Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic...
Dataset description:
There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks and crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research and transformative...
Additional Information
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Data last updated | October 22, 2025 |
| Metadata last updated | December 15, 2025 |
| Created | October 22, 2025 |
| Format | |
| License | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 |
| Datastore active | False |
| Datastore contains all records of source file | False |
| Has views | True |
| Id | 2846a49c-1406-4fc2-8b26-b8a37da5d111 |
| Name translated | {'en': 'Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods', 'km': 'Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods', 'lo': 'Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods', 'my_MM': 'Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods', 'vi': 'Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods'} |
| Package id | ea67d9a8-04f1-4d0d-a229-94f8e6a3bab8 |
| Position | 0 |
| Resource description | {'en': 'There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks\r\nand crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research\r\nand transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than\r\nobjects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite\r\nnumerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches\r\ncontribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand\r\nthe effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook\r\na systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in\r\nagroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows\r\nthat the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science,\r\na set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However,\r\nwe can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary\r\ntype of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23)\r\nwith a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods.\r\nThese studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an\r\nagroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers\r\nand farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on\r\ndesigning long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term\r\nproject-based society', 'km': 'There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks\r\nand crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research\r\nand transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than\r\nobjects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite\r\nnumerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches\r\ncontribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand\r\nthe effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook\r\na systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in\r\nagroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows\r\nthat the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science,\r\na set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However,\r\nwe can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary\r\ntype of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23)\r\nwith a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods.\r\nThese studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an\r\nagroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers\r\nand farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on\r\ndesigning long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term\r\nproject-based society', 'lo': 'There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks\r\nand crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research\r\nand transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than\r\nobjects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite\r\nnumerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches\r\ncontribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand\r\nthe effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook\r\na systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in\r\nagroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows\r\nthat the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science,\r\na set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However,\r\nwe can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary\r\ntype of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23)\r\nwith a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods.\r\nThese studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an\r\nagroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers\r\nand farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on\r\ndesigning long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term\r\nproject-based society', 'my_MM': 'There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks\r\nand crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research\r\nand transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than\r\nobjects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite\r\nnumerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches\r\ncontribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand\r\nthe effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook\r\na systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in\r\nagroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows\r\nthat the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science,\r\na set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However,\r\nwe can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary\r\ntype of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23)\r\nwith a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods.\r\nThese studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an\r\nagroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers\r\nand farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on\r\ndesigning long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term\r\nproject-based society', 'vi': 'There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks\r\nand crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research\r\nand transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than\r\nobjects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite\r\nnumerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches\r\ncontribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand\r\nthe effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook\r\na systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in\r\nagroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows\r\nthat the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science,\r\na set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However,\r\nwe can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary\r\ntype of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23)\r\nwith a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods.\r\nThese studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an\r\nagroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers\r\nand farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on\r\ndesigning long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term\r\nproject-based society'} |
| State | active |
| Name | Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods |
| Description | There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks and crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research and transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than objects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite numerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches contribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand the effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook a systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in agroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows that the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science, a set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However, we can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary type of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23) with a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods. These studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an agroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers and farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on designing long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term project-based society |