The socio-economic performance of agroecology. A review

Ioanna Mouratiadou (), Alexander Wezel (), Kintan Kamilia, Angelica Marchetti, Maria Luisa Paracchini and Paolo Bàrberi
Additional contact information
Ioanna Mouratiadou: ZALF - Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung = Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, LER - Laboratoire d'Études Rurales - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - ISARA, ISARA
Alexander Wezel: AGE - Agroécologie et Environnement - ISARA, ISARA
Kintan Kamilia: ISARA
Angelica Marchetti: SSSUP - Scuola Universitaria Superiore Sant'Anna = Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies [Pisa]
Maria Luisa Paracchini: JRC - European Commission - Joint Research Centre [Ispra]
Paolo Bàrberi: SSSUP - Scuola Universitaria Superiore Sant'Anna = Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies [Pisa]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Abstract Agroecology is identified as an important solution to increase the sustainability of agricultural and food systems. Despite the increasing number of publications assessing the socio-economic outcomes of agroecology, very few studies have consolidated the scattered results obtained on various case studies. This paper provides new insights by consolidating evidence on the varied socio-economic effects of agroecology across a large number of cases at a global level. To this purpose, we used a rapid review methodology, screening more than 13,000 publications to retrieve evidence on the socio-economic outcomes of the implementation of agroecological practices. The results of the review indicate that (1) agroecological practices are associated more often with positive socio-economic outcomes across the broad range of evaluated metrics (51% positive, 30% negative, 10% neutral, and 9% inconclusive outcomes); (2) the socio-economic metrics associated with financial capital represent the vast majority of evaluated metrics (83% of total) and are affected positively in a large share of cases (53%), due to favourable outcomes on income, revenues, productivity and efficiency; (3) human capital metrics (16%) are associated with a larger number of negative outcomes (46% versus 38% positive), due to higher labour requirements and costs that are however partly compensated by an overall greater number of positive outcomes on labour productivity (55%); and (4) the results vary depending on the agroecological practice assessed; e.g. for agroforestry, we identify 53% positive outcomes while for cropping system diversification 35%. These results indicate an overall favourable potential for farms to benefit from a positive socio-economic performance with the use of agroecological practices. Yet, the magnitude, temporal aspects, and success factors related to these outcomes, as well as the trade-offs between them, and the system-level effects of an agroecological transition are to be further assessed, since they can have an important influence on the performance of individual farms.

Keywords: Agroecological practices; Socio-economic indicators; Sustainable livelihoods; Farm economic performance; Agroforestry; Intercropping (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024-03-19
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-agr, nep-eff, nep-env and nep-eur
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://isara.hal.science/hal-04527200v1
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Published in Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2024, 44 (2), pp.19. ⟨10.1007/s13593-024-00945-9⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://isara.hal.science/hal-04527200v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04527200

DOI: 10.1007/s13593-024-00945-9

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().