Can agroecology improve food security and nutrition? A review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100540Get rights and content

Highlights

  • 56 agroecology studies had evidence for food security & nutrition (FSN) outcomes.

  • 78% of studies showed positive FSN outcomes from agroecological practices.

  • Key agroecological practices are crop diversity, organic soil amendments, and agroforestry.

  • Farmer networks and attention to social equity dimensions were important.

  • Increased complexity of agroecological system more positively associated with FSN.

Abstract

Agroecology increasingly has gained scientific and policy recognition as having potential to address environmental and social issues within food production, but concerns have been raised about its implications for food security and nutrition, particularly in low-income countries. This review paper examines recent evidence (1998–2019) for whether agroecological practices can improve human food security and nutrition. A total of 11,771 articles were screened by abstract and title, 275 articles included for full review, with 56 articles (55 cases) selected. A majority of studies (78%) found evidence of positive outcomes in the use of agroecological practices on food security and nutrition of households in low and middle-income countries. Agroecological practices included crop diversification, intercropping, agroforestry, integrating crop and livestock, and soil management measures. More complex agroecological systems, that included multiple components (e.g., crop diversification, mixed crop-livestock systems and farmer-to-farmer networks) were more likely to have positive food security and nutrition outcomes.

Introduction

Agroecology is a holistic approach that incorporates ecological, health, social, and economic considerations into agricultural and food systems design and implementation. Agroecology can be applied at the field, farm and whole food system scale (Wezel et al., 2009; Wezel and Soldat 2009). As a scientific and policy approach to transform the food system, agroecology has gained greater recognition, including as one of four flagship eco-schemes of the European Common Agricultural Policy (European Union, 2020), as a means to address environmental and social issues within food systems by the United Nations (HLPE, 2019) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Mbow et al., 2019). Social movements such as the international peasant organization La Vía Campesina advocate agroecology as a means to ensure food sovereignty (Pimbert 2018). Agroforestry, organic agriculture and permaculture can all fall under the category of farm-scale agroecological approaches (HLPE 2019). Some critics have raised concerns, however, about the implications of using agroecology to improve food security and nutrition (FSN). This review examines the evidence for whether agroecological practices can improve FSN. Previous reviews examined evidence for diversified farming systems and organic agriculture's impacts on yield and other ecosystem service outcomes (Ponisio et al., 2015; Reganold and Wachter 2016; Müller et al., 2017) as well as whether diversified systems influence FSN (Jones 2017; Pellegrini and Tasciotti, 2014, Pellegrini and Tasciotti, 2014; Powell et al., 2015; Sibhatu and Qaim 2018). No review so far uses the holistic concept of agroecology and the evidence of agroecological practices' impact on FSN. This review contributes to this knowledge gap.

Agroecological practices aim to optimize ecological processes, environmental and public health and well-being, and minimize social-ecological costs from agriculture such as soil degradation, water contamination, greenhouse gas emissions, exhaustion of nonrenewable resources, and inequitable social structures (HLPE 2019; Wezel 2017; Wezel et al., 2014; Dumont et al., 2013). Relying on principles rather than standardized practices, agroecological farming systems vary based on agroecosystem and socio-cultural context. A non-exhaustive list of the agroecological principles includes co-creation of knowledge, economic diversification, soil and animal health, input reduction, biodiversity, recycling, fairness and connectivity (Wezel et al., 2020). In agroecological food and farming systems, these principles translate into certain agricultural practices, marketing approaches, and food system governance.

Since agroecology encompasses a range of principles that vary in both scale and timeframe, transitions to agroecology have been depicted as a series of levels, from adoption of farming practices and cropping systems to more complex and comprehensive food system redesign (Gliessman 2014). Field-level changes based on principles of soil management and animal health can move incrementally towards an agroecological approach by enhancing efficiency of non-renewable inputs and through substitution, such as replacing synthetic fertilizers with organic soil amendments (Hill and MacRae 1995). Agroecological transitions involve more substantial farm-scale re-design centered around principles of diversity, nutrient recycling and animal health (HLPE 2019). Farm- and community-level changes are supported when social values are incorporated into food system design; for example, when culturally important foods are reintroduced or gender equity improves at the household level. Food-system transformation may occur when principles of fairness and participation are implemented through reconnecting producers and consumers and supporting food justice. Notably, this process is nonlinear and systems do not necessarily transition in sequential steps.

Food security and nutrition (text box).

The United Nations has defined global food security as a scenario in which “all people have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their food preferences and dietary needs for an active and healthy life” (FAO 1996). Nutrition is an integral, multi-dimensional aspect of food security that includes adequate diet, health services, sanitation, proper childcare and feeding practices (HLPE 2017). FSN are broad concepts that can be applied at the global, national, regional, household and individual level. National or global indicators such as per capita dietary food energy supply derived from aggregated data, however, often fail to capture the determinants of food insecurity below the national level (Jones et al., 2013). National and global indicators do not effectively capture the food security dimensions of utilization (Leroy et al., 2015) or power dynamics that affect control over food at the community, household and individual levels (Rocha 2009). As such, a global or national level of analysis would not be fine-grained enough to assess the impact of specific approaches such as agroecology on FSN. In this study we focus on evidence of improved FSN at a regional, household and individual scale.

Most literature related to agroecology assumes farm-level pathways will lead to improved FSN, primarily for smallholder farm households. Recent estimates suggest that smallholder farms (often defined as < 2 ha) make up 80% of all farms globally (Samberg et al., 2016). Globally, small and medium farms provide significant proportions of diverse food groups (e.g., vegetables, fruits, pulses), thereby contributing to human nutrition (Herrero et al., 2017). At the same time, smallholder farming households make up a significant proportion of the world's chronically food insecure population (HLPE, 2013). Direct consumption, agricultural income, and changes in gender relations are recognized as the primary household-level pathways most immediately responsible for FSN improvements (Carletto et al., 2013; Herforth and Harris 2014).

Complex adoption of agroecology can potentially lead to FSN improvements by changing outputs (what is produced) and generating mechanisms (processes and actions) that influence FSN pathways, when adhering to principles that increase agroecosystem health and resilience and transform food system governance to be based on cultural and social values, (Carletto et al., 2013; Herforth and Harris 2014). There is considerable variation in the extent to which food and farming systems implement agroecological principles, with the ecological, socio-economic, and political context in which a farm operates shaping whether more incremental or transformative approaches to agroecology are practiced.

Fig. 1 depicts how diverse forms of agroecology could present different possibilities for FSN impact, generating a variety of outcomes and mechanisms. Depending on the scale at which agroecological principles are applied (denoted in Fig. 1 by the inner and outer rings), certain mechanisms and outputs (the spokes of the rings) will be more relevant. While agroecological principles and related mechanisms applied at the household scale can reinforce those at the community-level, the extent of the FSN impact may depend on the extent of adoption. For example, farm-level agroecological practices could provide in- and around-field habitat for wild flora and fauna, linking household-level agroecological adoption to landscape-level biodiversity; however, the impact on biodiversity and the ecosystem services this diversity provides, such as pollination, will be minimal if surrounding households practice conventional monocropping (Ramos et al., 2018).

Principles applied at the community/landscape level will generally strengthen and reinforce household-level ones. In a community with established farmers’ networks, for example, individual households could benefit from exchanging knowledge about food preparation and preservation (Bezner Kerr et al., 2019a), effective pest management strategies, or techniques to improve soil quality. Principles more relevant to agroecosystem health and resilience can work synergistically with those pertaining to values-based food system governance, and vice versa. Increasing productivity at a household-level through improved soil, crop, and animal health may bolster food sharing networks, with social-practices of reciprocity redistributing resources within the community. Some principles, if applied at the community or farm-level, can themselves act as mechanisms of food security improvement: equitable land and resource governance, and input reduction directly influence FSN pathways.

This review summarizes available evidence on how agroecological approaches, characterized by considerable variation in the scale and extent to which principles are applied, influence FSN. The objectives of the study are to: 1) summarize all research between 1998 and 2019 that demonstrates a relationship between agroecology and FSN; 2) qualitatively describe the strength of the evidence (+, +/− and -), and 3) identify research gaps. The review considered direct (improved quality, quantity and distribution of agricultural products) and indirect effects of agroecological practices including, for example, how more equitable social relations may influence child feeding practices, labor distribution within households, and seed sharing networks. Other indirect effects are environmental improvements such as soil organic matter content or water quality. These capacities may either be direct (household consumption) or indirect (greater market access) — each impacting variety and quantity of food.

Section snippets

Inclusion criteria and search methodology

In this review we examined the evidence for whether agroecological practices have positive outcomes on FSN. Agroecological practices were drawn from a compiled set of practices (Table 1), including field-level practices such as crop diversification, intercropping or polycultures, agroforestry; farm-level practices such as integration of livestock and crops, riparian buffers; and community or regional practices such as farmer-to-farmer networks and increasing local markets that connect consumers

Results

The majority of studies (78%) found positive relationships between a range of agroecological practices as described in the literature and FSN; only one study found a negative relationship, while the remaining cases found mixed linkages-either no relationship, or both positive and negative results (Fig. 3). Fig. 4 illustrates the distribution of cases that examined simple vs. more complex adoption of agroecological practices, components and their links to food security outcomes.

Agroecology

Discussion

This review provides insight into how farming and food system approaches along a spectrum of agroecological transition contribute to FSN outcomes. The majority of studies were carried out with farming households, and 78% of all studies found evidence of improved household food security and dietary diversity. Most studies focused on food security or diet quality indicators, rather than direct human nutrition measures; while changing diets is not always enough to address nutritional status, due

Conclusions

This review searched for evidence of improving FSN through the use of agroecological practices. Overall, we conclude that a larger majority of studies (78%) found such evidence, with positive outcomes linked to the use of agroecological practices on FSN in households in low- and middle-income countries. Some studies found mixed FSN outcomes and a few studies reported negative FSN. The most common agroecological practices included crop diversification, agroforestry, mixed crop and livestock

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the following students who assisted in the preliminary screening and review process: Kenneth Anokye, Jean-Sébastien Beaulne, Jesse Martens, Camila Patricia de Souza Aroujo, Francisco Munoz Perotti, Carley Van Osch, Anna-Sophie Wild and Krystal Zwiesineyi Chindori-Chininga. We are further thankful for the support of the library staff at Cornell University, USA and Isara, Lyon, France for the support in literature search and analysis.

References (102)

  • J.L. Leroy et al.

    Perspective: what does stunting really mean? A critical review of the evidence

    Adv. Nutr.

    (2019)
  • H.R. Melgar-Quinonez et al.

    Household food insecurity and daily per capita food expenditure in Bolivia, Burkina Faso and the Philippines

    J. Nutr.

    (2006)
  • H. Nyantakyi-Frimpong et al.

    Agroecology and sustainable food systems: participatory research to improve food security among HIV-affected households in northern Malawi

    Soc. Sci. Med.

    (2016)
  • H. Nyantakyi-Frimpong et al.

    Agroecology and healthy food systems in semi-humid tropical Africa: participatory research with vulnerable farming households in Malawi

    Acta Trop.

    (2017)
  • I. Ramos et al.

    Combined effect of matrix quality and spatial heterogeneity on biodiversity decline

    Ecol. Complex.

    (2018)
  • P.Z.F. Santos et al.

    Can agroforestry systems enhance biodiversity and ecosystem service provision in agricultural landscapes? A meta-analysis for the Brazilian Atlantic Forest

    For. Ecol. Manag.

    (2019)
  • M.V. Santoso et al.

    What is the role of women's empowerment in child nutrition outcomes? A systematic review

    Advances in Nutrition

    (2019)
  • K.T. Sibhatu et al.

    Review: meta-analysis of the association between production diversity, diets, and nutrition in smallholder farm households

    Food Pol.

    (2018)
  • L.H. Allen

    Nutritional influences on linear growth: a general review

    Eur. J. Clin. Nutr.

    (1994)
  • R. Ambikapathi et al.

    Market food diversity mitigates the effect of environment on women's dietary diversity in the Agriculture to Nutrition (ATONU) study, Ethiopia

    Publ. Health Nutr.

    (2019)
  • F. Azupogo et al.

    Agro‐ecological zone and farm diversity are factors associated with haemoglobin and anaemia among rural school‐aged children and adolescents in Ghana

    Matern. Child Nutr.

    (2019)
  • L. Bachmann et al.

    Food Security and Farmer Empowerment: A Study of the Impacts of Farmer-Led Sustainable Agriculture in the Philippines

    (2009)
  • J. Bandanaa et al.

    Cocoa farming households in Ghana consider organic practices as climate smart and livelihoods enhancer

    Agric. Food Secur.

    (2016)
  • M.R. Bellon et al.

    On-farm diversity and market participation are positively associated with dietary diversity of rural mothers in southern Benin, west Africa

    PloS One

    (2016)
  • R. Bezner Kerr et al.

    Effects of participatory agriculture and nutrition project on child growth in northern Malawi

    Publ. Health Nutr.

    (2010)
  • R. Bezner Kerr et al.

    Agroecology and nutrition: transformative possibilities and challenges

  • I.S. Bisht et al.

    Farmers' rights, local food systems, and sustainable household dietary diversification: a case of Uttarakhand Himalaya in north-western India

    Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst.

    (2018)
  • K. Bliss

    Cultivating biodiversity: a farmer's view of the role of diversity in agroecosystems

    Biodiversity

    (2017)
  • C. Blixen Magariños et al.

    Propuesta de evaluación de sustentabilidad en agriculturaurbana para huertas vinculadas al programa de producciónde alimentos y organización comunitaria - Udelar. Thesis report

    (2006)
  • J. Boedecker et al.

    Participatory farm diversification and nutrition education increase dietary diversity in Western Kenya

    Matern. Child Nutr.

    (2019)
  • K. Brown et al.

    International zinc nutrition consultative group (IZiNCG) technical document # 1. Assessment of the risk of zinc deficiency in populations and options for its control

    Food Nutr. Bull.

    (2004)
  • V.N. Bushamuka et al.

    Impact of a homestead gardening program on household food security and empowerment of women in Bangladesh

    Food Nutr. Bull.

    (2005)
  • C.I. Calderón et al.

    Agroecology-based farming provides grounds for more resilient livelihoods among smallholders in Western Guatemala

    Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst.

    (2018)
  • P.A. Carney et al.

    Impact of a community gardening project on vegetable intake, food security and family relationships: a community-based participatory research study

    J. Community Health

    (2012)
  • L.J. Christiaensen et al.
    (2000)
  • J. Coates et al.

    Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) for measurement of household food access: indicator guide (v. 3)

  • R. D'Annolfo et al.

    A review of social and economic performance of agroecology

    Int. J. Agric. Sustain.

    (2017)
  • S. de Haan

    Potato diversity at height: multiple dimensions of farmer-driven in-situ conservation in the Andes Seed systems in Peru's central Andes: agrobiodiversity and nutrition in the high Andes. PhD thesis

    (2009)
  • A. Deaconu et al.

    The agroecological farmer's pathways from agriculture to nutrition: a practice-based case from Ecuador's highlands

    Ecol. Food Nutr.

    (2019)
  • M. Deitchler et al.

    Validation of a Measure of household hunger for cross-cultural use

  • M. Dobbins

    Rapid Review Guidebook - Steps for Conducting a Rapid Review

    (2017)
  • A.C.G. Fedyna da Silveira Furtado et al.

    Semeando a agroecologia e colhendo práticas alimentares saudáveis: um olhar sobre os faxinalenses

    DEMETRA Aliment. Nutr. Saúde

    (2014)
  • M. Fernandez et al.

    Subsistence under the canopy: agrobiodiversity's contributions to food and nutrition security amongst coffee communities in Chiapas, Mexico

    Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst.

    (2019)
  • S. Fishman et al.

    The role of vitamins in the prevention and control of anaemia

    Publ. Health Nutr.

    (2000)
  • Rome Declaration on World Food Security

    (1996)
  • M.W. Gitagia et al.

    Determinants of dietary diversity among women of reproductive age in two different agro-ecological zones of Rongai Sub-County, Nakuru, Kenya

    Food Nutr. Res.

    (2019)
  • S. Gliessman
  • T.M. Gondwe et al.

    The relationship between training farmers in agronomic practices and diet diversification: a case study from an intervention under the Scaling up Nutrition programme in Zambia

    Agric. Food Secur.

    (2017)
  • E. Gotor et al.

    Assessing the benefits of Andean crop diversity on farmers' livelihood: insights from a development programme in Bolivia and Peru

    J. Int. Dev.

    (2017)
  • H. Harris-Fry et al.

    The impact of gender equity in agriculture on nutritional status, diets, and household food security: A mixed-methods systematic review

    BMJ Global Health

    (2020)
  • Cited by (104)

    • Sustainable chemistry in adaptive agriculture: A review

      2024, Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text