Co-creation of knowledge in agroecology
Open accessAbstract
The co-creation of knowledge is gaining recognition and use within the science, practice, and movement of agroecology. Knowledge co-creation fosters participatory learning and development, which differs from passive knowledge sharing. This approach can bridge the real and perceived gaps across diverse forms of knowledge, including what is often distinguished as farmers’ traditional, Indigenous, tacit, or local knowledge and experts’ scientific, western, or generalizable knowledge. Formal academic documentation of processes and outcomes related to knowledge co-creation is limited; therefore, we bring in examples of published research, drawing from fields of agroecology, participatory action research, and science and technology studies, along with a firsthand farmer perspective on co-creation. Combined, these frameworks offer insight into the potential benefits of knowledge co-creation in agroecology. Many of these challenges, such as navigating power dynamics, may be addressed through mindful research and community practices, including strong communication and transparent expectations and goals. Co-creation processes have traditionally and continually taken place between farmers and throughout communities without academic acknowledgment and/or interpretation of such. We reinstate the invaluable role of farmer-centered inquiry, understanding, and application, which offer benefits to individual farmers and their extended communities of practice and research, in addition to holding spiritual and cultural significance. The co-creation of knowledge in agroecology presents a compelling, adaptive approach and outcome for the increasingly complex challenges facing farmers and the agrifood system.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Soil health improvements depend not only on sustainable farming practices but also on farmer-centered inquiry and collaborative knowledge co-creation and sharing.
“Importantly, the study highlights that soil health improvements depend not only on sustainable farming practices but also on farmer-centered inquiry and collaborative knowledge co-creation and sharing (Utter et al., 2021).”
From Agroecology for sustainable development: evidence on multidimensional performance from a cross-country TAPE assessment in Africa (2025) · cites this paper as Utter et al., 2021
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 76 · Cited by 126
- Authors
- Utter, A., White, A., Méndez, V. E., & Morris, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Vermont (US)
- Venue
- Elementa Science of the Anthropocene
- Publisher
- University of California Press
- Published
- 2021
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2325-1026 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3212395347
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 31 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 7
- FWCI
- 18.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Elementa Science of the Anthropocene (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Art Integration
- Keywords
- knowledge co-creation, agroecology, participatory action research, science and technology studies, farmer knowledge, indigenous knowledge, tacit knowledge, power dynamics in research, communities of practice, knowledge gaps, agri-food systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review