The need for transformation of food and agriculture systems to be aligned with sustainable development goals is widely acknowledged. Evidence from many parts of the world shows that agroecology, which considers the social and environmental performance of agricultural systems along with economic aspects, is helping farmers transition to sustainable agricultural systems. However, there are demands from national, regional and international food and agriculture planners and funders for evidence that agroecology can work at scale. Providing that evidence requires understanding how farmers use environmental factors when selecting agricultural practices, which is poorly documented. This study contributes to filling this gap by reporting how environmental factors are important in farmers’ decisions related to adopting agroecological practices. Qualitative and quantitative data from 239 key informants, a survey of 5025 farms, 85 focus group discussions with farmers and five participatory cross-benefit analyses in eleven case studies across eight African countries were used. We show that farmers use information on and perceptions of a wide range of environmental variables and processes when assessing the usefulness of agroecological practices. In most cases, farmers cited environmental factors more frequently than economic reasons for choosing to use agroecological practices. Most of the environmental factors articulated by farmers were components of the local or farm environment that were connected to their livelihood, including aspects of soils, water, microclimate, pests and diseases, other animals, and vegetation. Intrinsic and relational environmental values such as conservation of biodiversity, long-term maintenance of land quality and aesthetics were also important. These findings show first that providing data on environmental roles of agroecology will always be challenging because of the breadth of factors that are important. Secondly, viability or usefulness of an agroecological practice is not a characteristic of the practice alone, but also of the context in which it is used. Third, impact analyses of agroecological interventions cannot be confined to consideration of a few globally comparative indicators but need to include the context specific environmental factors that farmers care about.
Tag: Agroecology
Digital tools for supporting climate-informed agroecological transition in beef production in Brazil
Despite many available digital tools in the digital ecosystem, many neglect smallholders’ ranching. Also, they focus solely on performance indicators, lacking climate-informed agroecological features. Mitigation features are included only by performance assessment tools, although only by half of them. Adaptation features in digital tools include mitigation recommendations, access to pest and disease information or early warning, and product diversification. Of the digital tools providing performance assessment (6 total), all include agroecological principles, three included adaptation, and all mitigation indicators on average per tool. Social inclusion and co-design features are related to data protection for farmers, direct farmer contributions (on the improvement of the digital tools), and safety measures, especially amongst women. Tools with socially inclusive communication features are limited. Most of the tools reviewed here have more than one way of engaging farm users (IVR, SMS, etc.), and allow the integration of other tools.
Evaluating Farmers’ Knowledge of Shade Trees in Different Cocoa Agro-Ecological Zones in Ghana
Shade trees are an integral part of most cocoa growing systems across the world. This study assesses farmers’ local knowledge of shade trees at two locations in Ghana with different climatic conditions and vulnerability to climate change. Akumadan is located in the northern dry part of the cocoa belt representing marginal conditions for cocoa cultivation, whereas Asankragua is located in the southern wet part, more ecologically favorable for cocoa cultivation. Inventories were conducted to assess the abundance of species, their structural characteristics and benefits to cocoa systems. Results show that cocoa farmers have detailed knowledge on the functions of shade trees in cocoa systems and prefer species that provide specific needs according to the location. However, abundance of species in a location does not necessary translate into beneficial impacts on cocoa productivity. In the drier part of the cocoa belt, income diversification through shade trees is an adaptation strategy to the increasingly marginal conditions for cocoa production, which has led to the high proportion of fruit trees among the most abundant species. In contrast, farmers in the southern part of the cocoa belt select shade trees for their high cocoa compatibility. Adaptation strategies for cocoa farmers should therefore promote species that best accommodate farmers’ economic, agronomic and environmental needs.
Revisiting agroecological transitions in Rwanda a decade later: the role of local knowledge in understanding the crop diversity–food security–land degradation nexus
Achieving food security remains a pressing global challenge, exacerbated by broken food systems, climate change, biodiversity loss, land degradation, and social inequality. While crop diversification is a fundamental component of agroecological transitions and food security, its potential is often overlooked due to limited local participation and broad policy approaches that fail to account for local variability. This study revisits agroecological transitions in Western Rwanda a decade after data collection, assessing the relevance of local knowledge in understanding the interconnections between crop diversity, food security, and land degradation. Using a systematic knowledge-based approach (AKT5), researchers gathered data from 150 smallholder farmers through a Paired Catchment Assessment. Findings from the 1995–2015 period reveal a decline or disappearance of “low-value” crops due to the Crop Intensification Program (76%), land shortages (55%), and farmers abandoning slow-growing crops (49%). Consequently, 83% of farmers reported food insecurity, mainly in the form of seasonal food shortages (51%). Perennial crops emerged as essential for mitigating hunger, yet reduced crop diversity has increased reliance on off-farm food sources. The original analysis identified seven agroecological principles critical to the crop diversity–food security relationship: soil health, biodiversity, synergy, economic diversification, social values and diets, knowledge co-creation, and participation. These findings varied by land degradation status, underscoring the need for context-specific strategies. By 2015, food produced on-farm supported farmers for only 6.6 months annually, down from 10.1 months in 1995, reinforcing the need to strengthen ecological rather than administrative boundaries and improve food system connectivity. The study highlights the importance of equitable trade mechanisms for smallholder farmers and calls for the integration of local knowledge alongside stakeholder collaboration to co-design sustainable, context-appropriate policies. A decade later, these findings remain relevant, validated by recent literature, reinforcing the necessity of locally informed strategies to advance sustainable food systems.
Madagascar country report on Measuring Agroecology and its Performance (MAP). TAPE application in the context of the Global Programme “Soil Protection and Rehabilitation for Food Security” (ProSoil)
The Measuring Agroecology and its Performance (MAP) project is a collaboration to generate evidence of how agroecology can contribute to societal goals. The project assessed the performance of agroecology in three of the six districts of the Boeny region in Madagascar (Mahajanga II, Ambatoboeny, Mitsinjo), which have been part of the GIZ global project, Soil Protection and Rehabilitation for Food Security (ProSoil), since 2018–2019. Analysts applied Tools for Agroecology Performance Evaluation (TAPE), as well as the Characterization of Agroecological Transition (CAET) on 102 farms that participated in the global project, and on 98 non-participating farms as a control group.
Overall, CAET scores indicated participating and non-participating groups had few significant differences. For some elements of agroecology, such as diversity, synergies, co-creation and sharing of knowledge, participating farms showed a positive trend. The number of farms below the poverty line, crop incomes and non-agricultural incomes were not significantly different between the two groups, while livestock income was higher in the participating group. Strong correlations were observed between crop incomes and the diversity score in both groups, and global scores for soil health were the same for both groups. On environmental and social performance, participating farms recorded higher livestock diversity and higher women’s empowerment, respectively. Dietary diversity, pesticide use and the percentage of children working in agriculture were the same, or nearly the same, in both groups.
In all, the ProSoil project had a slight impact on the agroecology level and performance of farms. Nevertheless, CAET scores were positively correlated with different economic, environmental and social indicators, providing evidence for decision makers to sustain agroecology scaling-out and scaling-up for food security.
Harnessing the Power of Citizen Science for Agroecological Transitions: The Case of the One Million Voices of Agroecology Initiative and Digital Platform
The One Million Voices (OMV) citizen science initiative seeks to harness citizen science to accelerate agroecological transitions globally. Its primary objective is to co-develop a participatory platform that enables farmers, producer organizations, and consumers worldwide to engage in agroecology movements, adoption efforts, and collaborative knowledge-sharing on agroecological performance. The initiative employs a facilitated co-design process, incorporating a global review, regional partnerships, and structured dialogues across four regions to collectively shape the platform’s scope and features. In alignment with recommendations to leverage existing networks, OMV collaborated with Agroecology Map to create the OMV of Agroecology platform. The platform addresses the key research question: What agroecological practices are being implemented globally, by whom, and with what effects? It facilitates participatory mapping of innovative agroecological practices, their characterization and evaluation, and fosters connectivity among stakeholders. Users can access mapped locations and practices, engage with peers, and analyze personalized summary data, providing scientific insights into geographic trends, actor preferences, and context-specific agroecology performance. This study illustrates how a co-created citizen science process can be effectively structured and leveraged transdisciplinarily. The success of the OMV platform in advancing agroecological transitions hinges on broad, diverse, and decisive participation.
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.
How effective are on-farm conservation land management strategies for preserving ecosystem services in developing countries?: A systematic map protocol
Background
An extensive body of literature in the field of agro-ecology claims to show the positive effects that maintenance of ecosystem services can have on sustainably meeting future food demand, by making farms more productive and resilient, and contributing to better nutrition and livelihoods of farmers. In Africa alone, some research has estimated a two-fold yield increase if food producers capitalize on new and existing knowledge from science and technology. Site-specific strategies adopted with the aim of improving ecosystem services may incorporate principles of multifunctional agriculture, sustainable intensification and conservation agriculture. However, a coherent synthesis and review of the evidence of these claims is largely absent, and the quality of much of this literature is questionable. Moreover, inconsistent effects have commonly been reported, while empirical evidence to support assumed improvements is largely lacking.
Objectives
This systematic map is stimulated by an interest to (1) collate evidence on the effectiveness of on-farm conservation land management for preserving and enhancing ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes, by drawing together the currently fragmented and multidisciplinary literature base, and (2) geographically map what indicators have been used to assess on-farm conservation land management. For both questions, we will focus on 74 low-income and developing countries, where much of the world’s agricultural expansion is occurring, yet 80% of arable land is already used and croplands are yielding well below their potential.
Methods/Design
To this end, reviewers will systematically search bibliographic databases for peer-reviewed research from Web of Science, SCOPUS, AGRICOLA, AGRIS databases and CAB abstracts, and grey literature from Google Scholar, and 22 subject-specific or institutional websites. Boolean search operators will be used to create search strings where applicable. Ecosystem services included in the study are pollination services; pest-, carbon-, soil-, and water-regulation; nutrient cycling; medicinal and aromatic plants; fuel wood and cultural services. Outputs of the systematic map will include a database, technical report and an online interactive map, searchable by topic. The results of this map are expected to provide clarity about synergistic outcomes of conservation land management, which will help support local decision-making.
What evidence exists for the effectiveness of on-farm conservation land management strategies for preserving ecosystem services in developing countries? A systematic map
An extensive body of evidence in the field of agro-ecology claims to show the positive effects that maintenance of ecosystem services can have on meeting future food demand by making farms more sustainable, productive and resilient, which then contributes to improved nutrition and livelihoods of farmers. However, inconsistent effects have commonly been reported, while empirical evidence to support assumed improvements is largely lacking. Overall, a coherent synthesis and review of the evidence of these claims is largely absent from the literature.
Characterization of smallholder mixed crop–livestock systems in integration with spatial information: In case Ethiopia
The mixed crop–livestock systems are acknowledged as sustainable due to its complementarity and synergy, contribution to welfare, food security, income, and poverty alleviation. The lack of efforts in the long-term impact for increased and more efficient food production, however, threatens the livelihoods and food security of smallholder producers. This paper provides a description on smallholder crop–livestock systems in the dominant system unit of crop and livestock production discretely subdividing in different agroecological zones (AEZs) into land-use land-cover class for considering factors influencing socioeconomic and agricultural intensification. A linear mixed-effects model was carried out to fit the relationship between the land-cover measurement and the corresponding farm enterprise in land use. The repeated measurements of linear predictors that fit in full and reduced model analysis were conducted in the system framework. The landscape slope (%), elevation (m) and market distance (minute) analysis were used in spatial adjustment in the specific system. The overall area of land-use system of the peasant holdings was 599.86 ha. The area covered by annual crops was 56%, which was higher (p < 0.01) compared to the area covered by natural pasturelands (17%), perennial crops (15%), vegetable (1%) and the tree or grass cover (2%). Distinct six farming systems were characterized, each being significantly different from other. The difference within a similar AEZ could probably be a result of a minor level of farm systems manipulation. The major difference associated could essentially be with a difference in agroecology and spatial variability of the farm households.