Agroecological Transitions: A Systematic Review of Research Approaches and Prospects for Participatory Action Methods

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.

Data and Resources

Additional Info

Field Value
Type of ALiSEA product None
Title 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.
Agroecology Category
  • Collaboration
  • Knowledge and values
Agroecology Keyword Research action
Contributing organisations Section for Geography, Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; Multifunctional Landscapes, The International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Cali, Colombia; The French Agricultural Research Center for International Development (CIRAD), UMR ART-DEV, Montpellier, France 4Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR) Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Wageningen, Netherlands; Oxfam Novib, The Hague, Netherlands; The French Agricultural Research Center for International Development (CIRAD), UMR TETIS, Montpellier, France
Author Erwan Sachet, Ole Mertz, Jean-François Le Coq, Gisella S. Cruz-Garcia, Wendy Francesconi , Muriel Bonin6 and Marcela Quintero
Year 2021
Type of document Scientific & Research
Language English
Country Global
Administrative Level 1
Administrative Level 2
Web Link https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2021.709401