Conceptual and Empirical Tensions in Political Agroecology: Reflecting on Polycentric Governance and the EU Case
Presenter/s: Prof. Andreas Thiel, Prof. Praveen Jha
This presentation examined Political Agroecology’s conceptual foundations, political assumptions, governance tensions, and how these ideas related to the European Union’s agricultural and food system policies. It was based on the work of Ariane Goetz, Andreas Thiel, Theresa Meyer, Nora Schütze, and others.
The presentation explained agroecology as more than a farming method. It presented agroecology as practice, science, and a movement. As practice, ecological farming methods rely on biodiversity, local resources, reduced external inputs, and sustainable land and water management. As a science, agroecology studies the entire food system, including ecological, social, economic, and political dimensions. As a movement, it sought to transform food systems by supporting local, resilient, fair, and sustainable forms of food production.
The major focus of the presentation was the idea of Political Agroecology. This meant looking at agroecology not only as a technical or environmental approach, but also as a political project that questioned dominant food systems, capitalism, industrial agriculture, corporate power, and unequal global trade. The presentation linked Political Agroecology to ideas such as food sovereignty, degrowth, decoloniality, social justice, radical democracy, peasant autonomy, and the protection of local or territorial food systems.
The presentation also discussed polycentric governance, which referred to systems with multiple centres of decision-making rather than a single central authority. It is considered whether this governance model could support agroecological transformation by encouraging cooperation between farmers, consumers, civil society, the state, and other actors. However, it also highlighted tensions within this idea, especially around the role of the state, property rights, markets, farmer autonomy, and whether agroecological governance could function within capitalist systems.