Additional Information

Field Value
Data last updated November 12, 2024
Metadata last updated August 21, 2025
Created November 12, 2024
Format PDF
License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
Datastore activeFalse
Datastore contains all records of source fileFalse
Has viewsTrue
Idbbf45f18-ea7c-4c6d-9c52-063bc450bbcd
Mimetypeapplication/pdf
Name translated{'en': 'Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture', 'km': 'Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture', 'lo': 'Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture', 'my_MM': 'Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture', 'vi': 'Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture'}
Package id501d563a-193b-4879-8a54-45bfa037a3eb
Position0
Resource description{'en': 'Considerable controversy continues to exist in scientific and policy circles about how to\r\ntackle issues of global hunger, malnutrition, and rural economic decline, as well as environmental\r\nissues, such as biodiversity loss and climate change adaptation. On the one hand, powerful vested\r\ninterests, with close ties to government, media, and academic institutions, propose high-input\r\ntechnology-based solutions, speculative and neoliberal “market-based” solutions, and export-oriented\r\nagricultural models. On the other hand, an international scientific and grassroots Food Movement\r\nhas emerged, calling for a redesign of the Global Food System in support of small-scale agroecological\r\nfarming systems. A call to re-evaluate our current Food Systems was made in 2008 by the International\r\nAssessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Here,\r\nusing the IAASTD study as a backdrop, we review the recent literature to outline key contentious\r\npoints in the controversy between the need for high-input and “techno-based” versus agroecological\r\nfarming models. A critical assessment is made of proposed strategies to protect soil resources,\r\nimprove nutrient and energy cycles, protect agrobiodiversity, and promote social well-being in rural\r\ncommunities. With an increase in the number of affluent consumers (i.e., the middle class) in the\r\ndeveloping world, and with the continued problem of extreme and chronic poverty with other larger\r\nsectors of society, Organic Farming and Agroecology models are put forward as a sound social,\r\nscientific, and rural development strategy.', 'km': 'Considerable controversy continues to exist in scientific and policy circles about how to\r\ntackle issues of global hunger, malnutrition, and rural economic decline, as well as environmental\r\nissues, such as biodiversity loss and climate change adaptation. On the one hand, powerful vested\r\ninterests, with close ties to government, media, and academic institutions, propose high-input\r\ntechnology-based solutions, speculative and neoliberal “market-based” solutions, and export-oriented\r\nagricultural models. On the other hand, an international scientific and grassroots Food Movement\r\nhas emerged, calling for a redesign of the Global Food System in support of small-scale agroecological\r\nfarming systems. A call to re-evaluate our current Food Systems was made in 2008 by the International\r\nAssessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Here,\r\nusing the IAASTD study as a backdrop, we review the recent literature to outline key contentious\r\npoints in the controversy between the need for high-input and “techno-based” versus agroecological\r\nfarming models. A critical assessment is made of proposed strategies to protect soil resources,\r\nimprove nutrient and energy cycles, protect agrobiodiversity, and promote social well-being in rural\r\ncommunities. With an increase in the number of affluent consumers (i.e., the middle class) in the\r\ndeveloping world, and with the continued problem of extreme and chronic poverty with other larger\r\nsectors of society, Organic Farming and Agroecology models are put forward as a sound social,\r\nscientific, and rural development strategy.', 'lo': 'Considerable controversy continues to exist in scientific and policy circles about how to\r\ntackle issues of global hunger, malnutrition, and rural economic decline, as well as environmental\r\nissues, such as biodiversity loss and climate change adaptation. On the one hand, powerful vested\r\ninterests, with close ties to government, media, and academic institutions, propose high-input\r\ntechnology-based solutions, speculative and neoliberal “market-based” solutions, and export-oriented\r\nagricultural models. On the other hand, an international scientific and grassroots Food Movement\r\nhas emerged, calling for a redesign of the Global Food System in support of small-scale agroecological\r\nfarming systems. A call to re-evaluate our current Food Systems was made in 2008 by the International\r\nAssessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Here,\r\nusing the IAASTD study as a backdrop, we review the recent literature to outline key contentious\r\npoints in the controversy between the need for high-input and “techno-based” versus agroecological\r\nfarming models. A critical assessment is made of proposed strategies to protect soil resources,\r\nimprove nutrient and energy cycles, protect agrobiodiversity, and promote social well-being in rural\r\ncommunities. With an increase in the number of affluent consumers (i.e., the middle class) in the\r\ndeveloping world, and with the continued problem of extreme and chronic poverty with other larger\r\nsectors of society, Organic Farming and Agroecology models are put forward as a sound social,\r\nscientific, and rural development strategy.', 'my_MM': 'Considerable controversy continues to exist in scientific and policy circles about how to\r\ntackle issues of global hunger, malnutrition, and rural economic decline, as well as environmental\r\nissues, such as biodiversity loss and climate change adaptation. On the one hand, powerful vested\r\ninterests, with close ties to government, media, and academic institutions, propose high-input\r\ntechnology-based solutions, speculative and neoliberal “market-based” solutions, and export-oriented\r\nagricultural models. On the other hand, an international scientific and grassroots Food Movement\r\nhas emerged, calling for a redesign of the Global Food System in support of small-scale agroecological\r\nfarming systems. A call to re-evaluate our current Food Systems was made in 2008 by the International\r\nAssessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Here,\r\nusing the IAASTD study as a backdrop, we review the recent literature to outline key contentious\r\npoints in the controversy between the need for high-input and “techno-based” versus agroecological\r\nfarming models. A critical assessment is made of proposed strategies to protect soil resources,\r\nimprove nutrient and energy cycles, protect agrobiodiversity, and promote social well-being in rural\r\ncommunities. With an increase in the number of affluent consumers (i.e., the middle class) in the\r\ndeveloping world, and with the continued problem of extreme and chronic poverty with other larger\r\nsectors of society, Organic Farming and Agroecology models are put forward as a sound social,\r\nscientific, and rural development strategy.', 'vi': 'Considerable controversy continues to exist in scientific and policy circles about how to\r\ntackle issues of global hunger, malnutrition, and rural economic decline, as well as environmental\r\nissues, such as biodiversity loss and climate change adaptation. On the one hand, powerful vested\r\ninterests, with close ties to government, media, and academic institutions, propose high-input\r\ntechnology-based solutions, speculative and neoliberal “market-based” solutions, and export-oriented\r\nagricultural models. On the other hand, an international scientific and grassroots Food Movement\r\nhas emerged, calling for a redesign of the Global Food System in support of small-scale agroecological\r\nfarming systems. A call to re-evaluate our current Food Systems was made in 2008 by the International\r\nAssessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Here,\r\nusing the IAASTD study as a backdrop, we review the recent literature to outline key contentious\r\npoints in the controversy between the need for high-input and “techno-based” versus agroecological\r\nfarming models. A critical assessment is made of proposed strategies to protect soil resources,\r\nimprove nutrient and energy cycles, protect agrobiodiversity, and promote social well-being in rural\r\ncommunities. With an increase in the number of affluent consumers (i.e., the middle class) in the\r\ndeveloping world, and with the continued problem of extreme and chronic poverty with other larger\r\nsectors of society, Organic Farming and Agroecology models are put forward as a sound social,\r\nscientific, and rural development strategy.'}
Size211 KiB
Stateactive
Url typeupload
Name Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture
Description

Considerable controversy continues to exist in scientific and policy circles about how to tackle issues of global hunger, malnutrition, and rural economic decline, as well as environmental issues, such as biodiversity loss and climate change adaptation. On the one hand, powerful vested interests, with close ties to government, media, and academic institutions, propose high-input technology-based solutions, speculative and neoliberal “market-based” solutions, and export-oriented agricultural models. On the other hand, an international scientific and grassroots Food Movement has emerged, calling for a redesign of the Global Food System in support of small-scale agroecological farming systems. A call to re-evaluate our current Food Systems was made in 2008 by the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Here, using the IAASTD study as a backdrop, we review the recent literature to outline key contentious points in the controversy between the need for high-input and “techno-based” versus agroecological farming models. A critical assessment is made of proposed strategies to protect soil resources, improve nutrient and energy cycles, protect agrobiodiversity, and promote social well-being in rural communities. With an increase in the number of affluent consumers (i.e., the middle class) in the developing world, and with the continued problem of extreme and chronic poverty with other larger sectors of society, Organic Farming and Agroecology models are put forward as a sound social, scientific, and rural development strategy.