Periodic Reporting for period 1 - Agroecology-TRANSECT (Trans-disciplinary approaches for systemic economic, ecological and climate change transitions)
Reporting period: 2022-09-01 to 2024-02-29
The application of ecological principles and concepts in farming and food systems has given rise to a holistic approach called agroecology. Agroecology provides new agricultural management approaches aimed at adapting to and mitigating climate change, valuing agrobiodiversity, and enhancing farm socio-economic resilience. In this context, Agroecology-TRANSECT project aims to release the full potential of agroecology for annual and perennial cropping, grassland-based and integrated crop-livestock systems across Europe. A challenge, however, is that the term “agroecology” is interpreted differently in scientific, social and political arenas, which can lead to false equivalencies and confusion. We therefore first reviewed the definitions of agroecology in relation to other sustainability concepts, and characterized the narratives that frame agroecological social movements in Europe. Using a meta-analysis approach we are synthetizing scientific evidence on the effects of agroecological interventions on biodiversity and climate change mitigation. Taking a place-based approach the project aims to learn from and support the transition to agroecology in 11 multi-actor Innovation Hubs (IHs) through a co-innovation approach to project governance. Co-creation of knowledge between researchers and IH multi-actor networks will deliver a science-supported toolbox to better quantify the benefits of agroecology for climate, biodiversity and farm resilience. From this dialogue, we are continually identifying drivers, barriers – including social norms, opportunities and solutions to enhance the adoption of agroecology both as a concept and a set of practices. Project members are acting to further ensure that the knowledge generated in the project serves for decision-making from regional to the EU levels. Ultimately we will provide a comprehensive set of scale-specific policy recommendations for unfolding the potential of agroecology in Europe, underpinned scientifically and by the practical experiences of the IHs.
A meta-analysis of 123 independent studies is revealing a general positive effect of agroecological interventions on biodiversity. This positive effect is observed for arable cropping, perennial and grassland systems, with also a positive trend for horticulture. Statistically significant effects of agroecological interventions are observed for all functional groups except for micro-decomposers. A total of 63 social movements in Europe provide a clear definition of agroecology. While the principles proposed by the High Level Panel of Experts of the UN is a common reference for scientists, 78% of European social movements rather refer to the Nyéléni declaration or other grassroot agroecology definitions. In our network of 11 IHs, we are successfully sharing and valorizing past, ongoing and future experiences of agroecology in order to increase awareness and knowledge exchanges between local stakeholders. To systematically record this knowledge, we are proposing methodologies (causal analysis, network analysis), defining indicators for success, and formulating action plans through reflexive learning cycles. Finally, on the policy dimension, we have built a database of 235 publications for analysing current CAP performance on biodiversity and support the development of recommendations for CAP post-2027, Green Deal and Biodiversity strategy. We have also analysed the claims and counterclaims around the Nature Restoration Law (NRL), demonstrating based on scientific evidence that its benefits, especially with regards to agricultural lands, outweigh the costs. We argue that NRL could contribute to strengthening the links between nature conservation and agricultural land users, and make European agroecosystems more resilient to climate change.
The consortium’s way of working with in-depth structured co-innovation workshops and frequent on-site project meetings, supported by online meetings has contributed to project dynamics well beyond the state of the art in project governance-for-change. The working hypothesis is that understanding of each other’s contexts and abilities in an atmosphere where people feel safe to raise contested topics contributes to transformative contributions to unfolding agroecology in Europe. We evaluate this reflexive approach based on a principles-focused evaluation framework revolving around data from Learning History – Action Planning learning cycles in both the IHs and the WPs. First results show the relevance of locally salient knowledge, of analysis of each IHs history as a basis for defining project legacy, and of developing institutional entrepreneurial skills. The identification of three existing dominant conceptualizations of agroecology have resulted in a critical dialogue around the more socio-politically oriented pillars of Nyéléni declaration, its opportunities and inclusiveness for Europe. This political dimension is as disregarded as it is much needed, bringing our project in line with societal developments. It has helped the IHs to see their position within the larger debate (e.g. the position of a niche within the regime for one IH), and identify levers for action. Quantitative agroecological performance indicators have been articulated in a carefully designed interactive process, resulting in explicit IH strategies and the indicators to support these. We have provided masterclasses to enable local farmers and advisory services to move beyond their status quo based on best practices and recommendations. Combining biophysical and socio-economic data in GIS, we are identifying contexts with greater and lesser agroecological potential. We are invited by conferences, agroecology meetings and projects to share our approaches and insights, suggesting that others identify our advances as beyond business-as-usual.