Toward care-full plural agroecologies: Lessons from the U.S. Agroecology Summit 2023

Abstract

First paragraphs: In May 2023, approximately 100 people gathered in Kansas City, Missouri, for a national conven­ing on scaling agroecology in what is now known as the United States. The gathering (referred to throughout this special issue as the Agroecology Summit or simply the Summit) was convened by people working at research institutions throughout the U.S. The organizing committee aimed to iden­tify how research can support the growers, organi­zations, and communities enacting agroecology in the U.S. Initially funded by a US$50,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the committee also hoped to create a “roadmap” for agroecological research in the U.S. While a co-created research agenda for agro­ecology is arguably an important long-term goal, what unfolded at the Summit indicates that pursu­ing this goal was premature—putting the research cart before the agroecology horse, so to speak. Many summit participants from civil society and social movement spaces pushed against the idea of a roadmap. Some pushed against the idea of work­ing collectively on a goal that was not collectively identified or co-designed; others, against the idea of engaging in collective work without first estab­lishing trust, especially where deep reparative work between and among communities and institutions is still needed. Bringing together people who span diverse identities, positionalities, and ways of knowing is both an epistemologically and ethically complex endeavor. Given the diversity of histori­cal, cultural, and practical orientations to agroecol­ogy, it is unsurprising that the Summit revealed tensions. Two editors on this special issue (Roman-Alcalá and Horner) were on the summit organizing committee. Roman-Alcalá and Horner shared that it was not always comfortable for Summit organiz­ers to receive some of the critiques voiced before the summit (as shared by Wills, Tovar-Aguilar, and Naylor in this issue), at the summit, and further articulated in this special issue. However, the necessity of ongoing dialogue—of engaging in gen­erative discussions across points of difference—was and is evident (Roman-Alcalá, 2022). Although the Summit did not ultimately yield a research agenda or roadmap, it was not an unfruitful event. Participants did not coalesce around a singular goal. Instead, they gave voice to the many goals, needs, and visions driving agroecology in the U.S. The commentaries in this special issue highlight some of the research, policy, organizing, and repar­ative priorities that emerged during and after the Summit. . . .