Digital technologies are being developed and adopted across the agro‐food system, from farm to fork. Within decision‐making spaces, however, little attention is being paid to political factors arising from such technological developments. This review draws from critical social sciences to examine emerging technologies and big data systems in agriculture and assesses some key issues arising in the field. We begin with an introduction and review of the so‐called ‘digital revolution’ and then briefly outline how political economy is effective for understanding major challenges for governing technologies and data systems in agriculture. These challenges include: (1) data ownership and control, (2) the production of technologies and data development, and (3) data security. We then use literature and examples to consider the extent to which the political and economic landscape can be shifted to support greater equity in agriculture, while reflecting on structural challenges and limits. In doing so, we emphasise that while there are significant systemic tensions between digital ag‐tech development and agroecological approaches, we do not see them as mutually exclusive per se. This article intends to provide decision‐makers, practitioners and scholars from a wide range of disciplines with a timely assessment of agro‐food digitalisation that attends to political economic factors. In doing so, this article contributes to policy and decision‐making discussions, which, from our perspective, continue to be rather technocentric in nature while paying little attention to how digital technologies can support agroecological systems specifically.

This perspective piece teases out some of the tensions between the development of a national food policy, which has gained significant traction in Canada over the past few years, and Indigenous food sovereignty, which long predates the Canadian government and its policies and has a rich history and current practice of organizing. Drawing from our observations and discussions at conferences, workshops, and events, and pointing to key aspects of discourse commonly embedded in such discussions, we critically reflect on how settler engagements with Indigenous peoples in developing a national food policy may reify, rather than dismantle, colonial relationships. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of process and the ability for settlers to accept discomfort and incommensurability if we are to move towards spaces that embody solidarity, respect, and resistance.

Current institutional frameworks in sex- and gender-based analysis (SGBA) are promising, but significant gaps remain in their relation to recent developments in research praxis. In this paper we draw from our own experiences with a national health research funding agency, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), to critically examine the uptake and implementation of its current frameworks and practices of sex and gender analysis in health research. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a cohort of 18 health researchers alongside an institutional policy analysis to show how sex and gender have been understood, integrated, and addressed within the agency and initiative. Our findings reveal that attention to date has focused on representation (human and data) while deeper justice issues that are attentive to intersectionality, positionality and reflexivity-remain ambiguous. Finally, we discuss possible strategies for institutions to improve the uptake of knowledge, training, and policy to better support intersectional and culturally-relevant frameworks across the diverse research community.

This article examines the extent to which Indige­nous-led food systems and sovereignty goals, frameworks, and priorities are recognized, affirmed, and supported within the agri-food pub­lic sector. For this study, we focus on the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), but the findings and analysis have implications for settler-Indigenous relations more broadly. First, we situate Indigenous food systems and sovereignties within the context of agri-food bureaucracies in Canada. We then present the research design, which involved 27 interviews with people working within or collaborating with OMAFRA on issues related to agricultural land use, programming, and development, and Indige­nous relations and food systems. The find­ings are categorized into five themes: differing needs, visions, and priorities; land access, conver­sion, and health; representation; consultation and consent in agri-food programming; capacity build­ing. The findings reveal major gaps in Indigenous represen­tation, leadership, and control, and an absence of Indigenous-led planning and decision-making in the agri-food public sector. The findings further show that non-Indigenous people lack cru­cial knowledge concerning treaties and Indigenous rela­tionships to land and stewardship, which cre­ates ongoing and significant barriers to reconcilia­tion. We close by discussing key barriers and opportuni­ties for supporting Indigenous food sys­tem and sovereignty programming and ways forward for deepening settler knowledge of Indigenous issues and experiences. The perspec­tives shared in this study are intended to provide food system research, planning, policy, and practice with insights in order to begin to address structural injustices and better support Indigenous food sovereignty.