Enhancing the transformative potential of agroecology in Europe by examining the common ground and specificities between social movements and institutional definitions
Abstract
In the past 10 years, various efforts have been made by intergovernmental expert panels, United Nations agencies, and social movements to define agroecology, resulting in the co-existence of different definitions. We explore the emergence of the three main definitions of agroecology, namely those of the FAO, of the Ny & eacute;l & eacute;ni Declaration, and of the High Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) of the Committee on World Food Security, through literature search and first-hand experience. We examine specificities and correspondences among the principles of the three definitions. While most principles associated with the three definitions align, we identify five principles that are central to the Ny & eacute;l & eacute;ni definition and are omitted, or more peripheral in the FAO and HLPE definitions, namely: (i) the incompatibility of agrotoxics, GMOs and related technologies with agroecology, (ii) the spiritual and non-commodified connection to the land, (iii) a feminist and intersectional approach, (iv) the need to challenge global power structures and, (v) the crucial role of collective self-organization and action to advance agroecology. We discuss the risks and implications of omitting them, or leaving them implicit, for science, policy, and practice in the European context. We conclude that making them explicit would facilitate a more coherent transition toward long-lasting sustainable food systems.
Related
- Agroecology now! Transformations towards more just and sustainable food systems
- “Introducing Agroecology and Anthropology Through Graphic Novels”: Interview with Sébastien Carcelle and Laurent Houssin, Authors of Sertão. Enquête d’agroécologie au Brésil (Futuropolis, 2024)
- Agricultural machinery and digital technologies for agroecology: moving beyond pesticides in crop protection
- Co-evolution of plants, livestock and farming practices during dairy farm transformation to agroecology: an in-depth case study in France
- Integrating agrarian differentiation and labor mobility into TAPE-based assessments of agroecology. A methodological exploration in the Cambodian rice sector
BibTeX
@article{soto2026enhancing,
title = {{Enhancing the transformative potential of agroecology in Europe by examining the common ground and specificities between social movements and institutional definitions}},
author = {Raquel Luján Soto and Marta Guadalupe Rivera Ferre and Stephen Leitheiser and Bertrand Dumont and Walter Rossing and Pablo Tittonell and Cian Blaix and Elisa Oteros-Rozas},
journal = {Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.1080/21683565.2026.2703206},
url = {https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05794747v1},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Enhancing the transformative potential of agroecology in Europe by examining the common ground and specificities between social movements and institutional definitions
AU - Raquel Luján Soto
AU - Marta Guadalupe Rivera Ferre
AU - Stephen Leitheiser
AU - Bertrand Dumont
AU - Walter Rossing
AU - Pablo Tittonell
AU - Cian Blaix
AU - Elisa Oteros-Rozas
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/28
JO - Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems
DO - 10.1080/21683565.2026.2703206
UR - https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05794747v1
AB - In the past 10 years, various efforts have been made by intergovernmental expert panels, United Nations agencies, and social movements to define agroecology, resulting in the co-existence of different definitions. We explore the emergence of the three main definitions of agroecology, namely those of the FAO, of the Ny & eacute;l & eacute;ni Declaration, and of the High Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) of the Committee on World Food Security, through literature search and first-hand experience. We examine specificities and correspondences among the principles of the three definitions. While most principles associated with the three definitions align, we identify five principles that are central to the Ny & eacute;l & eacute;ni definition and are omitted, or more peripheral in the FAO and HLPE definitions, namely: (i) the incompatibility of agrotoxics, GMOs and related technologies with agroecology, (ii) the spiritual and non-commodified connection to the land, (iii) a feminist and intersectional approach, (iv) the need to challenge global power structures and, (v) the crucial role of collective self-organization and action to advance agroecology. We discuss the risks and implications of omitting them, or leaving them implicit, for science, policy, and practice in the European context. We conclude that making them explicit would facilitate a more coherent transition toward long-lasting sustainable food systems.
SN - 2168-3573
SN - 2168-3565
ER -