why literature review

Service update: Some parts of the Library’s website will be down for maintenance on August 11.

Secondary menu

• Log in to your Library account
• Hours and Maps
• Connect from Off Campus
• UC Berkeley Home

Search form

Conducting a literature review: why do a literature review, why do a literature review.

• How To Find "The Literature"
• Found it -- Now What?

Besides the obvious reason for students -- because it is assigned! -- a literature review helps you explore the research that has come before you, to see how your research question has (or has not) already been addressed.

You identify:

• core research in the field
• experts in the subject area
• methodology you may want to use (or avoid)
• gaps in knowledge -- or where your research would fit in

It Also Helps You:

• Publish and share your findings
• Justify requests for grants and other funding
• Identify best practices to inform practice
• Set wider context for a program evaluation
• Compile information to support community organizing

Great brief overview, from NCSU

Want To Know More?

• Next: How To Find "The Literature" >>
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 1:10 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/litreview

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

• Getting Started
• How to Pick a Topic
• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

What are Literature Reviews?

So, what is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries." Taylor, D.  The literature review: A few tips on conducting it . University of Toronto Health Sciences Writing Centre.

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews .  Review of General Psychology , 1 (3), 311-320.

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

What is the purpose of literature review , a. habitat loss and species extinction: , b. range shifts and phenological changes: , c. ocean acidification and coral reefs: , d. adaptive strategies and conservation efforts: .

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 

Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review .

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field.

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example 

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:  

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!

How to write a good literature review 

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as yo u go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free!

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review 

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:  

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:  

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:  

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:  

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:  

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:  

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?  

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research | Cite feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface. It also allows you auto-cite references in 10,000+ styles and save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research | Cite” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 

• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references in 10,000+ styles into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 22+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, academic integrity vs academic dishonesty: types & examples, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide).

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

Libraries | Research Guides

Literature reviews, what is a literature review, learning more about how to do a literature review.

• Planning the Review
• The Research Question
• Choosing Where to Search
• Organizing the Review
• Writing the Review

A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it relates to your research question. A literature review goes beyond a description or summary of the literature you have read. 

• Sage Research Methods Core This link opens in a new window SAGE Research Methods supports research at all levels by providing material to guide users through every step of the research process. SAGE Research Methods is the ultimate methods library with more than 1000 books, reference works, journal articles, and instructional videos by world-leading academics from across the social sciences, including the largest collection of qualitative methods books available online from any scholarly publisher. – Publisher

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

• What is a literature review?
• Steps in the Literature Review Process
• Define your research question
• Determine inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Choose databases and search
• Review Results
• Synthesize Results
• Analyze Results
• Librarian Support
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

What is a Literature Review?

A literature or narrative review is a comprehensive review and analysis of the published literature on a specific topic or research question. The literature that is reviewed contains: books, articles, academic articles, conference proceedings, association papers, and dissertations. It contains the most pertinent studies and points to important past and current research and practices. It provides background and context, and shows how your research will contribute to the field. 

A literature review should: 

• Provide a comprehensive and updated review of the literature;
• Explain why this review has taken place;
• Articulate a position or hypothesis;
• Acknowledge and account for conflicting and corroborating points of view

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

A literature review can be written as an introduction to a study to:

• Demonstrate how a study fills a gap in research
• Compare a study with other research that's been done

Or it can be a separate work (a research article on its own) which:

• Organizes or describes a topic
• Describes variables within a particular issue/problem

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

• It's a snapshot in time. Unlike other reviews, this one has beginning, a middle and an end. There may be future developments that could make your work less relevant.
• It may be too focused. Some niche studies may miss the bigger picture.
• It can be difficult to be comprehensive. There is no way to make sure all the literature on a topic was considered.
• It is easy to be biased if you stick to top tier journals. There may be other places where people are publishing exemplary research. Look to open access publications and conferences to reflect a more inclusive collection. Also, make sure to include opposing views (and not just supporting evidence).

Source: Grant, Maria J., and Andrew Booth. “A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies.” Health Information & Libraries Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, June 2009, pp. 91–108. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.

Librarian Assistance

For help, please contact the librarian for your subject area.  We have a guide to library specialists by subject .

• Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 5:59 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

The grassroots organizations continuing the fight for Ukrainian science

Career Feature 11 SEP 24

How a struggling biotech company became a university ‘spin-in’

Career Q&A 10 SEP 24

The human costs of the research-assessment culture

Career Feature 09 SEP 24

Why I’m committed to breaking the bias in large language models

Career Guide 04 SEP 24

Binning out-of-date chemicals? Somebody think about the carbon!

Correspondence 27 AUG 24

Publishing nightmare: a researcher’s quest to keep his own work from being plagiarized

News 04 SEP 24

Intellectual property and data privacy: the hidden risks of AI

Gathering Outstanding Overseas Talents, Innovating to Lead the Future

The 16th Peiyang Young Scientist Forum and the 2024 Tianjin University High-Level Forum for University Faculty, Postdoctoral Fellows...

Tianjin, China

Tianjin University (TJU)

High-level Talent Recruitment dedicated to teaching & research

College of Water Sciences, Beijing Normal University

Beijing, China

OSU Neurology Clayton C. Wagner Parkinson’s Disease Research Professorship

Columbus, Ohio

The Ohio State University (OSU)

Professor/Associate Professor/Assistant Professor/Senior Lecturer/Lecturer

The School of Science and Engineering (SSE) at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK-Shenzhen) sincerely invites applications for mul...

Shenzhen, China

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK Shenzhen)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Literature Review - what is a Literature Review, why it is important and how it is done

• Strategies to Find Sources

Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources

Reading critically, tips to evaluate sources.

• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

A good literature review evaluates a wide variety of sources (academic articles, scholarly books, government/NGO reports). It also evaluates literature reviews that study similar topics. This page offers you a list of resources and tips on how to evaluate the sources that you may use to write your review.

• A Closer Look at Evaluating Literature Reviews Excerpt from the book chapter, “Evaluating Introductions and Literature Reviews” in Fred Pyrczak’s Evaluating Research in Academic Journals: A Practical Guide to Realistic Evaluation , (Chapter 4 and 5). This PDF discusses and offers great advice on how to evaluate "Introductions" and "Literature Reviews" by listing questions and tips. First part focus on Introductions and in page 10 in the PDF, 37 in the text, it focus on "literature reviews".
• Tips for Evaluating Sources (Print vs. Internet Sources) Excellent page that will guide you on what to ask to determine if your source is a reliable one. Check the other topics in the guide: Evaluating Bibliographic Citations and Evaluation During Reading on the left side menu.

To be able to write a good Literature Review, you need to be able to read critically. Below are some tips that will help you evaluate the sources for your paper.

Reading critically (summary from How to Read Academic Texts Critically)

• Who is the author? What is his/her standing in the field.
• What is the author’s purpose? To offer advice, make practical suggestions, solve a specific problem, to critique or clarify?
• Note the experts in the field: are there specific names/labs that are frequently cited?
• Pay attention to methodology: is it sound? what testing procedures, subjects, materials were used?
• Note conflicting theories, methodologies and results. Are there any assumptions being made by most/some researchers?
• Theories: have they evolved overtime?
• Evaluate and synthesize the findings and conclusions. How does this study contribute to your project?

Useful links:

• How to Read a Paper (University of Waterloo, Canada) This is an excellent paper that teach you how to read an academic paper, how to determine if it is something to set aside, or something to read deeply. Good advice to organize your literature for the Literature Review or just reading for classes.

Criteria to evaluate sources:

• Authority : Who is the author? what is his/her credentials--what university he/she is affliliated? Is his/her area of expertise?
• Usefulness : How this source related to your topic? How current or relevant it is to your topic?
• Reliability : Does the information comes from a reliable, trusted source such as an academic journal?

Useful site - Critically Analyzing Information Sources (Cornell University Library)

• << Previous: Strategies to Find Sources
• Next: Tips for Writing Literature Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:56 AM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

Literature Review: Purpose of a Literature Review

• Literature Review
• Purpose of a Literature Review
• Work in Progress
• Compiling & Writing
• Books, Articles, & Web Pages
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Departmental Differences
• Citation Styles & Plagiarism
• Know the Difference! Systematic Review vs. Literature Review

The purpose of a literature review is to:

• Provide a foundation of knowledge on a topic
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication and give credit to other researchers
• Identify inconstancies: gaps in research, conflicts in previous studies, open questions left from other research
• Identify the need for additional research (justifying your research)
• Identify the relationship of works in the context of their contribution to the topic and other works
• Place your own research within the context of existing literature, making a case for why further study is needed.

Videos & Tutorials

VIDEO: What is the role of a literature review in research? What's it mean to "review" the literature? Get the big picture of what to expect as part of the process. This video is published under a Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-SA US license. License, credits, and contact information can be found here: https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/tutorials/litreview/

Elements in a Literature Review

• Elements in a Literature Review txt of infographic
• << Previous: Literature Review
• Next: Searching >>
• Last Updated: Sep 10, 2024 11:32 AM
• URL: https://uscupstate.libguides.com/Literature_Review

• Libraries & Collections
• News & Events
• Process: Literature Reviews
• Literature Review
• Managing Sources

Ask a Librarian

Does your assignment or publication require that you write a literature review? This guide is intended to help you understand what a literature is, why it is worth doing, and some quick tips composing one.

Understanding Literature Reviews

What is a literature review  .

Typically, a literature review is a written discussion that examines publications about  a particular subject area or topic. Depending on disciplines, publications, or authors a literature review may be: 

A summary of sources An organized presentation of sources A synthesis or interpretation of sources An evaluative analysis of sources

A Literature Review may be part of a process or a product. It may be:

A part of your research process A part of your final research publication An independent publication

Why do a literature review?

The Literature Review will place your research in context. It will help you and your readers:  

Locate patterns, relationships, connections, agreements, disagreements, & gaps in understanding Identify methodological and theoretical foundations Identify landmark and exemplary works Situate your voice in a broader conversation with other writers, thinkers, and scholars

The Literature Review will aid your research process. It will help you to:

Establish your knowledge Understand what has been said Define your questions Establish a relevant methodology Refine your voice Situate your voice in the conversation

What does a literature review look like?

The Literature Review structure and organization may include sections such as:  

An introduction or overview A body or organizational sub-divisions A conclusion or an explanation of significance

The body of a literature review may be organized in several ways, including:

Chronologically: organized by date of publication Methodologically: organized by type of research method used Thematically: organized by concept, trend, or theme Ideologically: organized by belief, ideology, or school of thought

• Find a focus
• Find models
• Review your target publication
• Track citations
• Read critically
• Manage your citations
• Ask friends, faculty, and librarians

Additional Sources

• Reviewing the literature. Project Planner.
• Literature Review: By UNC Writing Center
• PhD on Track
• CU Graduate Students Thesis & Dissertation Guidance
• CU Honors Thesis Guidance

• Next: Managing Sources >>
• University of Colorado Boulder Libraries
• Research Guides
• Research Strategies
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 3:23 PM
• URL: https://libguides.colorado.edu/strategies/litreview
• © Regents of the University of Colorado

• Library Homepage

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide: Literature Reviews?

• Literature Reviews?
• Strategies to Finding Sources
• Keeping up with Research!
• Evaluating Sources & Literature Reviews
• Organizing for Writing
• Writing Literature Review
• Other Academic Writings

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available or a set of summaries." - Quote from Taylor, D. (n.d)."The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting it".

• Citation: "The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting it"

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Each field has a particular way to do reviews for academic research literature. In the social sciences and humanities the most common are:

• Narrative Reviews: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific research topic and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weaknesses, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section that summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.
• Book review essays/ Historiographical review essays : A type of literature review typical in History and related fields, e.g., Latin American studies. For example, the Latin American Research Review explains that the purpose of this type of review is to “(1) to familiarize readers with the subject, approach, arguments, and conclusions found in a group of books whose common focus is a historical period; a country or region within Latin America; or a practice, development, or issue of interest to specialists and others; (2) to locate these books within current scholarship, critical methodologies, and approaches; and (3) to probe the relation of these new books to previous work on the subject, especially canonical texts. Unlike individual book reviews, the cluster reviews found in LARR seek to address the state of the field or discipline and not solely the works at issue.” - LARR

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 
• Baumeister, R.F. & Leary, M.R. (1997). "Writing narrative literature reviews," Review of General Psychology , 1(3), 311-320.

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

• When writing a prospectus or a thesis/dissertation
• When writing a research paper
• When writing a grant proposal

In all these cases you need to dedicate a chapter in these works to showcase what has been written about your research topic and to point out how your own research will shed new light into a body of scholarship.

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

Note:  In the humanities, even if they don't use the term "literature review", they may have a dedicated  chapter that reviewed the "critical bibliography" or they incorporated that review in the introduction or first chapter of the dissertation, book, or article.

• UCSB electronic theses and dissertations In partnership with the Graduate Division, the UC Santa Barbara Library is making available theses and dissertations produced by UCSB students. Currently included in ADRL are theses and dissertations that were originally filed electronically, starting in 2011. In future phases of ADRL, all theses and dissertations created by UCSB students may be digitized and made available.

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

Literature reviews are also written as standalone articles as a way to survey a particular research topic in-depth. This type of literature review looks at a topic from a historical perspective to see how the understanding of the topic has changed over time. 

• Find e-Journals for Standalone Literature Reviews The best way to get familiar with and to learn how to write literature reviews is by reading them. You can use our Journal Search option to find journals that specialize in publishing literature reviews from major disciplines like anthropology, sociology, etc. Usually these titles are called, "Annual Review of [discipline name] OR [Discipline name] Review. This option works best if you know the title of the publication you are looking for. Below are some examples of these journals! more... less... Journal Search can be found by hovering over the link for Research on the library website.

Social Sciences

• Annual Review of Anthropology
• Annual Review of Political Science
• Annual Review of Sociology
• Ethnic Studies Review

Hard science and health sciences:

• Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science
• Annual Review of Materials Science
• Systematic Review From journal site: "The journal Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews" in the health sciences.
• << Previous: Overview
• Next: Strategies to Finding Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 5, 2024 11:44 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.ucsb.edu/litreview

Frequently asked questions

What is the purpose of a literature review.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

Frequently asked questions: Academic writing

A rhetorical tautology is the repetition of an idea of concept using different words.

Rhetorical tautologies occur when additional words are used to convey a meaning that has already been expressed or implied. For example, the phrase “armed gunman” is a tautology because a “gunman” is by definition “armed.”

A logical tautology is a statement that is always true because it includes all logical possibilities.

Logical tautologies often take the form of “either/or” statements (e.g., “It will rain, or it will not rain”) or employ circular reasoning (e.g., “she is untrustworthy because she can’t be trusted”).

You may have seen both “appendices” or “appendixes” as pluralizations of “ appendix .” Either spelling can be used, but “appendices” is more common (including in APA Style ). Consistency is key here: make sure you use the same spelling throughout your paper.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The abstract is the very last thing you write. You should only write it after your research is complete, so that you can accurately summarize the entirety of your thesis , dissertation or research paper .

If you’ve gone over the word limit set for your assignment, shorten your sentences and cut repetition and redundancy during the editing process. If you use a lot of long quotes , consider shortening them to just the essentials.

If you need to remove a lot of words, you may have to cut certain passages. Remember that everything in the text should be there to support your argument; look for any information that’s not essential to your point and remove it.

To make this process easier and faster, you can use a paraphrasing tool . With this tool, you can rewrite your text to make it simpler and shorter. If that’s not enough, you can copy-paste your paraphrased text into the summarizer . This tool will distill your text to its core message.

Revising, proofreading, and editing are different stages of the writing process .

• Revising is making structural and logical changes to your text—reformulating arguments and reordering information.
• Editing refers to making more local changes to things like sentence structure and phrasing to make sure your meaning is conveyed clearly and concisely.
• Proofreading involves looking at the text closely, line by line, to spot any typos and issues with consistency and correct them.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:

• The abstract should focus on your original research, not on the work of others.
• The abstract should be self-contained and fully understandable without reference to other sources.

There are some circumstances where you might need to mention other sources in an abstract: for example, if your research responds directly to another study or focuses on the work of a single theorist. In general, though, don’t include citations unless absolutely necessary.

An abstract is a concise summary of an academic text (such as a journal article or dissertation ). It serves two main purposes:

• To help potential readers determine the relevance of your paper for their own research.
• To communicate your key findings to those who don’t have time to read the whole paper.

Abstracts are often indexed along with keywords on academic databases, so they make your work more easily findable. Since the abstract is the first thing any reader sees, it’s important that it clearly and accurately summarizes the contents of your paper.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

Whether you’re publishing a blog, submitting a research paper , or even just writing an important email, there are a few techniques you can use to make sure it’s error-free:

• Take a break : Set your work aside for at least a few hours so that you can look at it with fresh eyes.
• Proofread a printout : Staring at a screen for too long can cause fatigue – sit down with a pen and paper to check the final version.
• Use digital shortcuts : Take note of any recurring mistakes (for example, misspelling a particular word, switching between US and UK English , or inconsistently capitalizing a term), and use Find and Replace to fix it throughout the document.

If you want to be confident that an important text is error-free, it might be worth choosing a professional proofreading service instead.

Editing and proofreading are different steps in the process of revising a text.

Editing comes first, and can involve major changes to content, structure and language. The first stages of editing are often done by authors themselves, while a professional editor makes the final improvements to grammar and style (for example, by improving sentence structure and word choice ).

Proofreading is the final stage of checking a text before it is published or shared. It focuses on correcting minor errors and inconsistencies (for example, in punctuation and capitalization ). Proofreaders often also check for formatting issues, especially in print publishing.

The cost of proofreading depends on the type and length of text, the turnaround time, and the level of services required. Most proofreading companies charge per word or page, while freelancers sometimes charge an hourly rate.

For proofreading alone, which involves only basic corrections of typos and formatting mistakes, you might pay as little as $0.01 per word, but in many cases, your text will also require some level of editing , which costs slightly more.

It’s often possible to purchase combined proofreading and editing services and calculate the price in advance based on your requirements.

There are many different routes to becoming a professional proofreader or editor. The necessary qualifications depend on the field – to be an academic or scientific proofreader, for example, you will need at least a university degree in a relevant subject.

For most proofreading jobs, experience and demonstrated skills are more important than specific qualifications. Often your skills will be tested as part of the application process.

To learn practical proofreading skills, you can choose to take a course with a professional organization such as the Society for Editors and Proofreaders . Alternatively, you can apply to companies that offer specialized on-the-job training programmes, such as the Scribbr Academy .

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

5 Reasons the Literature Review Is Crucial to Your Paper

• 3-minute read
• 8th November 2016

People often treat writing the literature review in an academic paper as a formality. Usually, this means simply listing various studies vaguely related to their work and leaving it at that.

But this overlooks how important the literature review is to a well-written experimental report or research paper. As such, we thought we’d take a moment to go over what a literature review should do and why you should give it the attention it deserves.

What Is a Literature Review?

Common in the social and physical sciences, but also sometimes required in the humanities, a literature review is a summary of past research in your subject area.

Sometimes this is a standalone investigation of how an idea or field of inquiry has developed over time. However, more usually it’s the part of an academic paper, thesis or dissertation that sets out the background against which a study takes place.

There are several reasons why we do this.

Reason #1: To Demonstrate Understanding

In a college paper, you can use a literature review to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter. This means identifying, summarizing and critically assessing past research that is relevant to your own work.

Reason #2: To Justify Your Research

The literature review also plays a big role in justifying your study and setting your research question . This is because examining past research allows you to identify gaps in the literature, which you can then attempt to fill or address with your own work.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Reason #3: Setting a Theoretical Framework

It can help to think of the literature review as the foundations for your study, since the rest of your work will build upon the ideas and existing research you discuss therein.

A crucial part of this is formulating a theoretical framework , which comprises the concepts and theories that your work is based upon and against which its success will be judged.

Reason #4: Developing a Methodology

Conducting a literature review before beginning research also lets you see how similar studies have been conducted in the past. By examining the strengths and weaknesses of existing research, you can thus make sure you adopt the most appropriate methods, data sources and analytical techniques for your own work.

Reason #5: To Support Your Own Findings

The significance of any results you achieve will depend to some extent on how they compare to those reported in the existing literature. When you come to write up your findings, your literature review will therefore provide a crucial point of reference.

If your results replicate past research, for instance, you can say that your work supports existing theories. If your results are different, though, you’ll need to discuss why and whether the difference is important.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

5-minute read

Free Email Newsletter Template

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Literature Review

The purpose of a literature review is to collect relevant, timely research on your chosen topic, and synthesize it into a cohesive summary of existing knowledge in the field. This then prepares you for making your own argument on that topic, or for conducting your own original research.

Depending on your field of study, literature reviews can take different forms. Some disciplines require that you synthesize your sources topically, organizing your paragraphs according to how your different sources discuss similar topics. Other disciplines require that you discuss each source in individual paragraphs, covering various aspects in that single article, chapter, or book.

Within your review of a given source, you can cover many different aspects, including (if a research study) the purpose, scope, methods, results, any discussion points, limitations, and implications for future research. Make sure you know which model your professor expects you to follow when writing your own literature reviews.

Tip : Literature reviews may or may not be a graded component of your class or major assignment, but even if it is not, it is a good idea to draft one so that you know the current conversations taking place on your chosen topic. It can better prepare you to write your own, unique argument.

Benefits of Literature Reviews

• Literature reviews allow you to gain familiarity with the current knowledge in your chosen field, as well as the boundaries and limitations of that field.
• Literature reviews also help you to gain an understanding of the theory(ies) driving the field, allowing you to place your research question into context.
• Literature reviews provide an opportunity for you to see and even evaluate successful and unsuccessful assessment and research methods in your field.
• Literature reviews prevent you from duplicating the same information as others writing in your field, allowing you to find your own, unique approach to your topic.
• Literature reviews give you familiarity with the knowledge in your field, giving you the chance to analyze the significance of your additional research.

Choosing Your Sources

When selecting your sources to compile your literature review, make sure you follow these guidelines to ensure you are working with the strongest, most appropriate sources possible.

Topically Relevant

Find sources within the scope of your topic

Appropriately Aged

Find sources that are not too old for your assignment

Find sources whose authors have authority on your topic

Appropriately “Published”

Find sources that meet your instructor’s guidelines (academic, professional, print, etc.)

Tip:  Treat your professors and librarians as experts you can turn to for advice on how to locate sources. They are a valuable asset to you, so take advantage of them!

Organizing Your Literature Review

Synthesizing topically.

Some assignments require discussing your sources together, in paragraphs organized according to shared topics between them.

For example, in a literature review covering current conversations on Alison Bechdel’s  Fun Home , authors may discuss various topics including:

• her graphic style
• her allusions to various literary texts
• her story’s implications regarding LGBT experiences in 20 th  century America.

In this case, you would cluster your sources on these three topics. One paragraph would cover how the sources you collected dealt with Bechdel’s graphic style. Another, her allusions. A third, her implications.

Each of these paragraphs would discuss how the sources you found treated these topics in connection to one another. Basically, you compare and contrast how your sources discuss similar issues and points.

To determine these shared topics, examine aspects including:

• Definition of terms
• Common ground
• Issues that divide
• Rhetorical context

Summarizing Individually

Depending on the assignment, your professor may prefer that you discuss each source in your literature review individually (in their own, separate paragraphs or sections). Your professor may give you specific guidelines as far as what to cover in these paragraphs/sections.

If, for instance, your sources are all primary research studies, here are some aspects to consider covering:

• Participants
• Limitations
• Implications
• Significance

Each section of your literature review, in this case, will identify all of these elements for each individual article.

You may or may not need to separate your information into multiple paragraphs for each source. If you do, using proper headings in the appropriate citation style (APA, MLA, etc.) will help keep you organized.

If you are writing a literature review as part of a larger assignment, you generally do not need an introduction and/or conclusion, because it is embedded within the context of your larger paper.

If, however, your literature review is a standalone assignment, it is a good idea to include some sort of introduction and conclusion to provide your reader with context regarding your topic, purpose, and any relevant implications or further questions. Make sure you know what your professor is expecting for your literature review’s content.

Typically, a literature review concludes with a full bibliography of your included sources. Make sure you use the style guide required by your professor for this assignment.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

Literature Reviews

• What is a Literature Review?
• Steps for Creating a Literature Review
• Providing Evidence / Critical Analysis
• Challenges when writing a Literature Review
• Systematic Literature Reviews

Developing a Literature Review

1. Purpose and Scope

To help you develop a literature review, gather information on existing research, sub-topics, relevant research, and overlaps. Note initial thoughts on the topic - a mind map or list might be helpful - and avoid unfocused reading, collecting irrelevant content.  A literature review serves to place your research within the context of existing knowledge. It demonstrates your understanding of the field and identifies gaps that your research aims to fill. This helps in justifying the relevance and necessity of your study.

To avoid over-reading, set a target word count for each section and limit reading time. Plan backwards from the deadline and move on to other parts of the investigation. Read major texts and explore up-to-date research. Check reference lists and citation indexes for common standard texts. Be guided by research questions and refocus on your topic when needed. Stop reading if you find similar viewpoints or if you're going off topic.

You can use a "Synthesis Matrix" to keep track of your reading notes. This concept map helps you to provide a summary of the literature and its connections is produced as a result of this study. Utilizing referencing software like RefWorks to obtain citations, you can construct the framework for composing your literature evaluation.

2. Source Selection

Focus on searching for academically authoritative texts such as academic books, journals, research reports, and government publications. These sources are critical for ensuring the credibility and reliability of your review. 

• Academic Books: Provide comprehensive coverage of a topic.
• Journal Articles: Offer the most up-to-date research and are essential for a literature review.
• Research Reports: Detailed accounts of specific research projects.
• Government Publications: Official documents that provide reliable data and insights.

3. Thematic Analysis

Instead of merely summarizing sources, identify and discuss key themes that emerge from the literature. This involves interpreting and evaluating how different authors have tackled similar issues and how their findings relate to your research.

4. Critical Evaluation

Adopt a critical attitude towards the sources you review. Scrutinize, question, and dissect the material to ensure that your review is not just descriptive but analytical. This helps in highlighting the significance of various sources and their relevance to your research.

Each work's critical assessment should take into account:

Provenance:  What qualifications does the author have? Are the author's claims backed up by proof, such as first-hand accounts from history, case studies, stories, statistics, and current scientific discoveries? Methodology:  Were the strategies employed to locate, collect, and evaluate the data suitable for tackling the study question? Was the sample size suitable? Were the findings properly reported and interpreted? Objectivity : Is the author's viewpoint impartial or biased? Does the author's thesis get supported by evidence that refutes it, or does it ignore certain important facts? Persuasiveness:  Which of the author's arguments is the strongest or weakest in terms of persuasiveness? Value:  Are the author's claims and deductions believable? Does the study ultimately advance our understanding of the issue in any meaningful way?

5. Categorization

Organize your literature review by grouping sources into categories based on themes, relevance to research questions, theoretical paradigms, or chronology. This helps in presenting your findings in a structured manner.

6. Source Validity

Ensure that the sources you include are valid and reliable. Classic texts may retain their authority over time, but for fields that evolve rapidly, prioritize the most recent research. Always check the credibility of the authors and the impact of their work in the field.

7. Synthesis and Findings

Synthesize the information from various sources to draw conclusions about the current state of knowledge. Identify trends, controversies, and gaps in the literature. Relate your findings to your research questions and suggest future directions for research.

Practical Tips

• Use a variety of sources, including online databases, university libraries, and reference lists from relevant articles. This ensures a comprehensive coverage of the literature.
• Avoid listing sources without analysis. Use tables, bulk citations, and footnotes to manage references efficiently and make your review more readable.
• Writing a literature review is an ongoing process. Start writing early and revise as you read more. This iterative process helps in refining your arguments and identifying additional sources as needed.  

Brown University Library (2024) Organizing and Creating Information. Available at: https://libguides.brown.edu/organize/litreview (Accessed: 30 July 2024).

Pacheco-Vega, R. (2016) Synthesizing different bodies of work in your literature review: The Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump (CSED) technique . Available at: http://www.raulpacheco.org/2016/06/synthesizing-different-bodies-of-work-in-your-literature-review-the-conceptual-synthesis-excel-dump-technique/ (Accessed: 30 July 2024).

Study Advice at the University of Reading (2024) Literature reviews . Available at: https://libguides.reading.ac.uk/literaturereview/developing (Accessed: 31 July 2024).

Further Reading

Frameworks for creating answerable (re)search questions  How to Guide

Literature Searching How to Guide

• << Previous: Steps for Creating a Literature Review
• Next: Providing Evidence / Critical Analysis >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 11:43 AM
• URL: https://library.lsbu.ac.uk/literaturereviews

Public Health Research Guide

• Web Resources
• Conduct a Literature Review
• Citation Style Guides and Management Tools

Literature Review Overview

A literature review involves both the literature searching and the writing. The purpose of the literature search is to:

• reveal existing knowledge
• identify areas of consensus and debate
• identify gaps in knowledge
• identify approaches to research design and methodology
• identify other researchers with similar interests
• clarify your future directions for research

List above from Conducting A Literature Search , Information Research Methods and Systems, Penn State University Libraries

A literature review provides an evaluative review and documentation of what has been published by scholars and researchers on a given topic. In reviewing the published literature, the aim is to explain what ideas and knowledge have been gained and shared to date (i.e., hypotheses tested, scientific methods used, results and conclusions), the weakness and strengths of these previous works, and to identify remaining research questions: A literature review provides the context for your research, making clear why your topic deserves further investigation.

Before You Search

• Select and understand your research topic and question.
• Identify the major concepts in your topic and question.
• Brainstorm potential keywords/terms that correspond to those concepts.
• Identify alternative keywords/terms (narrower, broader, or related) to use if your first set of keywords do not work.
• Determine (Boolean*) relationships between terms.
• Begin your search.
• Review your search results.
• Revise & refine your search based on the initial findings.

*Boolean logic provides three ways search terms/phrases can be combined, using the following three operators: AND, OR, and NOT.

Search Process

The type of information you want to find and the practices of your discipline(s) drive the types of sources you seek and where you search. For most research you will use multiple source types such as: annotated bibliographies; articles from journals, magazines, and newspapers; books; blogs; conference papers; data sets; dissertations; organization, company, or government reports; reference materials; systematic reviews; archival materials; and more. It can be helpful to develop a comprehensive approach to review different sources and where you will search for each. Below is an example approach.

• Annual Reviews and Bibliographies – e.g., Annual Review of Public Health review articles (Annual Reviews database)
• Internet – e.g., Listservs, Blogs, Social Networking Sites, etc. related to your topic
• Grant Databases – e.g., National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Extramural Research (OEH) and NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT), Grants to Individuals
• Conference Proceedings and Professional Association websites – e.g., American Public Health Association, National Environmental Health Association, World Council for Health
• Research or Resource Centers – e.g., Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC)
• Citation Indexes – e.g., PubMed, Dissertations & Theses Global ProQuest, Web of Science Core Collection
• Journal Indexes/Databases and EJournal Packages – e.g., CINAHL Complete, Journals@Ovid
• Specialized Data – e.g., Disability & Health Data System (DHDS), Montana Public Health Information System
• Book Catalogs – e.g., local library catalog (OneSearch at UM), WorldCat, Google Books
• Institutional Repositories – e.g., ScholarWorks at the University of Montana (includes UM Conference on Undergraduate Research as UM Graduate Research Conference abstracts)
• Library Web Scale Discovery Service – e.g., OneSearch (main search from library homepage)
• Web Search Engines – e.g., Google
• Government websites – e.g., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health), Missoula City-County Health Department

Additional information gathering strategies:

• Identify and browse current issues of the most relevant journals for your topic
• Identify and search for the publications of experts and new scholars
• Setup alerts, e.g., Journal Table of Contents, Saved Searches
• Contact researchers, librarians, etc. at institutions, organizations, and agencies for resources or support
• << Previous: Web Resources
• Next: Citation Style Guides and Management Tools >>
• Last Updated: Sep 9, 2024 5:31 PM
• URL: https://libguides.lib.umt.edu/publichealth

Libraries & Cultural Resources

Research guides, research in education.

• Where to Start

Education Literature Review Guide

General literature review guides.

• Citation Resources
• Contact Us!

• << Previous: Where to Start
• Next: Citation Resources >>
• Last Updated: Sep 3, 2024 5:13 PM
• URL: https://libguides.ucalgary.ca/edresearch

Libraries & Cultural Resources

• 403.220.8895

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

What is a literature review, what is a literature review: a tutorial, literature reviews: an overview for graduate students.

• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window
• Sample Literature Reviews

A Literature Review Is Not:

• just a summary of sources
• a grouping of broad, unrelated sources
• a compilation of everything that has been written on a particular topic
• literature criticism (think English) or a book review

So, what is it then?

A literature review is an integrated analysis-- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings that are related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents the literature that provides background information on your topic and shows a correspondence between those writings and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students (by North Caroline State University Libraries)

• Next: Steps for Conducting a Lit Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 11, 2024 1:37 PM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

What is a literature review definition, types, and examples.

• Why Is Your CV Getting Rejected and How to Avoid It
• Where to Find Images for Presentations
• What Is an Internship? Everything You Should Know
• How Long Should a Thesis Statement Be?
• How to Write a Character Analysis Essay
• Best Colours for Your PowerPoint Presentation: Top Colour Combinations
• How to Write a Nursing Essay – With Examples
• Top 5 Essential Skills You Should Build As An International Student
• How Professional Editing Services Can Take Your Writing to the Next Level
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

A literature review is an essential part of any academic research paper, thesis, or dissertation. It provides a thorough examination of existing research on a particular topic, allowing the researcher to identify gaps, areas of agreement or disagreement, and emerging trends in the field. In this post, we’ll delve into the definition of a literature review, explore the different types of literature reviews, and provide examples of literature review structures that can guide your own work. Additionally, we’ll offer tips on how to craft a compelling literature review that strengthens the foundation of your research.

Literature Review Meaning

The term "literature review" refers to a comprehensive survey of the scholarly works, books, journal articles, and other sources relevant to a particular research topic. Its primary purpose is to offer a critical evaluation of the existing body of knowledge. The literature review helps set the context for the research question, showing what has already been explored and where gaps in knowledge or methodological limitations may exist. By examining various sources, you can assess how your research fits into the broader conversation within your field. The literature review also provides the foundation for your argument, helping to justify the importance of your research and explain how it contributes to the ongoing academic discussion.

Why Is a Literature Review Important?

A literature review is not just a summary of previous research but a critical analysis of the work that has been done in a particular area of study. It helps demonstrate your understanding of the topic and situates your work within the existing academic landscape. By conducting a literature review, you ensure that your research is not redundant and identify the unique contributions your study can make. Furthermore, the literature review informs your methodology, highlighting which methods have been successful in previous studies and which have encountered limitations. By understanding what has worked before, you can avoid potential pitfalls and build upon the successes of earlier researchers.

Literature Review Structure

The structure of a literature review can vary depending on the nature of your research and the field of study. However, the most common literature review structure includes several key components:

• Introduction :This section outlines the scope of the literature review, defines the key terms, and states the overall purpose of the review. It provides the reader with an understanding of what the review will cover.
• Thematic Organisation : The literature is often organised thematically, grouping together works that address similar aspects of the research topic. Themes can relate to theoretical approaches, methodologies, or different interpretations of key issues.
• Critical Evaluation : The body of the literature review should not only summarise the existing research but also critically evaluate it. This might involve identifying strengths and weaknesses in methodologies, assessing the reliability of findings, and discussing how well the research supports the claims made.
• Conclusion : The conclusion should summarise the main findings of the review, restate the key themes, and highlight gaps in the research that your study will address. It should also reflect on how the literature review has shaped your own research design.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are several different forms of literature reviews, each with a distinct focus and structure. Understanding these types can help you choose the approach that best fits your research needs. Here are some of the most common types of literature reviews:

• Narrative Literature Review : This is the most traditional form of literature review. It provides a comprehensive summary and analysis of the literature on a particular topic. Narrative reviews are often broad in scope and provide an overview of key themes and trends.
• Systematic Literature Review : This type of review involves a rigorous, structured process that aims to identify all relevant studies on a specific research question. Systematic reviews follow a clearly defined methodology, including specific criteria for selecting and analysing studies. They are commonly used in fields such as healthcare, where a comprehensive synthesis of evidence is needed.
• Scoping Review : Clearly outline your main argument or position. This should guide the direction of your essay.
• Scoping Review : A scoping review is used to map the key concepts, sources, and evidence in a research area. It is often the first step before a systematic review and is useful for identifying gaps in the literature and guiding further research.
• Meta-Analysis : This is a form of literature review that uses statistical techniques to combine the results of multiple studies. Meta-analyses are typically used to provide an overall estimate of the effect size for a particular intervention or phenomenon.
• Integrative Review : An integrative review synthesises qualitative and quantitative data to provide a more holistic view of the research on a particular topic. It aims to generate new perspectives by integrating findings from different types of studies.
• Critical Review : This type of literature review goes beyond merely describing the literature. A critical review analyses and synthesises the research, evaluating its strengths and weaknesses and offering new insights and perspectives on the topic.

Short Example of a Literature Review

Below is an example of the literature review from a dissertation on climate change policies. The example demonstrates how to structure a literature review and critically engage with the literature:

Introduction of the Literature Review

Climate change has been a topic of growing concern over the past few decades, with numerous policies introduced globally to mitigate its effects. This review examines the existing literature on climate change policies, focusing on the effectiveness of carbon pricing, renewable energy subsidies, and regulatory approaches. The review aims to highlight the strengths and limitations of these policies and identify gaps in the research that future studies should address.

Thematic Organisation

The literature is organised into three main themes: carbon pricing mechanisms, renewable energy subsidies, and regulatory approaches to emissions reduction. Each theme is analysed in detail, examining the key findings of previous research and assessing the impact of these policies on greenhouse gas emissions.

Critical Evaluation

The review finds that while carbon pricing mechanisms have been effective in reducing emissions in some contexts, their success is heavily dependent on political and economic factors. Renewable energy subsidies have contributed to significant increases in renewable energy capacity, but their long-term sustainability remains in question. Regulatory approaches, while often politically contentious, have proven to be effective in certain jurisdictions.

The literature review concludes that although significant progress has been made in the development of climate change policies, further research is needed to evaluate the long-term impacts of these policies and to explore new approaches that may be more effective in reducing emissions.

Key Considerations

Writing a literature review can be a complex task, but it is a vital part of the research process. By understanding the meaning of a literature review, familiarising yourself with different forms of literature reviews, and following a clear structure, you can create a review that enhances your research project and demonstrates your knowledge of the field.

Top 10 tips for writing a dissertation methodology

Advice for successfully writing a dissertation, how to structure your dissertation in 2024, writing services.

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Editing Service Examples
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

Why Contexts Matter for Gender Equal Outcomes in Research-Based Plant Breeding: The Case of Maize in Nigeria

• Open access
• Published: 11 September 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Mastewal Yami 1 ,
• Martina Cavicchioli   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7827-5969 2 ,
• Steven M. Cole 3 ,
• Tesfamicheal Wossen 4 &
• Tahirou Abdoulaye 5  

Maize is an important crop for food security and livelihood improvement in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa. Maize varieties that enable farmers to increase their productivity and profitability, for example, can help them achieve these development outcomes. Contextual factors shape women’s and men’s preferences for specific maize traits and varieties, thus influencing varietal uptake and the contribution varieties make towards securing people’s livelihoods. Understanding contextual factors is paramount to pursuing gender equal outcomes within research-based maize breeding. We review literature on the demand for and access to improved maize varieties in Nigeria by using a framework that helps breeding programs become more gender-responsive and, thereby, enhance their impact via increased uptake. Findings show that attention towards the role of social norms in shaping the contexts where women and men maize farmers negotiate production-related decisions, form trait preferences, and access improved maize varieties has been limited within breeding programs, while ethnobotanical approaches are absent. To boost gender equal outcomes, maize breeding programs should identify the reasons motivating women’s and men’s varietal preferences and their different capacities to access improved varieties with the suited characteristics. To pursue this objective, gender-based Indigenous knowledge should be integrated since the first stages of varietal development.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Over the past decades, donors have shown a growing interest in including gendered preferences in varietal development and flagged gender equality and social inclusion among the pillars of research for development (Voss et al. 2021 ). Ensuring the recognition of women’s contributions in crop production and post-harvest activities, improving their access to resources, strengthening their agency, and removing barriers to their equal participation in decision-making processes are said to be critical for achieving positive outcomes in plant breeding and agriculture more broadly (Yami et al. 2024 ). Hence, it has become paramount for breeding programs to take gendered needs and preferences of improved crop varieties into consideration and prioritize them when making breeding decisions. Despite these efforts, maize breeding programs in sub-Saharan Africa have been (paradoxically) inconclusive in addressing gendered trait preferences (Voss et al. 2021 ), while overlapping stereotypical representation of gendered roles to breeding traits could risk reinforcing gender inequalities rather than overcoming them (Tarjem 2022 ).

One way for breeding programs to handle this ambivalence is understanding the contexts in which women and men live and make varietal decisions. As technology gets developed and disseminated, there are a range of social, political, economic, and environmental factors that shape how it gets used or adopted and by whom and why (Emerton et al. 2015 ; Glover 2018 ). Thus, with no previous understanding of the contexts for which researchers design technologies and of how certain inequalities affect uptake decisions, accounting for the impact of agricultural research programs can be very difficult. A second aspect to consider is the possibility that an analysis of the contexts in which varieties are adopted may highlight certain spheres that hamper the social impact of a technology, but on which plant breeding researchers have limited or no influence. Concretely, this can be addressed if plant breeding researchers collaborate with other actors able to complement their efforts through integrative solutions targeting specific barriers, such as inclusive seed promotion and well-targeted policies.

Part of the effort of valuing contexts is recognizing the importance of Indigenous knowledge about plants and integrating it within research-based breeding approaches (Gesesse et al. 2022 ). Farmers maintain crop diversity on their farms by carefully selecting and conserving varieties that suit their different needs and help them respond to contextual challenges (Jarvis et al. 2008 ). Their preferences for specific traits are informed by the same logic (Marimo et al. 2020 ).

From a research-based breeding perspective, improved varieties are those that get developed through the deliberate crossing of different varieties in a breeding program (see Walker and Alwang ( 2015 ) and Thiele et al. ( 2021 ) for a rich discussion on what constitutes “improved” varieties). Per the above definition, in this article the term “improved” is considered relative to a researcher’s perception and measurement of varietal performance. Oftentimes, improved varieties that are higher-yielding or disease-tolerant get developed by a breeding program with the assumption that these traits are wanted or preferred by farmers or other end-users, although without asking farmers about their preferences for such traits. Integrating farmers’ knowledge during technology design allows instead to recognize how the same technology is shaped by its users (Glover et al. 2016 ) and to give credit to different kinds of plant knowledge (Brush 1993 ). Research-based breeding approaches involving technology users from the first stages of varietal development, such as participatory plant breeding (Almekinders et al. 2006 ; Ceccarelli and Grando 2019 ) and seed systems’ development (Christinck et al. 2005 ), as well as decentralized testing and selection of varieties (Van Etten et al. 2019 ; Fadda et al. 2020 ) are critical to integrating farmers’ knowledge and priorities in the development of new varieties and can have important implications both in terms of varietal adoption and farmers’ agency. Alongside these approaches, boosting farmers in biodiversity conservation through, e.g., seed- or gene banks, will minimize the risk of losing local landraces that are critical to both farmers and researchers for future crop improvement (Lamichhane and Thapa 2022 ).

In this paper, we adopt a framework developed by Cavicchioli et al. ( 2023 ) that was designed to boost gender equal outcomes in breeding programs and assess whether and how existing research on the design and dissemination of maize varieties in Nigeria account for the contextual factors and resources influencing farmers’ preferences and uptake decisions. Within this framework, Indigenous knowledge about plants is considered among the resources influencing women’s and men’s decisions about varietal uptake and their uses. This review serves as a case study to test this framework and will help identify action streams for more gender-responsive interventions in the maize value chain of Nigeria.

Gender and Maize Breeding in Nigeria

Despite the lack of certainty about its first penetration in Africa, various sources document the presence of maize in the sixteenth century (Miracle 1965 ). Nowadays, maize ( Zea Mays [L.]) is an important crop for food security and livelihood improvement for more than 300 million people in sub-Saharan Africa. Different initiatives have focused on developing technologies and innovations to boost maize productivity, increase the food supply, and reduce the food insecurity risks for smallholders (Abdoulaye et al. 2018 ; Chavas and Nauges 2020 ). Nigeria is currently the second largest maize producer in sub-Saharan Africa and among the main maize producers at a global scale, while maize ranks second among the most produced crops in the country after cassava (Amaza et al. 2021 ). In Nigeria, decades of investments in the development of improved maize varieties and in designing policies in support of the maize value chain have diversified the demand for maize and led to increased production rates (Wossen et al. 2023 ). On the research-based breeding side, emphasis has been on developing maize varieties that combine drought tolerance, Striga resistance, early maturity, increased yield, and grain quality traits (Kamara et al. 2020 ). On the policy and institutional side, various government-led initiatives have promoted the use of improved maize varieties along with other farming inputs and introduced subsidies on fertilizers and seeds (Amaza et al. 2021 ; Wossen et al. 2023 ). According to Kuhlmann et al. ( 2018 ), the demand for improved varieties in Nigeria has been higher for grain cereals compared to root and tuber varieties that farmers can multiply via vegetative propagation. The number of initiatives boosting maize production has led to improved maize varieties, especially hybrid maize, which are more adopted than other grain cereals or legumes.

Despite the reported successful integration of maize into the Nigerian economy, evidence accounting for its impact on women and men is contrasting. Amaza et al. ( 2021 ) correlate such a growing expansion of the maize value chain with the high demand for maize-derived products and the creation of policies, such as input subsidies and the limitation of maize imports, which help boost domestic production and support smallholder producers. However, Amaza et al. ( 2021 ) argue that the implementation of those policies has not reaped the intended benefits for most maize producers, and instead, has favored the interests of elites, processing industries, and traders. Unequal benefits are reported also among smallholders, especially from a gender perspective. Maize production and commercialization are largely dominated by male smallholder farmers, while women occupy low-remunerated activities in the processing or selling of maize and/or maize-derived products (Amaza et al. 2021 ; Farnworth et al. 2020 ). Notwithstanding the great sociocultural and agroecological diversity that characterizes Nigeria (Ajadi et al. 2015 ; Emmanuel 2019 ; Lamidi 2016 ), decisions on maize production are in large part driven by men rather than by women, including in activities to which women contribute as (unpaid) laborers (Hauwa et al. 2021 , 2022 ; Opata et al. 2020 ). Importantly, women’s limited control over strategic resources, such as land, labor, and income, inevitably affects their capacities to adapt to and cope with challenges in maize farming, leading them to pursue strategies aimed at minimizing risks more than improving production. This is also the case for women’s abilities to adapt to and cope with climate-related challenges (Amaza et al. 2021 ; Ifeanyi-Obi and Henri-Ukoha 2022 ; Olaosebikan et al. 2023 ; Othniel Yila and Resurreccion 2014 ), as well as deal with other critical factors, such as conflict-associated risks (Olaosebikan et al. 2023 ).

These considerations are of critical importance for maize breeding programs in Nigeria. A study by Farnworth et al. ( 2020 ) on the benefits for maize farmers in northern and southern Nigeria indicates that even though improved maize varieties have been welcomed positively by both women and men, the norms regulating gender relations have prevented these technologies from providing an essential contribution in leveling the inequality gap that would allow women to expand their opportunities. Looking at persisting inequalities raises the question about what it takes for research-based maize breeding to go beyond reaching farmers and tackling power imbalances in the maize value chain.

Women play an important role in crop domestication and conservation of wild plant species (Howard 2003 ). Both breeding and ethnobotany literatures suggest that women’s and men’s different evaluations of plant varieties are motivated by their domains of specialization, which in turn determine the depth of their knowledge around a crop’s specific characteristics and uses (Howard 2003 ; McDougall et al. 2022 ). This raises important concerns in terms of women’s involvement in in situ data collection about crop diversity conservation as well as when using participatory breeding approaches (Chambers and Momsen 2007 ), with important implications for women to influence varietal design and uptake decisions through their knowledge. Research documenting Indigenous knowledge among women in Nigeria indicates that this encompasses several life domains, such as health, nutrition, and farming, and that the passing of such knowledge across generations has been crucial to sustainable development and environment protection (Aluko 2018 ; Olatokun and Ayanbode 2009 ). However, research on Indigenous knowledge about maize in Nigeria adopting a gender lens and/or focusing on farmers’ conservation or selection of varieties is scant. What is highlighted instead are specific farming practices such as weed and pest control, soil management, planting techniques, fertilizer application, and post-harvest practices (Agada et al. 2020 ; Iseyemi et al. 2023 ; Taiwo et al. 2021 ).

By building on the case of research-based maize breeding in Nigeria, this article offers a review of existing literature investigating gender inequalities that shape different maize trait preferences, on the one hand, and access to improved maize varieties developed by breeding programs, on the other, in an attempt to identify gaps in the design and delivery of gender-responsive breeding products that can help contribute to greater equality outcomes.

Conceptual Framework

The framework that informs this review targets the often-neglected contexts in which women and men live and for whom varieties are designed and disseminated by breeding programs. The idea that preferences and the gender dynamics that influence preferences are critical in the uptake of new technologies has informed breeding research since the late 1990s (Ashby 1997 ; PRGA 1996 ). However, the introduction of frameworks that systematize the use of gender approaches in breeding research is relatively recent (Tarjem 2022 ). A framework by Polar et al. ( 2021 ) illustrates a pathway leading from the design of gender-responsive breeding products to gender equality and conceptualizes breeding products as “outputs leading to real choice options,” which, if accessed and adopted, would increase one’s capacity to choose and transform the status quo based on one’s own needs. The framework used for this review (Cavicchioli et al. 2023 ) complements the pathway put forth by Polar et al. ( 2021 ) with an analysis of the factors that characterize the contexts in which breeding products are taken up through a gender lens.

The framework builds on the idea that the socioeconomic, political, and environmental factors that affect women’s and men’s lives and livelihoods are experienced differently depending on one’s own social position. This in turn affects the type of resources one has access to and controls, as well as their capacity to act upon certain constraints to either overcome or circumvent them. The framework (Fig.  1 ) assumes that the reasons that justify women’s and men’s preferences for specific traits as well as their access to improved varieties are not always well documented. “Trait preferences” are defined in the framework as traits that stem from a specific need for a (positive) change in the livelihoods of agrifood system actors. In this sense, a more accurate documentation would identify a clear distinction between traits that are “needed” (i.e., seen as a solution to urgent problems) versus appreciated but not perceived as compulsory. Those reasons have to be explored in the contexts in which women and men smallholders set their livelihood priorities and pursue them. Within this framework, breeding products are considered strategic means that help women and men pursue their livelihood objectives. Such preliminary assessment will allow breeding programs and other stakeholders to justify their contributions to address specific livelihood challenges and inform the design of interventions that complement breeding efforts to create greater “choice options” and gender equal outcomes. In this literature review, we search for this causality and highlight possible gaps that could help boost gender equality and women’s empowerment through maize-related interventions in Nigeria. Within this framework, gender-responsive maize varieties — namely, maize varieties that are developed from research carried out by transdisciplinary teams who ascertained which maize traits address women’s and men’s specific contextual needs — are seen as potential triggers for positive change.

Framework analyzing the contextual factors on women’s and men’s trait preferences and choice options (source: Cavicchioli et al. 2023 )

For this article, we use Grant and Booth’s ( 2009 ) definition of “literature review” in an attempt to provide a comprehensive picture of the existing evidence around improved maize varieties in Nigeria and their relevance from a gender perspective. Alongside peer-reviewed studies, this review includes gray literature. This choice to include gray literature was made to acknowledge contributions from conference papers, unpublished manuscripts, and reports that did not participate in a peer-review process.

The literature review involved computerized searches of websites, scientific databases, and repositories of international organizations, such as the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), the International Food Policy and Research Institute (IFPRI), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the Google Scholar. The documents were screened using the following criteria: (1) studies that focused on maize in Nigeria; and, (2) studies published between 2000 and 2023, to privilege a focus on recent developments in the maize value chain over a more historical perspective. This approach resulted in 67 documents. As the framework used in this review primarily focuses on maize varieties resulting from research-based breeding, we examined whether these studies had intentionally addressed elements of gender equality along with promoting or testing maize technologies in Nigeria. This second screening resulted in 44 studies, 11 of which used a gender-focused methodology and 33 that focused on varietal performance, selection, and/or adoption but lacked a gender focus. The studies using a gender-focused methodology were assessed against the four components of the framework used in this literature review, which allowed us to map the aspects covered by existing research on gender and improved maize varieties in Nigeria and identify existing gaps. The studies that did not adopt a gender-focused methodology were instead summarized and categorized based on their different areas of contribution: trait preferences, adoption factors, and yield performance. The last area was added as it was found reoccurring in more than one article focusing on improved maize varieties (for an overview of the studies included in this review, refer to Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM 1 ): Tables 1 and 2 ). To help us ground the discussion in the broader debate on gender issues in the country and regarding gender-responsive breeding, we also included studies focusing on the gender aspects of agriculture in Nigeria and sub-Saharan Africa.

In a crop value chain, farmers’ preferences for specific varieties developed by breeding programs and their abilities to access those varieties result from the combination of various contextual factors that influence women’s and men’s capacities to choose. Following the framework informing this review, the results from the literature review are presented in two sections. The first section focuses on breeding as the first sphere in which the varieties that address the needs of their prospective users, i.e., “outputs leading to real choice options” (Polar et al. 2021 in Cavicchioli et al. 2023 ), are designed. The first section reviews research accounting for gendered maize trait preferences in Nigeria and enquires into the process through which preferences were documented to address the existing needs of maize users. The second section reviews literature analyzing the factors that affect access to improved maize varieties, i.e., allowing for “accessible choice options” (ibid.) and identifies the most critical factors affecting equal access to improved maize varieties. Thus, the second section sheds light on possible holdups along the pathway moving from varietal development to dissemination, which may limit the capacities of certain groups of maize users to access more choice options and/or to fully benefit from their own choices. The discussion of the results — following these two sections — sheds light on the spheres that breeding research needs to address for breeding products to address social inequalities and help women and men pursue their livelihood objectives.

Gender in the Demand for Improved Maize Varieties in Nigeria

For this article, we have searched for literature analyzing gendered maize trait preferences in Nigeria to understand which have been documented across the country and whether those traits preferred were informed by specific contextual factors. Three studies looked specifically into the maize trait preferences of women and men in Nigeria (Ayinde et al. 2013 ; Oladimeji et al. 2022 ; Tegbaru et al. 2020 ). We excluded two studies by Ayinde et al. ( 2016 ; 2018 ) focusing on women’s preferences for on-farm-tested drought-tolerant maize (DTM) varieties as varietal preferences were not supported with a clear characterization of the same varieties nor a justification of their lowest or highest ranking. Literature that did not adopt a gender-focused methodology and looked at only varietal and/or trait preferences included performance evaluations carried out by plant breeding researchers (Bello et al. 2012 ), research connecting preferences for specific traits or varieties with adoption choices (Chete 2021 ) or with cooperative membership and other socioeconomic factors (Kehinde and Tijani 2021 ).

The three publications that explored gendered trait preferences all targeted varieties of DTM and stress-tolerant maize (STM) and synthetized data from varietal evaluations based on varieties that had been introduced by the respective programs. Ayinde et al. ( 2013 ) investigated preferences for DTM varieties among women and men farmers from Niger and Kwara States who had been invited to visit field trials and to express their preferences based on observable traits. Overall, men preferred attributes such as big cobs with full grains, big seeds, and multiple cobs, while women preferred maize varieties with yellow seeds, nutrient-fortified seeds, and big cobs with full grains.

The other two studies reported similar preferences among women and men. Oladimeji et al. ( 2022 ) documented trait preferences for DTM varieties among adult women and men farmers and young farmers involved in DTM production in the Northern States of Katsina, Jigawa, Kaduna, Bauchi, and Kano. Among the three groups of respondents, the authors found similar preferences for traits bringing together both measurable breeding traits (disease/Striga resistance, high yield, late maturity, early maturity, drought resistance, high germination, resistance to pests and diseases) and other characteristics (seed price, no or minimal input requirement, cooking quality, marketability). Late maturity received the lowest score from all the groups. Women indicated higher preference for high yields and marketability traits, men preferred the drought tolerance trait, and young farmers showed greater preference for varieties that require fewer inputs to achieve desirable outcomes and that are early maturing. It is however not clear whether the list of traits had been pre-compiled or if it was a synthesis of the most reoccurring preferences among these groups. Moreover, the role study participants play in the maize value chain is not discussed, making it difficult to understand what conditions motivate the appreciation for these specific maize traits.

In a comparative study on gendered trait preferences for DTM and STM varieties between Mali, Benin, and Nigeria, Tegbaru et al. ( 2020 ) present preferences of women and men producers from both northern and southern Guinea Savannah who had been experimenting with stress-tolerant open-pollinated and hybrid varieties alongside farmers’ preferred varieties (serving as checks), in either on-farm trials or replicates under mother-baby trial setups. The authors conducted a multi-stage varietal and trait identification procedure, starting with a ranking of the first and the second preferred variety and then narrowing down the focus on the preferred traits limited to the varieties with the highest ranking. Overall, their results show farmers’ mixed preferences for hybrid and open-pollinated varieties, although more farmers in the northern region ranked hybrid varieties first, while farmers in the southern region had greater preference for open-pollinated varieties. The authors comment on the advantages brought by both types of varieties: open-pollinated varieties can be reused more than once for planting and hybrid varieties perform better in terms of drought tolerance and producing higher yields, alongside their higher market value. However, the article does not discuss the reasons behind such interregional differences in preferences for hybrid or open-pollinated varieties. Among both women and men, big cob was the most preferred trait, followed by good appearance, big stalk, color, and “good for food,” aspects which the authors interpret as preferences for grain yield, animal feed, and consumption-related characteristics.

Gender in Exposure and Access to Improved Maize Varieties in Nigeria

Compared to research focusing on gendered maize trait preferences, research investigating adoption factors is much broader and captures a great number of variables across contexts. Most of the studies focusing on adoption factors and improved maize varieties in Nigeria do not adopt a gender lens, nor provide an in-depth assessment of social inequalities. However, they shed light on the critical role played by both material and non-material resources in influencing adoption decisions. Therefore, this section combines the literature that used and did not use a gender lens to highlight the most critical resources influencing adoption and underline the need for follow-up research looking into the existing gender-based inequalities behind access to resources and beneficial outcomes for maize producers in Nigeria.

Some of the reviewed studies lacking a gender focus justify the low percentage of women in their samples with women’s lower involvement in production-related decisions and in farm labor — an aspect varying across regions. This information is partly confirmed by Farnworth et al. ( 2020 ), who give ample discussion to power dynamics and decision-making among women and men maize producers and highlight the unequal outcomes of those decisions, and by Ayinde et al. ( 2019a ), who point out women’s lower involvement in making maize production decisions as potentially detrimental to improved varietal uptake. However, women’s lower involvement in making decisions also raises important issues around the distribution of maize-related profits among adopters. Part of the literature lacking a gender focus highlights the link between adoption of improved maize varieties and achieving various types of outcomes, including higher profits (Haruna et al. 2018 ; Nkamigbo et al. 2015 ) along with higher productivity, reduced risk of crop failure, and increased welfare of the household based on poverty and food security indicators (Wossen et al. 2017 ).

A reoccurring factor identified in relation to the uptake of improved maize varieties is land size. Specifically, access to large farmlands is seen as both correlated with higher production of improved maize varieties (Ajah and Nmadu 2012 ) and with greater adoption of improved varieties (Ayinde et al. 2010 , 2019b ; Duniya 2018 ; Fadare et al. 2014 ; Kadafur et al. 2017 ; Liverpool-Tasie and Salau 2013 ; Nathanel et al. 2015 ). Access to fertile soils is also seen as positively influencing farmers’ adoption decisions (Ayinde et al. 2019b ; Baiyegunhi et al. 2022 ). However, accessing land and, more specifically, fertile land, is not found to be equal in most parts of Nigeria according to the gender-focused literature, where it is reported that generally men have better access to and control over land compared to women (Gaya et al. 2017 ; Sofoluwe 2020 ; Ugwu 2019 ). Along with facing restrictions in accessing land, women usually have access to plots of smaller size, an aspect influencing planting decisions. Data from central Nigeria show that women allocate less land (1.8 hectares on average) to maize production compared to their male counterparts (4.1 hectares on average) as they have access to less land due to local tenure practices and less access to inputs than men (Marechera et al. 2022 ).

As pointed out by several authors, access to farming inputs, among which fertilizers and other yield-increasing techniques (e.g., irrigation, fertilizer application, weed control, and crop spacing), increases adoption of improved varieties (Baiyegunhi et al. 2022 ; Fadare et al. 2014 ; Liverpool-Tasie and Salau 2013 ; Okonji and Awolu  2021 ) and maize productivity (Ajah and Nmadu 2012 ; Dahiru 2018 ; Olasehinde et al. 2023 ). However, access to inputs, primarily seeds and fertilizers, is reported to be difficult for many due to elevated costs (Okonji and Awolu  2021 ), poor availability (Nkamigbo et al. 2015 ), or the difficulty of reaching input dealers (Abdoulaye et al. 2018 ). This is considered primarily caused by poor infrastructure making access to markets difficult and putting additional pressure on farmers in terms of time and transportation costs (Abdoulaye et al. 2011 ; Liverpool-Tasie and Salau 2013 ; Okonji and Awolu  2021 ), with important consequences on their production (Adebayo et al. 2019 ). Alongside elevated input costs, access to labor is another important factor influencing adoption decisions (Kadafur et al. 2020 ), particularly for women farmers (Oluwafemi et al. 2020 ). Again, limited access to production-related resources raises some important inequality concerns. For instance, Amaza et al. ( 2021 ) indicate that despite seeing maize as potentially profitable, women may decide not to plant maize due to the resources that one would need to mobilize to cultivate it. Alternatively, they may decide to plant maize on smaller plots alongside less input-intensive crops, such as cowpea, cassava, groundnuts, and yams (ibid.). In alignment with Oluwafemi et al. ( 2020 ), their results suggest that when maize is seen as input-intensive, women may opt to produce other crops.

A handful of studies lacking a gender focus highlight the correlation between access to input subsidies (primarily fertilizer) and farmers’ uptake of improved maize varieties (Liverpool-Tasie and Salau 2013 ; Nkamigbo et al. 2015 ). Similarly, other studies highlight the correlation between access to credit and adoption of improved maize varieties (Ayinde et al. 2019a ; Duniya 2018 ; Kehinde 2020 ; Odia 2018 ; Okonji and Awolu  2021 ; Umar et al. 2014 ). However, some studies with a gender-focused methodology suggest that certain measures aimed at increasing the uptake of improved maize varieties may prove ineffective for women. In terms of access to credit, Ugwu ( 2019 ) found that women in Nigeria access less than 10% of credit packages available for small-scale agriculture as they are designed in such a way that discourages women from applying. This is due to high interest rates, loan sizes that do not consider women’s (mostly lower and fluctuating) income, and the lengthy procedures and paperwork that do not take women’s time and labor constraints into consideration. Salami et al. ( 2020 ) also found that women maize farmers in Kwara State had lower access to credit (30%) compared to men maize farmers (43%). However, this did not negatively impact their return on investments, in which women had higher returns than men, an aspect that the authors attribute to women’s more efficient use of the farming assets at their disposal.

Besides access to credit, group membership is also frequently associated with easier access to assets and higher exposure to knowledge about agricultural technologies. Knowledge about improved varieties is reported to have a positive impact on risk-taking behaviors that increase adoption rates favoring risk-taking behaviors in adoption (Ajewole et al. 2021 ). In this regard, literature sheds light on different ways to acquire knowledge for maize farmers. For instance, Olabanji et al. ( 2021 ) show how informal channels, such as farmer-to-farmer extension, are critical in favoring the flow of information and influencing adoption decisions. Likewise, participation in different kinds of associations, such as saving groups, input groups, and crop marketing groups, is reported by others to increase farmers’ exposure to knowledge about improved varieties and to inform their adoption decisions (Akinbode and Bamire 2015 ; Duniya 2018 ; Komolafe and Adeoti 2018 ).

Various studies indicate that contact with extension personnel (Fadare et al. 2014 ; Kehinde 2020 ; Umar et al. 2014 ) and membership in associations influenced the uptake of improved maize varieties (Ajayi et al. 2014 ; Akinbode and Bamire 2015 ; Ayinde et al. 2010 ; Chete 2021 ; Nathanel et al. 2015 ; Odia 2018 ), an aspect that some argue positively affects maize output (Ajayi et al. 2014 ). Being part of a cooperative or a farmer association makes it easier to access loans or credit, receive greater support from peers, and increases exposure to technological innovation (Ajewole et al. 2021 ). Moreover, these groups are usually among the first to be targeted by extension agents to participate in promotion activities, such as field days and on-farm trials, all of which increase exposure to knowledge about improved varieties and can positively influence uptake (Ayinde et al. 2018 ; Bawa and Ani 2014 ; Bello et al. 2019 ; Nathanel et al. 2015 ; Ndaghu et al. 2018 ; Odia 2018 ; Umar et al. 2014 ). However, not every (supposedly effective) promotion strategy is also inclusive. In fact, various contributions from all over Nigeria indicate that women in rural areas had the lowest access to extension services (Salami et al. 2020 ; World Bank 2022 ). This may be because agricultural extension services seldom consider women’s time or mobility constraints, an aspect rarely reported in the literature. Gaya et al. ( 2017 ) discuss evidence from various northern States linking social norms with women’s limited exposure to knowledge about DTM varieties. They indicate that even though awareness about DTM varieties across various States was generally low, levels for women (22.2%) were lower than for men (59.2%). This could be due to women’s low participation in field days and in varietal selection activities compared to men, which might be derived from women’s lower mobility to attend meetings.

More constraints were observed in packaging agricultural and varietal information that addresses literacy issues to allow every farmer to grasp messages more easily. While access to formal education was generally seen as positively influencing adoption decisions (Audu and Aye 2014 ; Bawa and Ani 2014 ; Fadare et al. 2014 ; Kehinde 2020 ; Ndaghu et al. 2018 ; Umar et al. 2014 ), low levels of literacy widened the gap in accessing relevant and timely information among men and women (Nlerum et al. 2012 ). In combination with the limited access to other critical assets such as land, inputs, or credit, such gender gaps could result in women’s low uptake of technologies for improving maize productivity (Sofoluwe 2020 ).

The literature reviewed surfaced two important issues that research-led plant breeding should consider to be gender-responsive. First, contextual factors gain greater attention in both literatures that use and do not use a gender lens concerning access to improved varieties compared to the design of breeding products. Even though understanding trait preferences is very critical to varietal uptake, the process of varietal development requires a sounder justification of the factors that motivate the preferences for specific traits. Second, none of the studies using a gender-focused methodology investigate trait preferences and exposure/access to varieties, indicating that gender-responsive breeding for maize in Nigeria requires research that connects these two interrelated topics.

In the below sub-sections, we discuss the results of this review to identify the main gaps in recent research on maize breeding in Nigeria by focusing on the importance of contextual factors as indicated in the framework. We start by enquiring about the kind of evidence and additional efforts needed to develop new gender-responsive maize varieties that help overcome barriers to gender and social equality outcomes and then narrow the focus on the resources that are critical in influencing access to improved maize varieties and on actions to take to overcome such barriers.

Contextualizing Gendered Trait Priorities

The inclusion of women’s and men’s perspectives during varietal development is critical to the design of varieties suited to their different needs (Ayinde et al. 2013 ; Tegbaru et al. 2020 ). However, breeding gender-responsive varieties requires that the needs of the user to which the variety “responds” are known. This is possible if the preferences for specific traits are documented.

This review shows that research focusing on gendered preferences for maize traits in Nigeria is scant compared to studies investigating the factors that affect the uptake of improved maize varieties (see Marimo et al. ( 2020 ) and Mehar et al. ( 2019 ) for similar review findings on banana and fish breeding). In this respect, a few considerations can be drawn based on the framework informing our analysis.

First, none of the reviewed studies show a clear linkage between trait preferences and the contextual factors that elicited those responses. While trait rankings may be useful to inform the development of new product profiles, not knowing what needs are addressed through a specific trait makes it difficult to anticipate the likely impact of the variety once adopted. Preferences for specific traits are more frequently related to a crop’s specific use, which can vary significantly depending on women’s and men’s roles and responsibilities in a crop’s management (Marimo et al. 2020 ; Teeken et al. 2018 ). Women and men may prefer different traits even though the tasks they perform in the value chain are similar. For instance, women and men farming maize on separate plots may have different capacities to cope with the same production challenges (Christinck et al. 2017 ; Rogé et al. 2017 ). Such variation could prompt the need for varieties with a different combination of traits. Participatory approaches adopting a gender lens in plant breeding can boost women’s confidence in their farming knowledge and capacities and strengthen their decision-making powers (Galiè 2013 ). Another aspect to improve is the documentation of trait preferences of ambivalent interpretation. Some examples from the review are traits such as “requirement of other inputs,” “cooking quality,” “yellow color,” “good appearance,” and “good for food.” Again, enquiring into the reasons behind specific preferences allows breeding programs to identify women’s and men’s needs and to better grasp possible differences in their priorities (see also Cavicchioli et al. 2024 ).

Second, most of the studies reviewed assessed traits related to agroclimatic and productivity factors. Most participatory evaluations were in fact based on farmers’ experiments or on their observations of the phenotypical characteristics of the varieties, while there is no mention of experiments or trials conducted at the post-harvest stage. This aspect risks omitting important preferences of certain groups regarding the crop’s processing, consumption, or multiple uses. For instance, research on root, tuber, and bananas in Africa (Bouniol et al. 2023 ) shows how varieties addressing drudgery problems attract the interest of potential crop users as they address a critical need that processors experience while using the crop. Thiele et al. ( 2021 ) stress the importance of consumer preferences as potentially driving factors in the uptake of varieties. Nonetheless, some participants in the reviewed studies mentioned traits related to other uses beyond production, such as consumption, although not in a very detailed way, as their exposure to the variety’s performance post-harvest was yet to happen.

Third, decisions on varietal uptake are not always pursued individually but can result from a discussion with other members of the same household and be influenced by interactions with neighbors or other community members. Even though it is not clear whether the data reported in the review were derived from primary decision-makers in the uptake of maize varieties, addressing gendered trait preferences in a context where such decisions are strongly contingent on intrahousehold gender dynamics highlights a potential pitfall in the objective to reach the intended target, as maize users may not necessarily correspond with those making decisions on varietal uptake (Ayinde et al. 2019a ; Cavicchioli et al. 2024 ; Voss et al. 2021 ).

Fourth, it should be highlighted that investments that prioritize gender-responsive objectives in breeding programs clearly incur additional costs compared to programs that would otherwise ignore or make assumptions about the varietal or trait preferences of women and men from different market segments. However, existing impact pathways would suggest that the potential benefits that outweigh these costs of investing in varietal development could be substantial, including increased adoption rates, increased food security, reduced poverty, and improved gender and social equality outcomes (Polar et al. 2022 ). Impact studies are needed to investigate the costs versus the benefits, especially for publicly funded programs that constantly grapple with how best to allocate scarce resources to new or diverse areas of research to achieve greater impacts (Pemsl et al. 2022 ).

Resources Enabling Greater Access to Improved Maize Varieties

The reviewed literature suggests that for certain social groups, and smallholder women in particular, accessing and benefitting from improved maize varieties is still challenging, making it difficult to assess the extent and the kind of contribution of research-based maize breeding to gender equality and women’s empowerment in Nigeria. However, the reviewed studies also shed light on some material and immaterial resources that are critical in boosting access to improved maize varieties and suggest that focusing on those resources and their linkages could tackle social inequalities and trigger benefits for maize users. In line with the framework used for this article, this discussion builds on evidence from the reviewed studies to shed light on “resources” — “strategic means through which women and men agrifood-systems (AFS) actors deal with these factors” (Cavicchioli et al. 2023 ) — as key to reframing the analysis of gender inequalities in access to improved maize varieties within the empowerment discourse (Kabeer 1999 ). Our contextual analysis sheds light on four main resources: land, income, social networks, and knowledge.

Several studies point at access to farming-related assets, such as land and inputs, as paramount in determining the demand as well as access to improved maize varieties. When it comes to production decisions, being granted access to land often entails one’s participation in decisions on planting, while limited access to land can cause lower involvement and influence decisions on which varieties to plant. However, the reviewed literature does not provide an accurate characterization of the land tenure systems in the regions concerned. What is being highlighted instead is that women can both work as unpaid laborers on their husband’s fields and have access to small portions of land. However, one or the other scenario may open up a very different type of involvement in decisions on crop production and use (Cavicchioli et al. 2024 ; Voss et al. 2023 ): while women’s inputs in decisions on their husband’s fields are not clear, little is known about women’s autonomy in decisions on the plots of which they are managers. Understanding local tenure arrangements can help recognize how limited access to land and farming inputs may result in opting for strategies that circumvent challenges, rather than tackling them (Amaza et al. 2021 ; Cavicchioli 2023 ; Ifeanyi-Obi and Henri-Ukoha 2022 ; Olaosebikan et al. 2023 ; Othniel Yila and Resurreccion 2014 ) and suggest how an overlap of production constraints (i.e., access to smaller plots and limited capacities to reinvest in inputs) can significantly reduce women’s options in terms of farming, with inevitable repercussions on planting decisions.

On the contrary, access to plots under more secure tenure arrangements can open up opportunities to increase productivity and have a likely positive effect in terms of uptake of improved maize varieties. However, findings by Ugwu ( 2019 ) and Salami et al. ( 2020 ) indicate how existing credit packages are not designed to consider women’s earning ranges and other possible logistical constraints that they may face, an aspect emphasizing the existing capital constraints in accessing improved varieties for women (Ayinde et al. 2019a ). While a more accurate investigation of local land tenure arrangements can help tackle some constraints that women keep facing with their involvement in a combination of low-remunerated activities and unpaid labor (Farnworth et al. 2020 ; Amaza et al. 2021 ), a more in-depth understanding of how credit is being used and production decisions are made on women’s and men’s farms can inform the design of more inclusive and gender-responsive credit programs.

A handful of studies highlight the importance played by social networks, and more specifically group membership, in relation to access to credit and information about improved maize varieties in Nigeria. Social ties strengthen farmers’ capacities to cope with livelihood challenges and are critical in overcoming the limits faced by certain groups of farmers, primarily women, in accessing credit-packages or extensions. Some studies report membership in farmer associations as potentially strategic in favoring access to a number of services that enhance exposure to knowledge about improved maize varieties and support production through smoother access to inputs. Given the critical role played by social ties in both favoring knowledge flows and providing material support, research could look at how information about improved maize varieties reaches individuals not belonging to any farmer association and design interventions accordingly. However, much of the reviewed literature approaches knowledge about varieties as information packages received from extension agents or plant breeding researchers. This aspect goes hand in hand with the reported association between farmers’ formal education and higher adoption rates. Olabanji et al. ( 2021 ) represent an exception in that they focus on farmer-to-farmer extension, that is, approaches that highlight the importance of farmers’ knowledge over information received through formal channels. Literature on maize in Nigeria should also explore how Indigenous knowledge about maize influences uptake decisions.

Conclusions

The framework adopted for this review has helped us shed light on the different components that maintain inequalities in access to, and demand for, improved maize varieties. This review shows that many barriers enabling equal access to seed, and equal capacity to choose among varieties suiting different needs, are yet to be overcome. While maize production and its uses in Nigeria have increased over the past decades, an important part of the Nigerian population has very limited input into making decisions around maize varieties and their uses. This raises important questions in terms of power: while part of this population may still benefit from maize varieties through consumption or other uses, whose uptake decisions are driving the demand for improved maize varieties in Nigeria and with what implications?

As this review suggests, coping with constraints in accessing improved varieties and in maize production depends on the capacity to access and make strategic use of resources, whose availability is often shaped by gendered social norms. However, addressing gender inequalities among maize users results from a multitude of contextual factors that only in part overlap with breeding priorities. To understand what specific needs should inform the design of improved maize varieties and how to enable women’s and men’s equal participation in decisions on maize uses, research-based breeding efforts should be complemented by other interventions that address the contextual constraints. This can be achieved by partnering with other actors in the broader agrifood systems, such as national research institutions, ministries, civil society organizations, and associations of producers and/or processors, to name a few.

This review shows that the documentation of gendered maize trait preferences in the literature in Nigeria is scant and that, overall, existing research focuses mostly on either trait preferences or access to maize varieties, while only a few studies adopt a gender-focused methodology. Moreover, research focusing on access to improved maize varieties indicates that women are usually not targeted to receive information and technical skills to assess the usefulness of varieties and that they are among those benefitting less from credit programs. Literature attributes this to inequalities in intrahousehold decision-making, literacy gaps, and a mostly male-biased extension limiting women’s exposure to knowledge about improved varieties.

Upon these conclusions, we propose some recommendations that build on the gaps highlighted in this review and target the two main dimensions addressed in this paper: the design of gender-responsive breeding products and their accessibility.

First, research on improved maize varieties in Nigeria should avoid focusing on only one component of the entire pipeline, and establish instead a clearer connection between the design of gender-responsive maize varieties with the development of more inclusive approaches enabling varietal access at the dissemination stage.

Second, plant breeding researchers should adopt approaches that integrate Indigenous knowledge within the design of new breeding products, such as through participatory plant breeding approaches, and seek support in addressing the institutional barriers that reportedly justify their limited implementation. In this vein, a closer collaboration between plant breeding researchers and ethnobotanists will not only ensure that Indigenous knowledge informs the design of new varieties but will also foster biodiversity conservation. Moreover, more transdisciplinary collaboration between plant breeding researchers and social scientists is required to understand the factors that determine the need for certain traits and whether any challenges may require complementary interventions along with the dissemination of improved maize varieties. In this vein, the well-known breeder dilemma of carefully assessing traits that will result in increased genetic gain could be addressed by complementing the dissemination of a new maize variety with, e.g., a labor-saving technology to address drudgery problems, such as a shelling and grinding machine.

Third, ethnobotanists would benefit from expanding research on the gender politics that lie behind Indigenous knowledge and sharpen their analysis of how women’s and men’s knowledge influence planting decisions during on-farm experimentations and how this affects their respective capacities to benefit from those decisions. A collaboration between social scientists, breeding programs, and extension services could help develop more targeted strategies that take women’s daily schedules and other constraints, such as limited time and mobility, into account. Moreover, collaborating with civil society organizations that advocate for addressing the gender gap in access to (or completing) formal education would favor women’s inclusion during informational campaigns promoting new technologies and allow them to access greater economic opportunities and livelihood improvements.

Data Availability

The papers used in this review are listed in the reference section. More information about the review methodology can be found in the Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM 1 ).

Code Availability

Abdoulaye, T., T. A. Wossen, and B. Awotide. 2018. Impacts of improved maize varieties in Nigeria: Ex-post assessment of productivity and welfare outcomes. Food Security 10: 369-379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-0772-9

Article   Google Scholar  

Abdoulaye, T., A. S. Bamire, A. N. Wiredu, M. N. Baco, and M. Fofana. 2011. Characterization of maize producing communities in Benin, Ghana, Mali, and Nigeria: West Africa Regional Synthesis Report. Ibadan: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/88185

Adebayo, C. O., U. S. Mohammed, and M. A. Durban. 2019. Effects of Sasakawa global-2000 improved maize production technology on farmers’ productivity in Kaduna State, Nigeria. FUDMA Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology 5(1): 197–202. https://doi.org/10.59331/jasd.v3i2.124

Agada, M.O., V. Akwu Otene, and S. O. Adikwu. 2020. Assessment of maize farmers’ awareness and effectiveness of Indigenous production and preservation practices in Ugbokolo, Benue State, Nigeria. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews 8(2): 307–13. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2020.8.2.0438

Ajadi, A. A., O. I. Oladele, K. Ikegami, and T. Tsuruta. 2015. Rural women’s farmers access to productive resources: The moderating effect of culture among Nupe and Yoruba in Nigeria. Agriculture & Food Security 4(1): 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-015-0048-y

Ajah, J., and J. N. Nmadu. 2012. Socio-economic factors influencing the output of small-scale maize farmers in Abuja, Nigeria. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 33(2): 333–341. https://www.thaiscience.info/journals/Article/TKJS/10897907.pdf

Ajayi, O. J., E. S. Yisa, Y. Muhammed, M. U. Austin, S. Jibrin, and J. H. Tsado. 2014. Effect of extension contact on maize production in Kachia Local Government Area of Kaduna state, Nigeria. Asian Journal of Science and Technology 5(7): 405–411. https://catalog.ihsn.org/citations/65617

Ajewole, O. O., O. E. Ayinde, A. Tahirou, M. J. Miranda, and I. J. Olaoye. 2021. Adoption of stress tolerant maize varieties in Nigeria: Does gender matter? [2021 Annual Meeting, August 1–3, Austin, Texas]. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.312915

Akinbode, W. O., and A. S. Bamire. 2015. Determinants of adoption of improved maize varieties in Osun State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development 7(3): 65–72. https://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2014.0605

Almekinders, C. J.M., and J. Hardon (eds.). 2006. Bringing farmers back into breeding. Experiences with participatory plant breeding and challenges for institutionalisation. Vol. 5. Agromisa Special. Wageningen: Agromisa. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/51557

Aluko, Y. A. 2018. Women’s use of Indigenous knowledge for environmental security and sustainable development in southwest Nigeria. The International Indigenous Policy Journal 9(3). https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2018.9.3.2

Amaza, P., S. Mailumo, and A. Silong. 2021. The political economy of the maize value chain in Nigeria. APRA Working Paper 60, Brighton: Future Agricultures Consortium. https://www.future-agricultures.org/publications/apra-working-paper-60-the-political-economy-of-the-maize-value-chain-in-nigeria/

Ashby, J. 1997. What do we mean by participatory research in agriculture? In: International seminar on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development: New frontiers in participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. Proceedings. CGIAR Systemwide program on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development and institutional innovation, 14–22. Cali: International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/55892

Audu, V. I., and G. C. Aye. 2014. The effects of improved maize technology on household welfare in Buruku, Benue State, Nigeria. Cogent Economics & Finance 2(1): 960592. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2014.960592

Ayinde, O., M. Adewumi, G. Olatunji, and O. A. Babalola. 2010. Determinants of adoption of downy mildew resistant maize by small-scale farmers in Kwara State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research 10(1): 32–35. https://globaljournals.org/GJSFR_Volume10/gsfr_vol10_issue1_ver1_paper12.pdf

Ayinde, O. E., T. Abdoulaye, G. Olaoye, and J. Akangbe. 2013. Gender and innovation in agriculture: A case study of farmers varietal preference of drought tolerant maize in southern Guinea Savannah region of Nigeria. Albanian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 12(4): 617–625. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/76667

Ayinde, O. E., T. Abdoulaye, F. O. Takim, A. O. Oloyede, and F. A. Bankole. 2016. Economic analysis of onfarm trial of drought tolerant maize in Kwara State Nigeria: A gender approach. Trakia Journal of Sciences 14(3): 287–293. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/63c15dc0-0b3d-4d29-97cb-1a01cffd4230/content

Ayinde, O. E., T. Abdoulaye, G. A. Olaoye, and A. O. Oloyede. 2018. Evaluation of women’s on-farm trial of drought tolerant maize in southern Guinea Savannah agro-ecological zone of Nigeria. In: Building a resilient and sustainable agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa, eds. A. Shimeles, A. Verdier-Chouchane, and A. Boly, 81–95. Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/chapter/ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76222-7_5

Ayinde, O. E., T. Abdoulaye, M. Muchie, and O. O. Ajewole. 2019a. Analysis of agricultural innovation and decision making among maize farming household in Nigeria: A gender approach. In: Innovation, regional integration, and development in Africa: Rethinking theories, institutions, and policies, eds. S. O. Oloruntoba and M. Muchie, 267–281. Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/chapter/ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92180-8_18

Ayinde, O. E., O. C. Daramola, A. H. Adenuga, and T. Abdoulaye. 2019b. Estimating farmers’ willingness to pay for stress tolerant maize (STM) in Nigeria: A Heckman model approach. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 27(2): 1159–1174. http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/pjtas/browse/regular-issue?article=JSSH-2541-2017

Baiyegunhi, L. J. S., F. Akinbosoye, and L. O. Bello. 2022. Welfare impact of improved maize varieties adoption and crop diversification practices among smallholder maize farmers in Ogun State, Nigeria. Heliyon 8(5): e09338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09338

Bawa, D. B., and A. O. Ani. 2014. Analysis of adoption of improved maize production technology among farmers in Southern Borno, Nigeria. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences 4(25): 137–141. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234674246.pdf

Bello, B., S. Y. Abdulmaliq, I. Sunday, J. F. O. Mahamood, M. Azeez, and A. Michael. 2012. Evaluation of early and late/intermediate maize varieties for grain yield potential and adaptation to a Southern Guinea Savanna agro-ecology of Nigeria. International Journal of Plant Research 2(2): 14–21. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.plant.20120202.03

Bello, M., T. Abdoulaye, A. Abdulai, T. Wossen, and A. Menkir. 2019. Modeling farmers’ willingness to pay for stress tolerance in maize in northern Nigeria: How does the states of gains and losses matter?. 6th African Conference of Agricultural Economists (September 23–26, 2019, Abuja, Nigeria). African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE). https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.295797

Bouniol, A., H. Ceballos, A. Bello, B. Teeken, D. O. Olaosebikan, D. Owoade, A. Afolabi, A. Fotso Kuate, T. Madu, B. Okoye, M. Ofoeze, S. Nwafor, N. Onyemauwa, L. Adinsi, L. Forsythe, and, D. Dufour. 2023. Varietal impact on women’s labour, workload and related drudgery in processing root, tuber and banana crops: Focus on cassava in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 104(8): 4498-4513. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.12936

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brush, S. B. 1993. Indigenous knowledge of biological resources and intellectual property rights: The role of anthropology. American Anthropologist 95(3): 653–671. https://www.jstor.org/stable/679655

Cavicchioli, M. 2023. Staying grounded: Women, land, and uncertainty in Burkina Faso. Berlin: Regiospectra Verlag.

Google Scholar  

Cavicchioli, M., S. M. Cole, B. Teeken, J. Ashby, V. Polar, B. Kramer, M. Yami, and T. Abdoulaye. 2023. Contextualizing women’s and men’s trait preferences and choice options in the uptake of breeding products: A framework. Ibadan: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/135068

Cavicchioli, M., B. Kramer, and C. Trachtman. 2024. At the ground level. Accounting for farmers’ perspectives and inclusion issues in seed promotion. Market Intelligence Brief Series 8. Montpellier: CGIAR. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/141933

Ceccarelli, S., and S. Grando. 2019. Participatory plant breeding: Who did it, who does it and where?. Experimental Agriculture 56(1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479719000127

Chambers, K. J., and J. H. Momsen. 2007. From the kitchen and the field: gender and maize diversity in the Bajío region of Mexico. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 28(1): 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9493.2006.00275.x

Chavas, J. P., and C. Nauges. 2020. Uncertainty, learning, and technology adoption in agriculture. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1): 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13003

Chete, O. B. 2021. Factors influencing adoption of improved maize seed varieties among smallholder farmers in Kaduna State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development 13(2): 107–114. https://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2019.1032

Christinck, A., E. Weltzien, and V. Hoffmann (eds). 2005. Setting breeding objectives and developing seed systems with farmers: A handbook for practical use in participatory plant breeding projects. Scientific Books. Weikersheim: Margraf Publishers.

Christinck, A., E. Weltzien, F. Rattunde, and, J. Ashby. 2017. Gender differentiation of farmer preferences for varietal traits in crop improvement: Evidence and issues. Working Paper No. 2, CGIAR Gender and Agriculture Research Network. CGIAR System Management Office and International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). https://hdl.handle.net/10947/4660

Dahiru, T. M. 2018. Introduction of sasakawa technology on irrigated maize (Zea mays L) production in Kurmi Mayolope, Hong. of Adamawa State Nigeria. Journal of Experimental Agriculture International 24(2): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.9734/JEAI/2018/42039

Duniya, K. 2018. Drivers of adoption intensity of certified maize seeds in northern Guinea Savannah of Nigeria: A triple hurdle model approach. 30 th International Conference of Agricultural Economists (July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver). International Association of Agricultural Economists. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.277539

Emerton, L., K. A. Snyder, and, J. E. Cordingley. 2015. Evaluating Land Management Options (ELMO): A participatory tool for assessing farmers’ sustainable land management decision preferences and trade-offs. Nairobi: International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/68989

Emmanuel, A. P. 2019. Women participation in post-harvest processing of maize using Indigenous technologies: A perspective of Kogi State of Nigeria. In: Maize—Production and Use, ed. A. Hossain. London, United Kingdom: IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88517

Fadare, O. A., D. Akerele, and, B. Toritseju. 2014. Factors Influencing Adoption Decisions of Maize Farmers in Nigeria. International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC) 2(3): 45–54. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.186266

Fadda, C., D. K. Mengistu, Y. G. Kidane, M. Dell’Acqua, M. E. Pè, and J. Van Etten. 2020. Integrating conventional and participatory crop improvement for smallholder agriculture using the seeds for needs approach: A review. Frontiers in Plant Science 11: 559515. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.559515

Farnworth, C. R., L. Badstue, G. J. Williams, A. Tegbaru, and, H. I. M. Gaya. 2020. Unequal partners: Associations between power, agency and benefits among women and men maize farmers in Nigeria. Gender, Technology and Development 24(3): 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2020.1794607

Galiè, A. 2013. Empowering women farmers: The case of participatory plant breeding in ten Syrian households. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 34(1): 58–92. https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.34.1.0058

Gaya, H., A. Tegbaru, A. Bamire, T. Abdoulaye, and, A. Kehinde. 2017. Gender differentials and adoption of drought tolerant maize varieties among farmers in northern Nigeria. European Journal of Business and Management 9(5): 81–87. https://web.archive.org/web/20200318165950/https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM/article/download/35330/36352

Gesesse, C. A., B. Nigir, K. de Sousa, L. Gianfranceschi, G. R. Gallo, J. Poland, Y. G. Kidane, et al. 2022. Genomics-driven breeding for local adaptation of durum wheat is enhanced by farmers’ traditional knowledge. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120(14): e2205774119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2205774119

Glover, D. 2018. Farming as a performance: A conceptual and methodological contribution to the ecology of practices. Journal of Political Ecology 25(1): 686-702. https://doi.org/10.2458/v25i1.22390

Glover, D., J. Sumberg, and J. A. Andersson. 2016. The adoption problem; or why we still understand so little about technological change in African agriculture. Outlook on Agriculture 45(1): 3–6. https://doi.org/10.5367/oa.2016.0235

Grant, M. J., and A. Booth. 2009. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal 26(2): 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

Haruna, V., S. M. Pakbong, I. M. Haruna, T. A. Adisa, and, I. U. Muhammad. 2018. Profitability of maize production using improved seed among small-scale farmers in Plateau State, Nigeria. International Journal of Science and Applied Research 3(1): 12–19. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354446048_Profitability_of_Maize_Production_Using_Improved_Seed_among_Small-Scale_Farmers_in_Plateau_State_Nigeria_PROFITABILITY_OF_MAIZE_PRODUCTION_USING_IMPROVED_SEED_AMONG_SMALL-SCALE_FARMERS_IN_PLATEAU_STAT

Hauwa, B., E. S. Salau, and H. S. Umar. 2021. Gender analysis on decision-making roles among maize farming households in agricultural zone C of Kogi State, Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental & Agriculture Research 7(10): 10-20. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5624419

Hauwa, B., H. S. Umar, E. S. Salau, I. Shehu, and S. Bako. 2022. Gender analysis of labor contribution among maize farming household in agricultural zone C of Kogi State, Nigeria. European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 4(2): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2022.4.2.444

Howard, P. 2003. Women and the plant world: An exploration. In: Women and plants: Gender relations in biodiversity management and conservation, ed. P. Howard, 1–48. London: Zed Books Ltd.

Ifeanyi-Obi, C. C., and A. Henri-Ukoha. 2022. Strengthening climate change adaptive capacity of rural women crop farmers through reduced social exclusion in Nigeria. European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 4(1): 54–60. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2022.4.1.436

Iseyemi, O., J. Okunlola, and K. Owolabi. 2023. Effects of Indigenous farming practices on maize production in Ondo State, Nigeria. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology 41(1): 73–85. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaees/2023/v41i11837

Jarvis, D. I., A. H. D. Brown, P. H. Cuong, L. Collado-Panduro, L. Latournerie-Moreno, S. Gyawali, T. Tanto, et al. 2008. A global perspective of the richness and evenness of traditional crop-variety diversity maintained by farming communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(14): 5326–5331. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800607105

Kabeer, N. 1999. Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Development and Change 30(3): 435–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00125

Kadafur, I. M., Y. L. Idrisa, and A. Shehu. 2020. Adoption of improved maize varieties in northern Guinea Savannah of Borno State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension 24(1): 34-41. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v24i1.4

Kadafur, M., Y. Idrisa, A. Kamara, and, O. Oyinbo. 2017. Understanding the drivers of adoption intensity of improved maize varieties in northern Guinea Savannah of Borno State, Nigeria. Albanian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 16(2): 59–66. https://www.proquest.com/openview/d79c9bc99ef264ca467fdd40f2debf9a/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1316365

Kamara, A. Y., N. Kamai, L. O. Omoigui, A. Togola, and J. E. Onyibe. 2020. Guide to maize production in northern Nigeria. Ibadan: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). https://www.iita.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Guide-to-Maize-Production-in-Northern-Nigeria.pdf

Kehinde, A. D., and A. A. Tijani. 2021. Effect of cooperatives membership on farmers’ preference for improved maize variety attributes in Oyo State, Nigeria. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Agricultura 20(1): 3–15. https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2216463

Kehinde, A. D. 2020. Does credit access improve adoption intensity of improved maize seed varieties? Cercetări Agronomice În Moldova LIII(4): 434–444. https://doi.org/10.46909/cerce-2020-037

Komolafe, J. O., and A. I. Adeoti. 2018. Influence of social capital on the use of improved maize seed among farmers in southwestern Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 8(3): 129–138. http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.ijaf.20180803.03.html

Kuhlmann, K., Y. Zhou, A. N. Naggayi, and H, Lui. 2018. Seed policy harmonization in ECOWAS: The case of Nigeria. Working paper. New Markets Lab for the Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture (SFSA). https://www.syngentafoundation.org/sites/g/files/kgtney976/files/document/sites/g/files/zhg576/f/seed_policy_harmonization_in_ecowas_the_case_of_nigeria_2019.pdf

Lamichhane, S., and S. Thapa. 2022. Advances from Conventional to Modern Plant Breeding Methodologies. Plant Breeding and Biotechnology 10(1): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.9787/PBB.2022.10.1.1

Lamidi, E. 2016. Multilevel analysis of state variations in women’s participation in household decision-making in Nigeria. Journal of International Women’s Studies 17(1): 186–201. https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol17/iss1/13/

Liverpool-Tasie, L. S., and S. Salau. 2013. Spillover effects of targeted subsidies: An assessment of fertilizer and improved seed use in Nigeria. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01260. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute. https://ebrary.ifpri.org/digital/collection/p15738coll2/id/127481

Marechera, G., M. Sedi, and M. A. Adebayo. 2022. Assessment of existing gaps among genders in maize value-chain in northern Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture and Technology 2(1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.33425/2770-2928.1010

Marimo, P., C. Caron, I. Van den Bergh, R. Crichton, E. Weltzien, R. Ortiz, and R. Tumuhimbise. 2020. Gender and trait preferences for banana cultivation and use in Sub-Saharan Africa: A literature review. Economic Botany 74 (2): 226–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-020-09496-y

McDougall, C., J. Kariuki, B. M. Lenjiso, P. Marimo, M. Mehar, S. Murphy, B. Teeken, et al. 2022. Understanding gendered trait preferences: Implications for client-responsive breeding programs. PLOS Sustainability and Transformation 1(8): e0000025. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pstr.0000025

Mehar, M., W. Mekkawy, C. McDougall, and J. A. H. Benzie. 2019. Fish trait preferences: A review of existing knowledge and implications for breeding programmes. Reviews in Aquaculture 12(3): 1273–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12382

Miracle, M. P. 1965. The Introduction and Spread of Maize in Africa. The Journal of African History 6(1): 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021853700005326

Nathanel, N. N., Z. Abdulsalam, S. A. Rahman, and, T. Abdoulaye. 2015. Socio-economic factors affecting adoption of early maturing maize varieties by small scale farmers in Safana Local Government Area of Katsina State, Nigeria. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 7(8): 273–281. https://academicjournals.org/journal/JDAE/article-abstract/D74A6D154349

Ndaghu, A. A., M. Mukthar, and A. Michael. 2018. Adoption of improved farm practices among maize (Zea mays L) farmers in Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development 18(1): 261–266. https://managementjournal.usamv.ro/pdf/vol.18_1/Art35.pdf

Nkamigbo, D., O. Atiri, B. Gbughemobi, and N. Obiekwe. 2015. Comparative analysis of costs and returns in hybrid and non hybrid maize production in Osun State, Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences 7(2): 56–70. https://www.cenresinjournals.com/category/2015-journals/journal-of-agriculture-and-veterinary-sciences-volume-7-number-2-2015/

Nlerum, F. E., C. O. Albert, and, E. S. Prince-Kaye. 2012. Access of rural women to agricultural information in the Eleme area of Rivers State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural & Food Information 13(2): 192–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496505.2012.667711

Odia, F. N. 2018. Adoption of Oba 98 maize production technologies by farmers in Delta State, Nigeria [Doctoral dissertation, University of Nigeria, Nsukka].

Okonji, C. J., and O. T. Awolu. 2021. Factors influencing adoption of improved technology among maize farmers in Ekiti State Nigeria. Agrosearch 20(2): 102–112. https://doi.org/10.4314/agrosh.v20i2.8

Olabanji, O. P., I. Ogunlade, and K. F. Omotesho. 2021. Determinants of farmers’ knowledge exchange on drought-tolerant maize technology in Kwara State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Research, Development, Extension, and Technology 3(1): 44–54. https://jardet.usm.edu.ph/index.php/jardet/article/download/51/46/457

Oladimeji, Y. U., A. Tahirou, H. A. Usman, H. Egwuma, K. D. Kadjo, Y. O. Anyebe, M. Oyekunle, S. Zakariyau, and H. Mani. 2022. Differentials in adoption of maize seed varieties and impact on farmers’ livelihood in northern Nigeria. Nigeria Agricultural Journal 53(3): 22–31. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/naj/article/view/243300

Olaosebikan, O., A. Bello, O. Utoblo, B. Okoye, N. Olutegbe, E. Garner, B. Teeken, E. Bryan, L. Forsythe, S. Cole, P. Kulakow, C. Egesi, H. Tufan, and T. Madu. 2023. Stressors and resilience within the cassava value chain in Nigeria: Preferred cassava variety traits and response strategies of men and women to inform breeding. Sustainability 15(10): 7837. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107837

Olasehinde, T. S., F. Qiao, and S. Mao. 2023. Impact of improved maize varieties on production efficiency in Nigeria: Separating technology from managerial gaps. Agriculture 13(3): 661. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13030611

Olatokun, W., and O. Ayanbode. 2009. Use of Indigenous knowledge by women in a Nigerian rural community. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 8(2): 287–95. https://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/3968

Oluwafemi, O. A., E. A. Opeyemi, A. Tahirou, and, J. O. Ibukun. 2020. Understanding gender risk behaviour: Panacea to adoption of innovations and technology for mitigating the effect of climate variability. African Journal of Rural Development 5(4): 235–246. http://repository.ruforum.org/documents/understanding-gender-risk-behaviour-panacea-adoption-innovations-and-technology-mitigating

Opata, P. I., A. B. Ezeibe, and C. O. Ume. 2020. Impact of women’s share of income on household expenditure in southeast Nigeria. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 15(1): 51–64. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.307616

Othniel Yila, J., and P. Resurreccion, B. 2014. Gender perspectives on agricultural adaptation to climate change in drought-prone Nguru Local Government Area in the semiarid zone of northeastern Nigeria. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management 6(3): 250–271. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-12-2012-0068

Pemsl, D.E., C. Staver, G. Hareau, A.D. Alene, T. Abdoulaye, U. Kleinwechter, R. Labarta, and G. Thiele. 2022. Prioritizing international agricultural research investments: Lessons from a global multi-crop assessment. Research Policy 51(4): 104473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104473

Polar, V., R. R. Mohan, C. McDougall, B. Teeken, A. A. Mulema, P. Marimo, and J. O. Yila. 2021. Examining choice to advance gender equality in breeding research. In: Advancing gender equality through agricultural and environmental research, eds. R. Pyburn and A. van Eerdewijk, 77–111. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://doi.org/10.2499/9780896293915_02

Polar, V., B. Teeken, J. Mwende, P. Marimo, H.A. Tufan, J.A. Ashby, S. Cole, S. Mayanja, J.J. Okello, P. Kulakow, and G. Thiele. 2022. Building demand-led and gender-responsive breeding programs. In: Root, tuber and banana food system innovations: Value creation for inclusive outcomes, eds. G. Thiele, M. Friedmann, H. Campos, V. Polar, and J. W. Bentley, 483–509. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92022-7

PRGA (Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation). 1996. Systemwide Initiative on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation: Proposal. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/71369

Rogé, P., T. Diarisso, F. Diallo, Y. Boiré, D. Goïta, B. Peter, M. Macalou, E. Weltzien, and S. Snapp. 2017. Perennial grain crops in the West Soudanian Savanna of Mali: Perspectives from agroecology and gendered spaces. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 15(5): 555-574. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2017.1372850

Salami, M., B. O. Fateru, K. K. Osasona, and N. D. Abdulsalam. 2020. Gender analysis of maize production in Asa Local Government Area of Kwara State, Nigeria. Agricultura 113(1–2): 125–130. https://doi.org/10.15835/agrisp.v113i1-2.13698

Sofoluwe, N. A. 2020. Institutional factors and gender role in rural technology adoption in Nigeria. NIU Journal of Social Sciences 6(1): 311–318. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Institutional-Factors-and-Gender-Role-in-Rural-in-Sofoluwe/d97ce439da3cdd105d685e64f11012214051480b

Taiwo, S., E. F. Akinyele, and S. O. Okeleye. 2021. Traditional occupational practices and survival of maize farming in rural area in Ogun State. African Scholar Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Tech 22(1): 40–81. https://www.africanscholarpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/AJAAT_Vol22_No1_September2021-4.pdf

Tarjem, I. A. 2022. Tools in the making: The co-construction of gender, crops, and crop breeding in African agriculture. Gender, Technology and Development 27(1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2022.2097621

Teeken, B., O. Olaosebikan, J. Haleegoah, E. Oladejo, T. Madu, B. Abolore, E. Parkes, et al. 2018. Cassava trait preferences of men and women farmers in Nigeria: Implications for breeding. Economic Botany 72: 263-277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-018-9421-7

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Tegbaru, A., A. Menkir, M. Nasser Baco, L. Idrisou, D. Sissoko, A. O. Eyitayo, T. Abate, and A. Tahirou. 2020. Addressing gendered varietal and trait preferences in West African maize. World Development Perspectives 20: 100268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2020.100268

Thiele, G., D. Dufour, P. Vernier, R. O. M. Mwanga, M. L. Parker, E. Schulte Geldermann, B. Teeken, T. Wossen, E. Gotor, E. Kikulwe, H. Tufan, S. Sinelle, A. M. Kouakou, M. Friedmann, V. Polar, and C. Hershey. 2021. A review of varietal change in roots, tubers and bananas: Consumer preferences and other drivers of adoption and implications for breeding. International Journal of Food Science & Technology 56: 1076-1092. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14684

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ugwu, P. 2019. Women in agriculture: Challenges facing women in African farming. Project report of African women in agriculture. Catholic University of the Sacred Heart. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paula-Ugwu/publication/332053861_WOMEN_IN_AGRICULTURE_CHALLENGES_FACING_WOMEN_IN_AFRICAN_FARMING/links/5dc934d1299bf1a47b2d2596/WOMEN-IN-AGRICULTURE-CHALLENGES-FACING-WOMEN-IN-AFRICAN-FARMING.pdf

Umar, S., M. W. Musa, and L. Kamsang. 2014. Determinants of adoption of improved maize varieties among resource-poor households in Kano and Katsina States, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension 18(2): 196–205. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v18i2.20

Van Etten, J., E. Beza, L. Calderer, K. Van Duijvendijk, C. Fadda, B. Fantahun, Y. G. Kidane, et al. 2019. First experiences with a novel farmer citizen science approach: Crowdsourcing participatory variety selection through on-farm triadic comparisons of technologies (TRICOT). Experimental Agriculture 55(S1): 275–96. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479716000739

Voss, R. C., J. Donovan, P. Rutsaert, and J. E. Cairns. 2021. Gender inclusivity through maize breeding in Africa: A review of the issues and options for future engagement. Outlook on Agriculture 50(4): 392-405. https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270211058208

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Voss, R. C., Z. M. Gitonga, J. Donovan, M. Garcia-Medina, and P. Muindi. 2023. Can I speak to the manager? The gender dynamics of decision-making in Kenyan maize plots. Agriculture and Human Values 41: 205-224 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-023-10484-w

Walker, T.S. and J. Alwang, 2015. Crop improvement, adoption, and impact of improved varieties in food crops in sub-Saharan Africa. Oxfordshire, UK: CABI.

Book   Google Scholar  

World Bank. 2022. Closing gaps, increasing opportunities: A diagnostic on women’s economic empowerment in Nigeria. Washington DC: World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/37225

Wossen, T., T. Abdoulaye, A. Alene, S. Feleke, A. Menkir, and V. Manyong. 2017. Measuring the impacts of adaptation strategies to drought stress: The case of drought tolerant maize varieties. Journal of Environmental Management 203(1): 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.06.058

Wossen, T., A. Menkir, A. Alene, T. Abdoulaye, S. Ajala, B. Badu-Apraku, M. Gedil, W. Mengesha, and S. Meseka. 2023. Drivers of transformation of the maize sector in Nigeria. Global Food Security 38: 100713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2023.100713

Yami, M., O. Abioye, S. Z. Sore, A. Mugisho, and T. Abdoulaye. 2024. Factors influencing gender and youth integration in agricultural research and innovation in Africa. CABI Agriculture and Bioscience 5(1): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43170-024-00215-4

Download references

This review was made possible with financial support from the CGIAR GENDER Impact Platform, as well as from the Accelerated Genetic Gain (AGG) Maize project, the Market Intelligence Initiative, and the Gender Equality (HER +) Initiative, which are grateful for the support of CGIAR Trust Fund contributors: www.cgiar.org/funders .

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Mastewal Yami

International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria

Martina Cavicchioli

International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Steven M. Cole

International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Nairobi, Kenya

Tesfamicheal Wossen

International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Bamako, Mali

Tahirou Abdoulaye

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MY and MC conducted the literature review and wrote the original draft. SC reviewed and edited the original draft. TA and TW input into the manuscript’s conceptualization.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martina Cavicchioli .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval, consent to participate, consent for publication, conflict of interest.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 54.4 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Yami, M., Cavicchioli, M., Cole, S.M. et al. Why Contexts Matter for Gender Equal Outcomes in Research-Based Plant Breeding: The Case of Maize in Nigeria. Econ Bot (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-024-09616-y

Download citation

Received : 05 January 2024

Accepted : 31 July 2024

Published : 11 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-024-09616-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Trait preferences
• Varietal uptake
• Maize breeding
• Gender-based social inequalities
• Literature review
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research