838
Views
14
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

The evolving landscape of agroecological research

ORCID Icon, , , , &
Pages 551-591
Published online: 30 Nov 2020
 

ABSTRACT

It has been widely argued that agroecological science, which originally developed as the application of ecological principles to agricultural systems, should engage with the social and political issues that affect production agriculture, and incorporate knowledge from a variety of sources. In this paper, we use techniques from network science and bibliometrics to evaluate the degree to which this transformation has taken place. By creating networks based on over 3,000 agroecology papers and the roughly 160,000 references they cite, we distinguish the sub-fields (“research fronts”) that made up agroecology in three time intervals: 1982–2004, 2005–2013, and 2014–2018. We also identify the main disciplines from which the research fronts in 2014–2018 drew their supporting knowledge. We suggest that, very broadly, themes in agroecological research include: Ecosystem services; (agro)biodiversity; approaches to agricultural intensification; tropical agroecosystems (particularly coffee); pest and weed management; organic agriculture; cropping systems; system transitions, modeling, and design; climate change adaptation; food sovereignty; education; and the nature and purpose of agroecology itself. Some research fronts mainly cite papers in natural science fields such as ecology, environmental science, agriculture, and entomology. However, others draw upon work in social science areas including development studies, environmental studies, and anthropology. The analysis presented in this paper demonstrates that agroecology has indeed evolved to possess many of the characteristics of an “ecology of [the entire] food system.” We anticipate that this work will also be of use to those wishing to gain an overview of the field or identify key papers, knowledge gaps, and potential collaborations.

Acknowledgments

REM would like to acknowledge J. Görres for thought-provoking comments on an early version of this manuscript, and also appreciates support from the UVM College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewer for constructive comments that significantly improved the presentation of the results in this paper.

Declaration of interests

The authors have no competing interests.

Supplemental material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
EUR 50.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
EUR 272.00 Add to cart

Purchase access via tokens

  • Choose from packages of 10, 20, and 30 tokens
  • Can use on articles across multiple libraries & subject collections
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded & printed
From EUR 400.00
per package
Learn more
* Local tax will be added as applicable
 

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.