David Ludwig

Soils are on the political agenda, recognized as central actors for agricultural transitions. At the same time, soils are often difficult for humans to relate to. This paradox—soil as central to sustainability but distant to most humans—motivates the question: what regenerative soil relations emerge from the practice of soil care in vegetable gardening? To answer this, our study draws from twelve months of ethnographic fieldwork at two vegetable gardens in Luxembourg to elaborate on the affective dimension of soil care. The prolonged engagement allows for an analysis of the caring practices and the collective affective relations that emerge from them. Gardeners enact respect for the soil through their practices to create the conditions for soil life to flourish. In addition, collective dynamics can create a vibrant and uplifting affective atmosphere. Rather than igniting passion for soils in individuals, we argue that the paradox of soil relations is best addressed collectively, by nurturing practices of respect and immersions in an affective atmosphere. It is crucial to move beyond individual responsibility for the agricultural transitions and to engage people affectively through collective forms of participation.

1. The project of multispecies justice emerged as a response to conceptions of justice that focus exclusively on human beings (Celermajer et al., 2025). There are various approaches that extend the...

Societal Impact Statement: Xylella fastidiosa is a major plant pathogen affecting crops such as grapes, citrus, almonds, and olives, with potentially severe consequences for agricultural production and rural livelihoods worldwide. This paper examines the conflict around the management of the X. fastidiosa outbreak affecting olive trees in southern Italy. We show that the conflict cannot be reduced to a confrontation between science and “science denialists” but involves multiple actors holding different forms of knowledge and values. Our findings highlight the importance of recognizing epistemic diversity for more resilient, socially robust plant health governance in an era of climate change and emerging plant diseases. Summary: This paper analyzes the epistemic and political dimensions of the conflict around the management of the Xylella fastidiosa epidemic in Apulia, southern Italy—one of the most contested episodes in European plant health governance. The study draws on 6 years of ethnographic research, combining interviews with scientists, farmers, and policymakers; participant observation at international conferences and local assemblies; and analysis of scientific publications, policy documents, and media coverage. We identify five different intersecting domains where knowledge politics unfolds: (1) the dispute over disease causality, naming and framing; (2) the tension between scientific and lay actors regarding legitimate knowledge and research hypotheses; (3) the internal disagreements within the scientific community, reflecting different disciplinary traditions; (4) the divisions among farmers, reflecting divergent economic strategies, cultural attachments, and visions of agricultural futures; and (5) the institutional dynamics shaping knowledge production within scientific institutions. Under high uncertainty and stakes, technocratic governance struggles to secure legitimacy. Acknowledging epistemic diversity and embracing epistemic pluralism—integrating multiple forms of knowledge—is essential for adaptive and trusted plant health strategies in an era of rapid climate change and globalized trade.

The aim of this chapter is to introduce a “partial overlaps” framework with particular attention to the roles of values in transdisciplinary and intercultural collaboration. This framework attends both to overlaps between epistemologies, ontologies, and values included in different knowledge systems and to differences that make those overlaps always partial. While overlaps can work as springboards for reaching common ground and coordinated joint action, their partialities require serious engagement with disagreements and tensions. In transdisciplinary practice, complex landscapes of heterogeneous and sometimes conflicting values need to be navigated, resulting in important challenges that can be faced using partial overlaps. In the chapter, the partial overlaps framework is situated in a wider history of epistemic paternalism, diversity, and decolonization, which involves an entanglement of values and knowledge production. The chapter illustrates partial overlaps between values by considering how they are articulated in different knowledge systems, especially focusing on Indigenous and local practices and knowledge. Finally, it also considers the possibilities of learning from partial overlaps, particularly in the entanglement of values and ontologies. Readers may also be interested in the Handbook chapters by Jacalyn M. Beck et al. and Kyle Whyte and Pasang Yangjee Sherpa.

Hybrid knowledge systems are central to community negotiations of environmental, social, and epistemic pressures. In multilingual borderland areas, interac

Societal Impact Statement: Socio‐ecological crises such as biodiversity loss, climate change, and food insecurity require academic expertise and also the inclusion of diverse actors outside of academia such as farmers, policymakers, and local communities. This article develops a synthesizing account of “transdisciplinary plant sciences” that aim to co‐create research and interventions with diverse non‐academic actors. The increasing importance of transdisciplinary methods reflects their potential in fostering more sustainable relations among plants, people, and the planet. At the same time, a more focused debate about transdisciplinarity in the plant sciences is necessary to tackle its many methodological and institutional challenges in contexts of expert‐driven research and technocratic governance cultures. Summary: This review article develops a synthesizing account of transdisciplinary plant sciences that include diverse non‐academic actors such as farmers, policymakers, and local communities. Five hotspots of transdisciplinarity in the plant sciences—ethnobotany, participatory plant breeding, integrated pest management, convivial conservation, and Do‐it‐Yourself “DIY” biology—are introduced to assess commonalities and differences from a comparative perspective. Across these five fields, the review reveals common opportunities and challenges of transdisciplinary plant sciences. Plant knowledge was never an exclusively academic affair, and the plant sciences can therefore mobilize rich traditions of co‐creation for more inclusive research practices. However, local plant knowledge often becomes sidelined in expert‐driven research and technocratic governance cultures that reflect serious methodological and institutional challenges of transdisciplinary approaches. A transformative agenda is needed to realize transdisciplinary promises of epistemically more robust and socially more just research. The rise of transdisciplinary plant sciences therefore raises foundational questions about the roles of plant sciences in times of planetary crises and about their potential in shaping relations among plants, people, and the planet.