B-ACT (Business Agroecology Criteria Tool) is an Excel-based assessment framework developed by Biovision to evaluate how closely businesses align with the 13 agroecological principles established by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE). Designed as a complementary tool to conventional business and financial analysis, B-ACT helps investors, donors, entrepreneurs, and development practitioners assess the environmental, social, and systemic contributions of agribusiness enterprises. Rather than focusing solely on financial performance, the tool incorporates ecological health, social equity, resilience, and sustainability considerations into business evaluation. Developed as part of Biovision’s broader suite of agroecology assessment tools, B-ACT complements the Agroecology Criteria Tool (ACT) for projects and Farm-level ACT (F-ACT) for farms.
Tag: agrifood
Meta-framework guide resource. Reflection checklist to support holistic agrifood system assessment series. United Nations Committee on World Food Security (CFS) policy tracking tool. Checklist 10
The CFS Policy Tracking Tool, developed by the Transformative Partnership Platform on Agroecology in collaboration with the Research and Innovation Working Group of the Agroecology Coalition, is designed to monitor the extent to which governments implement the agroecology-related policy recommendations adopted by the United Nations Committee on World Food Security (CFS). The tool translates 62 action points from the 2021 CFS policy guidance into 22 priority actions that collectively reflect the intent of the five CFS policy recommendations while aligning with the 13 agroecological principles established by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE). Its purpose is to provide a structured framework for assessing policy support for agroecological transitions and food system transformation at national and subnational levels.
Meta-framework guide resource. Reflection checklists to support holistic agrifood system assessment series
The reflection checklists aim to help you think through and reflect on what types of data and output a few commonly used tools produce, helping you select the right tool for your needs. They may validate your choice of tool, lead you in adapting or modifying it, or prompt you to think of an alternative.
Metrics Meta-framework guide. Guidance for developing holistic assessments of agrifood systems: A 10-step approach
There is increasing recognition that we need to measure food and agriculture (agrifood) systems’ performance holistically, including social, environmental and economic aspects. As a result, hundreds of frameworks and tools have been developed, each one for a particular purpose (Crossland et al. 2025). Choosing between the hundreds of available frameworks and tools can be overwhelming, yet it is also likely that none of these assessment approaches will perfectly meet all your specific needs. There is no one tool that will be appropriate for everyone, everywhere. The TRANSITIONS Metrics project developed the Metrics Meta-framework (Box 1) to help you navigate through this diversity of available frameworks and tools and help you design a holistic assessment of agrifood systems that is fit for your specific purposes and needs. The Meta-framework presented in this guide takes you through a 10-step process to design such an assessment tool. If you follow the 10-step process presented in this guide, you will end up with a practical method for a holistic agrifood system assessment that meets clear objectives and user needs. It might be a simple implementation of a standard tool. It might be a modified version of an already existing tool. Or, it might be a completely new and original assessment tool.
Measuring the holistic performance of food and agricultural systems: a systematic review
Assessing the performance of food and agricultural systems is crucial for their transformation toward sustainability, health, and resilience. To ensure agrifood systems serve multiple functions effectively, a holistic systems perspective is essential. Previous reviews of assessment methods have focused mainly on farm-level evaluations, often lacking a comprehensive framework for holistic analysis. This study evaluates 206 assessment approaches based on four key principles of holistic systems assessment: (1) measuring multiple dimensions of performance, (2) integrating diverse stakeholder perspectives, (3) evaluating emergent system properties, and (4) collecting and presenting data to reveal interactions, synergies, and trade-offs for informed decision-making. While recognition of holistic assessment is growing, most evaluations remain narrowly focused on performance metrics, with only 14% of assessments addressing synergies and trade-offs and 26% considering emergent system properties. A shift toward systemic framings, such as agroecology, is observed, highlighting the importance of broader contextual approaches. The study concludes that no single assessment framework can universally apply across all agrifood systems due to their inherent diversity. Instead, it emphasizes the need for clear guidance to help practitioners navigate existing methods and develop tailored assessments that address specific needs. The meta-framework proposed in this review offers structured guidance for designing effective holistic systems assessments, ensuring more comprehensive evaluations.
Putting value chain development into perspective: Evolution, blind spots and promising avenues
Donors, NGOs, and government agencies have long embraced market-based development approaches for achieving economic growth and poverty reduction. Over the past two decades, value chain development (VCD) has taken the lead among such approaches. This chapter reviews the evolution of these approaches since the 1980s, with emphasis on the contributions and interactions of researchers and practitioners. Adopting the lens of ‘issue-attention cycles’, we show how 1) excitement is built up over a given approach, funding becomes available, and proliferation kicks in; 2) disenchantment follows as awareness builds on the complexity, trade-offs, and resources required to address these; and 3) interest declines, funding sources dry up, and attention moves to new (or rebranded) approaches. Researchers have spurred these cycles by coining new terms, designing tools, and assessing impact, with limited accountability for VCD outcomes. Practitioners, in turn, have promoted own VCD frameworks and tools and trumpeted their success in implementation, while showing limited appetite for scrutiny. More impactful VCD will require productive interactions between researchers, practitioners, and funding agencies, lasting presence on the ground for supporting smallholders and SMEs, and safe spaces for (self-)critical reflection. Review of what has worked in previous cycles, and what has not, is needed to build on proven elements of VCD approaches while addressing evident shortcomings. Shared commitment to continuous improvement with a long-term view and evidence-based achievements will extend the length of issue-attention cycles, if not eliminate them altogether.
Developing holistic assessments of food and agricultural systems: A meta‑framework for metrics users
Food and agricultural (agrifood) systems feed the world and form the basis of our economic, political and cultural systems. At the same time, they are also drivers of environmental change at local and global levels. Given how central agrifood systems are to lives and livelihoods and the environment, it is not surprising that we try to measure, monitor and assess how they are performing.
Considering the diversity of agrifood systems globally, as well as the diversity in objectives of those who wish to collect data on the performance of those systems, there can be no single assessment framework which can meet every objective in all possible contexts. Any group that finds a need for holistic system assessment data has the challenge then, of selecting from available frameworks, adapting them to their needs, or innovating when there is nothing that meets those needs.
Hence, we need a guide through the maze of frameworks to help choose an approach, metrics and process that meet specific objectives. We therefore propose the development of a meta-framework, a scheme to guide or support those groups planning or promoting holistic agrifood systems measurement.
In this document, we put forward general steps for developing a holistic agrifood system assessment, as well as principles to guide decision making at each step of the design process, intended to support metrics-users in navigating the jungle of available approaches and selecting something that meets their needs. By developing a guiding framework for the design of holistic assessment and metrics, we aim to support their wider use, levelling the playing field for sustainable agrifood systems.