Farm mechanization promises to help raise labor productivity and reduce the heavy toil of farming on the world’s millions of smallholder farms, hence contributing to socioeconomic development in the Global South, in particular in Africa. While mechanization is therefore high on the African development agenda, there are heavy – at times dogmatic – debates on which technological pathway toward farm mechanization – animal traction, two-wheel tractors, and four-wheel tractors – should be supported by African governments and development partners. One discussion area relates to the future of animal traction. Proponents see a continued scope for the use of draught animals, whereas opponents see animal traction as old-fashioned and see a potential to leapfrog this mechanization stage. There are also debates on the potential of two-wheel tractors, with proponents arguing that such walk-behind tractors are more affordable and suitable for smallholder farmers, and opponents believing that such tractors lack efficiency and power and still come with a high drudgery. This paper argues that there are no blueprint answers on which technological pathway is ‘best’ but only answers on which one ‘best fits’ the respective conditions. Based on this premise, this paper introduces a ‘best-fit’ framework that allows for assessing the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the three technological pathways in different agroecological and socioeconomic conditions. The results suggest that all three forms of mechanization are associated with areas where they ‘best fit’. All three farm mechanization pathways hinge on public policies and investments to create an enabling environment for private markets, as, ultimately, innovation processes should be market driven. The ‘best-fit’ framework enables governments and development partners to focus efforts to support farm mechanization on solutions that ‘best fit’ their country’s farming systems and not on those that are politically most attractive, thereby contributing to sustainable agricultural mechanization and development.
