Consolidation of shared sustainability visions through deliberative multicriteria evaluation in Ecuadorian cocoa farming communities
5 affiliations
- 1Department of Food System Sciences, FiBL Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Frick, Switzerland
- 2Department of Environmental System Science, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
- 3Institute of Natural Resource Sciences, ZHAW University of Applied Sciences, Zürich, Switzerland
- 4Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
- 5Facultad de Ciencias de la Vida, Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Guayaquil, Ecuador
Abstract
Sustainability transitions in smallholder agriculture depend on how local communities understand and prioritise different futures, yet most assessment tools rely on externally defined criteria and expert-led evaluations. This study examines how deliberation shapes cocoa farmers’ evaluations of sustainability pathways. In two-day workshops with eight farmer groups (n = 36) in two regions of Ecuador (Amazon and Coast), farmers evaluated four scenarios using intuitive ranking, urgency ratings, and swing-weighting, based on sustainability criteria they had generated in a prior Photovoice process. We compared intuitive and criteria-based rankings of scenarios and calculated indices of individual deliberative reasoning and intersubjective consensus before and after deliberation. In the Amazon, where intuitive scenario preferences diverged, deliberation led all groups to converge on the same scenario rankings and to reweight criteria towards long-term environmental and social concerns. Importance-consensus and individual reasoning indices increased modestly, indicating tighter alignment between what farmers valued and the futures they preferred. In the Coastal region, groups already shared a strong preference for an environmentally restorative scenario. Deliberation primarily reinforced this consensus, substantially increasing agreement on the prioritisation of sustainability criteria while leaving overall scenario rankings unchanged. Across regions, some groups showed closer alignment between intuitive and criteria-based rankings after deliberation, while others diverged, suggesting that deliberation can both stabilise and reconfigure preferences as trade-offs are recognised. The results show that deliberative multicriteria evaluation, when grounded in community-generated criteria and narratives, can articulate and consolidate shared sustainability visions even where prior engagement has already fostered high agreement. The deliberation indices proposed here provide a transferable framework for tracking learning, reasoning, and consensus in participatory planning, supporting the design of more context-sensitive sustainability interventions. Author summary: How do farming communities decide what a good future looks like? In this study, we worked with 36 cocoa farmers in two regions of Ecuador (one in the Amazon, the other on the Coast) to find out. Over two days, farmers discussed and evaluated four possible futures for their communities, using criteria they themselves had defined in earlier workshops. We measured how these structured discussions changed their preferences and the consistency of their reasoning. In the Amazon, groups that initially disagreed came to a shared vision of the future they wanted; on the Coast, where farmers already agreed, discussion helped clarify “why” they agreed. In both cases, farmers prioritised ecological health and social cohesion over short-term economic gains. Our approach shows that when communities are given appropriate tools and time, they can engage in sophisticated collective deliberation about sustainability. The indices we developed to track changes in reasoning and agreement could be used in other participatory planning contexts.
Related
- The sustainability evaluation using SDG indicators under a geometric integrated threshold score framework
- Empowering Community Health Volunteers to Strengthen Integrated Primary Care Posyandu Sustainability: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation
- Teachers' reported experiences with the Food Education and Sustainability Training (FEAST) program: a process evaluation of FEAST.
- Should AI Trust Its Gut? The Cost of Deliberative Moral Reasoning in Humans and AI
- Measuring residents' perceptions of social-ecological healthy communities: development and initial psychometric evaluation of a multidimensional scale.
BibTeX
@article{egger2026consolidation,
title = {{Consolidation of shared sustainability visions through deliberative multicriteria evaluation in Ecuadorian cocoa farming communities}},
author = {Moritz Egger and Michael Curran and Alice Aubert and Norman Kearney and Diana Ventura and Guillermo Andrés Zambrano Mohauad and Adriana Patricia Santos Ordóñez and Johanna Jacobi},
journal = {PLOS Sustainability and Transformation},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pstr.0000279},
url = {https://journals.plos.org/sustainabilitytransformation/article?id=10.1371/journal.pstr.0000279},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Consolidation of shared sustainability visions through deliberative multicriteria evaluation in Ecuadorian cocoa farming communities
AU - Moritz Egger
AU - Michael Curran
AU - Alice Aubert
AU - Norman Kearney
AU - Diana Ventura
AU - Guillermo Andrés Zambrano Mohauad
AU - Adriana Patricia Santos Ordóñez
AU - Johanna Jacobi
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/09
JO - PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
DO - 10.1371/journal.pstr.0000279
UR - https://journals.plos.org/sustainabilitytransformation/article?id=10.1371/journal.pstr.0000279
AB - Sustainability transitions in smallholder agriculture depend on how local communities understand and prioritise different futures, yet most assessment tools rely on externally defined criteria and expert-led evaluations. This study examines how deliberation shapes cocoa farmers’ evaluations of sustainability pathways. In two-day workshops with eight farmer groups (n = 36) in two regions of Ecuador (Amazon and Coast), farmers evaluated four scenarios using intuitive ranking, urgency ratings, and swing-weighting, based on sustainability criteria they had generated in a prior Photovoice process. We compared intuitive and criteria-based rankings of scenarios and calculated indices of individual deliberative reasoning and intersubjective consensus before and after deliberation. In the Amazon, where intuitive scenario preferences diverged, deliberation led all groups to converge on the same scenario rankings and to reweight criteria towards long-term environmental and social concerns. Importance-consensus and individual reasoning indices increased modestly, indicating tighter alignment between what farmers valued and the futures they preferred. In the Coastal region, groups already shared a strong preference for an environmentally restorative scenario. Deliberation primarily reinforced this consensus, substantially increasing agreement on the prioritisation of sustainability criteria while leaving overall scenario rankings unchanged. Across regions, some groups showed closer alignment between intuitive and criteria-based rankings after deliberation, while others diverged, suggesting that deliberation can both stabilise and reconfigure preferences as trade-offs are recognised. The results show that deliberative multicriteria evaluation, when grounded in community-generated criteria and narratives, can articulate and consolidate shared sustainability visions even where prior engagement has already fostered high agreement. The deliberation indices proposed here provide a transferable framework for tracking learning, reasoning, and consensus in participatory planning, supporting the design of more context-sensitive sustainability interventions. Author summary: How do farming communities decide what a good future looks like? In this study, we worked with 36 cocoa farmers in two regions of Ecuador (one in the Amazon, the other on the Coast) to find out. Over two days, farmers discussed and evaluated four possible futures for their communities, using criteria they themselves had defined in earlier workshops. We measured how these structured discussions changed their preferences and the consistency of their reasoning. In the Amazon, groups that initially disagreed came to a shared vision of the future they wanted; on the Coast, where farmers already agreed, discussion helped clarify “why” they agreed. In both cases, farmers prioritised ecological health and social cohesion over short-term economic gains. Our approach shows that when communities are given appropriate tools and time, they can engage in sophisticated collective deliberation about sustainability. The indices we developed to track changes in reasoning and agreement could be used in other participatory planning contexts.
SN - 2767-3197
ER -