I have been working in agroecology for over 20 years, as a an academic engaging in Participatory Action Research (PAR) in Latin America and the United States. Below I present my comments on scope, project team, evidence, transparency and principles and procedures. Agroecology has great potential to contribute to improving the world's agrifood systems, especially because it engages with the deep structural issues that continue to oppress our food system and degrade our environment. My personal definition of agroecology is "Agroecology is an approach that integrates ecological science with other scientific disciplines (e.g. social sciences) and knowledge systems (e.g. local, indigenous) to guide research and actions towards the sustainable transformation of our current agrifood system."
a) the scope of the report should include a transdisciplinary and participatory agroecological perspective that fully engages in the scientific, social movement and practical dimensions of agroecology. This including giving full opportunity to include farmer and movement voices in addition to scientists and an acknowledgement of the influence of political economic forces and markets on food security, sovereignty and nutrition.
b) the Project Team should include scientists comfortable with crossing disciplinary lines and who can embrace the complexity of agrifood systems, as well as non-scientist practitioners that include farmers and social movement advocates.
c) The report should be mindful of what it considers evidence, and avoid marketing oriented materials from powerful corporate actors. In addition, practical knowledge and experience from farmers and social movements should be included in addition to scientific evidence.
d) transparency at all stages of this process is essential, and it will be necessary for the FAO to share progress consistently and in a timely matter.
e) this process should move forward with agreed upon principles & procedures determining governance and transparency over the project team's work, including total transparency of review process, "conflict resolution" processes, how differing conclusions and assessments of the evidence by authors will be presented, etc. These are critical and have to be established at the outset.
V. Ernesto Mendez