on agro-ecological, socio-economic, and institutional contexts. For example, irrigation and protected cultivation technologies provide higher productivity under peri-urban and commercial settings, whereas smallholders more readily adopt practices that are low cost and simple to manage (Ashine et al. , 2019; Gebremeskel et al. , 2019; Zigene, 2023). Identification of determinants and barriers: The analysis of adoption determinants (financial, technical, socio-economic, and institutional) provides actionable insights on why certain technologies succeed or fail in specific contexts, highlighting the interaction between technology, farmer capacity, and policy frameworks. Research gaps and future directions: This review provides a structured assessment of gaps in long-term studies, cost–benefit analyses, integration of socio-economic factors, and policy research. This serves as guidance for future research priorities and policy interventions in Ethiopian horticulture. Practical implications: The synthesis of the findings across the included studies provides stakeholders – including researchers, extension agents, policymakers, and farmers – with evidence-based guidance for selecting, adapting, and promoting horticultural production technologies in Ethiopia. HORTICULTURAL CROP PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES Ethiopia’s horticultural sector is diverse, including fruits, vegetables, spices, herbs, and ornamental crops. This sector plays a key role in food security, income generation, employment, and foreign exchange. Adoption of modern technologies and improved agronomic practices has contributed to increased productivity, sustainability, and profitability (Asmare et al. , 2019; Girma et al. , 2021). Status of and major types of horticultural crops in Ethiopia Table 5 summaries the major horticultural crops cultivated in Ethiopia. Smallholder farmers dominate the production of fruits and vegetables for domestic markets, while large-scale commercial farms, particularly in floriculture, focus on export-oriented production. Recent trends, including urbanisation, rising domestic demand, and expansion of irrigation and investment, are accelerating growth in high-value horticultural crops. Despite this potential, the horticultural sector faces challenges related to input supply, postharvest losses, market access, and technological adoption, highlighting the need for strengthened production technologies and institutional support mechanisms (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010; Minten et al. , 2014). Spatial distribution and agroecological zones of major horticultural crops in Ethiopia Horticultural crop production in Ethiopia varies widely across the country’s diverse agro-ecological zones, which range from lowland arid areas to highland temperate regions ( Table 6 ). Altitude, temperature, rainfall, and soil characteristics strongly influence crop suitability, growing seasons, pest and disease prevalence, and productivity levels. . In general, lowland areas (<1,500 m above sea level) favour tropical fruits and irrigated vegetable production, mid-altitude zones (1,500-2,300 m above sea level) support a broad range of vegetables and fruits, while highland areas (>2,300 m above sea level) are suitable for temperate fruits and cool-season vegetables. Table 1 – A summary of the major horticultural crops in Ethiopia Category Major crops Main producing regions Production status Primary use/market orientation Fruits Mango ( Mangifera indica ), banana ( Musa spp.), avocado ( Persea americana ), papaya ( Carica papaya ), Citrus spp. Oromia, SNNPR, Amhara, and Benishangul-Gumuz Expanding production; increasing smallholder and commercial farms; increasing irrigation Domestic consumption and growing export market Vegetables Tomato ( Solanum lycopersicum ), onion ( Allium cepa ), cabbage ( Brassica oleracea ), potato ( Solanum tuberosum ), pepper ( Capsicum spp. ), and carrot ( Daucus carota ) Oromia (Rift Valley), Amhara, SNNPR, and Tigray Widely cultivated by smallholders; rapid expansion under irrigation; increasing greenhouse production Domestic markets and some export (fresh vegetables) Root and tuber crops Sweet potato ( Ipomoea batatas ), taro ( Colocasia esculenta ), yam ( Dioscorea spp.), and enset ( Ensete ventricosum ) SNNPR and Oromia Important for food security; largely based on smallholders Household consumption and local markets Spices and herbs Ginger ( Zingiber officinale ), turmeric ( Curcuma longa ), coriander ( Coriandrum sativum ), and garlic ( Allium sativum ) SNNPR, Oromia, and Amhara Increasing commercialisation; export potential Domestic and export markets Floriculture (ornamentals) Cut roses, summer flowers, and cuttings Oromia (around Addis Ababa) and Amhara Highly commercialised; dominated by large-scale private investment; strong export growth Export oriented, especially to the European and Middle Eastern markets Abbreviation: SNNPR, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region Source: Gebreeyesus and Iizuka (2010) Table 6 – Spatial distribution and agroecological zones of major horticultural crops in Ethiopia Agro-ecological zone Altitude (m above sea level) Climate characteristics Dominant soil types Major horticultural crops Main producing areas Lowland (Kolla) <1,500 High temperature (20-30°C); low to moderate rainfall; semi-arid to sub-humid Fluvisols and Cambisols Banana, mango, Papaya, tomato (irrigated), onion, and pepper Afar, Somali, Rift Valley (Oromia), and Benishangul-Gumuz Mid-altitude (Woina Dega) 1,500-2,300 Moderate temperature (15-22°C); moderate rainfall Nitisols and Luvisols Avocado, citrus, cabbage, carrot, potato, and spices (ginger and turmeric) Oromia, Amhara, and SNNPR Highland (Dega) >2,300 Cool temperature (10-18°C); higher rainfall Nitisols and Vertisols Apple, pear, plum, garlic, shallot, and cool-season vegetables Amhara Highlands, Oromia Highlands, and Tigray Highlands Irrigated river basins (across zones) Variable Controlled water supply; year-round production potential Alluvial soils (Fluvisols) Tomato, onion, green beans, and cut flowers Awash Basin, Rift Valley, and peri-urban areas of Addis Ababa Abbreviation: SNNPR, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region Source: Hurni (1998) Soil types such as Nitisols, Vertisols, and Fluvisols further affect crop adaptation and yield performance (Hurni, 1998; MoA, 2000). Seed and planting materials High‑quality seed and planting materials are foundational to horticultural crop productivity because they strongly influence germination, seedling vigour, yield potential, and resilience to biotic and abiotic stresses. In Ethiopia, seed technologies range from certified open‑pollinated varieties and hybrids developed for specific agro-ecological conditions to pre‑sowing treatments such as priming, pelleting, and coating, which enhance germination rates and early vigour (Alemayehu et al. , 2015; Tesfaye et al ., 2020). Vegetative propagation methods – including cuttings, grafting, budding, and in vitro tissue culture – are widely employed for crops such as banana, avocado, and ornamentals to maintain genetic uniformity and quality (Bairu et al ., 2011; Ghebrehiwot and Tesfaye, 2019). Recent research has also explored biotechnological approaches such as marker‑assisted selection to accelerate the development of varieties with desirable traits such as disease resistance, drought tolerance, and improved shelf life (Kebede et al ., 2021). Comparisons between improved and local varieties show that improved seeds generally have higher germination rates, uniform crop maturity, greater yield potential, and enhanced resistance to major pests and diseases. In contrast, local varieties are often genetically heterogeneous and less resilient (Alemayehu et al ., 2015; Tesfaye et al ., 2020). However, many smallholder farmers continue to rely on local varieties due to the high cost of certified seeds, limited access to improved planting materials, cultural preferences for specific organoleptic traits, and the perceived reliability of local ecotypes under traditional management practices. Adoption of improved seed and planting material technologies in Ethiopia is further constrained by systemic inefficiencies in the seed supply chain. Formal seed production remains underdeveloped for most horticultural crops, with limited foundation seed from breeding programmes and weak linkages between research institutions and commercial multipliers (Gebremedhin et al ., 2019; MoARD, 2017). Ineffective quality assurance and certification systems restrict the availability of high‑quality planting materials at the farm level (Gebrekidan and Tadesse, 2020). Moreover, distribution networks are often unreliable, particularly in remote areas, so farmers often depend on informal seed sources that may lack varietal purity and vigour. Performance outcomes for adoption include the extent of varietal uptake, yield response, economic returns, and stability of performance across diverse agro-ecological conditions. Adoption rates are highest where extension support, credit access, and market integration are strong, resulting in measurable yield advantages and improved profitability (Alemayehu et al ., 2015; Tesfaye et al ., 2020). Conversely, in areas with limited technical support and weak seed system infrastructure, local varieties continue to predominate despite their lower productivity metrics. Uses of greenhouses in crop production Greenhouse technology is increasingly adopted in Ethiopia to enhance horticultural crop production, particularly for high-value vegetables, flowers, and seedlings. By providing a controlled environment, greenhouses mitigate the adverse effects of climate variability – including temperature extremes, erratic rainfall, and pest and disease pressures – allowing for year-round production (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010). Greenhouses regulate temperature, humidity, and light, improving crop growth, yield, and quality while reducing water usage and exposure to pests. They are particularly valuable in peri-urban areas and regions with limited arable land, enabling intensive production on smaller plots. Adoption is facilitated by the development of low-cost greenhouse models, training programmes for farmers, and support from the government and non-governmental organisations. However, high initial investment costs, limited technical knowledge, and insufficient access to quality greenhouse materials hinder wider uptake of greenhouses. Despite these constraints, greenhouse cultivation presents a significant opportunity to increase productivity, to enhance food security, and to generate income through both domestic and export markets (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010). Soil management Soil health – encompassing physical, chemical, and biological properties that support plant growth, nutrient cycling, and water retention – is fundamental for productive and sustainable horticultural systems (Abera and Belay, 2020). In Ethiopia, soils face challenges such as degradation, nutrient depletion, acidity, and poor water management, which limit crop productivity (ATA, 2021; Tadesse, 2017; Teklu and Hailemariam, 2019). Several sustainable soil management practices, including organic amendments, integrated nutrient management, crop rotation, cover cropping, conservation tillage, liming of acidic soils, and efficient irrigation and drainage systems, can enhance soil fertility, structure, and moisture retention while minimising environmental degradation (Abera and Belay, 2020; ATA, 2021; Tadesse, 2017; Teklu and Hailemariam, 2019). Adoption of these practices ensures long-term productivity, supports climate resilience, and improves crop quality. Biological control and IPM Pests and diseases are major threats to horticultural crops, reducing both yields and quality. Sustainable alternatives to chemical pesticides include biological control and IPM. Biological control utilises natural enemies – predators, parasitoids, and pathogens – to suppress pest populations (Bayeh and Bekele, 2018). IPM integrates biological, cultural, mechanical, and selective chemical control measures for effective monitoring, prevention, and ecosystem-based management (Alemu and Adamu, 2021; Kassa and Alemayehu, 2020). Although there has been increased awareness of and research on IPM and biological control in Ethiopia, these techniques have not been widely adopted by smallholder farmers due to limited knowledge, a lack of training, and insufficient resources. Strengthening extension services and providing policy support are critical for scaling up these sustainable pest management practices (ATA, 2021; Kassa and Alemayehu, 2020). Climate-resilient cultivation practices Horticultural production in Ethiopia is highly sensitive to climate variability, including irregular rainfall patterns, rising temperatures, and an increased frequency of drought events, all of which negatively influence crop performance (Deressa et al. , 2011; Kassie et al ., 2013). Based on a case study from the Central Rift Valley, erratic precipitation reduced yields of rain‑fed vegetables by up to 30% over a 5‑year period, highlighting the need for adaptive practices that stabilise production under changing climatic conditions (Molla et al ., 2018). The adoption of improved irrigation technologies, such as drip and sprinkler systems, enhance water‑use efficiency (WUE) and yield. For example, on smallholder tomato farms in the Awash Basin, drip irrigation increased WUE by 40%-55% and increased marketable yields by 25%-35% compared with traditional furrow irrigation (Gebreyesus et al ., 2017). Rainwater harvesting systems , including micro‑ponds and rooftop catchments, are being employed in semi‑arid zones to provide supplemental irrigation during dry spells, increasing seasonal crop survival by up to 20% (Worku and Dessalegn, 2019). Soil management and crop diversification also contribute to climate resilience. Conservation tillage, mulching, and organic compost improve soil moisture retention and fertility. For example, mulched plots in the Ethiopian Highlands maintained 15%-20% more soil moisture and produced 18%-22% higher yields of leafy vegetables compared with non‑mulched controls (Teklu and Hailemariam, 2019). Crop rotation and intercropping systems also contribute to resilience by reducing the incidence of pests and diseases and enhancing nutrient cycling. For example, incorporating legumes into rotation sequences improved subsequent vegetable yields by 12%-16% by enhancing soil nitrogen availability (Abera and Belay, 2020). The adoption of drought‑tolerant and heat‑resistant varieties has further improved stability, with trials of improved onion and cabbage cultivars showing a 20%-30% increase in yield over local varieties under water stress (Tesfaye et al ., 2015). P rotected cultivation systems , including low‑cost greenhouses and shade nets, buffer crops against climate extremes, reduce heat and water stress, and extend production windows. In peri‑urban zones, greenhouse-grown lettuce and peppers consistently achieved 1.5-2 times higher seasonal yields and more uniform quality (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010). Additionally, climate information services , such as seasonal forecasts and localised advisories disseminated through mobile platforms, help farmers plan planting, irrigation, and harvest schedules, improving yield stability and reducing risks (Kebede and Wondimagegnehu, 2021). Collectively, these climate‑resilient enhance resource use efficiency and support sustained productivity in Ethiopia’s variable environments. Quality standards and certification Quality standards and certification are essential for ensuring that horticultural products are safe, marketable, and internationally competitive. In Ethiopia, the Ethiopian Standards Agency (ESA) develops and enforces national standards for seed quality, pesticide use, postharvest handling, and grading, providing a regulatory framework for domestic and export markets (ESA, 2020). Producers targeting exports increasingly pursue international certification schemes, such as GlobalGAP and organic certification under the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), which cover food safety, environmental sustainability, and labour welfare (GlobalGAP, 2022; IFOAM, 2021). Certification is administered through national institutions, such as the Ethiopian Conformity Assessment Enterprise (ECAE), as well as private agencies, including SGS and Control Union, which conduct inspections, testing, and audits (Control Union, 2022; ECAE, 2019; SGS, 2022). Adherence to quality standards improves market access, consumer confidence, and sustainability, but implementation presents technical and economic challenges. Certification costs – including application fees, inspections, laboratory testing, and compliance audits – are often prohibitively high for smallholder producers, limiting participation in formal schemes (World Bank, 2020). Additional barriers, such as complex documentation requirements, strict pesticide residue limits, and traceability protocols, further restrict uptake, particularly among farmers with limited technical knowledge and resources (Mebratu, 2022). Noncompliance or inadequate adherence can lead to export rejection , penalties, and reduced incomes, threatening producer livelihoods and national export earnings (Bekele and Tesfaye, 2019; FAO, 2021). Addressing these challenges requires targeted training, technical support, and investment in inspection and testing infrastructure, along with policy coordination to streamline certification processes. Incentives such as cost-sharing mechanisms, group certification schemes, and market linkage programmes can reduce financial and operational burdens, enabling broader participation. Effective implementation of quality standards and certification ultimately safeguards export markets, reduces postharvest losses, promotes sustainable horticultural practices, and supports equitable participation across the horticultural value chain (Gebremedhin, 2018; Molla, 2020; USAID, 2019). Current state of ICT and digital farming solutions ICT and digital farming solutions are increasingly applied to enhance horticultural production in Ethiopia, although adoption remains uneven and limited ( Table 7 ). Recent surveys indicate that only 15%-20% of smallholder horticultural farmers use any form of digital technology to manage their crops, with adoption concentrated in peri-urban and better-connected regions (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Kebede and Wondimagegnehu, 2021). Key technologies include mobile applications, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), remote sensing, drones, and integrated data analytics platforms . Mobile applications provide real-time advisory services on pest and disease management, weather forecasts, and market price information, improving farmer decision-making and timely interventions by 20%-30% compared with non-users (Yonas and Hailu, 2022). GIS and remote sensing support soil mapping, crop health monitoring, and resource allocation, enhancing fertiliser and irrigation efficiency by 10%-15% (Tekalign and Mekonnen, 2019). Drones allow precision monitoring of pests, water stress, and disease outbreaks, reducing pesticide use by up to 25% (Kebede and Wondimagegnehu, 2021). Data analytics platforms integrate multi-source information to optimise crop management decisions, enhancing overall yield performance and input-use efficiency. Despite these benefits, widespread adoption is constrained by multiple factors. P oor internet connectivity, limited network coverage in rural areas, and unreliable electricity hinder consistent use of digital tools. In addition, digital literacy among smallholder farmers is low, with fewer than 30% able to use smartphone-based advisory applications effectively without external support (Abebe and Alemu, 2020). Financial barriers, including high initial device costs and subscription fees, further limit uptake. M obile applications are the most widely used and accessible ICT tool , while drones and GIS are largely restricted to research institutions, commercial farms, or development projects due to their cost and technical complexity (Tekalign and Mekonnen, 2019; Yonas and Hailu, 2022). Scaling up digital adoption requires capacity-building programmes , government-led digital extension initiatives, and public–private partnerships that provide affordable access to technology, training, and technical support. Investments in rural digital infrastructure and tailored and user-friendly ICT platforms can increase adoption; promote data-driven horticultural management; and enhance productivity, resource use efficiency, and resilience of smallholder horticultural systems in Ethiopia. Gender-inclusive approaches Gender-inclusive approaches and women empowerment initiatives are essential for promoting equity, improving livelihoods, and enhancing the sustainability of horticultural value chains in Ethiopia (Admasu et al. , 2018; Tilahun et al ., 2022). Women represent a significant proportion of the horticultural workforce, contributing substantially to crop production, postharvest handling, and marketing. Despite their critical role, women often face limited access to productive resources – including land, credit, quality seeds, fertilisers, irrigation facilities, and extension services – which constrains their productivity and adoption of modern technologies (Gebremedhin and Swinton, 2003). Gender norms also influence household decision-making and labour allocation, affecting women’s participation in innovative agricultural practices. Several interventions have aimed to reduce these disparities and to promote gender-responsive horticultural development . Training programmes targeting both men and women in modern horticultural techniques, pest and disease management, and postharvest handling have improved skill acquisition and adoption of improved technologies (Lemma, 2018). W omen’s access to technologies – including digital advisory tools, drip irrigation, and greenhouse systems – is 25%-35% lower than men’s, highlighting the need for gender-sensitive capacity-building (Tesfaye and Wood, 2015). Table 2 – Information and communication technology and digital farming solutions in Ethiopian Horticulture Tool Adoption rate Effectiveness Key constraints Mobile applications 15%-20% of farmers 20%-30% increase in decision-making and market access Low digital literacy; weak network coverage; high subscription costs Geographic Information Systems and remote Sensing 10%-12% of farmers 10%-15% improvement in input efficiency High cost and complexity; limited technical skills Drones 5%-8% of farmers Up to a 25% reduction in pesticide use Expensive equipment; regulatory barriers Data Analytics Platforms 8%-10% of farmers Enhanced yield and resource optimisation Poor internet access; data integration issues Source: Abebe and Alemu (2020); Kebede and Wondimagegn (2021); Tekalign and Mekonnen (2019); Yonas and Hailu (2022) Programmes facilitating women’s access to inputs, land, and financial services have increased participation in horticultural production and boosted productivity by 10%-20% in some regions. Gender integration also extends to climate-smart and ICT-based technologies . Equitable access to improved seed varieties, greenhouse farming, and efficient irrigation systems enhances labour efficiency and water-use efficiency, narrows productivity gaps, and improves yields (Tesfaye and Wood, 2015). Moreover, promoting women’s involvement in value addition, such as processing, packaging, and market linkages, further increases income, economic empowerment, and household food security (UN Women Ethiopia, 2019). Incorporating gender-disaggregated indicators – such as access to inputs, training participation, technology adoption rates, and decision-making authority – into horticultural interventions is crucial to ensure equitable benefits and to inform evidence-based policies and programmes. Government initiatives to promote the horticulture sector The Government of Ethiopia has implemented strategic policies and institutional interventions to promote the horticulture sector as part of its broader agricultural transformation framework. Initiatives such as the Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) and the Agricultural Transformation Agenda emphasise crop diversification, commercialisation of smallholder farms, and strengthening value chains. Public investments have focused on expanding irrigation infrastructure, enhancing seed systems for high‑quality planting materials, and supporting agricultural research and extension services tailored to horticultural crops (Minten et al ., 2014; Negatu and Parvathamma, 2018). The Ministry of Agriculture, in collaboration with regional agricultural bureaus, provides technical training on modern production technologies, IPM, postharvest handling, and market integration to increase productivity and reduce losses. Furthermore, policy frameworks encourage private sector participation through incentives, public–private partnerships, and certification systems that improve market access. These coordinated efforts reflect a shift from subsistence‑oriented production towards a more market‑oriented and commercially viable horticultural subsector that contributes to national economic growth and rural employment. Expansion of agroprocessing industries linked to horticultural growth The expansion of horticultural production in Ethiopia has stimulated growth in agroprocessing industries, which play a critical role in value addition, waste reduction, and enhancing competitiveness. Increased production of fruits, vegetables, spices, and herbs has encouraged investments in processing facilities such as fruit canning, juice and puree production, dried vegetables and spice processing units, and cold storage infrastructure (Assefa et al ., 2020). These ventures are frequently located in peri‑urban clusters that serve as hubs linking smallholder producers with processing enterprises, thereby generating rural employment and increasing farmers’ incomes. In the floriculture subsector, grading and packing facilities have expanded significantly to meet export specifications, reinforcing Ethiopia’s integration into international markets. Despite this progress, challenges such as limited access to finance, inadequate infrastructure, and logistical bottlenecks continue to limit the full realisation of Ethiopia’s agroprocessing potential. Addressing these issues requires enhanced investment incentives, improved transport and energy infrastructure, and stronger coordination between producers and processors. Marketing opportunities in neighbouring countries and the Middle East Ethiopia’s horticultural products have considerable marketing potential in regional and international markets, owing to geographic proximity, rising demand for fresh produce, and efforts to improve trade logistics. According to data, horticultural commodities – particularly cut flowers, fruits, and vegetables – are increasingly exported to Djibouti and Somalia, which serve as accessible regional outlets due to shared border access and established trade linkages (Gebreeyesus and Sonobe, 2012). Additionally, the Middle East, notably the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations, represents an expanding market for Ethiopian horticultural exports, driven by demand for off‑season produce and specialty crops that are not grown locally. Improvements in air and sea freight logistics, participation in regional trade agreements, and compliance with international quality standards such as GlobalGAP have facilitated access to these markets. Nonetheless, export growth faces challenges including stringent phytosanitary requirements, competition from other exporting countries, and infrastructural hurdles at border crossings. Strategic investments in cold chain systems, quality certification mechanisms, and bilateral trade agreements could enhance Ethiopia’s competitive position and expand its horticultural market share in Djibouti, Somalia, and the Middle East. Opportunities and challenges The Ethiopian horticultural sector has substantial opportunities for growth due to high domestic demand, expanding export markets, the adoption of modern technologies, and the potential for climate-resilient practices. Research innovations, public–private partnerships, capacity-building programmes, and ICT solutions further enhance productivity and sustainability (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Tesfaye and Abate, 2020). Nevertheless, challenges remain, including limited access to quality seeds and planting materials, poor infrastructure, fragmented supply chains, pests and diseases, high input costs, and low awareness of modern practices among smallholder farmers (Asmare et al ., 2019; Girma et al ., 2021; Tekalign and Mekonnen, 2019). Coordinated efforts by government, research institutions, non-governmental organisations, and private sector stakeholders are essential to develop context-specific solutions, to strengthen market linkages, to improve technical support, and to ensure the long-term sustainability of horticultural crop production in Ethiopia (Abera et al ., 2017; Tesfaye and Abate, 2020). CONCLUSIONS This review provides a comprehensive assessment of the status, technological advancements, and challenges in horticultural production in Ethiopia. This sector plays a critical role in food security, income generation, employment, and export earnings , supported by the country’s diverse agro-ecological conditions that enable the production of a wide range of crops, including fruits, vegetables, flowers, and spices. Key technological interventions – including improved seed and planting material technologies, modern nursery practices, vegetative propagation, and biotechnological tools – contribute to improved productivity and crop quality. However, adoption remains constrained by gaps in the seed supply chain, limited awareness of improved varieties, infrastructure gaps, and financial and knowledge barriers , particularly among smallholder farmers. Although improved varieties consistently outperform local cultivars in yield and resilience, their uptake depends on availability, affordability, and technical capacity. Quality standards and certification systems , such as GlobalGAP and organic certification, are increasingly important for market access and competitiveness. However, high costs and complex compliance requirements limit participation by smallholder farmers and increase the risk of exclusion from high-value markets. Similarly, ICT and digital farming solutions , including mobile applications, GIS, drones, and data analytics, have great potential to improve decision-making, resource use efficiency, and market linkages, but adoption remains limited due to digital literacy gaps, poor connectivity, and infrastructure constraints. This review also highlights important trade-offs across technologies . Climate-resilient practices such as drip irrigation and greenhouse cultivation enhance water-use efficiency and yield stability but require higher initial investments and training. IPM reduces reliance on pesticides and chemical inputs but demands increased knowledge and labour. Gender-inclusive approaches are critical, as women play a central role in horticultural production yet face persistent disparities in access to resources, training, and technologies , which affect adoption and productivity. Overall, sustainable development of Ethiopia’s horticultural sector requires coordinated efforts across research, extension, policy, and institutional frameworks. Strengthening infrastructure, improving access to technologies and markets, promoting gender equity, and supporting smallholder inclusion will be essential to overcome adoption barriers and fully realise the sector’s potential for economic growth, food security, and climate resilience. FUTURE PROSPECTS Ethiopia’s horticultural sector faces persistent challenges, including climate stress, limited technology adoption, postharvest losses, market dependence, and knowledge gaps. Addressing these constraints requires integrated and forward-looking strategies that balance technological innovation with adoption feasibility. Advances in climate-resilient cultivars, particularly drought- and heat-tolerant varieties, can help stabilise yields, but their adoption depends on strengthening seed systems and expanding extension support. Similarly, smart farming technologies , including ICT tools, GIS, drones, and data analytics, are expected to play a growing role in improving productivity and resource use efficiency. Realising this potential will require investments in digital infrastructure, as well as targeted capacity-building programs to address gaps in digital literacy. Future growth in the sector will also depend on strengthening value addition and marketing integration. Expansion of agroprocessing industries and cold-chain infrastructure can reduce postharvest losses and increase income but will require substantial investment and improved coordination across value chains. At the same time, diversification into regional and Middle Eastern markets presents opportunities to reduce export risks and increase competitiveness, contingent on improved compliance with quality standards and stronger production–market linkages. Capacity-building and inclusive extension systems will be central to these efforts. In particular, gender-responsive approaches that enhance women’s access to resources, training, and technologies are critical for improving adoption rates and overall productivity. Declarations Funding: This research received no external funding. Author Contributions: The author conceived and designed the study, developed the methodology, conducted the investigation, per-formed data curation and formal analysis, prepared the original draft, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and approved the final version of the manuscript. The author declares that he has read and approved the publication of the manuscript in this present form. Data availability statement: The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are publicly available in an open-access repository and can be accessed without restriction. Conflicts of interest: The author declares no conflicts of interest. References Abate GT, Rashid S, Borzaga C, Getnet K (2016) Rural finance and agricultural technology adoption in Ethiopia. Food Policy 60:122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.01.003 Abebe A, Asfaw A (2020) Adoption of Climate Smart Agricultural Practices among Smallholder Farmers: Evidence from Ethiopia. Sustainability 12(11):4478. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1211447 Abebe B, Alemu D (2020) ICT applications in Ethiopian horticultural crop production: adoption, challenges, and opportunities. Horticulturae 6(4):112. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae6040102 Abebe B, Alemu D (2020) Protected cultivation and horticultural crop performance in peri-urban Ethiopia. Horticulturae 6(4):112 Abebe B, Alemu D (2020) Digital agriculture adoption and impacts on horticultural productivity in Ethiopia. Ethiop J Agricultural Sci 30(2):45–58 Abebe G, Alemu B (2020) Adoption of digital farming technologies in Ethiopia: opportunities and challenges. Ethiop J Agricultural Sci 30(2):45–58 Abebe T (2020) Seed quality enhancement techniques in horticultural crops: a review. Afr J Hortic Sci 14(2):45–56 Abera G, Belay A (2020) Crop diversification effects on soil fertility and horticultural productivity in Ethiopia. Agron J 112(4):1786–1797 Abera G, Belay A (2020) Soil fertility management practices and their implications for sustainable agricultural production in Ethiopia. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management 11 (2), 47–60. https://academicjournals.org/journal/JSSEM.Accessed April 3, 2026 Admasu F, Tilahun G, Gebre M (2018) Gender integration in Ethiopian horticultural value chains: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security 3 (2), 45–58. https://www.agrigender.net/ Accessed April 3, 2026 Alemayehu D, Desta B, Tadesse M Evaluation of improved horticultural crop varieties in different agro-ecological zones of Ethiopia. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 2015, 90 (6), 631–638. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2015.11513189 Ashine T, Tesfaye B, Lemma D (2019) Review of horticultural production constraints and opportunities in Ethiopia. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 94(2):123–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2018.1464981 Assefa A, Abate G, Tadele A Agroprocessing and rural transformation in Ethiopia: the case of horticulture value chains. J Agric Food Res (2020), 2, 100067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2020.100067 Bairu MW, Aremu AO, van Staden J Micropropagation of horticultural crops: a review on present status and future prospects. J Biotechnol 2011 , 156 (4), 173–186 Barrett CB Smallholder market participation: concepts and evidence from eastern and southern Africa. Food Policy 2008, 33 (4), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.10.005 Bekele T, Tesfaye B Adoption of quality standards in horticultural value chains in Ethiopia. Food Control 2019, 104 , 1–10 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.04.015 Bekele T, Tesfaye A (2019) Enhancing food safety in Ethiopia: The role of certification and quality standards. African Journal of Food Science 13 (5), 89–97. https://academicjournals.org/journal/AJFS.Accessed April 3, 2026 Bellemare MF, Novak L Contract farming and food security. Am J Agricultural Econ 2017, 99 (2), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aaw053 Carletto C, Corral P, Guelfi A (2017) Agricultural commercialization and nutrition revisited: empirical evidence from three African countries. Food Policy 67:106–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.020 Deressa TT, Hassan RM, Ringler C (2011) Perception and adaptation to climate change by smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. J Agric Sci 149(1):23–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859610000687 Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA) (2021) https://www.ata.gov.et/Accessed April 3, 2026 Ethiopian Conformity Assessment Enterprise (2019) https://ecae.gov.et/Accessed April 3, 2026 Ethiopian Standards Agency (2020) https://www.esa.gov.et/Accessed April 3, 2026 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Export quality (2021) compliance and risks in horticultural products. FAO, Rome FAO (2026) Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) for Horticulture in Ethiopia. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2021. https://www.fao.org/ethiopia/Accessed April 3 FAOSTAT. FAO Statistical Database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2023) http://www.fao.org/faostat.Accessed April 3, 2026 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (2026) Ethiopia Horticulture Investment Guide: Opportunities for Sustainable Development 2021. https://www.fao.org/Accessed April 3 Gebreeyesus M, Iizuka M (2010) Discovery of a flower industry in Ethiopia: experimentation and coordination. J Dev Stud 46(3):440–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380902935826 Gebreeyesus M, Sonobe T (2012) Global value chains and market formation: the case of Ethiopian floriculture. J Dev Stud 48(3):335–348 Gebrehiwot T, van der Veen A Climate change vulnerability in Ethiopia: disaggregation of Tigray Region. J East Afr Stud 2013 , 7 (4), 607–629. https://doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2013.817162 Gebrekidan H, Tadesse T Seed system challenges and opportunities for vegetable crops in Ethiopia. J Seed Sci 2020, 42 (2), e202042017. https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1545v42232417 Gebremedhin B, Jaleta M, Hoekstra D The role of seed systems in the commercialization of smallholder agriculture: evidence from Ethiopia. Food Secur 2019, 11 , 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-00870-4 Gebremedhin B, Swinton S Micro-level determinants of gendered technology adoption in Ethiopian agriculture. Agricultural Econ 2003, 29 (2), 145156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00158 Gebremedhin B Impact of certification on smallholder horticultural farmers in Ethiopia. Agric Syst (2018), 165, 256–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.06.004 Gebremedhin B (2018) Sustainable Horticulture and Quality Standards in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute https://www.eiar.gov.et/ Accessed April 3, 2026 Gebremedhin B, Swinton SM (2003) Investment in soil conservation in northern Ethiopia: the role of land tenure security and public programs. Agric Econ 29(1):69–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00148.x Gebremedhin G, Gebre E (2018) Vegetative propagation methods in horticultural crop improvement: A review. Journal of Plant Sciences 7 (3), 89–101. https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/jps.Accessed April 3, 2026 Gebremeskel G, Gebremedhin B, Hoekstra D (2019) Adoption of irrigation technologies and its impact on agricultural productivity in Ethiopia. Water Resour Rural Dev 14:100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wrr.2019.100110 Gebreyesus B, Hailu T, Melaku A Irrigation technologies and vegetable productivity in the Awash Basin, Ethiopia. Irrig Sci 2017, 35 (3), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-017-0542-2 Ghebrehiwot HG, Tesfaye A Advances in vegetative propagation for horticultural crops in Ethiopia. Horticulturae 2019, 5 (2), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae5020028 GlobalGAP (2022) https://www.globalgap.org/Accessed April 3, 2026. http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0101sp1.htm (accessed on 25 August 2022) Hurni H Agroecological belts of Ethiopia: explanatory notes on three maps at a scale of 1:1,000,000. Soil Conservation Research Programme, University of Bern, Switzerland , (1998) IFOAM (2021) https://www.ifoam.bio.Accessed April 3, 2026 International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) (2026) Organic Standards. Retrieved from https://www.ifoam.bio.2021.https://www.ifoam.bio.Accessed April 3 Kassie M, Ndiritu S, Kassu Y Climate variability and agricultural production in Ethiopia. Food Secur 2013, 5 (2), 291307 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-013-0249-0 Kassie BT, Hengsdijk H, Rötter RP, Kahiluoto H, Asseng S, Van Ittersum MK (2013) Adapting to climate variability and change: experiences from cereal-based farming in the central rift and kobo valleys, Ethiopia. Environ Manage 52:1115–1131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0145-2 Kebede A, Mekonnen T, Tsegaye B Marker-assisted selection and biotechnology for crop improvement in Ethiopia. Plant Biotechnol Rep 2021, 15 (4), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11816-021-00690-0 Kebede A, Wondimagegnehu A Climate information services and farming decisions in Ethiopia. Clim Risk Manage 2021, 33 , 100321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100321 Kebede A, Wondimagegnehu A Precision agriculture and ICT adoption in Ethiopian smallholder farming. Computers Electron Agric 2021, 188 , 106324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106324 Kebede M, Wondimagegnehu S (2021) ICT in Ethiopian agriculture: status and future prospects. J Agricultural Food Inform 22(1):67–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496505.2020.1856164 Lemma D, Yayeh Z, Herath E (2015) Tomato production practices and constraints in Ethiopia. Agric Food Secur 4(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-015-0020-8 Lemma D Influences of gender-focused agricultural training on technology adoption in Ethiopia. J Dev Stud (2018), 54 (7), 12541269. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2017.1365768 Mebratu A Barriers to adoption of certification in smallholder horticultural production. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 2022, 97 (4), 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2022.2067487 Mebratu A (2022) Challenges and opportunities in implementing quality standards for horticultural crops in Ethiopia. Horticulture International Journal 16 (3), 152–160. https://www.horticultureinternationaljournal.com/Accessed April 3, 2026 Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) (2000) https://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed April 3, 2026 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD) (2017) https://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed April 3, 2026 Ministry of Agriculture of Ethiopia (2021) https://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed April 3, 2026 Minten B, Randrianarison L, Swinnen J Global retail chains and poor smallholders: evidence from Madagascar. World Dev (2014), 54, 302–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.08.010 Minten B, Tamru S, Engida E Structure and performance of Ethiopia’s horticulture export sector. Food Policy 2014, 44 , 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.09.006 Molla D (2026) Certification and market access for Ethiopian horticultural exports. Horticultural Science 2020 , 55 (3), 345–356. https://www.hortisciencejournal.com/Accessed April 3 Molla GD, Taffesse AS, Umeta M Rainfall variability and vegetable yield risk in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Int J Clim Change Strateg Manag (2018), 10 (4), 595–610. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2017-0107 Molla M (2020) The impact of GlobalGAP certification on Ethiopian horticultural exports. Journal of Agricultural Economics 12 (2), 115–130. https://www.jaejournal.com/Accessed April 3, 2026 Negatu WT, Parvathamma K Agricultural policy reforms and smallholder commercialization in Ethiopia. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics (2018), 10 (5), 128–138. https://academicjournals.org/journal/JDAE.Accessed April 3, 2026 Pingali P Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2012), 109 (31), 12302–12308. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912953109 Ruel MT, Minot N, Smith L Patterns and determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption in sub-Saharan Africa: a multi0-country comparison. Food Policy 2005, 30 (5–6), 436–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2005.08.001 SGS. Food Certification Services. SGS Group (2022) Retrieved from https://www.sgs.com https://www.sgs.com.Accessed April 3, 2026 SGS (2026) Horticultural product certification in Ethiopia: annual report. Geneva: SGS 2022. https://www.sgs.com.Accessed April 3 Snyder H (2019) Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 104:333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039 Tadele Z (2017) Raising crop productivity in Ethiopia through improved technologies. Agronomy 7(3):45. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy7030045 Tadesse T (2017) The role of organic matter in improving soil fertility and crop productivity in Ethiopia. Journal of Organic Agriculture and Ecology 5 (1), 30–42. https://joaejournal.org/Accessed April 3, 2026 Tekalign T, Mekonnen G Data-driven decision support systems for horticultural production in Ethiopia. Agricultural Syst 2019, 173 , 450–460 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.03.008 Tekalign T, Mekonnen D (2019) The role of mobile applications in enhancing agricultural productivity in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Research 14 (1), 32–49. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejar . Accessed April 3, 2026 Teklu T, Hailemariam T Soil moisture conservation and yield response of leafy vegetables under mulch systems in the Ethiopian Highlands. Soil Tillage Res 2019, 193 , 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2019.03.007 Teklu E, Hailemariam T (2019) Soil health and management in Ethiopia: A review. Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 29 (1), 1–14. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejas.Accessed April 3, 2026 Tesfaye A, Kassa B, Woldemariam M Adoption and performance of improved vegetable varieties in Ethiopia: opportunities and constraints. Horticulturae 2020, 6 (3), 45 Tesfaye A, Kassa B, Woldemariam M 6(3), 45., Tesfaye S, Wood R (2020) Adoption and performance of improved vegetable varieties in Ethiopia: opportunities and constraints. Horticulturae Climate-smart agricultural technologies and gender: Evidence from Ethiopian horticulture. Agricultural Systems 2020 , 137, 52–63 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.12.003 Tesfaye K, Zaidi PH, Gbegbelegbe S, Boeber C, Getaneh F, Seetharam K, Sterling J (2015) Climate change impacts and potential benefits of drought and heat tolerant maize in Africa. Int J Clim Change Strateg Manag 7(3):247–263. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2014-0063 Tilahun G, Admasu F, Gebre M (2022) Women empowerment in horticultural value chains: Evidence from Ethiopia. Horticultural Science & Technology 40 (3), 245–260. https://www.horticulturalsciencejournal.com/Accessed April 3, 2026 UN Women Ethiopia (2019) Promoting women’s economic empowerment in agricultural value chains. UN Women, Addis Ababa USAID (2019) Promoting horticultural exports through quality assurance and certification. USAID, Washington DC World Bank (2020) Strengthening quality standards and certification in Ethiopian horticulture. World Bank, Washington DC Yonas M, Hailu T (2026) Drone applications and remote sensing in Ethiopian horticulture: Adoption and challenges. International Journal of Remote Sensing Applications 2022 , 12 (2), 45–58. https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/ijrsa.Accessed April 3 Yonas B, Hailu Z (2022) Drones in Ethiopian agriculture: Potential applications and challenges. Journal of Precision Agriculture 8 (3), 105–120. https://www.journals.sagepub.com/home/jpa.Accessed April 3, 2026 Zigene ZD (2023) Horticultural sector development in Ethiopia: Challenges and opportunities. Heliyon 9(3):e14523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14523 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9716817","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Systematic Review","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":640429120,"identity":"618122e2-e047-4d54-a924-0d301af70ccf","order_by":0,"name":"Semahegn Geremew Abate","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5377-4726","institution":"Mekdela Amba University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Semahegn","middleName":"Geremew","lastName":"Abate","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-05-14 16:46:58","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9716817/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9716817/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":109321927,"identity":"c317c43c-8a62-47b8-a32e-fb6714216c5c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 13:46:56","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":61328,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePRISMA 2020 Flow Diagram\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9716817/v1/417cfce6c12d12d0b8696707.png"},{"id":109405759,"identity":"fa51b30a-d898-44f7-b466-4663bc5a34ab","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-17 13:20:05","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":443509,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9716817/v1/949e9440-3341-416f-944f-779fea63ed87.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCurrent Horticultural Crop Production Technologies in Ethiopia: A Comprehensive Review\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eAgriculture is the backbone of Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s economy, contributing substantially to the gross domestic product (GDP), employment, and foreign exchange earnings. The sector employs nearly three-quarters of the labour force and supports the livelihoods of the majority of the rural population. However, Ethiopian agriculture is predominantly based on smallholders and characterised by rain-fed production systems, low input use, limited mechanisation, and high vulnerability to climate variability, all of which constrain productivity and food security outcomes (Abate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Gebrehiwot and van der Veen, 2013). Given these structural challenges, agricultural diversification and technological advancement are needed to enhance resilience and to ensure sustainable growth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHorticulture is particularly important to Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s agricultural sector, as it contributes to the country\u0026rsquo;s food security and provides livelihoods for the rural population (FAO, 2021). The diverse agro-ecological zones and fertile soils of Ethiopia offer favourable conditions for cultivating fruits, vegetables, flowers, spices, roots, and tubers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn recent years, there has been a notable surge in horticultural crop production in the country, driven by growing domestic demand and more export opportunities. Horticultural crops provide essential vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and dietary fibre necessary for a balanced diet, improving food and nutrition security and reducing micronutrient deficiencies (Ruel \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2005). Compared with staple cereals, horticultural crops generally generate higher returns per unit area, contributing to income diversification, poverty reduction, and livelihood resilience among smallholder farmers (Bellemare and Novak, 2017).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe horticulture sector is an important driver of both employment and export revenue. The rapid growth of floriculture, for example, has established Ethiopia as a leading exporter of cut flowers, highlighting how targeted investment, adoption of new technologies, and integration into global markets can support structural changes in agriculture (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, the sector continues to face challenges, including gaps in productivity, pest and disease pressures, postharvest losses, limited irrigation, and weak coordination along the value chain. Overcoming these issues through improved farming techniques, integrated pest management, expanded irrigation, and stronger postharvest systems is key to unlocking the full potential of Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s horticultural industry.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn recent decades, Ethiopia has experienced a gradual transition from subsistence-oriented production towards greater commercialisation and market integration. Historically, smallholder farmers primarily produced staple crops for household consumption and had limited interaction with output markets. However, as the population has increased and the country has become more urbanised, policy reforms have influenced stronger market participation among smallholders (Barrett, 2008; Carletto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgricultural commercialisation is widely recognised as a key pathway for improving farm productivity, raising rural incomes, and enhancing economic transformation, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa (Pingali, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). In Ethiopia, commercialisation has been closely associated with the expansion of high-value crops, particularly horticultural commodities. The rapid growth of Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s floriculture and export-oriented vegetable sectors demonstrates how technological adoption, foreign investment, and institutional coordination can accelerate the shift towards commercial agriculture (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Nevertheless, commercialisation remains uneven throughout the country, as smallholders continue to face constraints related to access to irrigation, improved inputs, credit, extension services, and reliable market information. Therefore, it is crucial to strengthen horticultural production technologies and value chain integration to sustain Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s transition towards a more market-oriented and competitive agricultural system.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eKnowledge gap\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s substantial potential in horticultural crop production, there are significant gaps in the knowledge and practical adoption of advanced technologies among both smallholders and commercial producers. Most existing studies tend to describe individual technologies \u0026ndash; such as improved seed varieties, irrigation systems, integrated pest management, protected cultivation, and information and communications technology (ICT) applications \u0026ndash; without providing a comprehensive, comparative, and context-specific analysis of their adoption, effectiveness, and limitations. There are key challenges that must be addressed, including inefficiencies in seed systems, limited access to climate-resilient varieties, postharvest losses, certification and quality compliance issues, inadequate infrastructure, low digital literacy, gender disparities, and weak market linkages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, most previous research has not measured the impacts of technology adoption on yield stability, resource use efficiency, income generation, or export performance, and has rarely examined trade-offs, scalability, or readiness for implementation. There is also a lack of integrated studies connecting climate-resilient practices, ICT adoption, value addition, and market diversification across Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s diverse agro-ecological zones. Without this information, policymakers, researchers, and practitioners are limited in their ability to design evidence-based, technically feasible, economically viable, and socially inclusive interventions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsequently, a comprehensive, analytical, and context-sensitive review is urgently needed. It should describe the current technologies; evaluate adoption constraints; and identify practical strategies for smallholders, commercial producers, and policymakers. This effort would help bridge research-to-practice gaps and support the sustainable development of Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s horticultural sector.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eObjective\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe objective of this review is to critically examine horticultural crop production technologies in Ethiopia and to evaluate how they contribute to enhance productivity, commercialisation, and sustainable agricultural development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpecifically, the review identifies and synthesises major horticultural crop production technologies currently practiced in Ethiopia, including improved varieties, irrigation systems, nutrient management, integrated pest and disease management (IPM), protected cultivation, and postharvest handling techniques; evaluates the reported impacts of these technologies on yield performance, production efficiency, income generation, and export competitiveness based on available empirical studies; assesses existing constraints and adoption gaps limiting the effective implementation of horticultural technologies among smallholder farmers; and highlights research gaps and future directions for enhancing technological innovation, sustainability, and commercialisation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"MATERIALS AND METHODS","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData sources and search strategy\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines (Snyder, 2019). Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were searched using combinations of keywords related to horticultural production technologies, including “horticultural crops” and “Ethiopia”; “production technologies” and “horticulture”; “Ethiopia”, “irrigation systems”, and “horticulture”; “Ethiopia”, “integrated pest management”, and “horticulture”; “Ethiopia”, “postharvest handling”, and “vegetables”; “Ethiopia” and “protected cultivation”; and “greenhouse production” and “Ethiopia” Boolean operators (and, or) were used to refine and expand the search results. Articles were screened for relevance to Ethiopia’s horticultural sector, production technologies, commercialisation, and challenges. Two published reviews and sector syntheses – those by Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019) and Zigene (2023) – guided the search strategy. These articles reviewed horticultural research and development, horticultural constraints and opportunities, and sector growth in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInclusion and exclusion criteria\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 1\u003c/em\u003e describes the inclusion and exclusion criteria used to select the studies included in the review.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScreening and selection process\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 2\u003c/em\u003e summarizes the study selection process. Initially, 330 records were identified, of which 46 duplicates were removed. This left 284 records for screening based on titles and abstracts. Subsequently, 148 records that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. After full-text assessment, 136 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 60 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFigure 1\u003c/em\u003e shows the PRISMA flowchart for study selection. The final studies were grouped into six thematic categories for further analysis: varietal improvement, irrigation technologies, IPM, protected cultivation, postharvest technologies, and commercialisation/ value chains.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThematic categorisation of technologies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe 60 included studies were organised thematically to allow a comparative evaluation of performance, adoption constraints, and context-specific effectiveness across Ethiopia’s horticultural production systems. \u003cem\u003eTable 3\u003c/em\u003e summarises the six themes and lists the number of studies for each theme.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;1\u0026nbsp;–\u0026nbsp;Inclusion and exclusion criteria used for this review\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCategory\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInclusion criteria\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExclusion criteria\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType of publication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeer-reviewed journal articles, review papers, and research articles indexed in Scopus or Web of Science\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEditorials, opinion papers, newsletters, unpublished theses (unless highly relevant), and non-peer-reviewed sources\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGeographical scope\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies conducted in Ethiopia or directly addressing Ethiopian horticultural systems\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies conducted outside Ethiopia without clear relevance to Ethiopian horticulture\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSubject focus\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResearch addressing horticultural crops (fruits, vegetables, spices, ornamentals, and root and tuber crops) and related production technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies focusing solely on non-horticultural crops without linkage to horticulture\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThematic coverage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies on improved varieties, irrigation systems, nutrient management, integrated pest and disease management, protected cultivation, postharvest handling, value chains, and commercialisation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArticles not addressing production technologies, adoption, productivity, sustainability, or commercialisation aspects\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime frame\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublications from 2000 to 2024\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublications before 2000 unless considered foundational or highly cited\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLanguage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArticles published in English\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArticles published in other languages without an accessible English translation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMethodological quality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies with clearly defined objectives, transparent methodology, and scientifically sound analysis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies lacking methodological clarity, insufficient data, or unclear analytical procedures\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 17.1717%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAccessibility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 45.4545%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFull-text articles accessible through institutional or public databases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37.3737%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAbstract-only articles without accessible full text\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource:\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eSnyder (2019)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparative performance of horticultural technologies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEffectiveness is context-dependent: technologies with lower capital requirements and simpler management are more widely adopted. On the other hand, high-input technologies are usually limited to commercial farms. \u003cem\u003eTable 4\u003c/em\u003e presents a comparison of horticultural technologies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdoption determinants and constraints\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdoption of horticultural technologies in Ethiopia is influenced by financial issues, including high input costs and limited access to credit (Abate \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019). Moreover, a lack of extension services reduces adoption of IPM and protected cultivation (Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Zigene, 2023). Other factors that affect horticulture in Ethiopia include infrastructure limitations such as inadequate irrigation networks, storage, and transport (Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Zigene, 2023); socio-economic elements, including farm size, risk aversion, and market access (Lemma \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Tadele, 2017); and institutional barriers, namely fragmented value chains and weak coordination (Abate \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Tadele, 2017).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 –\u0026nbsp;Study inclusion based on the Preferred Reporting Items for\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSystematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"center\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePRISMA step\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescription\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNumber\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eof records\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNotes/reasons\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIdentification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecords identified through searching Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e312\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eComprehensive searches using predefined keywords and Boolean operators\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdditional records identified through other sources\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReference lists of key review articles and related studies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal records identified\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e330\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCombined database and manual searches\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDuplicate records removed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDuplicates across databases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecords after duplicates removed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e284\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecords forwarded to the screening stage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eScreening\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecords screened based on title and abstract\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e284\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eScreening based on relevance to Ethiopian horticulture and production technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecords excluded\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e148\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNot relevant to Ethiopia, non-horticultural focus, or lacking technological aspect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecords retained for full-text assessment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e136\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMet initial screening criteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"7\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEligibility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFull-text articles assessed for eligibility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e136\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEvaluated using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFull-text articles excluded\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSee reasons below\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNot focused on production technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDid not address core thematic areas\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOutside geographical scope (not the Ethiopian context)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies conducted outside Ethiopia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInsufficient methodological quality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLack of clear methods or weak analysis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFull text not accessible\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAbstract-only or inaccessible sources\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal excluded\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBased on strict application of the criteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncluded\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 33px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies included in qualitative synthesis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 37px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinal studies used for thematic analysis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSource:\u003c/strong\u003e Adapted from Snyder (2019) and Page \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2021)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTechnologies that require small investments and simpler management are more readily adopted, particularly among smallholder farmers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch gaps\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eand future directions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis systematic review revealed several research gaps: a lack of long-term and large-scale studies to assess sustainability and scalability (Snyder, 2019); limited integration of agronomic, economic, and social analyses (Abate \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Lemma \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015); insufficient cost–benefit evaluations for adoption potential (Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Zigene, 2023); understudied policy and institutional factors influencing adoption (Abate \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Tadele, 2017); and the need for context-specific technology adaptation across agro-ecological zones (Gebremeskel \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Lemma \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Zigene, 2023). Addressing these gaps is critical for improving the adoption, impact, and sustainability of horticultural technologies in Ethiopia.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 –\u0026nbsp;The six thematic areas considered in this review\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTheme\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFocus\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNumber of studies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReferences\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVarietal improvement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImproved varieties, yield, and pest resistance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAshine \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019); Lemma \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2015)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIrrigation technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrip irrigation, surface irrigation, and water-use efficiency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGebremeskel \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntegrated pest and disease management (IPM)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePest control and environmental sustainability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZigene (2023)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProtected cultivation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGreenhouses and high tunnels\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZigene (2023)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostharvest technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStorage, handling, and packaging\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAshine \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019); Zigene (2023)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommercialisation and value chains\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMarket access and adoption determinants\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAbate \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2015); Tadele (2017)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Table 4 – Comparative performance of horticultural technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTechnology\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReported benefits\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimitations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eContext-specific notes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReferences\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVarietal improvement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigher yield, pest resistance, better quality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLimited seed access and poor extension\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGenotype × environment interactions; performance varies across agro-ecologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAshine \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019); Lemma \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2015)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIrrigation technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreased yield and cropping intensity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh cost, water scarcity, and management challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost effective in arid/semi-arid zones\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGebremeskel \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntegrated pest and disease management (IPM)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReduced chemical use and improved sustainability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge/training limitations, local pest variability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdoption higher where there is extension support\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZigene (2023)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProtected cultivation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh yield and quality; off-season production possible\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh capital and technical requirements\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMainly adopted by commercial/ peri-urban farms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZigene (2023)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostharvest technologies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReduced losses (20%-40%) and better market value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWeak infrastructure and low awareness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh returns if markets accessible\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAshine \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019); Zigene (2023)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommercialisation and value chains\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImproved profitability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFragmented value chains and institutional weakness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdoption constrained for smallholders\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAbate \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2015); Tadele (2017)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAdded value of the study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSystematic synthesis of evidence: Using a PRISMA-guided approach, 60 relevant studies were critically analysed across six thematic areas: varietal improvement, irrigation technologies, IPM, protected cultivation, postharvest technologies, and commercialisation/ value chains. This thematic organisation allows for comparative assessment of technology performance, adoption constraints, and context-specific effectiveness in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eContext-specific insights: Based on the included studies, the effectiveness of horticultural technologies is highly dependent on agro-ecological, socio-economic, and institutional contexts. For example, irrigation and protected cultivation technologies provide higher productivity under peri-urban and commercial settings, whereas smallholders more readily adopt practices that are low cost and simple to manage (Ashine \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Gebremeskel \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Zigene, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIdentification of determinants and barriers: The analysis of adoption determinants (financial, technical, socio-economic, and institutional) provides actionable insights on why certain technologies succeed or fail in specific contexts, highlighting the interaction between technology, farmer capacity, and policy frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResearch gaps and future directions: This review provides a structured assessment of gaps in long-term studies, cost–benefit analyses, integration of socio-economic factors, and policy research. This serves as guidance for future research priorities and policy interventions in Ethiopian horticulture.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePractical implications: The synthesis of the findings across the included studies provides stakeholders – including researchers, extension agents, policymakers, and farmers – with evidence-based guidance for selecting, adapting, and promoting horticultural production technologies in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"HORTICULTURAL CROP PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES","content":"\u003cp\u003eEthiopia’s horticultural sector is diverse, including fruits, vegetables, spices, herbs, and ornamental crops. This sector plays a key role in food security, income generation, employment, and foreign exchange. Adoption of modern technologies and improved agronomic practices has contributed to increased productivity, sustainability, and profitability (Asmare \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Girma \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatus of and major types of horticultural crops in Ethiopia\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 5\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003esummaries the major horticultural crops cultivated in Ethiopia. Smallholder farmers dominate the production of fruits and vegetables for domestic markets, while large-scale commercial farms, particularly in floriculture, focus on export-oriented production. Recent trends, including urbanisation, rising domestic demand, and expansion of irrigation and investment, are accelerating growth in high-value horticultural crops.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite this potential, the horticultural sector faces challenges related to input supply, postharvest losses, market access, and technological adoption, highlighting the need for strengthened production technologies and institutional support mechanisms (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010; Minten \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2014).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSpatial distribution and agroecological zones of major horticultural crops in Ethiopia\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHorticultural crop production in Ethiopia varies widely across the country’s diverse agro-ecological zones, which range from lowland arid areas to highland temperate regions (\u003cem\u003eTable 6\u003c/em\u003e). Altitude, temperature, rainfall, and soil characteristics strongly influence crop suitability, growing seasons, pest and disease prevalence, and productivity levels. . In general, lowland areas (\u0026lt;1,500 m above sea level) favour tropical fruits and irrigated vegetable production, mid-altitude zones (1,500-2,300 m above sea level) support a broad range of vegetables and fruits, while highland areas (\u0026gt;2,300 m above sea level) are suitable for temperate fruits and cool-season vegetables.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable 1 – A summary of the major horticultural crops in Ethiopia\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCategory\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMajor crops\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMain producing regions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProduction status\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrimary use/market orientation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFruits\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMango (\u003cem\u003eMangifera indica\u003c/em\u003e), banana (\u003cem\u003eMusa\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003espp.), avocado (\u003cem\u003ePersea americana\u003c/em\u003e), papaya (\u003cem\u003eCarica papaya\u003c/em\u003e), \u003cem\u003eCitrus\u003c/em\u003e spp.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOromia, SNNPR, Amhara, and Benishangul-Gumuz\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExpanding production; increasing smallholder and commercial farms; increasing irrigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDomestic consumption and growing export market\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVegetables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTomato (\u003cem\u003eSolanum lycopersicum\u003c/em\u003e), onion (\u003cem\u003eAllium cepa\u003c/em\u003e), cabbage (\u003cem\u003eBrassica oleracea\u003c/em\u003e), potato (\u003cem\u003eSolanum tuberosum\u003c/em\u003e), pepper (\u003cem\u003eCapsicum spp.\u003c/em\u003e), and carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOromia (Rift Valley), Amhara, SNNPR, and Tigray\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWidely cultivated by smallholders; rapid expansion under irrigation; increasing greenhouse production\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDomestic markets and some export (fresh vegetables)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRoot and tuber crops\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSweet potato (\u003cem\u003eIpomoea batatas\u003c/em\u003e), taro (\u003cem\u003eColocasia esculenta\u003c/em\u003e), yam (\u003cem\u003eDioscorea\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003espp.), and enset (\u003cem\u003eEnsete ventricosum\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSNNPR and Oromia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImportant for food security; largely based on smallholders\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHousehold consumption and local markets\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpices and herbs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGinger (\u003cem\u003eZingiber officinale\u003c/em\u003e), turmeric (\u003cem\u003eCurcuma longa\u003c/em\u003e), coriander (\u003cem\u003eCoriandrum sativum\u003c/em\u003e), and garlic (\u003cem\u003eAllium sativum\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSNNPR, Oromia, and Amhara\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreasing commercialisation; export potential\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDomestic and export markets\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFloriculture (ornamentals)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 25px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCut roses, summer flowers, and cuttings\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOromia (around Addis Ababa) and Amhara\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHighly commercialised; dominated by large-scale private investment; strong export growth\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExport oriented, especially to the European and Middle Eastern markets\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbbreviation: SNNPR, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSource: Gebreeyesus and Iizuka (2010)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable 6 –\u0026nbsp;Spatial distribution and agroecological zones of major horticultural crops in Ethiopia\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAgro-ecological zone\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAltitude (m above sea level)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClimate characteristics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDominant soil types\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMajor horticultural crops\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMain producing areas\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLowland (Kolla)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;1,500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh temperature (20-30°C); low to moderate rainfall; semi-arid to sub-humid\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFluvisols and Cambisols\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBanana, mango, Papaya, tomato (irrigated), onion, and pepper\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAfar, Somali, Rift Valley (Oromia), and Benishangul-Gumuz\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMid-altitude (Woina Dega)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1,500-2,300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModerate temperature (15-22°C); moderate rainfall\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNitisols and Luvisols\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAvocado, citrus, cabbage, carrot, potato, and spices (ginger and turmeric)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOromia, Amhara, and SNNPR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHighland (Dega)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;2,300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCool temperature (10-18°C); higher rainfall\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNitisols and Vertisols\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eApple, pear, plum, garlic, shallot, and cool-season vegetables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAmhara Highlands, Oromia Highlands, and Tigray Highlands\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIrrigated river basins (across zones)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControlled water supply; year-round production potential\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlluvial soils (Fluvisols)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTomato, onion, green beans, and cut flowers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAwash Basin, Rift Valley, and peri-urban areas of Addis Ababa\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbbreviation: SNNPR, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSource: Hurni (1998)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSoil types such as Nitisols, Vertisols, and Fluvisols further affect crop adaptation and yield performance (Hurni, 1998; MoA, 2000).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSeed and planting materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHigh‑quality seed and planting materials are foundational to horticultural crop productivity because they strongly influence germination, seedling vigour, yield potential, and resilience to biotic and abiotic stresses. In Ethiopia, seed technologies range from certified open‑pollinated varieties and hybrids developed for specific agro-ecological conditions to pre‑sowing treatments such as priming, pelleting, and coating, which enhance germination rates and early vigour (Alemayehu \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015; Tesfaye \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVegetative propagation methods – including cuttings, grafting, budding, and \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e tissue culture – are widely employed for crops such as banana, avocado, and ornamentals to maintain genetic uniformity and quality (Bairu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2011; Ghebrehiwot and Tesfaye, 2019). Recent research has also explored biotechnological approaches such as marker‑assisted selection to accelerate the development of varieties with desirable traits such as disease resistance, drought tolerance, and improved shelf life (Kebede \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComparisons between improved and local varieties show that improved seeds generally have higher germination rates, uniform crop maturity, greater yield potential, and enhanced resistance to major pests and diseases. In contrast, local varieties are often genetically heterogeneous and less resilient (Alemayehu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015; Tesfaye \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). However, many smallholder farmers continue to rely on local varieties due to the high cost of certified seeds, limited access to improved planting materials, cultural preferences for specific organoleptic traits, and the perceived reliability of local ecotypes under traditional management practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdoption of improved seed and planting material technologies in Ethiopia is further constrained by systemic inefficiencies in the seed supply chain. Formal seed production remains underdeveloped for most horticultural crops, with limited foundation seed from breeding programmes and weak linkages between research institutions and commercial multipliers (Gebremedhin \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2019; MoARD, 2017). Ineffective quality assurance and certification systems restrict the availability of high‑quality planting materials at the farm level (Gebrekidan and Tadesse, 2020). Moreover, distribution networks are often unreliable, particularly in remote areas, so farmers often depend on informal seed sources that may lack varietal purity and vigour.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerformance outcomes for adoption include the extent of varietal uptake, yield response, economic returns, and stability of performance across diverse agro-ecological conditions. Adoption rates are highest where extension support, credit access, and market integration are strong, resulting in measurable yield advantages and improved profitability (Alemayehu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015; Tesfaye \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). Conversely, in areas with limited technical support and weak seed system infrastructure, local varieties continue to predominate despite their lower productivity metrics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUses of greenhouses in crop production\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGreenhouse technology is increasingly adopted in Ethiopia to enhance horticultural crop production, particularly for high-value vegetables, flowers, and seedlings. By providing a controlled environment, greenhouses mitigate the adverse effects of climate variability – including temperature extremes, erratic rainfall, and pest and disease pressures – allowing for year-round production (Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010). Greenhouses regulate temperature, humidity, and light, improving crop growth, yield, and quality while reducing water usage and exposure to pests. They are particularly valuable in peri-urban areas and regions with limited arable land, enabling intensive production on smaller plots.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdoption is facilitated by the development of low-cost greenhouse models, training programmes for farmers, and support from the government and non-governmental organisations. However, high initial investment costs, limited technical knowledge, and insufficient access to quality greenhouse materials hinder wider uptake of greenhouses. Despite these constraints, greenhouse cultivation presents a significant opportunity to increase productivity, to enhance food security, and to generate income through both domestic and export markets (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSoil management\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSoil health – encompassing physical, chemical, and biological properties that support plant growth, nutrient cycling, and water retention – is fundamental for productive and sustainable horticultural systems (Abera and Belay, 2020). In Ethiopia, soils face challenges such as degradation, nutrient depletion, acidity, and poor water management, which limit crop productivity (ATA, 2021; Tadesse, 2017; Teklu and Hailemariam, 2019).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral sustainable soil management practices, including organic amendments, integrated nutrient management, crop rotation, cover cropping, conservation tillage, liming of acidic soils, and efficient irrigation and drainage systems, can enhance soil fertility, structure, and moisture retention while minimising environmental degradation (Abera and Belay, 2020; ATA, 2021; Tadesse, 2017; Teklu and Hailemariam, 2019). Adoption of these practices ensures long-term productivity, supports climate resilience, and improves crop quality.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiological control and IPM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePests and diseases are major threats to horticultural crops, reducing both yields and quality. Sustainable alternatives to chemical pesticides include biological control and IPM. Biological control utilises natural enemies – predators, parasitoids, and pathogens – to suppress pest populations (Bayeh and Bekele, 2018). IPM integrates biological, cultural, mechanical, and selective chemical control measures for effective monitoring, prevention, and ecosystem-based management (Alemu and Adamu, 2021; Kassa and Alemayehu, 2020).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough there has been increased awareness of and research on IPM and biological control in Ethiopia, these techniques have not been widely adopted by smallholder farmers due to limited knowledge, a lack of training, and insufficient resources. Strengthening extension services and providing policy support are critical for scaling up these sustainable pest management practices (ATA, 2021; Kassa and Alemayehu, 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClimate-resilient cultivation practices\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHorticultural production in Ethiopia is highly sensitive to climate variability, including irregular rainfall patterns, rising temperatures, and an increased frequency of drought events, all of which negatively influence crop performance (Deressa \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2011; Kassie \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2013). Based on a case study from the Central Rift Valley, erratic precipitation reduced yields of rain‑fed vegetables by up to 30% over a 5‑year period, highlighting the need for adaptive practices that stabilise production under changing climatic conditions (Molla \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe adoption of \u003cstrong\u003eimproved irrigation technologies,\u003c/strong\u003e such as drip and sprinkler systems, enhance water‑use efficiency (WUE) and yield. For example, on smallholder tomato farms in the Awash Basin, drip irrigation increased WUE by 40%-55% and increased marketable yields by 25%-35% compared with traditional furrow irrigation (Gebreyesus \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017). \u003cstrong\u003eRainwater harvesting systems\u003c/strong\u003e, including micro‑ponds and rooftop catchments, are being employed in semi‑arid zones to provide supplemental irrigation during dry spells, increasing seasonal crop survival by up to 20% (Worku and Dessalegn, 2019).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSoil management and crop diversification also contribute to climate resilience.\u003c/strong\u003e Conservation tillage, mulching, and organic compost improve soil moisture retention and fertility. For example, mulched plots in the Ethiopian Highlands maintained 15%-20% more soil moisture and produced 18%-22% higher yields of leafy vegetables compared with non‑mulched controls (Teklu and Hailemariam, 2019). \u003cstrong\u003eCrop rotation and intercropping systems\u003c/strong\u003e also contribute to resilience by reducing the incidence of pests and diseases and enhancing nutrient cycling. For example, incorporating legumes into rotation sequences improved subsequent vegetable yields by 12%-16% by enhancing soil nitrogen availability (Abera and Belay, 2020). The adoption of \u003cstrong\u003edrought‑tolerant and heat‑resistant varieties\u003c/strong\u003e has further improved stability, with trials of improved onion and cabbage cultivars showing a 20%-30% increase in yield over local varieties under water stress (Tesfaye \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eP\u003cstrong\u003erotected cultivation systems\u003c/strong\u003e, including low‑cost greenhouses and shade nets, buffer crops against climate extremes, reduce heat and water stress, and extend production windows. In peri‑urban zones, greenhouse-grown lettuce and peppers consistently achieved 1.5-2 times higher seasonal yields and more uniform quality (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Gebreeyesus and Iizuka, 2010). Additionally, \u003cstrong\u003eclimate information services\u003c/strong\u003e, such as seasonal forecasts and localised advisories disseminated through mobile platforms, help farmers plan planting, irrigation, and harvest schedules, improving yield stability and reducing risks (Kebede and Wondimagegnehu, 2021). Collectively, these climate‑resilient enhance resource use efficiency and support sustained productivity in Ethiopia’s variable environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQuality standards and certification\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuality standards and certification are essential for ensuring that horticultural products are safe, marketable, and internationally competitive. In Ethiopia, the Ethiopian Standards Agency (ESA) develops and enforces national standards for seed quality, pesticide use, postharvest handling, and grading, providing a regulatory framework for domestic and export markets (ESA, 2020). Producers targeting exports increasingly pursue international certification schemes, such as GlobalGAP and organic certification under the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), which cover food safety, environmental sustainability, and labour welfare (GlobalGAP, 2022; IFOAM, 2021). Certification is administered through national institutions, such as the Ethiopian Conformity Assessment Enterprise (ECAE), as well as private agencies, including SGS and Control Union, which conduct inspections, testing, and audits (Control Union, 2022; ECAE, 2019; SGS, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdherence to quality standards improves market access, consumer confidence, and sustainability, but implementation presents technical and economic challenges. \u003cstrong\u003eCertification costs\u003c/strong\u003e – including application fees, inspections, laboratory testing, and compliance audits – are often prohibitively high for smallholder producers, limiting participation in formal schemes (World Bank, 2020). \u003cstrong\u003eAdditional barriers,\u003c/strong\u003e such as complex documentation requirements, strict pesticide residue limits, and traceability protocols, further restrict uptake, particularly among farmers with limited technical knowledge and resources (Mebratu, 2022). Noncompliance or inadequate adherence can lead to \u003cstrong\u003eexport rejection\u003c/strong\u003e, penalties, and reduced incomes, threatening producer livelihoods and national export earnings (Bekele and Tesfaye, 2019; FAO, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAddressing these challenges requires targeted training, technical support, and investment in inspection and testing infrastructure, along with policy coordination to streamline certification processes. Incentives such as cost-sharing mechanisms, group certification schemes, and market linkage programmes can reduce financial and operational burdens, enabling broader participation. Effective implementation of quality standards and certification ultimately safeguards export markets, reduces postharvest losses, promotes sustainable horticultural practices, and supports equitable participation across the horticultural value chain (Gebremedhin, 2018; Molla, 2020; USAID, 2019).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCurrent state of ICT and digital farming solutions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eICT and digital farming solutions are increasingly applied to enhance horticultural production in Ethiopia, although adoption remains uneven and limited (\u003cem\u003eTable 7\u003c/em\u003e). Recent surveys indicate that only \u003cstrong\u003e15%-20% of smallholder horticultural farmers\u003c/strong\u003e use any form of digital technology to manage their crops, with adoption concentrated in peri-urban and better-connected regions (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Kebede and Wondimagegnehu, 2021). Key technologies include \u003cstrong\u003emobile applications, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), remote sensing, drones, and integrated data analytics platforms\u003c/strong\u003e. Mobile applications provide real-time advisory services on pest and disease management, weather forecasts, and market price information, improving\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;farmer decision-making and timely interventions by 20%-30%\u003c/strong\u003e compared with non-users (Yonas and Hailu, 2022). GIS and remote sensing support soil mapping, crop health monitoring, and resource allocation, enhancing\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;fertiliser and irrigation efficiency\u003c/strong\u003e by 10%-15% (Tekalign and Mekonnen, 2019). Drones allow precision monitoring of pests, water stress, and disease outbreaks, \u003cstrong\u003ereducing pesticide use by up to 25%\u003c/strong\u003e (Kebede and Wondimagegnehu, 2021). Data analytics platforms integrate multi-source information to optimise crop management decisions, enhancing overall yield performance and input-use efficiency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite these benefits, widespread adoption is constrained by multiple factors. \u003cstrong\u003eP\u003c/strong\u003eoor internet connectivity, limited network coverage in rural areas, and unreliable electricity hinder consistent use of digital tools. In addition, \u003cstrong\u003edigital literacy\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eamong smallholder farmers is low, with fewer than 30% able to use smartphone-based advisory applications effectively without external support (Abebe and Alemu, 2020). Financial barriers, including high initial device costs and subscription fees, further limit uptake. M\u003cstrong\u003eobile applications are the most widely used and accessible ICT tool\u003c/strong\u003e, while drones and GIS are largely restricted to research institutions, commercial farms, or development projects due to their cost and technical complexity (Tekalign and Mekonnen, 2019; Yonas and Hailu, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eScaling up digital adoption requires \u003cstrong\u003ecapacity-building programmes\u003c/strong\u003e, government-led digital extension initiatives, and \u003cstrong\u003epublic–private partnerships\u003c/strong\u003e that provide affordable access to technology, training, and technical support. Investments in rural digital infrastructure and tailored and user-friendly ICT platforms can increase adoption; promote data-driven horticultural management; and enhance productivity, resource use efficiency, and resilience of smallholder horticultural systems in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender-inclusive approaches\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender-inclusive approaches and women empowerment initiatives are essential for promoting equity, improving livelihoods, and enhancing the sustainability of horticultural value chains in Ethiopia (Admasu \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2018; Tilahun \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). Women represent a significant proportion of the horticultural workforce, contributing substantially to crop production, postharvest handling, and marketing. Despite their critical role, women often face \u003cstrong\u003elimited access to productive resources\u003c/strong\u003e – including land, credit, quality seeds, fertilisers, irrigation facilities, and extension services – which constrains their productivity and adoption of modern technologies (Gebremedhin and Swinton, 2003). Gender norms also influence household decision-making and labour allocation, affecting women’s participation in innovative agricultural practices. Several interventions have aimed to reduce these disparities and to promote \u003cstrong\u003egender-responsive horticultural development\u003c/strong\u003e. Training programmes targeting both men and women in modern horticultural techniques, pest and disease management, and postharvest handling have improved skill acquisition and adoption of improved technologies (Lemma, 2018). W\u003cstrong\u003eomen’s access to technologies – including\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edigital advisory tools, drip irrigation, and greenhouse systems – is 25%-35% lower than men’s, highlighting the need for gender-sensitive capacity-building (Tesfaye and Wood, 2015).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;–\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eInformation and communication technology and digital farming solutions in Ethiopian Horticulture\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTool\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdoption rate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEffectiveness\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey constraints\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMobile applications\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15%-20% of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20%-30% increase in decision-making and market access\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLow digital literacy; weak network coverage; high subscription costs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGeographic Information Systems\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand remote Sensing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10%-12% of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10%-15% improvement in input efficiency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh cost and complexity; limited technical skills\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrones\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5%-8% of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUp to a 25% reduction in pesticide use\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExpensive equipment; regulatory barriers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData Analytics Platforms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8%-10% of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 29px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnhanced yield and resource optimisation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePoor internet access; data integration issues\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSource:\u003c/strong\u003e Abebe and Alemu (2020); Kebede and Wondimagegn (2021);\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTekalign and Mekonnen (2019); Yonas and Hailu (2022)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eProgrammes facilitating women’s access to inputs, land, and financial services have increased participation in horticultural production and boosted productivity by 10%-20% in some regions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender integration also extends to \u003cstrong\u003eclimate-smart and ICT-based technologies\u003c/strong\u003e. Equitable access to improved seed varieties, greenhouse farming, and efficient irrigation systems enhances labour efficiency and water-use efficiency, narrows productivity gaps, and improves yields (Tesfaye and Wood, 2015). Moreover, promoting women’s involvement in value addition, such as processing, packaging, and market linkages, further increases income, economic empowerment, and household food security (UN Women Ethiopia, 2019). Incorporating \u003cstrong\u003egender-disaggregated indicators\u003c/strong\u003e – such as access to inputs, training participation, technology adoption rates, and decision-making authority – into horticultural interventions is crucial to ensure equitable benefits and to inform evidence-based policies and programmes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGovernment initiatives to promote the horticulture sector\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Government of Ethiopia has implemented strategic policies and institutional interventions to promote the horticulture sector as part of its broader agricultural transformation framework. Initiatives such as the Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) and the Agricultural Transformation Agenda emphasise crop diversification, commercialisation of smallholder farms, and strengthening value chains. Public investments have focused on expanding irrigation infrastructure, enhancing seed systems for high‑quality planting materials, and supporting agricultural research and extension services tailored to horticultural crops (Minten \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2014; Negatu and Parvathamma, 2018).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Ministry of Agriculture, in collaboration with regional agricultural bureaus, provides technical training on modern production technologies, IPM, postharvest handling, and market integration to increase productivity and reduce losses. Furthermore, policy frameworks encourage private sector participation through incentives, public–private partnerships, and certification systems that improve market access. These coordinated efforts reflect a shift from subsistence‑oriented production towards a more market‑oriented and commercially viable horticultural subsector that contributes to national economic growth and rural employment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExpansion of agroprocessing industries linked to horticultural growth\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe expansion of horticultural production in Ethiopia has stimulated growth in agroprocessing industries, which play a critical role in value addition, waste reduction, and enhancing competitiveness. Increased production of fruits, vegetables, spices, and herbs has encouraged investments in processing facilities such as fruit canning, juice and puree production, dried vegetables and spice processing units, and cold storage infrastructure (Assefa \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). These ventures are frequently located in peri‑urban clusters that serve as hubs linking smallholder producers with processing enterprises, thereby generating rural employment and increasing farmers’ incomes. In the floriculture subsector, grading and packing facilities have expanded significantly to meet export specifications, reinforcing Ethiopia’s integration into international markets. Despite this progress, challenges such as limited access to finance, inadequate infrastructure, and logistical bottlenecks continue to limit the full realisation of Ethiopia’s agroprocessing potential. Addressing these issues requires enhanced investment incentives, improved transport and energy infrastructure, and stronger coordination between producers and processors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMarketing opportunities in neighbouring countries and the Middle East\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEthiopia’s horticultural products have considerable marketing potential in regional and international markets, owing to geographic proximity, rising demand for fresh produce, and efforts to improve trade logistics. According to data, horticultural commodities – particularly cut flowers, fruits, and vegetables – are increasingly exported to Djibouti and Somalia, which serve as accessible regional outlets due to shared border access and established trade linkages (Gebreeyesus and Sonobe, 2012). Additionally, the Middle East, notably the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations, represents an expanding market for Ethiopian horticultural exports, driven by demand for off‑season produce and specialty crops that are not grown locally. Improvements in air and sea freight logistics, participation in regional trade agreements, and compliance with international quality standards such as GlobalGAP have facilitated access to these markets. Nonetheless, export growth faces challenges including stringent phytosanitary requirements, competition from other exporting countries, and infrastructural hurdles at border crossings. Strategic investments in cold chain systems, quality certification mechanisms, and bilateral trade agreements could enhance Ethiopia’s competitive position and expand its horticultural market share in Djibouti, Somalia, and the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOpportunities and challenges\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Ethiopian horticultural sector has substantial opportunities for growth due to high domestic demand, expanding export markets, the adoption of modern technologies, and the potential for climate-resilient practices. Research innovations, public–private partnerships, capacity-building programmes, and ICT solutions further enhance productivity and sustainability (Abebe and Alemu, 2020; Tesfaye and Abate, 2020). Nevertheless, challenges remain, including limited access to quality seeds and planting materials, poor infrastructure, fragmented supply chains, pests and diseases, high input costs, and low awareness of modern practices among smallholder farmers (Asmare \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2019; Girma \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021; Tekalign and Mekonnen, 2019). Coordinated efforts by government, research institutions, non-governmental organisations, and private sector stakeholders are essential to develop context-specific solutions, to strengthen market linkages, to improve technical support, and to ensure the long-term sustainability of horticultural crop production in Ethiopia (Abera \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017; Tesfaye and Abate, 2020).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSIONS","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis review provides a comprehensive assessment of the status, technological advancements, and challenges in horticultural production in Ethiopia. This sector plays a critical role in \u003cstrong\u003efood security, income generation, employment, and export earnings\u003c/strong\u003e, supported by the country’s diverse agro-ecological conditions that enable the production of a wide range of crops, including fruits, vegetables, flowers, and spices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eKey technological interventions – including \u003cstrong\u003eimproved seed and planting material technologies, modern nursery practices, vegetative propagation, and biotechnological tools\u003c/strong\u003e – contribute to improved productivity and crop quality. However, adoption remains constrained by \u003cstrong\u003egaps in the seed supply chain, limited awareness of improved varieties, infrastructure gaps, and financial and knowledge barriers\u003c/strong\u003e, particularly among smallholder farmers. Although improved varieties consistently outperform local cultivars in yield and resilience, their uptake depends on availability, affordability, and technical capacity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQuality standards and certification systems\u003c/strong\u003e, such as GlobalGAP and organic certification, are increasingly important for market access and competitiveness. However, \u003cstrong\u003ehigh costs and complex compliance requirements limit participation by smallholder farmers\u003c/strong\u003e and increase the risk of exclusion from high-value markets. Similarly, \u003cstrong\u003eICT and digital farming solutions\u003c/strong\u003e, including mobile applications, GIS, drones, and data analytics, have great potential to improve decision-making, resource use efficiency, and market linkages, but adoption remains limited due to digital literacy gaps, poor connectivity, and infrastructure constraints.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis review also highlights \u003cstrong\u003eimportant trade-offs across technologies\u003c/strong\u003e. Climate-resilient practices such as drip irrigation and greenhouse cultivation enhance water-use efficiency and yield stability but require higher initial investments and training. IPM reduces reliance on pesticides and chemical inputs but demands increased knowledge and labour. Gender-inclusive approaches are critical, as women play a central role in horticultural production yet face persistent \u003cstrong\u003edisparities in access to resources, training, and technologies\u003c/strong\u003e, which affect adoption and productivity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOverall, sustainable development of Ethiopia’s horticultural sector requires coordinated efforts across research, extension, policy, and institutional frameworks. Strengthening infrastructure, improving access to technologies and markets, promoting gender equity, and supporting smallholder inclusion will be essential to overcome adoption barriers and fully realise the sector’s potential for economic growth, food security, and climate resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFUTURE PROSPECTS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEthiopia’s horticultural sector faces persistent challenges, including climate stress, limited technology adoption, postharvest losses, market dependence, and knowledge gaps. Addressing these constraints requires integrated and forward-looking strategies that balance technological innovation with adoption feasibility. Advances in \u003cstrong\u003eclimate-resilient cultivars,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eparticularly drought- and heat-tolerant varieties, can help stabilise yields, but their adoption depends on strengthening seed systems and expanding extension support. Similarly, \u003cstrong\u003esmart farming technologies\u003c/strong\u003e, including ICT tools, GIS, drones, and data analytics, are expected to play a growing role in improving productivity and resource use efficiency. Realising this potential will require investments in digital infrastructure, as well as targeted capacity-building programs to address gaps in digital literacy. Future growth in the sector will also depend on strengthening \u003cstrong\u003evalue addition and marketing integration. Expansion of agroprocessing industries\u003c/strong\u003e and cold-chain infrastructure can reduce postharvest losses and increase income but will require substantial investment and improved coordination across value chains. \u003cstrong\u003eAt the same time, diversification\u003c/strong\u003e into regional and Middle Eastern markets presents opportunities to reduce export risks and increase competitiveness, contingent on improved compliance with quality standards and stronger production–market linkages. \u003cstrong\u003eCapacity-building and inclusive extension\u003c/strong\u003e systems will be central to these efforts. In particular, gender-responsive approaches that enhance women’s access to resources, training, and technologies are critical for improving adoption rates and overall productivity.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e This research received no external funding.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributions:\u003c/strong\u003e The author conceived and designed the study, developed the methodology, conducted the investigation, per-formed data curation and formal analysis, prepared the original draft, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and approved the final version of the manuscript. The author declares that he has read and approved the publication of the manuscript in this present form.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability statement:\u003c/strong\u003e The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are publicly available in an open-access repository and can be accessed without restriction.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of interest:\u003c/strong\u003e The author declares no conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbate GT, Rashid S, Borzaga C, Getnet K (2016) Rural finance and agricultural technology adoption in Ethiopia. Food Policy 60:122\u0026ndash;134. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.01.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.01.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbebe A, Asfaw A (2020) Adoption of Climate Smart Agricultural Practices among Smallholder Farmers: Evidence from Ethiopia. Sustainability 12(11):4478. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su1211447\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su1211447\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbebe B, Alemu D (2020) ICT applications in Ethiopian horticultural crop production: adoption, challenges, and opportunities. Horticulturae 6(4):112. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae6040102\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/horticulturae6040102\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbebe B, Alemu D (2020) Protected cultivation and horticultural crop performance in peri-urban Ethiopia. Horticulturae 6(4):112\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbebe B, Alemu D (2020) Digital agriculture adoption and impacts on horticultural productivity in Ethiopia. Ethiop J Agricultural Sci 30(2):45\u0026ndash;58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbebe G, Alemu B (2020) Adoption of digital farming technologies in Ethiopia: opportunities and challenges. Ethiop J Agricultural Sci 30(2):45\u0026ndash;58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbebe T (2020) Seed quality enhancement techniques in horticultural crops: a review. Afr J Hortic Sci 14(2):45\u0026ndash;56\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbera G, Belay A (2020) Crop diversification effects on soil fertility and horticultural productivity in Ethiopia. Agron J 112(4):1786\u0026ndash;1797\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbera G, Belay A (2020) Soil fertility management practices and their implications for sustainable agricultural production in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Soil Science and Environmental Management 11\u003c/em\u003e(2), 47\u0026ndash;60. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://academicjournals.org/journal/JSSEM.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://academicjournals.org/journal/JSSEM.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdmasu F, Tilahun G, Gebre M (2018) Gender integration in Ethiopian horticultural value chains: Challenges and opportunities. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security\u003c/em\u003e 3 (2), 45\u0026ndash;58. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.agrigender.net/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.agrigender.net/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlemayehu D, Desta B, Tadesse M Evaluation of improved horticultural crop varieties in different agro-ecological zones of Ethiopia. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 2015, \u003cem\u003e90\u003c/em\u003e(6), 631\u0026ndash;638. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2015.11513189\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14620316.2015.11513189\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshine T, Tesfaye B, Lemma D (2019) Review of horticultural production constraints and opportunities in Ethiopia. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 94(2):123\u0026ndash;135. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2018.1464981\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14620316.2018.1464981\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAssefa A, Abate G, Tadele A Agroprocessing and rural transformation in Ethiopia: the case of horticulture value chains. J Agric Food Res (2020), 2, 100067. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2020.100067\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jafr.2020.100067\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBairu MW, Aremu AO, van Staden J Micropropagation of horticultural crops: a review on present status and future prospects. J Biotechnol \u003cem\u003e2011\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e156\u003c/em\u003e (4), 173\u0026ndash;186\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrett CB Smallholder market participation: concepts and evidence from eastern and southern Africa. Food Policy 2008, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 299\u0026ndash;317. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.10.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.10.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBekele T, Tesfaye B Adoption of quality standards in horticultural value chains in Ethiopia. Food Control 2019, \u003cem\u003e104\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;10\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.04.015\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.04.015\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBekele T, Tesfaye A (2019) Enhancing food safety in Ethiopia: The role of certification and quality standards. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Journal of Food Science 13\u003c/em\u003e(5), 89\u0026ndash;97. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://academicjournals.org/journal/AJFS.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://academicjournals.org/journal/AJFS.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBellemare MF, Novak L Contract farming and food security. Am J Agricultural Econ 2017, \u003cem\u003e99\u003c/em\u003e(2), 357\u0026ndash;378. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aaw053\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/ajae/aaw053\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarletto C, Corral P, Guelfi A (2017) Agricultural commercialization and nutrition revisited: empirical evidence from three African countries. Food Policy 67:106\u0026ndash;118. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeressa TT, Hassan RM, Ringler C (2011) Perception and adaptation to climate change by smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. J Agric Sci 149(1):23\u0026ndash;31. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859610000687\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0021859610000687\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEthiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA) (2021) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ata.gov.et/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ata.gov.et/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEthiopian Conformity Assessment Enterprise (2019) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ecae.gov.et/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ecae.gov.et/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEthiopian Standards Agency (2020) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.esa.gov.et/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.esa.gov.et/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFood and Agriculture Organization (FAO)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eExport quality (2021) compliance and risks in horticultural products. FAO, Rome\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFAO (2026) Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) for Horticulture in Ethiopia. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2021. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.fao.org/ethiopia/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.fao.org/ethiopia/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFAOSTAT. FAO Statistical Database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2023) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.fao.org/faostat.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.fao.org/faostat.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (2026) Ethiopia Horticulture Investment Guide: Opportunities for Sustainable Development 2021. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.fao.org/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.fao.org/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebreeyesus M, Iizuka M (2010) Discovery of a flower industry in Ethiopia: experimentation and coordination. J Dev Stud 46(3):440\u0026ndash;463. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00220380902935826\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00220380902935826\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebreeyesus M, Sonobe T (2012) Global value chains and market formation: the case of Ethiopian floriculture. J Dev Stud 48(3):335\u0026ndash;348\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebrehiwot T, van der Veen A Climate change vulnerability in Ethiopia: disaggregation of Tigray Region. J East Afr Stud \u003cem\u003e2013\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(4), 607\u0026ndash;629. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2013.817162\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/17531055.2013.817162\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebrekidan H, Tadesse T Seed system challenges and opportunities for vegetable crops in Ethiopia. J Seed Sci 2020, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e (2), e202042017. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1545v42232417\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1590/2317-1545v42232417\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremedhin B, Jaleta M, Hoekstra D The role of seed systems in the commercialization of smallholder agriculture: evidence from Ethiopia. Food Secur 2019, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-00870-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12571-018-00870-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremedhin B, Swinton S Micro-level determinants of gendered technology adoption in Ethiopian agriculture. Agricultural Econ 2003, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e (2), 145156.\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00158\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00158\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremedhin B Impact of certification on smallholder horticultural farmers in Ethiopia. Agric Syst (2018), 165, 256\u0026ndash;265. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.06.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agsy.2018.06.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremedhin B (2018) Sustainable Horticulture and Quality Standards in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eEthiopian Agricultural Research Institute\u003c/em\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.eiar.gov.et/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.eiar.gov.et/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremedhin B, Swinton SM (2003) Investment in soil conservation in northern Ethiopia: the role of land tenure security and public programs. Agric Econ 29(1):69\u0026ndash;84. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00148.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00148.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremedhin G, Gebre E (2018) Vegetative propagation methods in horticultural crop improvement: A review. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Sciences 7\u003c/em\u003e (3), 89\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/jps.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/jps.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebremeskel G, Gebremedhin B, Hoekstra D (2019) Adoption of irrigation technologies and its impact on agricultural productivity in Ethiopia. Water Resour Rural Dev 14:100\u0026ndash;110. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.wrr.2019.100110\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.wrr.2019.100110\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGebreyesus B, Hailu T, Melaku A Irrigation technologies and vegetable productivity in the Awash Basin, Ethiopia. Irrig Sci 2017, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e (3), 275\u0026ndash;289. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-017-0542-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00271-017-0542-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGhebrehiwot HG, Tesfaye A Advances in vegetative propagation for horticultural crops in Ethiopia. Horticulturae 2019, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e (2), 28. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae5020028\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/horticulturae5020028\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGlobalGAP (2022) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.globalgap.org/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.globalgap.org/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026. http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0101sp1.htm (accessed on 25 August 2022)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHurni H Agroecological belts of Ethiopia: explanatory notes on three maps at a scale of 1:1,000,000. \u003cem\u003eSoil Conservation Research Programme, University of Bern, Switzerland\u003c/em\u003e, (1998)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIFOAM (2021) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ifoam.bio.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ifoam.bio.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInternational Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) (2026) Organic Standards. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ifoam.bio.2021.https://www.ifoam.bio.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ifoam.bio.2021.https://www.ifoam.bio.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKassie M, Ndiritu S, Kassu Y Climate variability and agricultural production in Ethiopia. Food Secur 2013, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(2), 291307\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-013-0249-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12571-013-0249-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKassie BT, Hengsdijk H, R\u0026ouml;tter RP, Kahiluoto H, Asseng S, Van Ittersum MK (2013) Adapting to climate variability and change: experiences from cereal-based farming in the central rift and kobo valleys, Ethiopia. Environ Manage 52:1115\u0026ndash;1131. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0145-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00267-013-0145-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKebede A, Mekonnen T, Tsegaye B Marker-assisted selection and biotechnology for crop improvement in Ethiopia. Plant Biotechnol Rep 2021, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e (4), 321\u0026ndash;331. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11816-021-00690-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11816-021-00690-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKebede A, Wondimagegnehu A Climate information services and farming decisions in Ethiopia. Clim Risk Manage 2021, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e, 100321. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100321\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.crm.2021.100321\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKebede A, Wondimagegnehu A Precision agriculture and ICT adoption in Ethiopian smallholder farming. Computers Electron Agric 2021, \u003cem\u003e188\u003c/em\u003e, 106324. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106324\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.compag.2021.106324\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKebede M, Wondimagegnehu S (2021) ICT in Ethiopian agriculture: status and future prospects. J Agricultural Food Inform 22(1):67\u0026ndash;83. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10496505.2020.1856164\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10496505.2020.1856164\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLemma D, Yayeh Z, Herath E (2015) Tomato production practices and constraints in Ethiopia. Agric Food Secur 4(1):1\u0026ndash;10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-015-0020-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s40066-015-0020-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLemma D Influences of gender-focused agricultural training on technology adoption in Ethiopia. J Dev Stud (2018), 54 (7), 12541269.\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2017.1365768\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00220388.2017.1365768\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMebratu A Barriers to adoption of certification in smallholder horticultural production. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 2022, \u003cem\u003e97\u003c/em\u003e (4), 543\u0026ndash;554. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2022.2067487\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14620316.2022.2067487\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMebratu A (2022) Challenges and opportunities in implementing quality standards for horticultural crops in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eHorticulture International Journal 16\u003c/em\u003e (3), 152\u0026ndash;160. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.horticultureinternationaljournal.com/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.horticultureinternationaljournal.com/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinistry of Agriculture (MoA) (2000) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinistry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD) (2017) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinistry of Agriculture of Ethiopia (2021) \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.moa.gov.et/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinten B, Randrianarison L, Swinnen J Global retail chains and poor smallholders: evidence from Madagascar. World Dev (2014), 54, 302\u0026ndash;320. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.08.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.08.010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinten B, Tamru S, Engida E Structure and performance of Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s horticulture export sector. Food Policy 2014, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e, 71\u0026ndash;84. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.09.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.09.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMolla D (2026) Certification and market access for Ethiopian horticultural exports. \u003cem\u003eHorticultural Science 2020\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e55\u003c/em\u003e (3), 345\u0026ndash;356. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.hortisciencejournal.com/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.hortisciencejournal.com/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMolla GD, Taffesse AS, Umeta M Rainfall variability and vegetable yield risk in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Int J Clim Change Strateg Manag (2018), 10 (4), 595\u0026ndash;610. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2017-0107\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2017-0107\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMolla M (2020) The impact of GlobalGAP certification on Ethiopian horticultural exports. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Agricultural Economics 12\u003c/em\u003e (2), 115\u0026ndash;130. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.jaejournal.com/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.jaejournal.com/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNegatu WT, Parvathamma K Agricultural policy reforms and smallholder commercialization in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Development and Agricultural Economics\u003c/em\u003e (2018), \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e (5), 128\u0026ndash;138. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://academicjournals.org/journal/JDAE.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://academicjournals.org/journal/JDAE.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePingali P Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path ahead. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\u003c/em\u003e (2012), \u003cem\u003e109\u003c/em\u003e(31), 12302\u0026ndash;12308. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912953109\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1073/pnas.0912953109\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuel MT, Minot N, Smith L Patterns and determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption in sub-Saharan Africa: a multi0-country comparison. Food Policy 2005, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e (5\u0026ndash;6), 436\u0026ndash;457. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2005.08.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.foodpol.2005.08.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSGS. Food Certification Services. SGS Group (2022) Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sgs.com\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.sgs.com\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e https://www.sgs.com.Accessed April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSGS (2026) Horticultural product certification in Ethiopia: annual report. Geneva: SGS 2022. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sgs.com.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.sgs.com.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSnyder H (2019) Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 104:333\u0026ndash;339. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTadele Z (2017) Raising crop productivity in Ethiopia through improved technologies. Agronomy 7(3):45. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy7030045\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/agronomy7030045\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTadesse T (2017) The role of organic matter in improving soil fertility and crop productivity in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Organic Agriculture and Ecology 5\u003c/em\u003e (1), 30\u0026ndash;42. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://joaejournal.org/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://joaejournal.org/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTekalign T, Mekonnen G Data-driven decision support systems for horticultural production in Ethiopia. Agricultural Syst 2019, \u003cem\u003e173\u003c/em\u003e, 450\u0026ndash;460\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.03.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agsy.2019.03.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTekalign T, Mekonnen D (2019) The role of mobile applications in enhancing agricultural productivity in Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eEthiopian Journal of Agricultural Research 14\u003c/em\u003e (1), 32\u0026ndash;49. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejar\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejar\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeklu T, Hailemariam T Soil moisture conservation and yield response of leafy vegetables under mulch systems in the Ethiopian Highlands. Soil Tillage Res 2019, \u003cem\u003e193\u003c/em\u003e, 18\u0026ndash;26. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2019.03.007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.still.2019.03.007\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeklu E, Hailemariam T (2019) Soil health and management in Ethiopia: A review. \u003cem\u003eEthiopian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 29\u003c/em\u003e (1), 1\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejas.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejas.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTesfaye A, Kassa B, Woldemariam M Adoption and performance of improved vegetable varieties in Ethiopia: opportunities and constraints. Horticulturae 2020, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e (3), 45\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTesfaye A, Kassa B, Woldemariam M 6(3), 45., Tesfaye S, Wood R (2020) Adoption and performance of improved vegetable varieties in Ethiopia: opportunities and constraints. Horticulturae Climate-smart agricultural technologies and gender: Evidence from Ethiopian horticulture. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Systems 2020\u003c/em\u003e, 137, 52\u0026ndash;63 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.12.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTesfaye K, Zaidi PH, Gbegbelegbe S, Boeber C, Getaneh F, Seetharam K, Sterling J (2015) Climate change impacts and potential benefits of drought and heat tolerant maize in Africa. Int J Clim Change Strateg Manag 7(3):247\u0026ndash;263. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2014-0063\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2014-0063\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTilahun G, Admasu F, Gebre M (2022) Women empowerment in horticultural value chains: Evidence from Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eHorticultural Science \u0026amp; Technology\u003c/em\u003e 40 (3), 245\u0026ndash;260. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.horticulturalsciencejournal.com/Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.horticulturalsciencejournal.com/Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUN Women Ethiopia (2019) Promoting women\u0026rsquo;s economic empowerment in agricultural value chains. UN Women, Addis Ababa\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUSAID (2019) Promoting horticultural exports through quality assurance and certification. USAID, Washington DC\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWorld Bank (2020) Strengthening quality standards and certification in Ethiopian horticulture. World Bank, Washington DC\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYonas M, Hailu T (2026) Drone applications and remote sensing in Ethiopian horticulture: Adoption and challenges. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Remote Sensing Applications 2022\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e (2), 45\u0026ndash;58.\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/ijrsa.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/ijrsa.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYonas B, Hailu Z (2022) Drones in Ethiopian agriculture: Potential applications and challenges. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Precision Agriculture\u003c/em\u003e 8 (3), 105\u0026ndash;120. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.journals.sagepub.com/home/jpa.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.journals.sagepub.com/home/jpa.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e April 3, 2026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZigene ZD (2023) Horticultural sector development in Ethiopia: Challenges and opportunities. Heliyon 9(3):e14523. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14523\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14523\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"adoption, climate-smart agriculture, Ethiopia, horticulture, ICT","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9716817/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9716817/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eHorticultural crop production is central to Ethiopia’s agricultural transformation, contributing to food and nutrition security, employment, diversification and exports. Although the country has favourable agro-ecological conditions and expanding markets, the sector faces persistent constraints, including weak seed systems, climate variability, limited irrigation access, postharvest losses, certification barriers, digital infrastructure gaps, and gender disparities. This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of horticultural production technologies in Ethiopia based on peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2024. It examines improvements in seed and planting materials, climate-resilient practices, soil and nutrient management, integrated pest management, protected cultivation, information communication technology–based solutions, quality standards, and value addition systems. Based on the literature, improvements in varieties, drip irrigation, greenhouse production, and integrated pest management enhance yields, water-use efficiency, and product quality. However, there has been uneven adoption due to high investment costs, limited extension services, low digital literacy, infrastructure deficits, and compliance expenses. There are gaps in linking technology adoption to long-term productivity, income stability, and export competitiveness. There is the need for coordinated, gender-responsive, and context specific strategies to strengthen innovation systems and promote sustainable, inclusive horticultural development in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Current Horticultural Crop Production Technologies in Ethiopia: A Comprehensive Review","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-15 13:46:52","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9716817/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"f955633a-d333-4211-af7d-f3803a7b5a16","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 15th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":68188645,"name":"Horticulture"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-15T13:46:52+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-15 13:46:52","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9716817","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9716817","identity":"rs-9716817","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}