Assessing benefits and limits of agroecological transitions in different contexts is of foremost importance to steer and manage agroecological transitions and to feed evidence-based advocacy. However, assessing agroecological transitions remains a methodological challenge. The objective of this research was to investigate to what extent existing multiscale and multidimensional assessment methods were suitable to assess agroecological transitions. We used a literature review to identify and select 14 existing multiscale and multidimensional assessment methods related to sustainable or resilient agriculture. We then analyzed these 14 methods according to five evaluation criteria that reflected key requirements for assessing agroecological transitions: 1) be adaptable to local conditions, 2) consider social interactions among stakeholders involved in the transitions, 3) clarify the concept of agroecology, 4) consider the temporal dynamics of the transitions to better understand barriers and levers in their development and 5) use a participatory bottom-up approach. The methods adopted different approaches to consider each evaluation criterion, but none of them covered all five. The two evaluation criteria most often employed were the adaptability to local conditions (used by 13 of the methods) and the consideration of social interactions (used by all 14 of the analyzed methods). To be adaptable, methods mobilized generic guidelines with flexible content and/or included a contextualization phase. For social interactions, most methods mobilized social-related indicators, and two included stakeholder mapping. Two methods clarified the agroecological concept by mobilizing different sets of principles. Two other methods considered temporal dynamics of the transitions, mobilizing a trajectory of change to understand barriers and levers in their development. Finally, seven methods adopted a bottom-up participatory approach, involving stakeholders in both their development and use. To balance the existing trade-offs between the evaluation purpose, the time requirement and the level of participation in the different approaches adopted by the 14 methods studied, we suggest combining some of the approaches in a complementary mode to cover all 5 criteria and therefore improve the assessment of agroecological transitions.

In 2013, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) established a science–policy interface (SPI) to address Parties’ need for demand-driven, timely, interdisciplinary science and technical knowledge to tackle problems of desertification, land degradation and drought. Since then, a comprehensive assessment of the SPI’s impacts on policy decision-making has been lacking, despite perceptions that the SPI is vital to the Convention’s success. Addressing this gap, this paper evaluates whether the SPI and its processes and outputs have provided the necessary scientific and technological knowledge and advice to Parties to support timely, evidence-informed decision-making. It applies an analytical framework to assess performance metrics, considering associated documents and evidence of societal relevance and social quality. The findings indicate that SPI outputs have improved implementation of the UNCCD since 2015, particularly in the context of Sustainable Development Goal Target 15.3. SPI outputs have supported scientific cooperation between the Convention and its strategic partners while enhancing its science and technology profile in line with Article 16 and Article 17. The findings indicate that further formalization of the SPI’s status within the UNCCD is vital to improve its functions, undertake its work, and enable the UNCCD to maintain its global lead in providing knowledge and advice on combating desertification, land degradation and drought.

The report examines the interactions between the various goals and targets, determining to what extent they reinforce or conflict with each other. It provides a blueprint to help countries implement and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The Paris Climate Agreements and Sustainable Development Goals, signed by 197 countries, present agendas and address key issues for implementing multi-scale responses for sustainable development under climate change—an effort that must involve local, regional, national, and supra-national stakeholders. In that regard, Continental Carbon Sequestration (CoCS) and conservation of carbon sinks are recognized increasingly as having potentially important roles in mitigating climate change and adapting to it. Making that potential a reality will require indicators of success for various stakeholders from multidisciplinary backgrounds, plus promotion of long-term implementation of strategic action towards civil society (e.g., law and policy makers, economists, and farmers). To help meet those challenges, this discussion paper summarizes the state of the art and uncertainties regarding CoCS, taking an interdisciplinary, holistic approach toward understanding these complex issues. The first part of the paper discusses the carbon cycle’s bio-geophysical processes, while the second introduces the plurality of geographical scales to be addressed when dealing with landscape management for CoCS. The third part addresses systemic viability, vulnerability, and resilience in CoCS practices, before concluding with the need to develop inter-disciplinarity in sustainable science, participative research, and the societal implications of sustainable CoCS actions.