Anne W. Kuria

The challenge of achieving food security amidst broken food systems, the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, degrading land, and growing social inequity remains a critical development priority in alignment with the Vision 2030 agenda. While crop diversification is a cornerstone of agroecological transitions and food security, global food systems have often overlooked its potential, largely due to insufficient local participation and the reliance on blanket policies unsuitable for heterogeneous contexts. This article revisits agroecological transitions in Western Rwanda a decade after data collection, assessing the enduring relevance of local knowledge in understanding the crop diversity–food security–land degradation nexus. Using a systematic knowledge-based approach (AKT5), data were collected from 150 smallholder farmers through a Paired Catchment Assessment. Findings from the 1995–2015 period revealed a decline or disappearance of “low-value” crops, driven by the Crop Intensification Program (76%), land shortages (55%), and abandonment of slow-growing crops (49%). As a result, 83% of farmers reported food insecurity, primarily manifesting as seasonal food shortages (51%). Perennial crops emerged as critical for bridging hunger gaps, while reduced crop diversity forced many farmers to rely on off-farm food sources. The original analysis identified seven agroecological principles integral to the crop diversity–food security nexus: soil health, biodiversity, synergy, economic diversification, social values and diets, co-creation of knowledge, and participation. These findings varied significantly by land degradation status, emphasizing the importance of context-specific solutions. This study also showed that farmers have become more dependent on sourcing food off-farm, with food produced on-farm supporting farmers for an average of 6.6 months annually in 2015 compared to 10.1 months in 1995. This underpins the need to leverage ecological rather than administrative boundaries, ensuring connectivity within food systems, and fostering equitable trade mechanisms for smallholder farmers if agroecological transitions are to be realized. A decade later, the findings of this study were reflected upon and validated through recent literature, which underpins the validity of local knowledge in understanding of agroecological transitions. This advocates for stronger integration of local knowledge, stakeholder collaboration to promote the co-design of tailored context-appropriate, inclusive, and sustainable policy frameworks to foster sustainable food systems across scales.

Agroecology, as a holistic approach to sustainable food systems, is gaining momentum globally as a key approach to addressing current challenges in agricultural and food production. In sub-Saharan Africa, despite numerous efforts to address declining soil productivity, water scarcity, and increasing pest pressure through agroecological soil, water, and integrated pest management (IPM) practices, the adoption of such practices remains low. As part of the CGIAR Agroecology Initiative, we conducted a collaborative rapid innovation assessment of existing soil, water, and pest management practices in two Agroecological Living Landscapes (ALLs) in Makueni and Kiambu counties, Kenya. The assessment also included an evaluation of the performance of these practices and identified farmer preferences. Using a multi-stage approach, we applied stratified random sampling to identify 80 farmers for farm assessments and in-depth interviews. A total of 31 practices were identified, of which 26 were further evaluated. The evaluation revealed a heterogeneous set of socio-economic and biophysical contextual factors influencing practice performance. Respondents identified 19 strengths, and 13 challenges associated with the practices, highlighting opportunities for innovation to improve or adapt performance. Farmers also expressed preferences for future adoption of 31 practices, 77% of which were listed in one of the three focus areas, namely soil management, water management, or IPM. The other 33% were associated with multiple functions and were listed under two or three of the focus areas. The results of the collaborative assessment informed a broader co-design cycle that included participatory prioritization and selection of innovative practices, experimental design, and monitoring protocols. This collaborative and systematic approach was taken because innovative practices often fail to be adopted due to a lack of co-design and inclusion of local perspectives in innovation design, and a disconnect between science and practice. Our study highlights the importance of integrating stakeholder input and transdisciplinary technical expertise in the co-design and implementation of agroecological innovations. It also emphasizes the importance of using a structured methodology to understand farmers’ options, context, and preferences while co-designing locally relevant agroecological practices, which promotes holistic and inclusive adoption, successful implementation and long-term sustainability of agroecological practices.