Cited by 89Agriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentRural Development and AgricultureOrganic Food and Agriculture

Agroecological transitions: a systematic review of research approaches and prospects for participatory action methods

Open access
Sachet, Erwan, Mertz, Ole, Le Coq, Jean-François, Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S., Francesconi, Wendy, Bonin, Muriel, Quintero, Marcela·2021·Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems

Abstract

There have been many calls for an agroecological transition to respond to food shocks and crises stemming from conventional food systems. Participatory action research and transformative epistemologies, where communities are research actors rather than objects, have been proposed as a way to enhance this transition. However, despite numerous case studies, there is presently no overview of how participatory approaches contribute to agroecological transitions. The present article therefore aims to understand the effect of applying participatory action research (PAR) in agroecology. We undertook a systematic review of articles reporting methods and results from case studies in agroecological research. On the one hand, our systematic review of 347 articles shows that the agroecological research scope is broad, with all three types—as science, a set of practices and social movement—well-represented in the corpus. However, we can see a clear focus on agroecology “as a set of practices” as the primary type of use of the concept. On the other hand, we found a few case studies (23) with a participatory approach while most studies used extractive research methods. These studies show that understanding the drivers and obstacles for achieving an agroecological transition requires long-term research and trust between researchers and farmers. Such transformative epistemologies open doors to new questions on designing long-term PAR research in agroecology when confronted with a short-term project-based society.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fsufs.2021.709401

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • This process often prioritizes the attainment of long-term sustainability over short-term productivity gains.

    “This process often prioritizes the attainment of long-term sustainability over short-term productivity gains (Ong and Liao, 2020;Sachet 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 Sachet et al., 2021

    The Methods section describes agroecology as a path to sustainable development, and the Conclusions emphasize long-term work needed for the transition. Neither passage says that the process prioritizes long-term sustainability over short-term productivity gains; the paper’s short-term contrast concerns project-based research, not productivity. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sachet, E., Mertz, O., Le Coq, J.-F., Cruz-Garcia, G. S., Francesconi, W., Bonin, M., & Quintero, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • International Center for Tropical Agriculture (KE)
  • Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (FR)
Corresponding author
Sachet, Erwan
Venue
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems
Published
2021-10-26
Volume
5
Pages
709401
ISSN
2571-581X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3208495072
Cited by
89
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 5
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Agritrop (Cirad) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Rural Development and Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
Keywords
agroecological transition, participatory action research, long-term research

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