Women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture: challenges and barriers

Abstract

In small island agriculture, sustainable innovation is vital for strengthening resilience in the face of resource constraints and climate impacts. Despite women’s undeniable contribution to social, economic, and environmental sustainability in these societies, their leadership and decision-making capacity in developing sustainable innovative solutions for agricultural opportunities and challenges continue to face systemic barriers. Identifying and mitigating these barriers has a positive impact on the development, resilience, and well-being of small island societies. Using a mixed-methods approach, this conceptual expansion research identifies eleven key characteristics of small islands’ agriculture, introduces eighteen orientations for sustainable innovation within this context, and investigates women’s roles in sustainable innovation. It also identifies barriers and challenges that hinder women from attaining leadership roles in developing sustainable innovation in small island agriculture and proposes nine possible mitigation strategies and measures.

Introduction

Agriculture is fundamental to the well-being and prosperity of any society, providing food security, economic stability, environmental sustainability, resource optimisation, cultural identity, mitigating climate change and numerous other benefits essential for human development and flourishing (Christiaensen, 2012; Meerburg et al., 2009; Tichá et al., 2003). These impacts of agricultural activities are particularly important for small, isolated island societies due to their unique vulnerabilities such as limited arable land, limited resources (including human-resources), natural disasters, dependence on external imports, fragile ecosystems prone to degradation, limited access to diverse foods and disproportionate impacts of climate change (Fernandes et al., 2017; Ismail, 2015; Karampela et al., 2016; Mak et al., 1996; Shultz et al., 2016). To improve agricultural activities in small islands, it is important to create and implement practices that optimise resource use, minimise environmental impact, enhance resilience to climate change and improve social equity and well-being through sustainable innovation (Farooq et al., 2019; Jararweh et al., 2023; Oliveira et al., 2019; Shultz et al., 2016). One of the most important and limited resources of small islands is human resources (Cave et al., 2012). Human resource and workforce shortages have been identified as one of the biggest concerns in many island states for a long time, driving numerous programmes and planning efforts to develop and empower this limited resource (Cave et al., 2012; Kang et al., 2017). Women, as integral members of the active human resource pool, often find themselves underrepresented in the workforce of society. In 2023, around 38% of global workforce were women (Dyvik, 2023). In the agriculture sector, this number reaches 43% of the workforce worldwide (FAO, 2024), a trend that extends to small island communities as well. While women contribute a high proportion of labour in the agricultural sector and play a vital role in all farm-to-fork activities including enhancing sustainable innovation in this sector (Satyavathi et al., 2010), they face systemic barriers and challenges for decision-making and leadership roles in all societies, sectors and activities including sustainable innovation activities in small island agriculture (Gaini et al., 2020; Gandhi, 2023; Griffeth et al., 2018; Satyavathi et al., 2010). Identifying and mitigating these barriers and challenges are vital in fostering women-led sustainable innovation in small islands’ agriculture. Accordingly, this study adopts a conceptual expansion research design that integrates a narrative literature review with focused group brainstorming involving multi-country, multidisciplinary experts. This combined approach, applied as a mixed-methods synthesis rather than field-based empirical research, enables the mapping, contextualisation and systematisation of knowledge on women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture. While the findings are not drawn from direct field interventions, this approach offers value by bringing together dispersed literature into a context-specific framework, incorporating expert perspectives to enhance practical relevance and outlining considerations that may inform policymakers, practitioners and researchers in shaping targeted initiatives. To our knowledge, no prior work has systematically mapped women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture through a triple-bottom-line lens supported by expert refinement. In doing so, the study also establishes a structured basis that can guide and be tested through future empirical research. Guided by this methodology, the study addresses the following Research Questions (RQs):

[RQ1] What are the characteristics of small island agriculture?

[RQ2] What is sustainable innovation in the context of small island agriculture?

[RQ3] What are the roles of women in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture?

[RQ4] What are the critical barriers and challenges of women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture?

[RQ5] What measures and strategies could be suggested for mitigating and confronting women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture barriers and challenges?

The article addresses these research questions in Sections ‘Small islands and its agriculture characteristics’, ‘Sustainable Innovation in Small island agriculture’, ‘Women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture’ and ‘Challenges and barriers of women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture’, following the presentation of the research methodology in section ‘Methodology’, and concludes in section ‘Conclusion’ with a synthesis of key contributions, recommendations and identified limitations of this conceptual synthesis. The Conclusion also outlines a clear agenda for future empirical research to validate and further develop the proposed framework in diverse small island contexts.

Methodology

This study employs a conceptual expansion research design, utilising a mixed-methods synthesis that combines a narrative literature review with focused group brainstorming and a refinement phase. This approach was selected to integrate knowledge from various disciplines, consolidate scattered evidence and incorporate expert perspectives to ensure contextual and practical relevance.

Narrative literature reviews

This method was chosen due to the interdisciplinary nature of the topic and the limited availability of consolidated research specifically addressing women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture. The review process focused on examining the characteristics of small island agriculture [RQ1], sustainable innovation in agriculture [RQ2], the roles of women in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture [RQ3], as well as preliminary information on identifying and mitigating of barriers and challenges of women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture [RQs 4 and 5]. The review encompassed major academic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar) and included targeted searches in relevant grey literature sources (e.g. FAO, UNDP, OECD) to capture non-peer-reviewed but policy-relevant material. Boolean operators were used to combine terms related to small islands, sustainable innovation, agriculture, women and barriers/strategies. Inclusion criteria encompassed peer-reviewed or institutional works addressing at least one target concept (small islands, sustainable agriculture, women-led innovation, or barriers/strategies), while studies unrelated to agriculture or innovation in small islands or lacking conceptual relevance were excluded. Thematic analysis of relevant sources informed the identification of the characteristics of small islands’ agriculture [RQ1], sustainable innovation orientations [RQ2], women’s roles in sustainable innovation [RQ3] and preliminary evidence on barriers and mitigation strategies [RQs 4 and 5]. By systematically consolidating dispersed evidence from academic and institutional sources, the review facilitated the development of a context-specific knowledge base that is currently lacking in an integrated form.

Focused group brainstorming

This structured approach is used to generate ideas, solutions, or creative insights within a group setting. It combines the benefits of both brainstorming and focused discussions to identify barriers to women-led sustainable innovation in small islands’ agriculture and propose measures and strategies for confronting and mitigating them [RQs 4 and 5]. The process involved clearly stating the research questions, selecting participants and setting ground rules before the sessions began. Participants in the focused group engaged in eight online brainstorming meetings, each lasting between 60 and 90 min. They generated and discussed ideas both individually and collectively. All contributions were recorded and anonymized to ensure confidentiality. The compiled results were then shared with a refinement group, composed of experts who were not part of the original focused group, in at least three additional online or in-person meetings. This independent refinement stage allowed for fresh perspectives and reduced groupthink bias. The new participants critically reviewed the outputs, clarified concepts, merged overlapping suggestions and enhanced the proposed measures to ensure they were contextually relevant, feasible and aligned with the socio-economic and environmental realities of small island agriculture. While this study does not include field-based empirical interventions, the combination of a structured literature synthesis with multi-country, multidisciplinary expert refinement serves to bridge existing knowledge gaps. It integrates global evidence with practitioner-informed perspectives providing a rigorously framed yet practice-oriented foundation. This can inform both immediate policy discussions and future empirical testing in small island contexts.

Participant selection for both groups was conducted through purposive sampling, ensuring diversity of expertise, geographical representation and sectoral perspectives, and considering current research and innovation (R&I) activities oriented toward community and business environment needs. The focused group included 12 academic and non-academic experts (See Table 1) from nine different disciplines and fields, representing seven countries: Portugal, Italy, Brazil, Morocco, Iran, Angola and Ecuador. The refinement group consisted of 11 academic and non-academic experts (See Table 1) from nine disciplines and fields, representing eight countries: Portugal, Brazil, Angola, Italy, Iran, Ecuador, Pakistan and Morocco. In both cases, priority was given to individuals with a minimum of 5 years of professional or research experience in agriculture, gender studies, sustainability, innovation systems, or small island development and with active engagement in relevant research and innovation activities.

Table 1 Distribution of focused group and refinement group in different disciplines and fields.

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants took part voluntarily and provided informed consent prior to participation, after receiving an information sheet describing the study’s objectives, methods, anticipated outputs and data use. Participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without consequence. All contributions were anonymized, and identifying information was removed from all datasets.

The characteristics of the focused and refinement groups were examined in terms of gender and professional experience to ensure diversity and representativeness within the study.

Both groups had a balanced gender participation, with the focused group consisting of 7 women and 5 men, and the refinement group comprising 6 women and 5 men. This distribution ensured that both female and male perspectives were equally represented in the discussions and validation processes.

Participants in both group also exhibited a wide range of professional experience. In the focused group, 8% had less than 5 years of experience, 33% had between 5 and 10 years, 25% had 11–20 years, 17% had 21–30 years and 17% had more than 31 years of experience. In the refinement group, 9% had less than 5 years of experience, 18% had between 5 and 10 years, 36% had 11–20 years, 18% had 21–30 years and 18% had more than 31 years of experience.

Small islands and its agriculture characteristics

A small island is defined as a detached land mass with a surface area less than 10,000 km² and a population of fewer than 500,000 inhabitants (Ozuem et al., 2014). It is challenging to determine the exact number of small islands in the world as it would require comprehensive data on land area and population for each island globally. However, it is safe to say that there are thousands of small islands worldwide with most populated ones traditionally depending on agricultural activities for survival and economic development (IPCC, 2007). Small island agriculture exhibits several unique characteristics influenced by the islands’ geographical, environmental and socio-economic contexts (See Fig. 1). Some key characteristics include:

Fig. 1: Characteristics of Small Islands Agriculture.

illustrates the key structural, environmental, and socio-economic characteristics that shape agriculture in small island contexts. The figure highlights limited cultivatable land, constrained human resources, subsistence-oriented production, climate vulnerability, diverse and integrated farming systems, dependence on imports, reliance on coastal and marine resources, community-based agricultural practices, tourism-linked agriculture, and the central role of innovation for sustainability. Together, these characteristics frame the unique conditions under which agricultural development and sustainable innovation must operate in small island environments.

Limited cultivatable land area

• Small islands typically have a restricted amount of cultivable land available for agriculture due to their small size and topographical features. This limitation necessitates efficient land use practices and innovative cultivation methods to maximise agricultural productivity (Barros et al., 2014).

Limited workforce and human resources

• Small islands often face challenges related to workforce shortages and human resource constraints due to their small populations and remote locations. This can be observed in various ways, including labour shortages, an aging population, dependence on imported labour, limited access to education and training, brain drain, seasonal labour dynamics, and gender imbalance in the workforce. These characteristic have significant implications for various sectors, including agriculture (Boccuzzi, 2021; Daley et al., 2022; Dos Santos, 2022; Katircioglu, 2006).

Focus on subsistence farming

• Small islands predominantly rely on subsistence farming to ensure food security for their populations. Subsistence agriculture involves small-scale, diversified and innovative farming practices, where households grow a variety of crops and rais livestock for their own consumption (Drori et al., 1991).

Vulnerability to climate change

• Small island agriculture is highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, including rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns and extreme weather events. These environmental changes can disrupt agricultural production, threaten food security and exacerbate existing challenges like soil erosion and water scarcity (Abeysekara et al., 2023; Griswold, 2021; Lincoln Lenderking et al., 2021; Rhiney et al., 2018).

Diverse agricultural systems

• Small island agriculture encompasses a diverse range of agricultural systems that reflect the islands’ varied climates, landscapes and cultural practices. These systems may include traditional farming methods, agroforestry, organic farming and innovative techniques like hydroponics and vertical farming (Altieri et al., 2012; Burlingame et al., 2019; Marrero et al., 2022; Selbonne et al., 2022; Swarnam et al., 2018).

Integration of livestock and crops

• Livestock rearing is often integrated with crop cultivation in small island agriculture, with households raising animals such as chickens, goats and pigs alongside staple crops. This integrated approach optimise s resource use, manages organic waste and diversifies income sources (Kleinpeter et al., 2023; Natividad et al., 1997; Swarnam et al., 2018, 2024).

Import dependency

• Many small islands, especially those reliant on tourism, depend on imported food to supplement domestic agricultural production. Import dependency can pose challenges for food security and economic resilience, particularly during global market instability or trade disruptions (Dorodnykh, 2017a, 2017b; Paddock et al., 2018).

Coastal and marine resources

• Small islands often rely on coastal and marine resources as integral components of their agricultural systems. Fishing, aquaculture and seaweed farming complement traditional farming practices, providing additional food and income sources for coastal communities (Pickering, 2006; Tresnati et al., 2022; van der Velden, 2022).

Community-based agriculture

• Community-based agriculture initiatives are prevalent in small islands, with local communities collaborating to address common challenges, share resources and promote sustainable land management practices. These initiatives enhance social cohesion, resilience and food sovereignty within island communities (Basel et al., 2020; Hagedoorn et al., 2019; Marrero et al., 2022).

Tourism-related agriculture

• Small island agriculture may be influenced by the tourism industry, with agricultural products catering to tourist markets. Agri-tourism initiatives, farm-to-fork dining experiences and farmers’ markets contribute to the economic diversification of small island economies (Karampela et al., 2016; Parra López et al., 2006; Yu et al., 2021; Budiasa and Ambarawati, 2014).

Innovative solutions for sustainability

• Small island agriculture often prioritises sustainable practices such as water conservation, soil conservation and agroecological approaches due to limited resources and environmental constraints. Innovation in technology, renewable energy and climate-smart agriculture is crucial for enhancing productivity, resilience and environmental stewardship in small island agriculture (De Comarmond et al., 2010; Kelman et al., 2015; Meddeb, 2022).

In response to [RQ1], which investigated the characteristics of agriculture in small islands, eleven key features have been identified. These traits, including limited cultivatable land and reliance on coastal resources like fishing and aquaculture, significantly influence agricultural practices in these isolated areas. They represent a delicate balance between sustainability and economic viability, with innovative solutions and community-based initiatives emerging as vital pillars of resilience and prosperity. However, these characteristics can be better understood when compared briefly with other vulnerable agricultural systems. While small islands share certain vulnerabilities with arid and semi-arid regions, mountain farming systems and disaster-prone coastal zones, they also exhibit distinctive challenges. Unlike arid regions where water scarcity is the main issue, small islands deal with a combination of limited cultivatable land, reliance on maritime transport for essential supplies and high exposure to tropical storms and sea-level rise. Similarly, while mountain agriculture struggles with isolation and limited infrastructure, the remoteness of small islands increases import dependency, restricts internal markets, and raises vulnerability to global trade disruptions. These distinct dynamics highlight the need for tailored strategies for sustainable innovation in small island agriculture that consider their socio-economic, environmental and cultural contexts, rather than directly adopting approaches from other regions.

Sustainable innovation in small island agriculture

Sustainable innovation encompasses a multifaceted and systemic perspective, defined by the integration of environmental, social and economic goals into the design and implementation of new products, processes, technologies and organisational models. It transcends the traditional focus on technological advancement by embedding sustainability principles into the entire lifecycle of innovation, ranging from ideation and development to deployment and end-of-life management (Adams et al., 2016; Carrillo-Hermosilla et al., 2010). Scholars such as Tello and Yoon (2008) and Bos-Brouwers (2010) emphasise that sustainable innovation is not merely about incremental improvement but about reconciling the fulfilment of human needs with the preservation of ecological integrity and social equity (Bos-Brouwers, 2010; Tello et al., 2008). This integrative view aligns with the triple bottom line framework, advocating for innovations that simultaneously enhance environmental performance, economic viability and societal well-being (Elkington, 1997). Boons and Lüdeke-Freund (2013) further argue that sustainable innovation should be systemic and embedded within business models, influencing not only the output of innovation (e.g. eco-products) but also the underlying organisational structures, value creation logics and stakeholder relationships (Boons et al., 2013). In this view, sustainability is not a constraint but a strategic orientation that redefines business operations and innovation pathways. Supporting this, Hellström (2007) and Nidumolu et al. (2009) contend that sustainability-driven innovation fosters long-term competitiveness by anticipating regulatory trends, responding to evolving consumer values and mitigating supply chain risks (Hellström, 2007; Nidumolu et al., 2009). Moreover, sustainable innovation requires cross-sectoral collaboration and participatory processes, particularly in complex and resource-constrained contexts such as agriculture or regional development (Bocken et al., 2014; OECD, 2012). The transition towards sustainable innovation is not solely a technological endeavour, but a socio-technical shift that necessitates institutional change, stakeholder alignment and knowledge co-production (Geels, 2002).This underscores the need for adaptive, inclusive and context-sensitive innovation frameworks that can guide decision-making in diverse sectors, including small island agriculture.

Building on these foundational understandings of sustainable innovation, it is imperative to examine how these principles translate within the agricultural sector, an area intrinsically linked to environmental stewardship, social well-being and economic development. Agriculture is not solely a means of food production; rather, it operates at the intersection of multiple complex systems, including natural ecosystems, cultural practices, market structures and policy regimes (J. Pretty et al., 2018; Wezel et al., 2009). Therefore, sustainable innovation in agriculture must go beyond mere technological enhancement and encompass systemic, multidimensional approaches tailored to the sector’s inherent complexity. Due to the multifaceted nature of agricultural systems and the diverse set of challenges they face, including climate change, soil degradation, biodiversity loss, market volatility, labour shortages and socio-economic inequalities, sustainable innovation must adopt several distinct but interrelated orientations (Klerkx et al., 2020; Vrabcová et al., 2023b). These orientations include not only ecological and technical improvements, but also institutional, organisational and behavioural innovations that can drive resilient and inclusive transformation across the value chain. Altieri and Nicholls (2017a) argue that sustainable agricultural innovation must be grounded in agroecological principles that promote biodiversity, soil health and resource efficiency while being socially just (Altieri et al., 2017a). Similarly, the FAO (2022) emphasises the need for innovations that enhance smallholder livelihoods, reduce environmental harm and promote climate resilience (FAO, 2022b). Agricultural innovation systems, as defined by the World Bank (2006), are most effective when they incorporate knowledge exchange among a wide array of stakeholders, including farmers, researchers, policy-makers and private sector actors, thereby fostering co-creation and adaptation of sustainable practices to local conditions (World Bank, 2006). Moreover, recent scholarship stresses that innovation in agriculture cannot be viewed as universally transferable or linear; instead, it must be context-specific, adaptive and sensitive to local ecological and socio-cultural realities (Scoones et al., 2009; Sumberg et al., 2012). This becomes particularly crucial when considering agriculture in small island settings, where environmental fragility, geographic isolation and resource constraints further amplify the need for sustainable, integrative and locally grounded innovation pathways. Based on this multidimensional understanding, several key orientations of sustainable innovation have been identified in the agricultural sector, each addressing specific challenges and opportunities along environmental, social and economic axes. These include:

Labour productivity

• (Binayao et al., 2024; Colnago et al., 2021, 2020; Daum, 2023; Hamilton et al., 2022; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; King, 2016; Rose et al., 2016; United Nations Development Programme, 2021; Van Loon et al., 2024; Wolfert et al., 2017; Yan et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2002) Labour productivity is a key orientation of sustainable innovation in agriculture, aimed at enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of human labour through mechanisation, automation and improved work practices. In the general agricultural sector, innovations such as GPS-guided tractors, robotic harvesters, precision spraying systems and drone-assisted monitoring have significantly reduced manual workload and increased output per worker. Digital farm management platforms, such as AgriWebb¹ and the John Deere Operations Centre², enable real-time task tracking, optimise labour allocation and reduce idle time, thereby improving overall efficiency and profitability. In many regions, particularly across the Global South, appropriate-scale mechanisation, such as two-wheel tractors, portable threshers and mobile irrigation systems, has improved labour conditions, enhanced productivity and supported youth engagement in farming. In small island agricultural systems, where labour resources are often limited due to demographic shifts, land fragmentation and geographic isolation, tailored labour-saving solutions are essential. For example, studies specific to small islands show that the use of lightweight tillers and hand-held machinery has enabled farmers to cultivate marginal lands more efficiently without ecological harm. Mobile-based tools for labour scheduling and advisory services also help farmers respond to weather variability and optimise workforce use in dispersed settings. Moreover, participatory innovation processes, such as co-designing tools and workflows with local farming communities, ensure that labour-enhancing technologies are adapted to cultural practices and ecological realities. Strengthening labour productivity in this way contributes not only to the economic viability of farming but also to the resilience and sustainability of agricultural systems in small island contexts.

The quality of work or products

• (AGRINFO, 2024; FAO, 2021b; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; Huang et al., 2023; IFAD, 2022; ISO, 2018; Lv et al., 2023; Trienekens et al., 2008; United Nations Development Programme, 2021; Wolfert et al., 2017) focuses on enhancing the safety, nutritional value and marketability of agricultural outputs while simultaneously improving working conditions for farmers and labourers. This involves the integration of good agricultural practices (GAP), food safety protocols and traceability technologies to ensure that products meet quality standards from production to consumption. In the broader agricultural sector, innovations such as blockchain-based traceability platforms, IoT sensors for contamination alerts and AI-driven grading systems are being adopted to improve product quality and safety. Simultaneously, global frameworks like GLOBALG.A.P. and ISO 22000 help standardise practices for hygiene, pesticide management and worker welfare across the value chain. These systems promote safe working environments and empower producers to meet export standards and consumer expectations. In small island agricultural systems, where producers often serve local and niche export markets, these innovations have been tailored to resource-limited environments. For example, recent studies show that agribusinesses can adopt QR-codes and blockchain-linked traceability to improve transparency in seafood and fresh produce supply chains, enabling consumers to scan codes for origin and handling data. Community-led GAP trainings delivered through networks like the Pacific Islands Farmers Organisation Network (PIFON)³ have helped farmers adopt safer harvesting and handling practices, with mobile advisory tools providing decentralised support even in remote areas. These innovations not only elevate food quality and safety but also strengthen worker protection, build consumer trust and enhance the economic resilience of small island food systems.

Environmental impact mitigation

• (Altieri et al., 2020; Bailey et al., 2024; Boulouta et al., 2022; FAO, 2019, 2021b; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023; Josa et al., 2023; Lal, 2020; Masum et al., 2023; Pretty et al., 2018; Rosemann et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2019; Tittonell, 2014; United Nations Development Programme, 2024; Waite, 2012; Wezel et al., 2009): is aimed at reducing negative ecological consequences such as soil degradation, water contamination, greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss. In the broader agricultural sector, sustainable practices and technologies such as conservation tillage, integrated pest management (IPM), agroforestry and precision nutrient application have been widely adopted to address these concerns. Innovations like digital soil health monitoring tools, satellite-based crop assessments and variable rate application (VRA) systems allow for more targeted and environmentally sound interventions. Additionally, the use of biofertilizers, biopesticides and carbon-smart farming practices, including biochar application and crop residue management, contribute to emissions reduction and improved ecological balance. In small island agricultural systems, where natural resources are often limited and ecosystems highly sensitive, environmental impact mitigation requires context-specific adaptations. Innovations such as solar-powered irrigation systems and rainwater harvesting technologies are being deployed to conserve freshwater while reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Ecological practices like intercropping, organic composting and the use of locally adapted seeds enhance soil fertility and reduce the need for chemical inputs. Mobile-based advisory platforms have also emerged as low-cost tools for promoting climate-smart farming and disseminating environmental best practices to dispersed farming communities. Furthermore, participatory land management approaches involving farmers in erosion control, reforestation and sustainable water use planning contribute to the long-term protection of fragile agricultural landscapes. These innovations collectively support more resilient and environmentally sustainable food systems tailored to the biophysical and socio-economic realities of small island settings.

Material innovation

• (Adderley et al., 2023; Calabi-Floody et al., 2018; He et al., 2023; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; Islam et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2025; Plaimart et al., 2021; Rodríguez-Rodríguez et al., 2025; Wolfert et al., 2017): Material innovation in agriculture focuses on introducing eco-friendly inputs, such as biodegradable packaging, bio-based fertilisers and pesticides, sustainable mulch films, hydrogels and green building materials, to reduce pollution and improve soil and water quality. In the global agricultural sector, biodegradable packaging made from agro-waste (e.g. rice husks, corn cobs) and bioplastics like Polylactic Acid (PLA) or Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA) is being adopted to lower carbon footprints and plastic pollution. Biofertilizers and microbial soil amendments derived from organic residues are effective at reducing chemical fertiliser dependency while enhancing soil health. Meanwhile, biodegradable mulch films and water-retaining hydrogels help conserve moisture and reduce plastic runoff. In small island systems, where plastic pollution and resource scarcity are acute, locally adapted material innovations have emerged. For instance, Pacific farmers are using coconut husk biochar made with simple earth-pit kilns to enhance soil moisture retention and reduce erosion. Seaweed-based biofertilizers, produced from abundant coastal Sargassum or macroalgae, have been trialled in Mauritius and the Bahamas, improving soil nutrient content and reducing chemical fertiliser dependency. Locally made compostable packaging using bagasse and coconut fibre is also entering island agro-processing chains. These context-specific material innovations enable small islands to improve agricultural sustainability, support circular economies and protect fragile ecosystems.

Social innovation

• (Bock, 2012; Howaldt et al., 2016; Kandel et al., 2025; Klerkx et al., 2019; Magis et al., 2008; Mehmood et al., 2013; Moulaert et al., 2014; Neumeier, 2012; Seyfang et al., 2016; Westley et al., 2014): refers to the development and implementation of new social practices, governance models and collaborative approaches that address societal challenges such as food security, poverty alleviation, gender equality and the social inclusion of marginalised communities. It often manifests through participatory decision-making platforms, farmer-led cooperatives, inclusive supply chain models and the integration of social enterprises into rural development strategies. Such innovations empower local actors, redistribute benefits more equitably and strengthen the resilience of farming communities. Examples include multi-stakeholder innovation platforms for co-designing agricultural services, community-supported agriculture (CSA) schemes that link producers directly to consumers and microfinance systems tailored to smallholder farmers, enabling access to resources and markets that would otherwise be inaccessible. In small island agricultural systems, where community networks are critical to economic and social life, social innovation requires context-specific mechanisms that reflect local governance traditions and cultural norms. Cooperative models for input procurement and product marketing have been adapted to small-scale, dispersed farming contexts to reduce transaction costs and improve bargaining power. Participatory land use planning initiatives have been employed to balance agricultural productivity with environmental conservation, while also ensuring that the voices of women, youth and marginalised groups are actively represented. Mobile-based platforms and radio-based advisory services have expanded access to market information, weather forecasts and training opportunities for farmers in remote areas. Additionally, social learning approaches, where farmers share indigenous knowledge and adaptive techniques through peer-to-peer networks, have fostered innovation uptake and strengthened community cohesion. These socially driven innovations not only enhance livelihoods and inclusivity but also contribute to building more equitable, resilient and sustainable agricultural systems in small island settings.

Marketing innovation

• (Berti et al., 2016; FAO, 2021a; Galli et al., 2015; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; Ilbery et al., 2005; Lorek et al., 2014; Low et al., 2015; Lubberink et al., 2017; Mancini et al., 2019; Migliore et al., 2015; Rijswijk et al., 2021): refers to the development and application of new marketing strategies, distribution channels and branding approaches that improve farmers’ access to markets, enhance the visibility of local and sustainable products and strengthen consumer awareness of environmentally responsible agricultural practices. It includes direct-to-consumer business models such as farmers’ markets, CSA, subscription-based produce delivery and agritourism initiatives that connect consumers with production sites. Digital platforms, ranging from e-commerce marketplaces to mobile applications, facilitate real-time transactions, enable transparent pricing and broaden market reach for small-scale producers. Certification schemes, such as organic, fair trade and geographical indication (GI) labels, help differentiate products, communicate sustainability attributes and command price premiums. Integrated branding strategies that combine storytelling, provenance information and digital engagement are increasingly used to strengthen consumer trust and loyalty. In small island agricultural systems, marketing innovation must address challenges such as limited market size, geographic isolation, high transportation costs and seasonal production variability. Adapted solutions include cooperative marketing arrangements that aggregate products from multiple smallholder farmers, enabling economies of scale in transport, storage and promotion. Digital tools, such as mobile-based marketplaces, social media sales channels and QR code enabled traceability, allow producers to reach niche export markets while maintaining transparency and authenticity. Direct-to-consumer models are often adapted to local contexts through pop-up markets, community food hubs and producer–consumer networks that minimise intermediaries and ensure fairer returns for farmers. Certification schemes tailored to small-scale and diversified production systems help build product reputation in both local and external markets. Moreover, participatory branding processes, where farmers, community organisations and consumers co-create marketing narratives, reinforce the cultural and environmental values embedded in small island food systems, strengthening both market appeal and community resilience.

Organisational innovation

• (Bijman et al., 2012; Bitzer et al., 2013; Chaddad et al., 2013; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; C. W. Kilelu et al., 2011; Klerkx and Leeuwis, 2009; Kneipp et al., 2019; Knickel et al., 2009; Porter et al., 2011; VALENTINOV, 2007): refers to the implementation of new structures, governance arrangements and management practices within farming enterprises, cooperatives and value chain partnerships aimed at improving competitiveness, sustainability and resilience. Such innovations include cooperative farming models, contract farming arrangements, public–private partnerships (PPPs) and vertically integrated value chains that enable producers to pool resources, reduce transaction costs and improve market positioning. Collaborative frameworks such as cluster organisations, producer associations and inter-professional bodies have also been instrumental in facilitating joint investments, knowledge sharing and quality control across the supply chain. Management innovations, such as lean farming principles, performance-based resource allocation and digitalised workflow coordination, further enhance operational efficiency and adaptability to market changes. In small island agricultural systems, organisational innovation often addresses the challenges of small production volumes, dispersed farming communities and high logistical costs. Cooperative farming structures adapted to local contexts enable producers to share inputs, infrastructure and marketing resources, thereby increasing bargaining power and reducing individual risk. Value chain partnerships between farmers, processors and distributors help streamline product flow from production to market while maintaining quality and traceability standards. Multi-stakeholder governance models, which include representation from farmers, local authorities and community organisations, facilitate coordinated responses to supply chain disruptions and environmental risks. Furthermore, digital platforms for cooperative management and supply chain coordination allow dispersed producers to access shared services, monitor operations in real time and collectively negotiate better terms with buyers. By strengthening organisational capacity and promoting collective action, these innovations enhance the economic viability, social cohesion and sustainability of agricultural systems in small island contexts.

Service supply optimisation

• (Aker, 2011; Beach et al., 2025; Bonilla et al., 2024; FAO, 2022a; Gakuru Kristen Winters and Francois Stepman, 2009; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; Klerkx et al., 2012, 2013; Kneipp et al., 2019; Mapiye et al., 2021; Qiang et al., 2012; Ragasa et al., 2024): focuses on improving the accessibility, effectiveness and efficiency of services such as agricultural extension, technical assistance, input delivery and market information systems. These include decentralised extension networks, demand-driven advisory systems and integrated service provision models that combine training, financing and input supply. The use of information and communication technologies (ICT), including mobile applications, SMS alerts and interactive voice response systems, has transformed how farmers access agronomic advice, weather forecasts, pest alerts and market prices. PPPs have played a key role in scaling these services, integrating governmental agricultural agencies, NGOs and agribusinesses to ensure broader reach and sustainability. Performance monitoring tools and feedback mechanisms are increasingly embedded in service delivery to improve responsiveness and tailor support to farmer needs. In small island agricultural systems, where geographic dispersion and logistical constraints can hinder service delivery, optimisation strategies leverage both digital and community-based approaches. Mobile-based extension platforms deliver real-time, location-specific recommendations to farmers in remote areas, reducing dependency on infrequent in-person visits. Community resource centres serve as hubs for shared equipment, demonstration plots and training activities, enhancing the cost-effectiveness of service provision. Partnerships between farmer cooperatives and service providers facilitate bulk procurement of inputs and shared access to specialised machinery, reducing per-unit costs. Moreover, the integration of local knowledge into extension programmes ensures that advice is culturally relevant and adapted to island-specific agro-ecological conditions. By streamlining service provision and embedding participatory feedback loops, these innovations increase the timeliness, relevance and impact of agricultural services, ultimately strengthening productivity and resilience in small island contexts.

Cost reduction

• (Agaton et al., 2024; Burney et al., 2010; Cillo et al., 2019; Ema et al., 2024; Gebbers et al., 2010; Markelova et al., 2009; Martins et al., 2023; Mgendi, 2024; J. Pretty et al., 2018; Rose et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2002): refers to the strategic implementation of innovations that lower production expenses while maintaining or improving productivity and product quality. This orientation draws on efficiency gains, resource optimisation and the development of value-added products to improve profitability and competitiveness. In the broader agricultural sector, precision farming technologies, such as GPS-guided equipment, precision irrigation and targeted nutrient application, reduce input waste and operational costs. Renewable energy integration, including solar-powered pumps, biomass heating systems and wind-powered grain drying, lowers long-term energy expenses and mitigates exposure to fossil fuel price volatility. Lean production methods, adapted from manufacturing, have been introduced to agricultural operations to streamline workflows, reduce downtime and eliminate non-value-adding activities. Value-added processing at the farm level, such as on-site drying, packaging, or conversion of raw produce into specialty goods, enables farmers to capture a larger share of the value chain while offsetting unit production costs. In small island agricultural systems, cost reduction strategies are often tailored to address high transportation costs, limited economies of scale and resource constraints. Renewable energy solutions, particularly small-scale solar-powered irrigation and refrigeration units, reduce reliance on costly imported fuels and improve post-harvest storage efficiency. Low-cost precision irrigation methods, such as gravity-fed drip systems and sensor-based watering schedules, optimise scarce freshwater use and reduce pumping expenses. Collaborative purchasing of inputs through farmer cooperatives reduces per-unit costs, while shared use of machinery and processing facilities minimises capital investment for individual farmers. Locally adapted lean production practices, developed with farmer participation, help minimise waste in labour and inputs, improving overall profitability. Additionally, diversification into value-added products suited to local and niche markets, such as processed fruits, spices, or herbal teas, can improve revenue streams and balance seasonal cost fluctuations. These approaches collectively enhance the economic viability of small island agriculture while supporting sustainable resource use.

Knowledge transfer among stakeholders

• (Akpo et al., 2015; Berthet et al., 2018; Dogliotti et al., 2014; FAO, 2023a; Klerkx et al., 2012; Klerkx and Proctor, 2013; Leeuwis et al., 2018; Saha, 2017; Schut et al., 2016; Turner et al., 2017; Wigboldus et al., 2016): refers to the systematic facilitation of information exchange, experiential learning and collaborative problem-solving among various actors, including farmers, researchers, extension agents, policymakers, agribusinesses and civil society organisations. This process enhances collective capacity, promotes innovation diffusion and speeds up the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices. In the agricultural sector, multi-actor platforms, innovation networks and living labs are utilised to co-create solutions aligned with local needs. Farmer-to-farmer knowledge exchange, often supported by demonstration farms, field schools and digital communication tools, remains a key aspect of experiential learning, enabling the adaptation of innovations to specific contexts. Participatory research approaches, such as on-farm trials designed with farmer input, enhance the relevance, ownership and long-term uptake of new practices. In small island agricultural systems, knowledge transfer mechanisms are crucial due to limited access to formal agricultural research and extension services. Community-based innovation hubs bring together diverse stakeholders to address common challenges like soil fertility management, pest control and climate adaptation, through collaborative experimentation. Mobile and radio-based advisory systems help disseminate of best practices to dispersed farming communities, while social media groups and messaging platforms facilitate real-time peer-to-peer communication. Farmer-to-farmer exchange visits, organised in collaboration with cooperatives or NGOs, enable for direct observation and replication of successful practices tailored to similar agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions. Additionally, living lab approaches, where farmers, scientists and local institutions co-create and test solutions, ensure that innovations are not only technically sound but also socially and culturally appropriate. These multi-directional knowledge flows strengthen innovation systems, enhance resilience and promote a culture of shared learning in small island contexts.

Agri-business innovation

• (Barrett et al., 2012, 2022; COMBA, 1988; FAO, 2021b; Ferris et al., 2014; Hall et al., 2018; Hernandez-Vivanco et al., 2018; C. Kilelu et al., 2017; Rizzo et al., 2024; Schoneveld, 2022; Vrabcová et al., 2023a): involves enhancing and transforming business models, management practices and market connections the agricultural sector to boost competitiveness, profitability, and sustainability. It includes optimising value chains, agro-processing, supply chain integration, and diversifying business to capture more value, reduce inefficiencies and enhance resilience to market fluctuations. In the broader agricultural sector, agri-business innovations include integrated value chains connecting smallholder farmers directly with processors and retailers, contract farming arrangements ensuring markets and inputs and vertically integrated agro-processing enterprises enabling on-site transformation of raw produce into higher-value products. Tools like enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, digital supply chain platforms and blockchain-enabled traceability solutions streamline operations, enhance transparency and attract premium markets. Sustainability-oriented business models, such as circular economy approaches and carbon credit generation schemes, align profitability with environmental stewardship and social responsibility. In small island agricultural systems, agri-business innovation addresses challenges like small production volumes, geographic isolation and limited processing infrastructure. Producer cooperatives and community-based enterprises pool resources for shared agro-processing facilities, enabling the production of value-added goods such as dried fruits, spice blends, herbal teas and artisanal preserves for niche export markets. Localised supply chain coordination platforms improve aggregation, reduce transportation costs and optimise shipping schedules for perishable goods. Partnerships between farmers and tourism operators integrate agricultural products into hospitality and gastronomy sectors, creating diversified income streams. Island-specific branding leveraging cultural heritage and environmental sustainability, such as ‘reef-to-table’ seafood supply chains or ‘island-grown’ organic certifications, enhance market appeal and build consumer trust. These innovations not only enhance the profitability and competitiveness of agri-businesses but also embed environmental and social accountability into the core of agricultural value creation in small island contexts.

Collaborative innovation process

• (Ansell, C. and Gash, 2016; Feo et al., 2022; Jordan et al., 2016; Klerkx, Hall, et al., 2009; Medina-García et al., 2022; Sartas et al., 2018; SCHUT et al., 2016): refers to fostering collaboration and partnership among diverse stakeholders, including farmers, researchers, policymakers, agribusinesses, civil society organisations and technology providers, to address complex agricultural challenges through collective problem-solving, knowledge co-creation and technology transfer. It involves building trust-based relationships, aligning incentives and creating institutional arrangements that enable joint action across disciplinary and sectoral boundaries. In the broader agricultural sector, collaborative innovation is facilitated through multi-actor platforms, living labs, PPPs and innovation hubs that provide structured spaces for experimentation, dialogue and joint project implementation. Examples include farmer–researcher partnerships for co-designing climate-smart practices, PPPs for developing resilient seed systems and regional innovation platforms that align policy reforms with grassroots innovation needs. These processes accelerate technology adoption, enhance the relevance of innovations to local contexts and generate shared ownership over outcomes. In small island agricultural systems, where geographic isolation, resource constraints and climate vulnerability heighten the need for coordinated responses, collaborative innovation processes are often localised and culturally embedded. Innovation hubs hosted by farmer cooperatives, universities, or community organisations serve as meeting points for cross-sector dialogue and demonstration of new practices. Multi-stakeholder networks, such as those linking fishers, farmers, tourism operators and environmental agencies, address shared resource management challenges, including sustainable coastal agriculture and watershed protection. Participatory technology transfer programmes integrate indigenous knowledge with modern science, ensuring solutions are ecologically sound and socially acceptable. Furthermore, the use of digital collaboration platforms and mobile communication tools helps maintain engagement across dispersed island communities, enabling continuous co-creation despite physical distance. By leveraging diverse expertise and shared resources, collaborative innovation processes strengthen adaptive capacity, foster inclusive growth and drive systemic transformation toward more sustainable and resilient agricultural systems in small island contexts.

In the unique context of small island agriculture, several additional orientations of sustainable innovation can be proposed, drawing inspiration from the findings gathered through the examination of scientific literature:

Resource efficiency

• (Altieri et al., 2017a; Balzan et al., 2018; FAO, 2021c; Kourtis et al., 2019; Nath et al., 2010; Noda et al., 2019; van der Velde et al., 2007): In small island agricultural systems, where natural resources are inherently scarce and ecological boundaries tightly constrained, resource efficiency emerges as a foundational orientation for sustainable innovation. This involves adopting of innovative practices and technologies that maximise the productivity of available land, water, energy and agricultural inputs while minimising waste and environmental degradation. Strategies include precision irrigation and nutrient management, intercropping and agroecological approaches to enhance soil health, as well as integrating renewable energy into farm operations to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels. Closed-loop systems such as composting, crop-livestock integration and the use of organic fertilisers contribute to nutrient recycling and improved input efficiency. Additionally, strengthening local seed systems and promoting context-specific, low-input farming techniques can reduce external dependencies and enhance resilience to market and climate shocks. These resource-efficient practices not only address environmental sustainability but also support the economic viability of farming communities and food security in remote and often vulnerable island settings. Ultimately, resource efficiency serves as both a necessity and a strategic innovation pathway for fostering self-reliant, climate-resilient agricultural systems in small island contexts.

Climate resilience

• (Altieri et al., 2017b; Krishnapillai, 2018, 2014; Saint Ville et al., 2016): In the face of accelerating climate change, small island agriculture is increasingly vulnerable to environmental stressors such as sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, prolonged droughts, erratic rainfall and intensified storm activity. Enhancing climate resilience within these fragile systems requires the development and integration of adaptive strategies and technologies that can sustain productivity under adverse and shifting climatic conditions. Agroecological practices such as crop diversification, soil conservation and agroforestry have been shown to buffer climatic shocks by stabilising ecosystems and reducing dependency on external inputs. The introduction of drought-tolerant and saline-resistant crop varieties, combined with early warning systems and climate-smart irrigation technologies, can further safeguard food production in risk-prone zones. Community-based adaptation approaches that incorporate traditional ecological knowledge, local resource management and participatory planning also play a critical role in fostering social and institutional resilience. In addition, policies that support adaptive capacity, such as secure land tenure, accessible insurance schemes and climate-informed extension services, are vital for reinforcing the long-term sustainability of agriculture on small islands. As climate impacts intensify, innovation for resilience becomes not just a reactive measure but a strategic pillar for safeguarding livelihoods, food security and ecological balance.

Island-specific solutions

• (Barbera et al., 1992; Giannarakis et al., 2023; Griswold, 2021; Kelman et al., 2015; McCoy et al., 2010; M. Mycoo et al., 2023; Pathirana, 2025; Saint Ville et al., 2015; Weir et al., 2017): Small islands face a constellation of unique and interlinked challenges that require localised and context-sensitive innovation strategies. These challenges include limited land availability, high dependency on external imports, ecological fragility, geographic isolation and high vulnerability to natural disasters such as hurricanes, cyclones and tsunamis. Therefore, sustainable innovation in island agriculture must move beyond generalisable solutions and instead focus on adaptive, locally embedded practices that consider for the specific socio-ecological dynamics of island territories. Innovations may involve vertical and rooftop farming in urbanised islands with limited arable land, agroecological zoning to protect fragile coastal ecosystems and decentralised water-harvesting systems that enhance agricultural productivity despite freshwater scarcity. Furthermore, integrating of traditional ecological knowledge, which is deeply rooted in centuries of local adaptation, with modern science can lead to hybrid solutions that are both culturally appropriate and environmentally effective. Initiatives to establish localised seed banks, develop salt- and drought-tolerant crops and implement modular renewable energy systems demonstrate how tailored interventions can enhance the resilience and self-sufficiency of island food systems. Taken together, island-specific solutions are essential to promote not only environmental sustainability but also economic sovereignty, social cohesion and cultural preservation in small island developing states (SIDS).

Community engagement

• (Araújo de Almeida, 2020; Berkes, 2009; Campbell, 2009; K. J. Campbell et al., 2015; Ensor et al., 2018; Kilpatrick et al., 2003; Lowitt et al., 2015; J. N. Pretty, 1995): In small island agricultural systems, community engagement is crucial for the development and successful implementation of sustainable innovations. The effectiveness and longevity of agricultural interventions depend not only on technological soundness but also on their social acceptability, cultural relevance and local ownership. Participatory approaches, such as farmer field schools, community-based innovation platforms and participatory action research, enable stakeholders to co-design solutions that align with local priorities, knowledge systems and socio-cultural norms. These methods enhance trust, empower marginalised groups (especially women and youth) and facilitate knowledge exchange between scientists, policymakers and local actors. Furthermore, engaging communities early and consistently fosters collective responsibility, adaptive capacity and resilience, particularly in the face of external pressures such as climate change, market volatility and land-use conflicts. In small islands, where community ties are strong yet institutional support often limited, such engagement ensures that innovations are not only technically viable but also socially embedded and democratically governed. Ultimately, community participation transforms beneficiaries into active partners, contributing to the co-creation of solutions that are more sustainable, inclusive and contextually grounded.

Circular economy

• (Argo et al., 2021; Bogdanski et al., 2021; Ghisellini et al., 2016; Kirchherr et al., 2017; Reynolds et al., 2022; Schumann, 2020; Wang et al., 2024; Yousefzadeh et al., 2023): In small island contexts, where resource constraints and waste disposal challenges are pronounced, embracing circular economy principles offers a transformative approach to sustainable agricultural development. Circular economy in agriculture involves designing regenerative systems that reduce dependency on external inputs, minimise environmental impact and ensure that materials remain in productive use for as long as possible. Key practices include composting organic waste to restore soil fertility, recycling wastewater for irrigation, using crop residues for bioenergy or animal feed and upcycling agricultural by-products into value-added goods. These approaches not only reduce the volume of waste but also create new income streams for smallholders, enhance food system resilience and close nutrient loops. Moreover, circular practices align well with traditional knowledge systems in many island communities, which often emphasise stewardship, minimal waste and cyclical resource use. By embedding circularity within the agricultural value chain, small island states can reduce import dependence, strengthen local economies and contribute to climate mitigation and adaptation goals.

Ecosystem restoration

• (Aradottir et al., 2013; Aronson et al., 2006; Levin, 2022; Locatelli et al., 2015; McMillen et al., 2014; Thaman, 2002; Wood et al., 2017): In small island settings, ecosystems are often highly sensitive and easily degraded due to intensive land use, monocropping, overgrazing and coastal development. Unsustainable agricultural practices, combined with the impacts of climate change, have accelerated land degradation, biodiversity loss and soil erosion across many SIDS. Sustainable innovation in this context requires integrative approaches that restore the ecological integrity and long-term productivity of these vulnerable systems. Ecosystem restoration in agriculture can include reforestation of upland watersheds to prevent sediment runoff, agroforestry practices to enhance biodiversity and soil structure and the rehabilitation of degraded lands through organic soil amendments, mulching and erosion control techniques. Furthermore, the restoration of coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves and seagrasses, can serve as natural buffers that protect agricultural lands from storm surges and saline intrusion, while simultaneously supporting fisheries and nutrient cycling. Participatory land use planning, which incorporates traditional ecological knowledge and community stewardship, has proven especially effective in island environments where institutional capacities may be limited. These interventions not only enhance ecological health but also contribute to food security, water retention and climate resilience, positioning ecosystem restoration as a cornerstone of sustainable innovation in island agriculture.

Considering the specific socio-ecological characteristics of small islands discussed throughout Section 4, such as limited resource availability, environmental fragility, geographic isolation and heightened vulnerability to climate change, this article proposes the definition of sustainable innovation in small island agriculture as ‘the development and implementation of context sensitive products, services, processes, technologies, and governance models that balance economic viability, ecological sustainability, and social inclusivity within small island agricultural practices.’ This definition reflects an integrative approach to innovation that not only pursues productivity and efficiency but also strengthens local resilience, cultural relevance and ecological restoration. By embedding sustainability principles at the core of agricultural operations and decision-making, small island systems can develop adaptive capacity to cope with external pressures while fostering more autonomous, circular and equitable food systems.

In direct response to [RQ2], which explores how sustainable innovation manifests within the context of small island agriculture, this study identifies and synthesises eighteen distinct orientations derived from both general agricultural innovation literature and island-specific studies (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2: Eighteen Distinct Orientation of Sustainable Innovation in Small Agricultural Systems.

Presents the eighteen identified orientations of sustainable innovation relevant to small island agriculture, organised into two complementary layers. The first layer captures general agricultural innovation orientations common across contexts (e.g., labour productivity, environmental impact mitigation, quality enhancement, organisational and marketing innovation, knowledge transfer, and cost reduction). The second layer highlights island-specific orientations that respond to small island constraints and vulnerabilities, including resource efficiency, climate resilience, ecosystem restoration, community engagement, circular economy approaches, and island-tailored solutions. These orientations form an integrated framework for sustainability-driven innovation in small island agricultural systems.

These orientations are grouped under two complementary layers. The first includes foundational approaches common across agricultural sectors, such as labour productivity, environmental impact mitigation, quality enhancement and knowledge transfer. The second layer introduces island-specific innovation pathways, including resource efficiency under constraint, climate resilience, ecosystem restoration, community engagement and circular economy strategies. These pathways are not abstract ideals but represent empirically grounded, practice-oriented responses tailored to the realities of small island environments. They reflect how sustainability-driven innovation in these contexts requires a shift from linear, input-intensive models to more regenerative, participatory and localised systems of agricultural transformation. Together, these orientations form a holistic and operational framework for sustainable innovation in small island agriculture, one that integrates ecological restoration with technological advancement, traditional knowledge with scientific research and community participation with systemic planning. By adopting this framework, small islands can not only mitigate vulnerabilities and reduce external dependencies but also chart new pathways toward long-term food security, climate adaptation and sustainable rural development. In doing so, they exemplify how innovation, when guided by sustainability principles and grounded in place-based realities, can transform constraint into opportunity and vulnerability into resilience.

Women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture

Women are among the fundamental and multiracial players in the agriculture sector worldwide and small island agriculture is not an exception. They are actively engaged in all farm-to-fork activities, including various aspects of agricultural production, from planting and harvesting crops to managing livestock and small-scale fisheries. Additionally, women contribute to post-harvest activities such as food processing, preservation and marketing (Mondal, 2013). Their contributions are essential for ensuring food security (Quisumbing et al., 1996), generating income for their families and sustaining rural livelihoods (Sopamena et al., 2021; Teng, 2011). To systematically examine these contributions, the analysis is structured according to the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) sustainability framework (Elkington, 1997), which considers the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainability. This framework is widely recognised and applied in policy and academic contexts, including agricultural and rural development studies. It provides a structured approach to assessing sustainability, ensuring that ecological integrity, human well-being and economic viability are addressed holistically. The TBL model aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 13 (Climate Action). Our analysis of women’s contributions will be structured around these three categories to capture the full spectrum of sustainability imperatives relevant to small island agriculture. The environmental, social and economic sustainability of small islands is closely linked to women’s involvement in various activities, including those across the agri-food and agricultural systems:

Environmental sustainability

• Women play a multifaceted and significant role in environmental sustainability within small island agriculture through their agricultural practices that prioritise conservation and sustainable land management (Sachs et al., 2016). They are often key stakeholders in implementing eco-friendly farming techniques, such as organic farming, agroforestry and soil conservation methods (Summer, 2003). Additionally, women are responsible for water and waste management within households (Love et al., 2022), promoting practices that minimise the agricultural carbon footprint and conserve natural resources (Lynch, 2011; Schwarz et al., 2014). They also participate in initiatives aimed at protecting marine ecosystems, such as coral reef restoration projects or sustainable fishing practices. In small island contexts, environmental sustainability directly underpins food and nutritional security (Vogiatzakis et al., 2023). Women-led initiatives help ensure the availability of diverse, nutrient-rich crops and marine products, by maintaining soil fertility, conserving water resources and protecting biodiversity. These ecological foundations are critical for supporting healthy diets and reducing dependence on imported, less nutritious food options (Burlingame et al., 2019; Guell et al., 2022; Marrero et al., 2022).

Social sustainability

• Women are key agents of social sustainability in small island communities (Gaini et al., 2020). They contribute significantly to maintaining social cohesion, community resilience and preserving cultural heritage (Abenir et al., 2022). Women often take the lead in community-based organisations (Schwarz et al., 2014), participate in decision-making processes and in the execution of decisions related to agriculture and natural resource management (Kevany et al., 2013). Additionally, they provide essential caregiving and support services within households and communities (‘Assessing the Burden of Family Caregivers of People with Dementia Living in the Community of a Greek Island,’ 2021). Through their active involvement in community organisations, and leadership in health initiatives (Homer et al., 2017; Keni, 2006), education (Maezama, 2015) and social welfare, women contribute significantly to the overall well-being and resilience of island populations (‘Gender, agrifood value chains and climate-resilient agriculture in Small Island Developing States,’ 2022; Stroma et al., 2021). Social sustainability also encompasses ensuring food and nutritional sustainability by promoting equitable access to safe, culturally appropriate and nutrient-rich foods (Hamm et al., 2003). Women-led programmes, such as school gardens, community kitchens and local food festivals, not only enhance dietary diversity but also strengthen community identity and traditional knowledge of healthier foodways (Brown et al., 2022; Ghattas et al., 2020; Gibbs et al., 2013; Marrero et al., 2022; Pastorino et al., 2023; Vogliano et al., 2021). These activities help reliance on imported processed foods, improve public health and reinforce the transfer of intergenerational knowledge (Pastorino et al., 2023).

Economic sustainability

• In small island agriculture, women are key economic actors who contribute to household incomes and local economies (Sopamena et al., 2021; Teng, 2011). They engage in various income-generating activities such as crop cultivation, livestock rearing (Mondal, 2013), artisanal fishing and handicraft production. Women’s entrepreneurship and involvement in value-added activities (Novaczek et al., 2006), such as food processing and agri-tourism, enhance economic diversification and resilience in island communities (Lee et al., 2015). Moreover, women often play a critical role in managing household finances (Sopamena et al., 2021), ensuring food security (Quisumbing et al., 1996) and adapting to economic challenges and fluctuations (Stroma et al., 2021). From an economic standpoint, advancing food and nutritional sustainability can be achieved by supporting women-led value chains for nutrient-dense crops, traditional marine products and fortified local foods (Bove et al., 2024; Kimanga et al., 2025a). This not only creates income opportunities but also enhances the availability and affordability of healthy diets (Connors et al., 2023; Orkoh et al., 2025). Developing niche markets for high-quality, nutrient-rich products, such as moringa, breadfruit flour, seaweed-based foods, or artisanal fish products, can create economic incentives for sustaining diverse and nutritious local food systems (Brown et al., 2022; FAO, 2017; Kimanga et al., 2025b).

Women with their local knowledge, make a significant contribution to the social, economic and environmental sustainability of small islands ecosystems and agricultural practices. They are often at the forefront of developing and implementing innovative solutions tailored to the unique challenges of small islands (Garibay-Orijel et al., 2012; McNamara et al., 2011; Stein et al., 2018; Wahyuni et al., 2023). In small islands, as in other parts of the world, women pioneer the adoption of climate-smart farming techniques, such as agroforestry and water harvesting, to mitigate the impact of climate change and ensure food security (Nchanji et al., 2022). Moreover, women-led initiatives promote biodiversity conservation, soil fertility enhancement and natural resource management, preserving the delicate balance of island ecosystems (Dyer, 2016; J. D. Lau, 2020; Pavlova et al., 2023; Poor et al., 2021; Rogers, Ashley., Grieves, 2017). Beyond environmental conservation, women’s involvement and leadership in sustainable agriculture foster social inclusion and community empowerment by providing opportunities for education, skill-building and entrepreneurship (Maezama, 2015; Novaczek et al., 2006). By encouraging women as leaders, innovators and change agents, small island communities harness their full potential of their agricultural sector to thrive in harmony with nature while advancing the well-being of present and future generations (Batalofo et al., 2023; Clissold et al., 2022; Stroma et al., 2021).

In addressing [RQ3], which examines the roles of women in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture, this section has underscored the significant contributions made by women across various dimensions of sustainability. Women actively engage in all facets of agricultural activities, spanning from cultivation to marketing. They champion eco-friendly farming methods, conserve natural resources and oversee waste and water management within households. Moreover, women play pivotal roles in fostering community resilience, preserving cultural heritage and facilitating social cohesion through their leadership and involvement in decision-making processes. Economically, they serve as key drivers, participating in income-generating endeavours and promoting economic diversification. Women also spearhead innovation, adopt climate-smart agricultural practices and advocate for biodiversity conservation. Collectively, their diverse roles are indispensable for advancing the sustainability agenda in small island agriculture.

Challenges and barriers of women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture

Women who aspire to lead sustainable innovation in the agriculture sector of small islands encounter various challenges and barriers that can impede progress and impact. This study, utilise a Mixed-Methods approach combining Focused Group Brainstorming with a Literature Review, to identify the most significant challenges and barriers, as well as potential mitigation strategies and measures.

Limited access to resources

Limited access to resources refers to the restricted availability and accessibility of critical assets and inputs necessary for women to effectively engage in sustainable innovation within the agricultural sector of small islands. Women islanders often encounter challenges in accessing essential resources like land, credit, inputs (including seeds and fertilisers), and technology. Without these resources, they may find it difficult to implement sustainable farming practices or to innovate effectively within the agricultural sector.

To address this challenge, it is crucial to implement a multi-faceted approach. Firstly, efforts should focus on enhancing land tenure rights through legal reforms and land redistribution initiatives that prioritise gender equality. This involves securing and formalising land ownership for women, ensuring they have equitable access to agricultural land. Secondly, financial inclusion measures should be implemented to provide women with access to microfinance services, tailored savings and credit facilities and financial literacy training. Collaboration with financial institutions is crucial to develop gender-responsive lending practices and innovative financing mechanisms. Additionally, improving access to inputs and technologies is vital, achieved through strengthened extension services and agricultural advisory programmes. These should prioritise women-friendly agriculture approaches, ensuring that tools, technologies and practices are ergonomically designed, culturally appropriate and adaptable to the needs and capacities of women farmers. This includes lighter-weight equipment, time-saving devices and innovations that reduce physical strain and align with women’s roles and schedules. Research and development initiatives should focus on adapting technologies to address the specific needs of women farmers. Lastly, investment in rural infrastructure is essential to enhance market access, transportation networks and agricultural support services for women. These measures, combined with efforts to promote women’s empowerment through capacity-building and advocacy, can significantly mitigate the challenges of limited resource access in small island agriculture. While many of these measures are supported by empirical evidence from broader rural development programmes, it is important to note that small island contexts require localised adaptation of these interventions, due to geographic isolation, higher per-unit transport costs and smaller-scale economies.

Comparable interventions in other fragile agricultural contexts, such as arid and drought-prone sub-Saharan regions or post-conflict rural areas, are often part of integrated rural development programmes that include land rights reform, access to microfinance and extension services focused on women. These programmes have led to significant increases in crop yields, household income and women’s decision-making power in farming communities (Behrman et al., 2012; Gartaula et al., 2025; Johnson et al., 2017; Meinzen-Dick et al., 2011; Quisumbing et al., 2023). For instance, (Behrman et al., 2012) emphasise how secure land rights have empowered women in negotiating large scare land deals, while (Quisumbing et al., 2023) showcase innovative methods for measuring empowerment outcomes in agriculture. However, unlike continental or post-conflict settings where market access can be expanded through regional trade corridors, small island contexts face persistent geographic isolation and higher transport costs per unit, necessitating localised market integration strategies to achieve similar benefits (Becker, 2012; Khayat, 2025; UNCTAD, 2022). Evidence from these contexts suggests that combining resource access reforms with customised training and market connections not only boosts productivity but also enhances long-term resilience against climate and market fluctuations (Chiriac et al., 2023).

Gender inequality

Gender inequality refers to the unequal treatment or perceptions of individuals based on their gender, typically favouring one gender over the other. In the context of agriculture in small islands, gender inequality often manifests in various forms, including unequal access to land, resources, markets and decision-making power. Deep-rooted gender norms and stereotypes limit women’s participation in decision-making and leadership roles within agriculture. This inequality limits their ability to drive sustainable innovation initiatives and influence agricultural policies and practices.

To mitigate this barrier, several strategies can be implemented. Firstly, legal and policy reforms are crucial to ensure gender-sensitive legislation that supports women’s rights to land ownership, inheritance and access to productive resources. This includes enacting and enforcing laws that prohibit gender-based discrimination and ensure fair access to land tenure rights. Secondly, capacity-building and empowerment programmes should be introduced to enhance women’s knowledge, skills and leadership abilities in agriculture. Training initiatives on financial management, agricultural techniques and entrepreneurship empower women to actively participate in farming activities and decision-making processes. Additionally, promoting gender-responsive extension services and agricultural advisory programmes is crucial for disseminating information and technologies tailored to women’s specific needs. Providing access to credit, inputs and market linkages through targeted financial inclusion measures enables women to invest in agricultural production and participate in value chains. Moreover, creating a supportive environment for women’s involvement in community organisations, cooperatives and decision-making bodies enhances their representation and influence in agricultural governance.

Similar gender-transformative approaches in other fragile agricultural contexts have combined legislative reform with women-focused leadership training, mentorship programmes and mixed-gender producer groups, leading to measurable improvements in women’s bargaining power, participation in producer organisations and influence over household and community agricultural decisions (Farnworth et al., 2016; Johnson et al., 2017; Kabeer et al., 2013). For instance, (Johnson et al., 2017) analysed agricultural development projects and demonstrated that women-specific empowerment strategies are often designed to enhance decision-making, control over resources and leadership, with their effectiveness heavily dependent on project design and implementation context. However, unlike larger rural regions where women’s producer networks can expand across districts or countries, small island contexts often encounter tighter social structures and fewer formal organisations. This means that leadership initiatives must operate within smaller, more interconnected communities where reputational and cultural dynamics strongly influence women’s participation (Becker, 2012; Jenkins et al., 2023; Stege et al., 2008). Evidence also indicates that interventions addressing both formal rights and informal norms are more effective in achieving long-term shifts toward gender-equitable agricultural governance (FAO, 2023b; Lwamba et al., 2022).

Lack of education and training

The lack of education and training among women in small island agriculture poses significant challenges to their participation and leadership in sustainable innovation. This barrier is often rooted in limited access to formal education and vocational training opportunities, resulting in disparities in knowledge, skills and technical expertise. Women´s limited educational attainment restricts their ability to adopt modern farming practices, access information on sustainable agricultural techniques and engage in decision-making processes within the agricultural sector.

To tackle this issue, efforts should be directed toward investing in educational infrastructure and promoting gender-sensitive curricula. By allocating resources to enhance access to quality education and training facilities, especially in rural and remote areas, women can acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to adopt modern farming practices and engage in decision-making processes within the agricultural sector. Additionally, capacity-building initiatives such as training workshops, seminars and extension programmes tailored to women farmers can provide hands-on training and technical assistance on sustainable agricultural techniques and crop diversification. Furthermore, partnerships with educational institutions can offer specialised training programmes and scholarships, while ICT-based learning platforms and peer learning networks can facilitate remote learning and knowledge exchange. Through these measures, women in small island agriculture can be empowered to actively participate in sustainable innovation, driving positive change and resilience within their communities.

Similar initiatives in other vulnerable agricultural settings, such as mountainous rural Nepal and drought-prone East Africa, have combined literacy programmes, agricultural skills training and ICT-enabled extension services, leading to higher uptake of improved practices, greater farm productivity and stronger participation of women in producer organisations (Akter et al., 2017; Chakravarty et al., 2019; Mudege et al., 2017; Mullally et al., 2022). However, unlike in larger continental settings where training programmes can be scaled across extensive rural regions with diverse market connections, small island contexts require more localised, multi-purpose learning hubs that integrate education with community engagement and resource-sharing to overcome geographic isolation and smaller learner pools (Mariaye et al., 2018; Selby et al., 2018). Lessons from these cases emphasise that combining education with access to markets and leadership pathways generate more lasting and transformative impacts (UNDP, 2024a).

Technological and infrastructural constraints

This barrier refers to the limitations in access to modern agricultural technologies and inadequate infrastructure, including roads, transportation and communication networks, which hinder women from practicing and developing sustainable innovations in small island agriculture. These constraints often lead to reduced productivity, increased production costs and limited market access for women farmers.

To mitigate these challenges, it is crucial to invest in appropriate technologies and infrastructure. Governments and development organisations should support the adoption of sustainable farming technologies, such as drip irrigation systems, precision farming tools and renewable energy solutions, tailored to the specific needs and conditions of agriculture in small islands. Priority should be given to women-friendly agriculture, which involves designing and promoting tools, machinery and infrastructure that are safe, ergonomic and inclusive, enabling women to perform agricultural tasks efficiently and without undue physical burden. Additionally, improving rural infrastructure through the construction and maintenance of roads, bridges, and storage facilities enhances market connectivity and facilitates the transportation of agricultural produce to markets. Furthermore, expanding access to reliable and affordable communication networks, including internet connectivity and mobile phone services, enables women farmers to access market information, financial services and agricultural extension support, empowering them to make informed decisions and adopt innovative practices. Through targeted investments in technology and infrastructure, the barriers imposed by technological and infrastructural constraints can be overcome, enabling women-led sustainable innovation to flourish in small island agriculture.

Insights from other fragile agricultural environments, such as remote highland regions and flood-prone delta areas, demonstrate that integrating infrastructure upgrades with gender-sensitive technology deployment leads to improved market access, reduced post-harvest waste and increased participation of women in value chains (Ayim et al., 2022; FAO, 2011; Huyer et al., 2021). However, unlike continental or riverine contexts where infrastructure projects can leverage large-scale regional transport corridors, small island settings require more modular, decentralised solutions, such as micro-scale storage facilities, off-grid renewable energy systems and boat-based transport links, that are tailored to dispersed populations and maritime geographies (Agua et al., 2020; Handique et al., 2024; Meschede et al., 2022; Spiegel-Feld, 2015). Practical observations emphasise that participatory design and inclusive implementation result in the most enduring benefits (CDRI, 2025; Fuldauer et al., 2019).

Cultural and societal norms

Cultural and societal norms often pose significant challenges to women’s leadership and participation in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture. These norms may include traditional gender roles, expectations and biases that limit women’s access to resources, decision-making opportunities and leadership positions within agricultural communities. Psychological barriers, such as low self-confidence, fear of social disapproval and internalised gender stereotypes, are closely linked to these external norms and can deter discourage women from seeking leadership or innovation roles even when opportunities are available. These psychological constraints are often reinforced by limited exposure to role models and the perpetuation of community narratives that underestimate women’s contributions to agriculture.

To overcome barriers imposed by cultural and social norms, combined efforts are required at various levels. It is essential to promote gender-responsive policies that tackle structural inequalities and ensure fair access to resources and opportunities for women. Additionally, raising awareness and sensitising communities about the importance of gender equality in agriculture can help challenge traditional norms and stereotypes. Offering specialised training and capacity-building programmes for women farmers can empower them with the skills and knowledge to actively participate in innovation initiatives. Mentorship programmes, confidence-building workshops and leadership training can effectively address psychological barriers by promoting self-efficacy and creating a supportive peer environment. Moreover, supporting the formation of women’s networks and associations can provide a platform for collective action and advocacy, amplifying women’s voices and fostering solidarity. By implementing these strategies to address cultural and societal barriers, small island communities can establish more inclusive and supportive environments for women to contribute to sustainable agricultural development.

Experiences from other culturally conservative agricultural contexts, such as rural Pakistan and northern Nigeria, demonstrate that combining community sensitisation campaigns with women-led producer groups and visible female leadership roles can gradually change community attitudes, reduces resistance to women’s participation, and enhance their influence over agricultural decisions (Adam et al., 2023; Cornwall et al., 2015; P. Kristjanson et al., 2010; Patricia Kristjanson et al., 2017; Njuki et al., 2013; Salomon, 2015). However, unlike these larger, land-connected regions where outreach can draw on broad inter-community networks and formalised producer associations, small island contexts often rely on tightly knit, smaller-scale social systems. In these setting, interventions must engage with localised leaders, island councils and culturally embedded communication channels to gain traction (Jiggins et al., 1997; Njuki et al., 2022). In terms of planning and execution, interventions in small islands often require more participatory, trust-based engagement processes compare to other fragile agricultural sites. This is due to the heightened social visibility of individual actors and the potential for rapid shift in community-level opinions (Gomese et al., 2025; Pearl A. McElfish et al., 2019). While cultural change programmes in larger continental contexts may utilise mass media campaigns or regional women’s federations, small islands face-to-face dialogue, localised storytelling and the involvement of respected community figures to legitimise women’s leadership (Abdullah et al., 2023; Raw et al., 2024). Consequently, the impact of interventions in small islands may be less immediate in term of institutional change but can lead to gradual yet profound shifts in social norms, which are more enduring due to the close-knit nature of island societies (J. Lau et al., 2021). These examples illustrate that successful transforming of norms occurs when interventions address structural barriers, community perceptions and individual agency simultaneously (Njuki et al., 2022; Rouf et al., 2025).

Financial constraints

Financial constraints refer to the lack of access to sufficient capital and financial resources necessary to invest in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture. This barrier often prevents women from pursuing entrepreneurial ventures, adopting new technologies, or scaling up their agricultural activities.

To address this challenge, a multifaceted approach is needed. Governments can establish microfinance institutions and offer credit facilities tailored to women farmers’ needs, while also providing subsidies or grants to support sustainable agricultural initiatives. Collaboration with the private sector can facilitate access to funding, technical expertise and market opportunities through public-private partnerships. Additionally, investing in capacity-building programmes focusing on financial literacy and entrepreneurship can empower women with the skills needed to manage finances effectively and develop sustainable business models. Alternative financing mechanisms such as crowdfunding and community-based financing can also play a crucial role in mobilising resources from diverse sources. By implementing these strategies, stakeholders can help alleviate financial barriers and enable women to participate more actively in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture.

Similar approaches in other resource-constrained agricultural settings have demonstrated that combining microfinance with financial literacy training, group-based lending and market linkage support not only enhances women’s repayment rates but also encourages greater investment in productivity-enhancing technologies and diversified income streams (Bandiera et al., 2022; Banerjee et al., 2015; Beck, 2015; Gash et al., 2013; Khandker et al., 2014). However, unlike in these continental contexts where borrowers have access to larger regional markets and benefit from lower per-unit transport costs, small island settings require financial products and repayment models tailored to seasonal production cycles, higher shipping expenses and smaller-scale market opportunities (McClung, 2023). These experiences highlight that financial inclusion programmes deliver more significant and longer-lasting impacts when they combine capital access with skills development and market integration (Bandiera et al., 2022; Beck, 2015).

Lack of representation and support

The lack of representation and support in the agriculture sector of small islands refers to the insufficient recognition and backing provided to women in leadership positions and sustainable initiatives. This challenge often arises from deep seated gender biases, inadequate institutional support and limited access to decision-making processes. The absence of visible representation can also lead to psychological barriers, such as reduced self-belief and reluctance to pursue leadership roles, thereby perpetuating a cycle of underrepresentation.

To address this issue, proactive measures are necessary to promote gender equality and create an enabling environment for women’s participation and leadership. This includes implementing policies that require gender-balanced representation in agricultural organisations and decision-making bodies, as well as offering training and capacity-building programmes tailored to women. Establishing mentorship programmes and support networks can provide valuable guidance and encouragement to women aspiring to leadership roles. Additionally, creating platforms for knowledge sharing and collaboration among women-led initiatives can amplify their voices and enhance their visibility in the agricultural community. By tackling these structural barriers and advocating for greater inclusion and support, stakeholders can empower women to drive sustainable innovation in small island agriculture effectively. By combining institutional support with initiatives that address confidence, leadership readiness and psychological empowerment, stakeholders can help women overcome internal and external obstacles to leadership.

Similar strategies in other agricultural contexts, such as India’s self-help group movement and women’s cooperative networks in West Africa, have demonstrated that combining formal representation quotas with mentorship, leadership training and peer-to-peer learning significantly increases women’s participation in governance bodies, improves policy responsiveness to gendered needs and strengthens collective bargaining power (Al-Kubati et al., 2023; Baden, 2013; Desai et al., 2014; Kumar et al., 2021; Meier zu Selhausen, 2016; OECD/SWAC, 2019). However, unlike these larger national or regional programmes where scale allows for broad coalition-building across multiple districts, small island initiatives often operate within more limited political structures and smaller constituencies, requiring tailored representation frameworks and tighter feedback loops between grassroots groups and policy-makers (Jiggins et al., 1997; Njuki et al., 2022). These cases highlight that institutional reforms are most effective when complemented by grassroots capacity-building and solidarity mechanisms (Al-Kubati et al., 2023; Ramesh, 2023).

Time constraints and workload

Time constraints and heavy workloads pose significant challenges for women in small island agriculture, often limiting their ability to engage in sustainable innovation initiatives. Women typically juggle multiple tasks within and outside the agricultural sector, leaving them with limited time and energy for innovation and entrepreneurial endeavours. Additionally, seasonal variations and unpredictable weather patterns further compound these time constraints, as agricultural activities often demand immediate attention during critical periods such as planting, harvesting and livestock management.

To mitigate these challenges, a multifaceted approach could be implemented. Providing women with training in effective time management techniques can help them prioritise tasks, allocate resources efficiently and optimise productivity. Introducing suitable agricultural technologies and machinery can streamline labour-intensive tasks, reducing the time required for activities like land preparation, irrigation and harvesting. Establishing support networks within local communities can facilitate task-sharing arrangements among women, enabling collaboration and mutual assistance with agricultural duties. Implementing flexible work arrangements, such as part-time employment or cooperative farming models, can accommodate women’s diverse responsibilities and enable them to balance agricultural work with other commitments. Access to affordable childcare services can also alleviate the burden on women, allowing them to focus on agricultural activities without interruptions. Additionally, addressing underlying gender disparities and promoting gender equality in resource access, decision-making processes and educational opportunities can help reduce the disproportionate burden of agricultural work on women, thereby mitigating time constraints and workload pressures.

Similar measures in other labour-constrained agricultural settings, such as women’s farmer field schools in Uganda and cooperative-based childcare programmes in rural Nepal, show that introducing labour-saving technologies, community-based task sharing and integrated childcare can free up women’s time, enabling greater participation in training, market activities and innovation projects (Bezner Kerr et al., 2019; Hidrobo et al., 2024; Peterman et al., 2011; van den Bold et al., 2013). However, unlike in these continental contexts where childcare and labour-sharing programmes can be linked across multiple villages or districts, small island settings often require hyper-localised solutions that consider limited-service coverage, higher per-capita infrastructure costs and close-knit social networks where collective arrangements are negotiated within smaller communities (Grassi, Flavia; Landberg, Josefine; Huyer, 2015; Perelli et al., 2024). These findings underline that interventions addressing time poverty are most effective when they focus on both technological efficiency and the redistribution of unpaid care work (ActionAid, 2018; Gupta, 2024).

Limited networking opportunities

Women in small islands face challenges in accessing networks, platforms and mentorship opportunities that support knowledge sharing, collaboration and the exchange of innovative ideas in agriculture. This lack of networking opportunities can hinder their ability to innovate and drive sustainable practices. To tackle this issue, targeted mitigation strategies are essential. One affective approach is to establish women’s agricultural cooperatives, providing a structured platform for collaboration and knowledge exchange. Conducting workshops and training programmes focused on empowering women in agriculture can also facilitate networking by enabling women to share experiences and best practices. Leveraging ICTs, such as mobile phones and social media, can facilitate remote networking and access to market information. Additionally, supporting women’s leadership initiatives within agricultural organisations and promoting cross-sectoral collaboration can expand networking opportunities. Strengthening extension services tailored to women farmers and investing in outreach programmes can further enhance connectivity and resource access. Through these concerted efforts, women in small island agriculture can overcome networking challenges and actively engage in sustainable agricultural practices.

Evidence from similar agricultural contexts, such as pastoralist women’s groups in Kenya and farmer innovation networks in Latin America, demonstrates that integrating women into multi-level producer organisations, digital extension platforms and peer mentoring schemes, leads to stronger market linkages, increased adoption of climate-smart practices and greater decision-making influence. (Abate et al., 2023; Acosta et al., 2021; Hellin et al., 2009; Kingiri et al., 2014; Lyon et al., 2010; Malhotra et al., 2024; Markelova et al., 2009). However, unlike in larger land-based contexts where physical producer networks can span vast territories and link to national platforms, small island settings require networking models adapted to maritime geographies, smaller and more dispersed populations and higher inter-island travel costs, making hybrid approaches that blend localised hubs with digital linkages particularly essential (Amin et al., 2021; Briceno-Garmendia et al., 2014; Jensen et al., 2017; UNDP, 2024b). Compared to other fragile agricultural sites, networking interventions in small islands are often more relationship-driven and informal, relying on pre-existing trust networks and personal contacts rather than large-scale institutional affiliations (Baldacchino, 2015; Pearl Anna McElfish et al., 2018; Pugh, 2013). In continental or peri-urban contexts women’s agricultural networks might scale quickly through regional associations and conferences, but in small islands the limited participant pool means that each connection holds greater strategic weight (Baldacchino, 2015; Connell, 2013; Meinzen-Dick et al., 2011). Consequently, impacts may be more visible in the depth and quality of collaborative ties rather than in the number of connections formed, often leading to more cohesive but smaller innovation ecosystems (Kelman, 2021; Zach et al., 2017). These findings suggest that networking interventions are most effective when they combine physical collaboration spaces with digital tools that bridge geographic and social isolation (Baul et al., 2024; J-PAL, 2025; Sen et al., 2025; World Bank Group et al., 2015).

In summary, addressing [RQ4] and [RQ5], this research identified nine key challenges and barriers to women’s leadership in sustainable innovation within the agricultural sector of small islands, along with tailored mitigation strategies and measures for each. Figure 3 presents a synthesis of these barriers and the corresponding strategies. The analysis also draws on examples from other fragile agricultural contexts, offering perspective on which intervention models may be adapted for small islands and where unique adjustments are needed to address their geographic isolation, limited scale and maritime dependence. This comparative view is intended to support more context-sensitive strategies rather than direct replication from other settings.

Fig. 3: Barriers and Challenges of Women-Led Sustainable Innovation in Small Island Agriculture and Suggested Mitigation Strategies and Measures.

Synthesises the nine main challenges and barriers faced by women in leading sustainable innovation within small island agricultural systems and maps them against proposed mitigation strategies and measures. The barriers include limited access to resources, gender inequality, lack of education and training, technological and infrastructural constraints, cultural and societal norms, financial constraints, limited networking opportunities, time constraints and workload burdens, and lack of representation and institutional support. The associated strategies outline policy, capacity-building, technological, social, and institutional interventions aimed at enabling women’s leadership and participation in sustainable innovation in small island agriculture.

Conclusion

This research highlights the crucial role of women in driving sustainable innovation within the agriculture sector of small islands. By examining the unique characteristics of small island agriculture (RQ1| section ‘Small islands and its agriculture characteristics’) and the orientations of sustainable innovation (RQ2 | section ‘Sustainable innovation in small island agriculture’), this study offers insights into the diverse dimensions of women’s contributions to sustainable innovation in the agriculture sector of small islands (RQ3 | section ‘Women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture’). It is argued that women actively participate in all stages of farm-to-fork activities, making strong contributions to the social, economic and environmental development and resilience of small islands. However, they also face numerous challenges and barriers that impede their ability to effectively lead sustainable innovation (RQ4 | section ‘Challenges and barriers of women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture’).

The challenges identified, which include limited access to resources, gender inequality, technological constraints and financial limitations, highlight the importance of implementing targeted interventions and support mechanisms to empower women in small island agriculture. Mitigation strategies such as increasing women’s access to resources, providing education and training opportunities, enhancing technological infrastructure and addressing cultural and societal norms are essential for overcoming these barriers. Additionally, improving women’s representation and support, expanding networking opportunities and addressing time constraints and workloads are crucial steps in creating an enabling environment for women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture [RQ5| section ‘Challenges and barriers of women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture’].

While this research offers valuable insights, it is important to acknowledge its conceptual and synthesis-oriented nature. The study was deliberately crafted as a foundation for future empirical research, combining a narrative literature review with brainstorming sessions involving experts from multiple countries and disciplines to map, contextualise and organise knowledge on women-led sustainable innovation in small island agriculture. Consequently, it does not present direct field-based intervention outcomes. Nevertheless, by consolidating scattered literature into a TBL-guided framework and enriching it with insights from practitioners, it provides a readily applicable resource for policy and programme design and development, as well as a structured foundation for empirical validation in various small island settings.

Despite these limitations, this research holds significant implications for policymakers, practitioners and stakeholders involved in agricultural development and gender equality efforts in small islands. By recognising and addressing the specific challenges faced by women in sustainable innovation, policymakers can design more targeted interventions and policies that empower women and promote inclusive long-term sustainable development in small island communities.

Future research should build on this conceptual foundation through well-designed empirical studies capable of testing, validating and refining the orientations, barriers and mitigation strategies identified here. Potential approaches include case-based evaluations across diverse small island contexts to assess how socio-economic, cultural and environmental factors influence women-led sustainable innovation; participatory action research engaging women farmers, community leaders, and policymakers in co-developing and piloting targeted interventions; and comparative analyses across different island nations to identify both shared patterns and context-specific drivers of success. Such studies could examine greater depth the gender dynamics shaping agricultural innovations, quantify and rank the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation strategies for improving women’s leadership capacity, and assess how indigenous knowledge systems and traditional practices contribute to sustainability and innovation outcomes. Additional research could test and adapt methods for enhancing women’s access to agricultural extension services and capacity-building programmes, with a focus on remote or underserved island regions. Furthermore, empirical work could evaluate the performance and adoption of gender-responsive technological innovations tailored to small island agriculture, analyse women’s roles and decision-making power within agricultural value chains, including access to markets, finance and governance and design and trial gender-sensitive climate change adaptation and resilience-building measures that align with local needs, cultural practices and ecological constraints. In addition, future studies could explicitly compare small island agricultural systems with other vulnerable agricultural contexts, such as arid and semi-arid regions, mountain farming systems, or disaster-prone coastal zones, to identify unique vulnerabilities, resilience mechanisms and transferable lessons, ensuring that strategies developed for small islands are context-appropriate and not merely adapted from other environments. Finally, a promising direction for future work is to apply a similar research design to other fragile and vulnerable agricultural contexts independently, for example, arid and semi-arid regions, mountain farming systems, or disaster-prone coastal zones. Building on these independent studies, a subsequent comparative investigation could then synthesise findings across contexts to highlight both unique vulnerabilities and transferable resilience mechanisms. Such a two-step approach would ensure that strategies for small islands remain context-appropriate, while also positioning them within a broader global understanding of gender-responsive agricultural innovation.