Explore our latest Annual Report

Research Articles Can agroecology feed the world? A story of narratives, nuance, and the path forward

Can agroecology feed the world - A story of narratives, nuance, and the path forward
by José Luis Urrea-Benítez, Jonathan Mockshell, Marcela Quintero

A recent systematic literature review explores different narratives on this ongoing debate. Rather than offering a single answer, the research invites us into a deeper, more informed, and evidence-based conversation.

It’s a question that keeps surfacing in every conference hall, community assembly, and policy roundtable on the future of food: Can agroecology feed the world? 

Behind that question lies more than just concern about yields and calories. It’s about power, livelihoods, land, identity, culture, and the kind of future we’re sowing. 

A recent systematic literature review of 46 studies filtered through around 1,000 journal articles made by researchers of the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, Hohenheim University from Germany and FAO explores different narratives on this ongoing debate. It doesn’t try to pick a side—it aims to make sense of the sides that exist, why they matter, and what we can learn from each one of those. Rather than offering a single answer, the research invites us into a deeper, more informed, and evidence-based conversation. 

Let’s walk through it. 

Three Ways to See Agroecology

According to the researchers, there are three dominant narratives around agroecological transitions. 

  • The Supportive Narrative views agroecology as the path to regenerate the planet and uplift rural livelihoods. It’s a systems approach—one that blends knowledge, ecology, equity, and food sovereignty. 
  • The Skeptical Narrative warns that agroecology, with its lower input and often lower short-term yields, cannot meet global food demands. It sees intensification as necessary to prevent further land-use change and degradation. 
  • The Pragmatic Narrative lands somewhere in the middle: it recognizes agroecology’s promise but insists that its success depends on access to land, credit, policy support, and knowledge systems tailored to each local context. 

And it’s not just an academic debate. These narratives have real-world advocates: 

  • Supporters tend to include farmers, grassroots organizations, Indigenous groups, and social science scholars. 
  • Skeptics are often agrifood corporations, governments, and natural scientists focused on yield and efficiency. 
  • Pragmatists include NGOs, development agencies, and some academic sectors looking for scalable, workable models. 
Can agroecology feed the world - A story of narratives, nuance, and the path forward

Image credit: CIAT/Isabella Muñoz 

Digging Deeper: Six Areas That Matter

Beyond the overarching narratives, the review uncovers six contentious themes that shape the agroecological debate. Each is a lens to better understand what’s at stake—and where we can go from here. 

  • Initial Transition Costs 

    Everyone agrees: transitions are hard. But while supporters see diversification as a safety net and path to long-term gain, skeptics focus on the economic vulnerability of farmers. Pragmatists states that under certain conditions (i.e. access to credits, institutional support) production costs can offset initial hurdles. 

  • Inputs and Supply 

    Supporters envision ecological justice—fewer synthetic inputs, more farmer autonomy. Skeptics argue some soils (like those in Sub-Saharan Africa) are too depleted to thrive without external nutrients. Pragmatists call for rethinking supply chains and shared investment. 

  • Yield Potential 

    Here lies the heart of the food security concern. Skeptics worry about drops in yield. Supporters point to case studies showing stable or even increased yields. Pragmatists say: It depends on where you start, and what success looks like. Therefore, one single solution does not fit all, and varies according to the context. 

  1. Labor 
    More labor in agroecology? Supporters say yes—and that’s a good thing, creating rural jobs and restoring community dignity. Skeptics raise concerns about workforce shortages. Pragmatists push for tech and policies that make labor manageable without compromising on livelihoods. 

  1. Scalability 
    Can agroecology scale? Supporters say: Yes, if rooted in local knowledge and social movements. Skeptics doubt its potential in the face of dominant economic models. Pragmatists advocate for hybrid strategies, building coalitions and governance structures that allow it to grow meaningfully. 

  1. Markets 
    Supporters favor solidarity economies and local empowerment. Skeptics warn that alternative markets may not absorb agroecological supply. Pragmatists emphasize the need for institutional backing, policy alignment, and strong producer-consumer networks. 

The Power of Knowledge Co-Creation

A cross-cutting thread throughout the research is the need for knowledge co-creation. Agroecology isn’t just a set of practices—it’s a way of thinking and learning. It requires multi-stakeholder dialogue, local innovation, and participatory science. 

But this only works if power dynamics are addressed. Without equity and inclusion, even the most participatory process can be more symbolic than meaningful. Real transformation begins when diverse actors shape goals together, not just exchange information. 

The authors of the review leave us with a thought-provoking conclusion: Some say agroecology can’t feed the world. Others say it’s the only way we’ll manage to. The truth may lie in the richness of the dialogue between both views. 

Rather than choosing a camp, we need better tools for navigating complexity. We need to ask not just can it feed the world? But also what kind of world do we want to feed and with what food? One where ecosystems thrive, farmers are empowered, markets are inclusive, and knowledge is built together. 

Now we want to hear from you. Do you believe agroecology can feed the world? 
Which narrative resonates with your experience—supportive, skeptical, or pragmatic? 

Drop your thoughts in our social media (LinkedIn, Facebook, X) or share this article to keep the debate alive. Because the future of food is not just about what we grow—it’s about what we believe is possible.

The Team

Further reading

Read the complete article published in Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems

Cover Image: Sweetpotato vines harvested in Nungwe village, Geita District, Geita Region, Tanzania. Photo Credit: CGIAR/CIP