The history of agrecology "described simultaneousy as a science, a set of practices and a social movement" on different continents does provide food for endless debates of pro's and con's in a wide range of points of vue from ideology to hard science...
One of the reasons why Agroecolgy is still a controversal issue, is that scientific evidence is late behind what farmers and often CSOs and the private sector have already developed in various contexts and practices. Often agroecology is based on practioners or activits says. On the other hand the inherent complexity of agroecology ( simultaneously adressing social, economic and ecologic objectives + local adaptation) advocate for a multicriteria analysis that involves different types of science that need to be balanced.
Nowadays many decision makers are convienced of the need to move fast towards agriculture transition in order to meet the current challenges in food production, healthy food and lanscapes, sustainable natural ressources management, food security , combating poverty and mitigation and adapatation to global warming. But the public policies are still not in line and their adoption is challenged by short term return considerations put to the front by investors and lack of information.
Unfortunatly the available knowledge is often fragmented and centered on only one or two aspects . We must admit a common accepted methodology for scoping agroecology in its complexity is still not yet availalble. Also there is a need for a global overview of the already existing agroecological practices all over the world .
Burger Patrice