Agroecology enhances dietary diversity through regenerating genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity on farms. This increases the availability, quality, and access to diverse foods. Diversifying crops and livestock in agroecosystems renders populations more resilient to problems. Functional biodiversity also reduces pests and diseases while enhancing dietary options. Agroecological practices and markets build alternative food networks that reconnect producers and consumers locally, promoting access to diverse diets. However, agroecology requires transformational changes to support farmers' material security and participation in research.

1. Transforming research for diverse
and sustainable food systems: a
paradigm shi8 for mul9-actor
transdisciplinary research
Professor Michel Pimbert
Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience
Coventry University, UK

2. Food and farming is more then ever unsustainable
• All relevant biophysical indicators are turning nega5ve, fast,
steeply, dangerously
• The emerging context is beyond human experience
• Costs of mi5ga5on, adapta5on, remedia5on are rising
sharply

3. Recent policy support for agroecology
• IAASTD advocates reducing vulnerability of global food system
through locally based innovations and agro-ecological approaches
(IAASTD, 2008).
• SCAR = EU Standing Committee on Agricultural Research. Highest
priority should be given to ‘low-input high-output systems -
integrating historical knowledge and agroecological principles that
use nature’s capacity and models nature’s system flows (SCAR FEG,
2011).
• UN FAO – after over four years of international dialogue, two
international symposia and six major regional consultations, the FAO
announced its Scaling Up Agroecology Initiative in April 2018.

4. From Uniformity to Diversity
Key approaches:
• Agro-ecology – mimicking
natural ecosystems
• Eco-literacy and eco-
design/permaculture/bio-
mimicry
• Models of circular economy
that combine food and energy
production with water and
waste management along
rural-urban continuum.

5. Incremental and transforma/ve agroecological
transi/ons to sustainable food systems (Gliessman, 2014)
• Level 1 practices focus on increasing efficiency
• Level 2 efforts substitute less-damaging inputs and practices
• Level 3 efforts to re-design and diversify farming systems in
image of nature
• Level 4 systems reinforce connections between producers
and consumers within territories
• Level 5 systems fully develop and integrate the
agroecological practices of Level 3 and the alternative
market relationships of Level 4

7. Agroecology enhances Dietary Diversity
By regenera)ng and enhancing gene2c, species and
ecosystem diversity & complexity on farms and the
wider landscape, agroecological prac)ces increase the
availability, quality and access to dietary diversity in
food chains & food webs

8. Diversifying crop varieties and livestock breeds in
agroecosystems and the wider landscape
• Evolutionary plant
breeding of wheat based
on a diverse & complex
mixture of varieties or
lines. This complexity
renders the whole
population resilient.
Whatever the problem,
there seems always to be
some components of the
population able to deal
with it.
• Links with artisan bakers

9. Functional biodiversity to reduce
pest & disease outbreaks, while
simultaneously enhancing dietary
diversity on offer
• Shropshire sheep
not only control
weeds in
commercial apple
and pear orchards
in northern Europe,
they also help limit
the spread of
fungal diseases by
eating fallen leaves

10. Enhancing the conserva/on of soil, water and trees
on the farm and neighbouring landscape
• By building terraces, swales, tree
belts, hedges and ponds to
conserve soil and water, farmers’
individual and collective action
generate ecological complexity and
heterogeneity at different scales.
Øthis creates habitats and micro-
environments for wild edible
species to co-exist in
agroecosystems and human-
managed landscapes.

11. • In Poland, harvest of wild bush and berry fruits in woodlands e.g. 30 000
tonnes/year harvest of wild Vaccinium myr+llus
• The mean use of wild foods by agricultural and forager communi>es in 22
countries of Asia and Africa (36 studies) is 90–100 species per loca>on.
• Farmers harvest these wild foods from environments they have co-created
with nature: collec>vely managed watersheds, common lands, tree
planta>ons and woodlands, field edges and organically manured farm plots

12. Agroecological markets for dietary diversity
Agroecological approaches build alternative
food networks through forms of economic
exchange that reinforce connections
between producers and consumers within
territories, – re-localising production &
consumption
ØPublic procurement of locally
produced agroecological/organic
foods promotes access to more
dietary diversity in schools,
hospitals and public canteens in
Italy, Austria, Denmark and Brazil

13. Agroecology and local food initiatives are
growing, - creating markets for farmers
• Local Food Systems -
production, processing, trade
and consumption of food
occur in a defined reduced
geographical area
• Short Food Supply Chain - the
number of intermediaries is
minimised, the ideal being a
direct contact between the
producer and the consumer.

14. Study of 84 different SFSCs in Europe (Kneafsey et al,
2013. European Commission)
• CSA and AMAPs
• farm shops, pick-your-own
schemes…
• farmers' markets, shops
owned by farmers, farm-
based delivery schemes, or
through one single trade
intermediary
• Farmer link with public
procurement scheme
• Sell mainly to local and /or
regional markets
• Products traded: fresh fruit
and vegetables, animal
products (meat, dairy),
beverages
• Urban-driven schemes have
grown rapidly in recent
years in comparison with
rural SFSCs

15. Environmental impacts of Short Food Chains
• Agroecological production methods: reduced GHG involved
in production; reduced pesticide use; reduced soil and water
pollution; enhanced biodiversity; minimum processing
(reduces GHG in processing & storage)
• Local: reduced GHG emissions associated with transportation
• Seasonal: Reduced GHG emissions involved in storage

16. Study of 84 different Short Food Chains in EU
(European Commission, 2013)
Social impacts
• Closer connection between
farmers and consumers
• Development of trust and
social bonds - a sense of
community and of 'living-
together
• Behavioral changes: eating
habits with public health
effect (reduced obesity)
Economic impacts
• A higher share of value
added is retained locally by
producers – economic
regeneration
• Higher multiplier effect on
local economies than long
chains, with impacts also on
maintaining local
employment, particularly in
rural areas

17. Re-localizing produc1on and consump1on to exit unfair
commodity markets – a norma1ve vision
• Re-embedding agriculture in Nature, relying on
func6onal biodiversity & internal resources, - including
rediscovery of local assets
• Farmers distance themselves from markets supplying
inputs (hybrid and GM seeds, agri-chemicals….)
• Farmers diversify outputs and market outlets
• Rebuild the infrastructure of local food systems (e.g.
local mills, abaDoirs, community food processing units,
micro-dairy….) in territories
• Trade rules that protect local economies (e.g. local food
procurement)

18. Transitions to Diverse and Sustainable Food
Systems Through Agroecology
Six transition domains strongly
shape agroecological practices,
and are determined by
governance
Need to focus on the wider social,
political and economic context
that shapes food system
transitions through agroecology
CAWR and FAO, 2019.

19. Contested Agroecology
Dominant agri-food model
• Agroecology as part of
Sustainable Intensifica6on
and Climate Smart
Agriculture (e.g. co-
existence with GMOs)
• Emphasis on science
• Conforms to produc6vist
model and ‘business as
usual’ in food, farming and
development
Food sovereignty and other
possible worlds
• Agroecology as a science,
prac6ce and social
movement
• Emphasis on peasant
agroecology as part of food
sovereignty
• Transforma6on of dominant
agri-food regime

20. Transforma)ve Agroecology: a paradigm shi7
for mul)-actor transdisciplinary research

21. Agroecology builds on the knowledge of farmers,
indigenous peoples, fishers, and pastoralists
Four areas of peoples’ knowledge important for
agroecologists who value and build on farmers’ knowledge
and skills:
1. Local taxonomies – wo/men’s detailed knowledge and
classification of different types of soils, plants, animals,
and ecosystems.
2. Ecological knowledge - climate, winds, topography,
micro-climates, plant communities, and local ecology

22. Four areas of farmers’ knowledge important for
agroecology
3. Knowledge of farming practices - the intentional mixing of
different crop and livestock species & varieties to stabilise
yields, reduce the incidence of diseases and pest attacks on
the farm, and enhance resilience to change
4. Experimental knowledge that stems from farmers’ active
seed selection and plant breeding work which has generated
myriads of locally adapted crop varieties – embodiments of
the experimental knowledge, creativity and labour of
generations of wo/men farmers.

23. Peoples’ knowledge is embedded in - and shapes -
landscapes and agroecosystems

24. Crafts(wo)man
• Producer, creator, maker,
inventor, generator,
breeder, discoverer,
creative worker…..
• Artist, builder, architect,
engineer, artisan,
experimenter…

25. Agroecological Research & Development
• Agroecological solutions are not delivered top down. They are
developed through respectful intercultural dialogue between
scientists and farmers/citizens, - building on peoples’ local
priorities, knowledge and capacity to innovate
• Shift from a transfer of technology model of R&D to a
decentralised, bottom up, and participatory process of
knowledge creation tailored to unique local contexts in rural
and urban areas
• Knowledge intensive, transdisciplinary and based on principles
of cognitive justice

26. Cognitive justice – recognizing different knowledge
systems and their right to exist
Cognitive justice is ‘the
constitutional right of different
systems of knowledge to exist as
part of a dialogue and debate’
This implies the continued
existence of ‘the ecologies that
would let these forms of
knowledge survive and thrive not
in a preservationist sense but as
active practices’ (Visvanathan,
2005).

27. Cognitive justice and participatory research depend on two
complementary approaches:
• democra8zing science and technology research, with
increased funding for public research and transdisciplinary
approaches that include peoples’ knowledge
• de-ins8tu8onalizing research for autonomous learning and
ac8on, with an emphasis on strengthening horizontal networks
of grassroots research and innova;on as well as ci;zen
oversight over the produc;on of knowledge.

28. Democratizing Public Research and Transforming
Ways of Knowing for Agroecology

29. An alterna)ve vision for food & agricultural
research
Ci#zens are viewed as knowledgeable and ac#ve actors with the
ability to be centrally involved in both the ‘upstream’ choice of
strategic research priori#es and the design of innova#ons, as
well as in their ‘downstream’ implementa#on, spread and
regula#on.

30. Farmer/citizen participation throughout the research
cycle to expand agroecology and knowledge democracy:
• the framing of national policies for science and development
• the choice of upstream strategic priorities for R&D, including
decisions on budget allocations by funding bodies
• during scientific and technological research – the production and
validation of knowledge in the natural and social sciences, as well
as the arts and humanities
• in evaluating research results and impacts, including risk and
sustainability assessments.

31. Democratising Public Research and Transforming
Knowledge for Agroecology
• Increase funding for R&D
• New roles and ways of working
for researchers
• A shift to transdisciplinary and
participatory research that
respects and includes farmer &
peoples’ knowledge
• Organisational transformation
• Protecting public research from
corporate control and
censorship

32. Increased public funding for agroecological R&D
USA
in the USA, a recent analysis of
funding by the US Department
of Agriculture (USDA) showed
that projects with an emphasis
of agroecology based on
agroecosystem diversifica@on
represented only 0.6 to 1.5% of
the enAre USDA Research,
Extension and Economics
budget
UK
Funding for agroecological
research is less than 1.5% of the
total UK budget for agricultural
R&D.
Since 2010, agroecological
research projects received less
than 0.1% of the UK’s budget for
official overseas aid on food and
farming in Africa, Asia and Latin
America.

33. Priority funding for Agroecology Research and Education
• Worldwide: urgent need
for more public funding
for agroecological R&D -
including for the creation
of new research posts and
expertise
• Substantial increase in
agroecology training
courses in formal and
informal education
institutions

34. Professional reversals and organizational transformation
• Emphasis on training of researchers in par1cipatory skills as
well as enabling a7tudes and behavior needed to learn
from farmers/ci1zens (mutual listening, respect, gender
sensi6vity, empathy etc.) and create safe spaces for
par6cipatory research
• Rewards and incen1ves to engage in power equalizing
transdiciplinary research with farmers & ci6zens
• Transforming organisa1onal cultures and opera1onal
procedures: shiCs from hierarchical and rigidly bureaucra6c
structures to ‘flat’, flexible, and responsive research
organiza6ons

35. Protecting public research against privatization and
corporate control
• Job security in university educa1on and research
• Safeguards against the corrup1on of science by
corpora1ons
• Re-inven1ng research ins1tu1ons for the common good
through alliances between researchers and ci1zens

36. Expanding farmer-led agroecological research
• Strengthening self-managed
research and grassroots
innovation in horizontal farmer-
citizen networks

37. Self-managed research and grassroots innovation:
many examples
ØCitizens victims of pollution developing a peoples’
epidemiology in Europe
ØGlobal open source community developing new computer
software
ØAmateur gardeners mapping links between weather and
phenology of plants and animals in UK
ØHorizontal networks of farmers and citizens producing
knowledge in fields, workshops, villages and ‘living campuses’

38. Horizontal grassroots networks producing knowledge
and innovations
ØCampesino a campesino movements in Central America
and Cuba
Ø Community-based Farmer Field Schools (FFS) in
Indonesia
ØMST agroecology schools in Brazil
ØRéseau Semences Paysannes (Italy, France…)
ØMillet Network of India
ØFarm Hack (USA, UK) et L’ Atelier Paysan (France)
ØURGENCI the international network for Community Supported
Agriculture (CSA)

39. Self-managed research and innova3on for
agroecology: key processes
• Horizontal networks and
peer-to-peer decentralized
knowledge produc5on &
exchange in rural and urban
areas
• Cri5cal adult educa5on – e.g.
Paolo Freire inspired
pedagogies for Farmer Field
Schools

40. Self-managed ways of knowing for agroecology
transitions: key processes
• Dialogo de saberes –
dialogue of different
knowledges and ways of
knowing
• Production of practical
and political knowledge

41. Self-managed ways of knowing for agroecology
transitions: key processes
• Extended peer review to
validate knowledge
• Greater farmer & citizen
control over the
dissemination of
knowledge

42. Strengthening local organisa/ons to scale out grassroots
agroecological R&D
• Local adaptive management
of environment
• People’s access to land and
food
• Federations, networks and
organized policy influence

43. Mul$-scale networks of local
organisa$ons
§Local and regional coali-ons
of food producers &
consumers
§Federa-ons of indigenous
peoples
§Via Campesina
§Global social movements

44. Grassroots R&D system for agroecology and sustainable
food systems

45. The bigger picture: time and material security are
pre-requisites for democratizing research
• Without people and farmers on the land there is no
par2cipa2on and co-inquiry possible
• Deep policy changes needed to reverse economic genocide
of farmers and give more material security to farmers – cf.
French inter-ministerial study: Départs précoces en
agriculture. Analyse d’une situa6on peu connue (ASP, 2016)

46. French inter-ministerial study: Départs précoces
en agriculture. Analyse d’une situa6on peu
connue (ASP, 2016)
• 10 000 farmers per year leave farming before reaching
re4rement age – i.e. one third of total number of farmers
who quit farming every year
• Young people unable to enter farming or find it hard to do
so
• Re4red farmers receive a very small pension

47. Reasons for leaving farming in France (ASP, 2016)
• Banks refuse to give loans; lack of cash; inability to reimburse money
borrowed for farm investments
• Impacts of mul;ple crisis (climate change, illnesses, market
vola;lity….) “Farm enterprises are less and less able to absorb
impacts of two consecu4ve years of crisis” (ASP)
• Isola;on (geographical and social); lack of recogni;on; insufficient
income for long day’s work
• Suicides – third cause of farmer death aHer cancer and cardio-
vascular problems.

48. The bigger picture: .me and material security are
pre-requisites for democra.zing research
• Women and men need free time for democratic deliberations,
citizenship, and practice of the art of participatory democracy

49. Leveling the economic playing field for participation
and democratic control over research
• a guaranteed and uncondi-onal minimum income for all
• a significant drop in -me spent in wage-work and a fairer
sharing of jobs and free -me between men and women
• the re-localisa-on of plural economies that combine both
market oriented ac-vi-es with non-monetary forms of
economic exchange based on barter, reciprocity, gi>
rela-ons, and solidarity

50. Leveling the economic playing field for par5cipa5on
and democra5c control over research
• a tax on financial specula/ons, - to fund the regenera/on
of local economies and ecologies
• the use of alterna/ve local currencies to regenerate
assets and retain wealth in re-territorialised economies
• a shi: from globalised, centralised and linear systems to
re-localized circular models that mimic natural cycles and
link sustainable food and energy produc/on with water
and waste management in rural and urban areas.

51. Transitions to Diverse and Sustainable Food
Systems Through Agroecology
Six transi*on domains strongly
shape agroecological prac*ces,
and are determined by
governance
Need to focus on the wider social,
poli*cal and economic context
that shapes food system
transi*ons through agroecology
CAWR and FAO, 2019

52. Merci
Thank you