Search

There is great diversity in the methods, terms, and empirical focuses employed by social and natural scientists working on agroecological transitions. The upshot is that whilst various researchers may nominally be putting their shoulder to the same agroecological wheel, the impact of their combined efforts is not what it might be. The aim of this article is to assist in the co-ordination and collaboration of disparate research activities and actors. It does so by offering the readers of this journal a user-friendly guide to someof the terms being used by social scientists (particularly human geographers and anthropologists) in their work on pests, diseases, crop protections and agroecological transitions. Such a document is of particular use as the terms and concepts employed by social scientists are equipped to generate analysis with explicit political insight in a way that those used by natural scientists may not be. The concepts and theories of social scientists foreground the commonalities that cut across case studies which might otherwise seem separated by a reservoir of context specificity. Tooled with these terms of analysis, the promise of agroecology rightly becomes something with far reaching political and justice consequences. These terms are presented across five areas: the ontological, the epistemological, the methodological, the historical, and the aesthetic. Given the range of social, ecological, cultural, and economic barriers involved in effecting an agroecological transition, it is vital that different researchers are conversant in each other's language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is great diversity in the methods, terms, and empirical focuses employed by social and natural scientists working on agroecological transitions. The upshot is that whilst various researchers may nominally be putting their shoulder to the same agroecological wheel, the impact of their combined efforts is not what it might be. The aim of this article is to assist in the co-ordination and collaboration of disparate research activities and actors. It does so by offering the readers of this journal a user-friendly guide to some of the terms being used by social scientists (particularly human geographers and anthropologists) in their work on pests, diseases, crop protections and agroecological transitions. Such a document is of particular use as the terms and concepts employed by social scientists are equipped to generate analysis with explicit political insight in a way that those used by natural scientists may not be. The concepts and theories of social scientists foreground the commonalities that cut across case studies which might otherwise seem separated by a reservoir of context specificity. Tooled with these terms of analysis, the promise of agroecology rightly becomes something with far reaching political and justice consequences. These terms are presented across five areas: the ontological, the epistemological, the methodological, the historical, and the aesthetic. Given the range of social, ecological, cultural, and economic barriers involved in effecting an agroecological transition, it is vital that different researchers are conversant in each other’s language.

Given the novel character of disturbances caused by the pandemic in food systems, initial studies have been conducted to stress the reinforced urgent need for food systems' transformation toward sustainability. First assessments, conducted in the early months of the pandemic, found that local food actors responded to changing production and marketing conditions by implementing alternative practices under the umbrella of agroecology. However, given the unprecedented and dynamic character of the pandemic in regional situations, and related context-specific changes caused in food system actors' operations, case studies are needed to assess in more detail under which changing conditions food actors implemented alternative practices. Moreover, the maintenance of practices as conditions normalize, and food actors' transformative potential in relation to the principles of agroecology, need further assessment. In response to these emerging issues, we provide insights into our case study research conducted during 2021 in a local food system in Argentina. The aim of this research was to study how changing conditions triggered local food actors to (re-)frame their objectives and activities regarding marketing, and to assess the relevance of agroecological principles as a means of responding to changing conditions and to unfold longer-term transitions. We identified local producer shops (n = 5) and markets (n = 4) that were established or consolidated by self-organized producer groups (SOPGs) during the first months of the pandemic. Using semi-structured interviews with SOPG members (n = 12) and qualitative content analysis, we found that alternative practices were adopted in response to different changing conditions, and new needs and opportunities for producers and consumers brought about by the pandemic. Objectives pursued, and activities undertaken by the groups revealed reactive short-term mitigation strategies, and proactive longer-term transformative objectives. The relational analysis between practices and agroecological principles showed that the principles became important means of responding to changing conditions and to unfold longer-term transitions. The cases illustrate how local food actors operationalized agroecological principles, and in turn how principles can be used to investigate the nature and potentials of food actors' alternative practices, highlighting the relevance of agroecology to co-design sustainability transitions in local food systems and to mitigate possible future crisis.

Natural wine is made from grapes produced under organic or biodynamic management without using additives in the cellar. Natural wine represents a movement of winegrowers that see agriculture as an ethical act against wine industrialization and as a way to make food systems more sustainable. The movement has gained fast-growing global fame and connects rural producers with urban consumers. The recent French recognition of a natural wine certification has spurred discontent among other European countries and wine business associations. A debate about the policy implications of natural wine certification is necessary in order to shed light on the matter. This article calls for transparency in the labeling of wine ingredients, in line with recent consumer demands, which would make the creation of new certifications redundant.

Wider and more profitable legume crop cultivation is an indispensable step for the agroecological transition of global agri-food systems but represents a challenge especially in Europe. Plant breeding is pivotal in this context. Research areas of key interest are represented by innovative phenotypic and genome-based selection procedures for crop yield, tolerance to abiotic and biotic stresses enhanced by the changing climate, intercropping, and emerging crop quality traits. We see outmost priority in the exploration of genomic selection (GS) opportunities and limitations, to ease genetic gains and to limit the costs of multi-trait selection. Reducing the profitability gap of legumes relative to major cereals will not be possible in Europe without public funding devoted to crop improvement research, pre-breeding, and, in various circumstances, public breeding. While most of these activities may profit of significant public-private partnerships, all of them can provide substantial benefits to seed companies. A favorable institutional context may comprise some changes to variety registration tests and procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wider and more profitable legume crop cultivation is an indispensable step for the agroecological transition of global agri-food systems but represents a challenge especially in Europe. Plant breeding is pivotal in this context. Research areas of key interest are represented by innovative phenotypic and genome-based selection procedures for crop yield, tolerance to abiotic and biotic stresses enhanced by the changing climate, intercropping, and emerging crop quality traits. We see outmost priority in the exploration of genomic selection (GS) opportunities and limitations, to ease genetic gains and to limit the costs of multi-trait selection. Reducing the profitability gap of legumes relative to major cereals will not be possible in Europe without public funding devoted to crop improvement research, pre-breeding, and, in various circumstances, public breeding. While most of these activities may profit of significant public-private partnerships, all of them can provide substantial benefits to seed companies. A favorable institutional context may comprise some changes to variety registration tests and procedures.