I wonder which kind of “other innovative approaches” are considered in the first question. This should be clarified. Agroecology should not be taken out of its productive, social and political context. Peasant families and indigenous peoples in their territories are at the centre-piece of agroecological innovations and creativity fostering to address local problematics (see Timmermann & Félix, 2015). Practices and technologies that derive from traditional knowledge and ancestral know-how have often proved sound in the use and management of biodiversity, water and land resources, and in strengthening social resilience and intergenerational sustainability. To what extent can agroecology improve resource-use efficiencies, minimize ecological footprint, strengthen resilience, secure social equity and responsibility, and create jobs as well? The short answers is to have political will (locally, nationally, and internationally) to do so! To achieve this political will, grassroots movements are key to achieve agroecological food systems, and I cite Michel Pimbert with at least four aspects that are key (http://www.cultivatecollective.org/in-perspective/agroecology-as-an-alternative-vision-to-climate-smart-agriculture/):
(1) Promote a new modernity and a dignified peasant identity
(2) Transition from a linear economy towards circular and solidarity economy
(3) Re-think the whole system of economics, trade, and markets
(4) Deepen into proper participatory democracy
Diversification of farming system designs is key in sustaining food security and nutrition in its four dimensions. An agroecological approach to food systems also includes the territorialisation of the food produced and consumed (i.e. “food is grown where it is needed the most”, https://www.wur.nl/en/show/Towards-ecological-intensification-of-world-agriculture.htm). The implementation of agroecological principles not only addresses food security, but also enhances local livelihoods.
Agroecology should not be framed in a certification scheme nor a top-down implementation. Rather, the amplification of agroecological approaches and principles should be rooted in social and organizations and political processes at local levels. This also highlights the need for a paradigm shift in curriculum and courses of technical and higher-education levels. ‘New’ technicians that are skilled in supporting community-based processes (instead of imposing research/development agendas) will only benefit the transformation of locally-rooted food systems.
The fourth question on metrics should be anchored in the re-vitalization of urban and rural communities through the practice of agroecology. The potential of agroecology to foster creativity and the development of innovative options to agricultural issues (production, consumption and markets) should not be overlooked in performance assessments of agricultural system.
Georges Félix