Perspectives related to food sovereignty and climate change: Research agenda and related global  factors

Introduction

Access to food is an internationally recognized human right¹ and an essential element for human survival.² Nevertheless, at the present time, not all communities are able to access adequate, healthy, and sufficient food due to a confluence of economic, political, and social factors.³ The global outbreak of the Coronavirus has served to highlight the inherent contradictions of the current food regime.² The issue of access to food during the pandemic has emerged as one of the most significant unresolved challenges on a global scale.²

In this context, the concept of food sovereignty has been addressed from various perspectives, including legal, social, political, and ecological approaches. Different authors define it as the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food, produced through sustainable and ecological methods, as well as their right to define their own food systems. For the purposes of this analysis, we adopt an operational definition that understands food sovereignty as the capacity of communities to autonomously decide on the production, distribution, and consumption of food, ensuring equitable access, environmental sustainability, and respect for traditional knowledge. This integrative view allows us to analyze publications from a systemic perspective aligned with the current challenges arising from climate change.

In order to guarantee the right to food and promote food security, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development focuses on several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), providing tools and defining policies and strategies that enable all people to feed themselves. One such goal is SDG 2, which is to eradicate hunger and enhance nutritional outcomes for all.⁴ SDG 12 pertains to consumption and production, whereas SDG 5l is concerned with life and terrestrial ecosystems.⁴ In addition to promoting responsible consumption and production, these goals seek to reduce the per capita material footprint, hunger, and obesity, while increasing investment in sustainable agriculture and small producers.⁵

It is therefore imperative that the food system undergoes a radical transformation in order to guarantee the achievement of the proposed sustainable development objectives. However, as Capone et al.⁶ and Galli et al.⁷ have observed, the factors involved in this system are among the main promoters of environmental problems worldwide. These include biodiversity loss, soil and water depletion, and landscape degradation. Conversely, Campesina⁸ posited that food sovereignty is a prerequisite for genuine food security. The concept of food sovereignty is multifaceted and has been defined in various ways. It encompasses aspects related to food law, security, and justice.⁹ Food sovereignty refers to the entitlement of individuals to obtain nutritious and culturally suitable food, cultivated using environmentally responsible and enduring techniques, as well as the authority to shape their own agricultural and food systems.¹⁰

Certain studies have focused on clarifying the challenges faced by groups in achieving autonomy over food. The notion of food self-determination and its progress via agroecological practices has garnered attention within native movements, and thus, is utilized by policymakers in their narratives to reshape existing food frameworks.¹¹ For example, Coté¹² posits that numerous health issues and inequities experienced by Indigenous populations are attributable to a complex interplay of factors, including colonialism, the dispossession of their lands, globalization, migration, and the erosion of cultural and linguistic identity. In this sense, food sovereignty in Indigenous communities is grounded in cultural knowledge that is transmitted from one generation to the next.^13–15

Amid cultural transformations and the spread of globalization, it is remarkable that certain Indigenous groups have managed to maintain substantial intergenerational knowledge sharing along with their cultural and spiritual traditions. These communities achieve this by acquiring, preparing, and consuming their indigenous foods, thereby substantiating the argument for food sovereignty.^16,17 Consequently, in order to guarantee food sovereignty, it is imperative that policies are devised to safeguard the autonomy of individuals and communities in relation to food choices. This is a fundamental aspect of the right to self-determination and food. It is imperative that these policies take into account the time required for food harvesting and the environmental constraints resulting from global and local forces.³

With regard to environmental factors, a substantial proportion of the research on food sovereignty has concentrated on the impact of climate change in this domain. This is because climate change is anticipated to exacerbate other factors, both climatic and non-climatic, that contribute to the vulnerability of agricultural systems.¹⁸ Alterations in precipitation and temperature patterns, in conjunction with an increase in the frequency of extreme events, are already reducing crop and grassland productivity.¹⁹ Despite the implementation of measures to mitigate these effects, the efficacy of current measures has been demonstrated to be insufficient.²⁰ In this context, research has focused on strategies that encourage collaborative approaches and interventions between scientists and farmers with the objective of enhancing coping strategies and adaptation capacities.¹⁹ Notably, the expertise and practices of Indigenous populations in food security frameworks deserve focused consideration in studies, as they offer critical perspectives that can be leveraged to strengthen food sovereignty.¹⁹

The effects of climate change on food systems are becoming increasingly complex and region-specific. In countries like China, climate variability not only threatens crop production but also exacerbates food insecurity through systemic stressors such as the redistribution of production factors and increasing grain storage vulnerabilities. These dynamics call for integrated and multidisciplinary adaptation strategies to build resilient food systems in the face of global climate change.²¹

The objective of this study is to identify bibliometric indicators of food sovereignty research that are affected by climate change. A bibliometric analysis was therefore undertaken for this purpose. To this end, a bibliometric analysis was conducted, and the following questions were posed:

In which years has there been the greatest interest in the concept of food sovereignty?

In which journals have the greatest number of articles on the topic of food sovereignty been published?

Which authors have received the greatest number of citations in their published articles on food sovereignty?

In which journals have the greatest number of citations been made in publications related to food sovereignty?

In which countries have articles published in those countries received the highest number of citations?

The document is structured as follows: The initial stage of the process, which involves the extraction of quality and quantity indicators, is presented in the Materials and Methods section. Subsequently, the findings and their implications are presented, and finally, the conclusions are addressed.

Methods

In order to gain insight into the objective of the present research, an exploratory study was conducted based on secondary sources of information using bibliometric analysis. However, bibliometrics are supported by the factors established by the PRISMA statement for systematic literature reviews, as evidenced in Wang et al.²² In light of the aforementioned considerations, the following aspects emerge as key points for discussion.

A bibliometric analysis allows for an examination of the evolution and distribution of literature within a specific field. In this instance, the field of study is that of food sovereignty. This approach is particularly well-suited to mapping the scholarly impact, identifying emerging trends, and assessing the influence of countries and journals on the topic. In contrast to a systematic review, which is designed to assess and synthesize specific evidence from primary studies in order to answer a particular research question, bibliometric analysis focuses on the analysis of publication and citation patterns in order to gain an overview of the development of the field. This method provides a comprehensive understanding of the trajectory and scholarly impact of the field, which is essential for achieving the exploratory objective of this study.

e) Selection process

Finally, following the parameters established by the PRISMA statement, the methodological design of the research is presented in detail in Figure 1, using a flow chart.

Figure 1. PRISMA flow chart.

Own elaboration.

Results

The initial presentation is of the quantity per year indicators. Figure 2 illustrates that the number of studies on food sovereignty indexed in the Scopus database increased between 2015 and 2022. Furthermore, there is evidence of linear 99.5% growth of the thematic, with the year with the highest academic productivity being 2015. In that year, a total of 69 publications were produced, including articles examining the potential and limitations of food sovereignty for health,²⁴ for profit maximization, particularly in the rural sector,²⁵ and others. The year 2021 presented an accumulated 58 publications related to the central thematic. The third term includes the year 2019, in which a total of 53 studies were published. Another noteworthy year in terms of scientific publications related to food sovereignty was 2020, with a total of 52 publications. This period saw a notable focus on the exploration of agroecological and systemic thinking in the context of post-Covid-19 scenarios.²⁶

Figure 2. Publications by year.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

Based on the bibliometric analysis, a sustained increase in scientific production on food sovereignty has been observed since 2015. This growth aligns with key global events that have reshaped academic and policy agendas around sustainable development. For instance, the adoption of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in September 2015 prompted a surge in research focused on goals such as Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG 12), and Climate Action (SDG 13), all of which are closely linked to food sovereignty. This global framework encouraged researchers and policymakers to focus on local food dynamics, integrating approaches that emphasize social justice, environmental sustainability, and community resilience.

Another pivotal event was the signing of the Paris Agreement in December 2015, which committed signatory countries to limit global warming and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This milestone catalyzed studies exploring how climate change affects food availability and access, particularly in vulnerable regions. Since then, there has been thematic growth in publications connecting food sovereignty with climate mitigation and adaptation strategies, highlighting the role of agroecology, Indigenous knowledge, and resilient food systems as integrated responses to the climate crisis. In this context, the peaks in publications during 2019, 2020, and 2021 can be interpreted as a reflection of the growing interest in understanding the intersections between climate policy, food security, and social justice at both global and local scales.

Although 2015 saw the highest number of articles, the general trend indicates neither abrupt peaks nor significant drops, but rather a steady increase in academic production. In recent years, 25% of publications are concentrated in the most recent year, 50% in the last three years, and 75% in the last five years. This pattern of continuous and cumulative growth lends support to the conclusion that there is a linear trend in the increase of research on food sovereignty, with stable and progressive production rather than irregular fluctuations.

In terms of publications on the subject of food sovereignty, the author with the highest number of publications to date is Hannah Wittman, with nine publications that primarily address digital aspects of agroecology, focusing on climate resilience, security, nutrition, literacy, and sustainable rural development.^27–29 Subsequently, Marca Tilzey and Michel P. Pimbert have published seven and six articles, respectively, on the subject of food sovereignty.³⁰ Nevertheless, given that 64.56% of the authors have developed 80% of the publications on the topic of study, it can be concluded that the Pareto Law is not fulfilled.

With regard to productivity by journals, Figure 3 illustrates that the Journal of Peasant Studies, based in England, has published the greatest number of articles on the subject of food sovereignty, with a total of 27 publications. The journal’s primary focus is on rural policy and development, as evidenced by the works of Dale³¹ and Meek & Khadse.³² The second-highest output was observed in the case of the journal Agriculture and Human Values from the Netherlands, which had 24 publications. This journal is dedicated to the interdisciplinary study of the humanities, social sciences, and agriculture from ethical and social perspectives, as evidenced by the works of Ahmad et al.³³ and Price et al.³⁴ Conversely, Globalizations has published 18 articles on the topics of food sovereignty and security. Therefore, with regard to productivity by journal, it is evident that, as illustrated in Figure 3, 32.08% of the journals have published 80% of their publications on food sovereignty, which is not in accordance with Pareto’s law.

Figure 3. Publications by journal.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

With regard to the subject of productivity by country, the United States has to date published the largest number of articles, with 117 publications. The United States has also addressed a number of topics, including the analysis of the country’s agroecological potential^35,36 and different aspects related to different approaches to food sovereignty.²⁶ Canada has published a total of 48 articles on the subject, with a particular focus on indigenous food sovereignty in urban environments. This has involved an examination of the factors of responsibility and reciprocity.³⁴ The United Kingdom and the Netherlands have published 37 and 23 articles, respectively, while Australia and Spain have published 18 articles each. Indonesia has 16 publications, New Zealand and South Africa have seven publications each, and India has six publications.

It is crucial to understand that the quantitative analysis of citations allows for the evaluation of an article’s impact within the academic community.³⁵ Therefore, it is essential to calculate the number of citations in order to identify authors who have had the greatest impact on the academic community. In accordance with the preceding considerations, Figure 4 delineates the ten principal authors in terms of their citation and impact profiles with respect to studies on food sovereignty. The results indicate that Cristina Schiavoni, with a total of 181 citations, has the greatest impact on the academic community. Her research specialization is in the understanding of disputed lands and state-society interaction for the construction of food sovereignty.^36,37

Figure 4. Author citations.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

Hannah Wittman ranks second in impact, with her work on food sovereignty cited 173 times in studies on the topic. Her research emphasizes the importance of food sovereignty, agroecological transitions, market stability, and farmers’ autonomy as essential elements driving innovation in social welfare programs aimed at addressing malnutrition.³⁸ represents an important reference in this field. She is not only the author with the second highest academic impact but also the most productive. Subsequently, Sam Grey is the author who, at the present time, accounts for a total of 131 citations in studies on food sovereignty. Her specialization is on the contributions of Indigenous movements to the food system and development policies with a view to decolonization.³⁹

A statistical analysis of the distribution of citations by quartile reveals that 20 authors, representing 0.27% of the total, account for 25% of the total number of citations in the field. Sixty authors (0.81%) accounted for 50% of the total number of citations in studies focused on food sovereignty, and 148 authors (2%) accounted for 75% of citations. Finally, given that 2.38% of authors have 80% of the citations in the subject area, it is evident that the Pareto principle does not hold true.

Although citation analysis provides a valuable metric for gauging the influence of individual scholars within the academic community, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of relying exclusively on quantitative measures. While citations are a valuable metric for gauging an author’s academic reach, they often fail to capture the broader societal or practical impacts of research. This is particularly evident in fields like food sovereignty, which intersect with social movements, local governance, and grassroots initiatives. It is not uncommon for influential contributions, particularly those emanating from indigenous communities or grassroots organizations, to fail to achieve high citation counts despite their significant role in shaping policies or practices related to food sovereignty. It would therefore be beneficial for future research on academic influence to integrate qualitative assessments of impact, such as case studies on policy changes, community engagement, or the direct implementation of research findings.

Furthermore, the current distribution of citations among scholars in the field of food sovereignty demonstrates a concentration of academic attention on a limited number of highly cited authors. This concentration, as evidenced by the observation that a mere 2% of authors account for 75% of citations, suggests that a select few voices or perspectives may be disproportionately influential within the discourse. Such trends could result in the inadvertent marginalization of emerging scholars or underrepresented groups, whose work, although potentially groundbreaking, may encounter difficulties in gaining traction in highly competitive academic landscapes. To address this imbalance, it is necessary to broaden the criteria for assessing academic impact. In addition to citation counts, it is essential to consider the relevance of research to local communities and its contribution to addressing real-world challenges related to food sovereignty. Such a shift could facilitate the development of a more inclusive and diverse academic discourse.

As a bibliometric analysis encompasses only a subset of journals, as demonstrated in the study by Wittman et al.,⁴⁰ it is essential to present a comparative quantification of citations among the most prominent academic and scientific journals. Accordingly, Figure 5 enumerates the ten journals that currently exert the greatest influence, as gauged by the total number of citations. First, the English Journal of Peasant Studies has 488 citations, a journal that has previously been identified as the most productive in its field, and which is therefore the principal reference for the scientific dissemination of food sovereignty.

Figure 5. Journal citations.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

Secondly, the Dutch Journal of Agriculture and Human Values has a total of 379 citations in research related to the study of food sovereignty. In particular, the journal has made significant contributions to the field by publishing research on the subject from a range of disciplines, including Social Sciences, Humanities, and Agricultural Sciences. This has positioned it as a leading source of knowledge in the area, as evidenced by its high impact and productivity ratings (see Figure 4). The English journal Globalizations is the next most impactful in terms of scientific impact, with a total of 373 citations in research related to the study of food sovereignty. It addresses aspects that focus on the new meanings of globalization, expanding the debates and providing the best practices for As evidenced by Grey and Patel,⁴¹ the journal has positioned itself as the third most impactful and productive journal in the field, establishing itself as a leading reference for disseminating scientific knowledge on food sovereignty.

Furthermore, a statistical analysis reveals that a single journal, representing 0.03% of the total, accounts for 25% of the total number of citations. Three journals (0.1%) were responsible for 50% of the total citations in works focused on food sovereignty, while 20 journals (0.64%) accounted for 75% of the total citations. Finally, given that 0.84% of journals received 80% of the citations in the subject area, it is evident that the Pareto principle is not satisfied.

The results of this bibliometric analysis, as illustrated in Figure 6, demonstrate that the ten countries or territories with the greatest academic and scientific impact on the quantification of citations in research on food sovereignty are, in aggregate or accumulated form, as follows: In this context, the United States is the country with the greatest academic eminence or transcendence, with 970 citations in related publications to date. It is crucial to comprehend the U.S. approach, as evidenced by previous findings (see Figure 5), as it is the most scientifically productive country. Its most prominent publications have delved into the nuances of sustainable rural development.³⁸ Additionally, the United States has conducted research on the interconnections between food sovereignty, power dynamics, and resilience in the context of development.⁴² Furthermore, it has explored the intersections between food sovereignty and other related concepts, including the conditions, challenges, and contradictions associated with this phenomenon.⁴³

Figure 6. Country citations.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

It is important to consider that the high number of citations in US journals may be influenced by a number of external factors, including the prestige and visibility of these journals within the global academic landscape, as well as the prevalence of US researchers in the field. This context suggests that the impact of publications may be related to the prominence of the journals in question and the scope of the published research, beyond the mere number of citations. Moreover, rising atmospheric CO₂ and global temperature increases have been shown to significantly affect crop yields, nutrient content, and water availability, highlighting the urgency of adopting sustainable practices such as agroforestry and no-till farming.⁴⁴

Secondly, the Netherlands has the second-highest number of total citations in research related to the study of food sovereignty, with a total of 484 citations. In the context of this country, research has been presented on a number of topics, including land grabbing, agricultural workers, and rural livelihoods,⁴⁵ as well as the scope of commercialization of home gardens.⁴⁶ With regard to its influence on the publication of topics pertaining to food sovereignty, Canada currently accounts for 382 citations in research related to the study of food sovereignty. The primary publication highlights the increasing political interest in social justice issues related to health and food, thereby elevating the prominence of food sovereignty and food security in the discourse on health inequalities.⁴⁷ This allows us to gain insight into the Canadian approach to the subject, which serves as a benchmark in terms of impact and productivity.

Moreover, an examination of the statistical analysis divided into quartiles reveals that a total of two countries, representing 0.06% of the total, account for 50% of the citations. Additionally, their academic output on food sovereignty is of equivalent quality. Furthermore, five countries, representing 0.16% of the total, account for 75% of the citations. Ultimately, given that 0.23% of countries account for 80% of the citations in this field, it is evident that the Pareto principle is not satisfied.

It is important to consider that the number of citations may be influenced by external factors, such as the greater visibility and reach of journals in which these studies are published, as well as the concentration of active researchers on the topic in certain countries. Therefore, the considerable number of citations in these countries may be indicative of an elevated level of research activity and topic relevance in specific contexts, rather than a universal phenomenon across all countries.

The present bibliometric analysis has enabled the identification of the positioning of the main keywords used by the authors as descriptors of their research, as shown in a Cartesian plane. The horizontal axis, or X-axis, relates to the frequency of use of each concept, that is, the number of times it has been used. In contrast, the vertical axis, or Y-axis, positions the average years of use of such concepts. Figure 7 illustrates quadrant IV, which encompasses the most frequently occurring concepts, yet whose average use is not current. These include terms such as “Agriculture” and “Food systems,” which pertain to the promotion of a transition towards agri-food alternatives developed around broader social, environmental, and ethical principles.⁴⁸ Similarly, the term “food justice” is situated within the same quadrant. This term emphasizes the structural inequalities that shape the socio-spatial organization of food systems, creating forms of privilege and disadvantage in the intersectionality of class, gender, race, and other forms of differences.^49,50

Figure 7. Validity and frequency of keywords.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

Subsequently, quadrant III comprises infrequent concepts with a lower average year of use. These concepts are relevant to a lesser extent and, therefore, should be the focus of less emphasis in future research agendas. In this quadrant, concepts such as neoliberalism and food policy were identified. These are understood to be the different strategies that deal mainly with public health and the factors that different governmental entities can analyze to combat poor nutrition.⁴⁸ Furthermore, the term “urban agriculture” is examined from the perspective of its various multifunctional forms, including access to fresh and nutritious vegetables, cost savings on food, personal well-being, and environmentally sustainable agriculture from a socioeconomic standpoint.⁵¹ Additionally, terms such as human rights and agrarian change, among others, are also discussed.

The concepts included in Quadrant II are not commonly found in the existing literature on the topic of food sovereignty. However, there has been a notable increase in their usage in recent years, which suggests that they are emerging concepts within this field of study. Among these is the term “climate change,” which is a pivotal concept in studies that examine the impact of food production on climate change and, in turn, its subsequent effect on food production.⁵² This highlights the crucial interdependence between agricultural production and the climatic environment, emphasizing that any proposition related to food sovereignty must consider the mutual influences between these two elements. Moreover, terms such as governance and Indigenous food systems have been examined from the perspective of Indigenous communities’ rights to their wild food systems⁵³ and the right to food, which is inextricably linked to the struggle for self-determination in food production and consumption.

In contrast, Quadrant I enumerates the most prevalent and contemporary terminology, with Ecuador being the sole nation to fall within this category, which aligns with the deliberations in Quadrant IV. This suggests that the country has been a pioneer in implementing policies related to food sovereignty, driven by social, political, and environmental factors that prioritize local production and the protection of natural resources.

In order to engage in a meaningful discourse on food sovereignty, it is imperative to consider the impact of global warming on our capacity to ensure the availability of safe and adequate food. However, it is also necessary to contextualize the current manifestations of climate change within a framework of structural inequality that has a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable regions. As Al Gore has observed, natural phenomena will intensify, affecting those who depend on local and traditional food systems with greater severity.⁵⁴ The climate imbalance not only endangers food production but also intensifies inequalities in access to food resources, thereby undermining food sovereignty in numerous regions worldwide.

A variety of international forums and agreements, including the Kyoto Protocol⁵⁵ and the Paris Agreement,⁵⁶ have sought to address these issues by reducing emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change. It is of the utmost importance that these discussions place a greater emphasis on the protection of local food systems and their capacity to adapt to new climatic conditions. These strategies are of vital importance for the maintenance of food sovereignty, particularly in countries that are most severely affected by climate change.

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has cautioned that there is a 50% chance the planet’s average annual temperature will temporarily surpass pre-industrial levels by 1.5°C in at least one of the upcoming five years.⁵⁷ Such an increase could have a profound impact on the conditions for life on Earth, including food production and distribution, which would have a detrimental effect on global food sovereignty.

It is imperative to acknowledge that the ramifications on food security will not be homogeneous, as they will be contingent on a plethora of variables, including public policies enacted in each nation, geographical conditions, biodiversity conservation, and the resources allocated to adaptation to climate change.⁵⁸ As indicated by the United Nations,⁵⁹ climate change will jeopardize food and water resources, precipitating a cascade of consequences that will be most acutely felt in the most impoverished countries unless measures are taken to halt soil degradation and maintain global warming below 2°C.

In light of the aforementioned, it becomes evident that the concept of food sovereignty, defined as the right of communities to determine their own agricultural and food systems, is contingent upon their capacity to adapt to the evolving climatic conditions. The development model adopted by each country, the implementation of agroecological practices, such as crop rotation or planned reforestation, and the type of exploitation of natural resources will directly influence the possibility of guaranteeing sustainable and equitable food systems. This also encompasses the examination of models such as dehesa systems,⁶⁰ which facilitate the sustainable utilization of natural resources, as opposed to the proliferation of monocultures that diminish biodiversity and jeopardize food sovereignty over time.

Discussion

This bibliometric study proposes a research agenda to address both trending topics, which are emerging and growing conceptualizations, and the current conceptual gaps that hinder a more holistic and systemic development of the subject, as illustrated in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Research agenda.

Own elaboration based on Scopus and Web of Science.

In this regard, the initial set of prominent concepts for future studies encompasses those that have been addressed over an extended period, thereby indicating their significance within the current and future scientific discourse. The initial concept is that of sustainable development, which is of paramount importance in addressing the current challenges related to food sovereignty. Future research should concentrate on the evaluation and distribution of food, as well as the implementation of rigorous studies on the impact of sustainable agricultural practices.

Another concept that is pervasive throughout the literature is that of the environment, which has played a pivotal role in the discourse on food sovereignty. It would be beneficial for future studies to investigate the impact of environmental changes, such as climate change and ecosystem degradation, on food availability and quality. This would facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the interactions between agriculture and the environment, as well as how sustainable agricultural practices can mitigate the negative impacts on ecosystems and enhance the resilience of food systems.

Another significant concept in the discourse on food sovereignty is biodiversity. Further research could expand the current body of knowledge on the impact of biodiversity loss on food security and the potential contribution of biodiversity conservation and promotion to more sustainable food systems. A more detailed examination of the role of diversified agroecosystems in the production of nutritious and resilient food would assist in understanding how genetic diversity in crops and animal breeds can enhance adaptability and responsiveness to future challenges.

Organic agriculture has the potential to play a significant role in the promotion of food sovereignty. Further research is required to ascertain the advantages of organic agriculture in relation to food security, nutritional quality, and environmental sustainability. A comparative analysis of organic and conventional production systems in diverse contexts, assessing factors such as crop yields, soil quality, human health, and animal welfare, would offer invaluable insights.

The maintenance of soil fertility represents a pivotal challenge for future research, particularly in the context of food sovereignty. Future investigations should prioritize innovative methods for improving and maintaining soil fertility, including organic fertilizers, crop rotation, and soil conservation practices. Long-term studies that assess the impact of diverse agricultural practices on soil health, nutrient availability, and crop productivity will facilitate the integration of conventional agricultural techniques and indigenous knowledge into sustainable soil management.

The use of pesticides in agriculture represents another crucial research challenge. Future studies should rigorously assess alternative pest management strategies, biological control, and the use of repellent plants in order to explore their impacts on human health, biodiversity, and soil quality. In addition, the effectiveness of these approaches in crop protection without compromising food security or harming the environment can be examined.

Furthermore, biotechnology represents a cross-disciplinary concept that could serve as a focal point for future research endeavors aimed at enhancing agricultural productivity and crop resilience to diseases, drought, and other adverse conditions. Comprehensive studies assessing the socioeconomic and environmental impacts of genetically modified crops, as well as exploring more sustainable alternatives, such as genetic editing and the use of beneficial microorganisms in agriculture, would contribute to the field. In particular, biofortification through genetic engineering has shown potential to address nutritional deficiencies under climate stress, using tools like CRISPR to improve micronutrient content in staple crops.⁶¹

In addition, a number of concepts have emerged in the literature, although their temporal coverage may be more limited than that of previous concepts. A grasp of these concepts is indispensable to the future of food sovereignty. One such concept is that of food security, which is the most frequently occurring keyword in scientific literature. Future studies can expand the current knowledge base by investigating strategies and policies to ensure access to and availability of sufficient and nutritious food. Such studies could analyze the impacts of climate change, globalization, and conflicts on food security, as well as explore more resilient and equitable food production and distribution systems, including the strengthening of local production and the reduction of food waste.

Another concept that is directly related to the environment is climate change, which has a significant impact on food sovereignty. Future studies may investigate the impact of climate change on the availability of natural resources, such as water and soil, and on agricultural production patterns. Further examination of the adaptability of food systems to climate change is warranted, with a view to identifying crops resistant to extreme weather conditions and developing strategies for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture. Such strategies might include the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices and the use of renewable energy.

The use of plant-growth-promoting bacteria (PGPR) can enhance future studies on beneficial bacteria and their capacity to enhance crop growth and resistance to diseases and abiotic stress, as well as their impact on the nutritional quality of food. Further investigation into the use of biofertilizers has the potential to expand current knowledge regarding the enhancement of soil fertility within the context of sustainable agricultural production. This could entail an examination of the efficacy of diverse biofertilizers, including those comprising nitrogen-fixing and phosphorus-solubilizing microorganisms.

The application of another trending technology, such as nanotechnology, is fundamental to the discussion of food sovereignty, as it has the potential to revolutionize current agricultural practices. It is thus recommended that future research focus on investigating the diverse applications of this technology in enhancing crop quality and yield, as well as in safeguarding food during storage and transportation. To this end, a number of studies can be conducted to evaluate the effects of nanoparticles on soil fertility, nutrient absorption by plants, and interactions with soil microorganisms, as well as the environmental and safety implications associated with the use of nanomaterials in agriculture.

Some concepts that are prominent in the scientific literature on the subject have fallen out of use by different authors. Consequently, future research should reposition these concepts within the current key discussion on Sustainable Development Goals, such as food sovereignty.

The promotion of plant growth is considered a crucial factor in ensuring the healthy and sustainable growth of crops. Consequently, future studies should examine innovative strategies for plant growth promotion, including the utilisation of beneficial microorganisms and bioactive compounds. Such investigations can assist in the identification of effective microbial strains that promote plant growth and in the comprehension of the mechanisms through which plant growth and health are stimulated.

Another concept that requires repositioning is resilience, which is pivotal to the analysis of food sovereignty in evolving and exceedingly challenging environments. A resilience analysis assesses the capacity of food systems to adapt, recuperate, and persist in their efficient and sustainable functioning amidst disturbances and crises. Consequently, future research should concentrate on enhancing the resilience of food systems through the implementation of innovative techniques and methodologies. This objective can be achieved through research that evaluates and promotes sustainable agricultural practices that enhance the resilience of crops and production systems to extreme weather events, diseases, and changes in resource availability.

Another concept that should be the subject of significant future analysis is the use of biopesticides, which represent an important tool in the pursuit of food sovereignty. They facilitate the sustainable and safe control of pests and diseases, thereby safeguarding human health and the environment. Future research should concentrate on the identification and development of effective biopesticides, as well as their application and formulation. This objective can be achieved through research that evaluates the efficacy of different biopesticides in controlling specific pests and diseases, as well as their impact on soil health and biodiversity.

Furthermore, although not initially included in the research plan, the search was refined by associating terms such as environmental changes and ecosystem degradation. The proposed research, which is linked to these terms, aims to gain insight into how human-induced environmental changes have led to an increase in the time required for crop harvesting.³ Moreover, research suggests that climate change has resulted in the degradation of ecosystems, which has in turn affected food sovereignty and the health of indigenous communities. This is due to the contamination of food and water sources, as well as the harm caused to traditional practices such as gardening, which are essential for their subsistence. Additionally, climate change has resulted in the degradation of Andean ecosystems, which has had a detrimental impact on food sovereignty and agrobiodiversity. These factors are of paramount importance for the production of staple foods such as maize, potatoes, and quinoa. Such changes pose a threat to the cultural and religious practices associated with these foods. In light of these considerations, the proposed research agenda includes new lines of investigation with the objective of preserving Andean agricultural traditions in order to protect food sovereignty and address the impacts of climate change.

In light of the keywords identified through the aforementioned process and as previously indicated, each of these words was classified into a variable category based on the context of the articles under analysis. This classification may facilitate future research by enabling the establishment of relationships and research routes, taking into account the contextual applicability of these terms.

It is also important to consider that, although research on the subject under study has been carried out in countries with a higher level of development, such as the United States, some of the most relevant research has been conducted in countries with a lower level of development. In countries with a lower level of development, such as those in Latin America, access to healthy food is most affected by social inequality, and rates of malnutrition in early childhood are higher. Consequently, certain countries have devised legislative and governmental strategies to mitigate this issue and facilitate a solution in terms of national sovereignty, security, and food law. Table 1 provides an overview of the legislation employed in select countries.

Indeed, as illustrated in Figure 9, the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity among the population in several of the aforementioned countries is evident. These figures are derived from data provided by the World Bank and represent the years 2019 and 2020. As illustrated in the graph, the countries with the largest populations and the highest prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity that have food security or sovereignty policies are Guatemala and Honduras for both years. It is noteworthy that Argentina has the third highest record for 2020, with a notable discrepancy between the data for 2019 and 2020. In contrast to the trend observed in Argentina, the registration of individuals experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity in Ecuador, Mexico, and Brazil declined from 2019 to 2020. This suggests that, although countries may integrate plans and programs to guarantee adequate nutrition and ensure the right to choose one’s diet into their regulations and norms, it is essential that this extends beyond a mere strategy. Furthermore, it is vital to activate diverse approaches to bring food sovereignty closer to the population. It is plausible that these figures are influenced by other factors, such as corruption, birth rate, death rate, education, violence, employability, and pollution. These and other potential influences on access to food and the right to feed themselves in these countries warrant further investigation.

Figure 9. Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity indicators in 2020 and 2019.

Own elaboration based on Data The World Bank.⁶³

In this manner, despite the peripheral role of climate change in the discourse on food security in Latin America, empirical evidence indicates a direct correlation between climate change and the prevalence of unsustainable agricultural practices in the region. In particular, the deterioration of ecosystems and its impact on agrobiodiversity represent areas where climate change has exerted a detrimental influence, impinging upon food sovereignty and the capacity of communities to secure access to nutritious food. A number of studies have demonstrated that the implementation of intensive agricultural practices, with a particular focus on monoculture production, has served to exacerbate a range of environmental issues, including soil degradation and biodiversity loss. This, in turn, has had a detrimental impact on the ability of communities to access healthy food. This has had a particularly detrimental impact on rural populations and indigenous communities, who rely on biodiversity for their subsistence.

In this regard, Mann’s⁶⁴ study underscores that the prevailing global food system, shaped by the industrialized agricultural model, has resulted in a surge in greenhouse gas emissions and a notable decline in biodiversity. The promotion of agroecology by peasant movements such as La Vía Campesina represents a significant alternative approach to addressing these challenges. Agroecology is not only concerned with environmental sustainability; it also aims to reinforce food sovereignty by incorporating traditional knowledge, gender equity, and social justice.⁶⁴

Similarly, Madaleno⁶⁵ underscores the significance of urban and peri-urban agriculture in Latin America, highlighting that these practices have been instrumental in enhancing the nutritional status of urban communities, particularly during recent crises such as the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic and the impact of rising food prices due to global conflicts. However, the effects of climate change and structural poverty in the region have undermined the resilience of these agricultural systems. This demonstrates the necessity for food sovereignty policies to extend beyond mere legislation and encompass initiatives that promote sustainable agricultural production and equitable access to food resources.⁶⁵

Conversely, Gordillo and Méndez⁶⁶ illustrate how numerous Latin American countries have enacted particular legislation to address concerns pertaining to food sovereignty and security. However, the effects of climate change and other factors, including inequality and corruption, have constrained the impact of these legislative measures. Despite the implementation of food security policies in countries such as Honduras and Guatemala, which face high levels of food insecurity, the prevalence of insecurity remains high. This suggests that climate change and ecosystem degradation have exacerbated these problems, severely affecting the ability of the most vulnerable communities to access nutritious food.

Moreover, as evidenced by Madaleno’s⁶⁵ research, the capacity of communities to safeguard agrobiodiversity is a pivotal determinant of food sovereignty. In the Andes, agrobiodiversity is a crucial component of the production of staple foods such as maize, potatoes, and quinoa, which constitute a significant portion of the dietary intake of rural communities. However, the advent of climate change has had a detrimental impact on the accessibility of these resources, thereby jeopardizing not only food security but also the cultural and religious practices associated with these foods. This highlights the necessity for food sovereignty policies to incorporate specific measures to address the impacts of climate change.⁶⁵ It is also noteworthy to mention the studies collected by La Vía Campesina and other organizations that promote agroecology as a means of mitigating the effects of climate change and restoring food sovereignty in Latin America. These studies underscore the necessity of integrating agroecological science with traditional knowledge to develop more resilient and equitable food systems.⁶⁶

With regard to data on malnutrition, Figure 10 illustrates the number of individuals registered by region with malnutrition in 2020 and 2019. This may be attributed to a multitude of factors, including political, economic, and climatic conditions, among others. However, it is also associated with the type of food that people can access and the conditions under which they socially eat. However, the regions with the greatest social problems were those that were the most affected. As illustrated in the graph, North America, Europe, and South Asia have the lowest malnutrition records. Nevertheless, it is crucial to ascertain the correlation between the perceived food security in these countries and the climatic factors that may be associated with these records. Although only a limited data set is presented here, and an attempt is made to establish a relationship, it is imperative to identify more comprehensive aspects.

Figure 10. Undernourishment indicators in 2020 and 2019.

Own elaboration based on Data The World Bank.⁶⁷

Furthermore, Figure 11 illustrates the distribution of CO₂ emissions by country in 2022, which reveals that Latin America and the Caribbean, particularly Brazil and Mexico, exhibit the highest emission rates within the region. This phenomenon is a cause for concern, as high emissions are often correlated with environmental degradation, which can have a direct impact on agricultural production and, consequently, food sovereignty. In contrast, countries such as Canada have significantly lower emissions records, which could facilitate more sustainable access to quality food. The map employs a color scale, with red indicating the highest emissions and green representing the lowest, to illustrate the crucial role of environmental management and sustainable agricultural policies in ensuring communities have access to sufficient and nutritious food, particularly in contexts where malnutrition is a concern.

Figure 11. CO₂ emissiones (kt) in 2022.

Own elaboration based on Data The World Bank.⁶⁸

In light of the present-day complexity and importance of the subject, it is essential to acknowledge the significance of the emerging nuances of food sovereignty within the scientific literature. Future research should encompass a more comprehensive examination of the thematic juncture, where greater recognition of the right to food is imperative, as well as an investigation of strategies, including indigenous food systems, which represent a novel and emerging area of research.

These strategies necessitate a comprehensive approach from institutional initiatives, which primarily involve the private sector and government initiatives. This translates into public efforts to create policies that guarantee fundamental rights for the population in various socio-demographic characteristics, including ethnic, racial, and gender aspects.

Conclusions

In light of mounting concerns surrounding climate change, there has been a notable intensification in the study of the availability of natural resources and their impact on food production. In this context, there has been a notable increase in the number of publications on food sovereignty since 2015, with a constant linear growth in academic production. In particular, the year 2015 saw the highest number of publications (69), indicating a significant initial interest in the topic. Moreover, subsequent years, including 2019, 2020, and 2021, also evidenced a considerable volume of publications, reflecting a consistent and sustained interest in this topic, devoid of any sudden peaks or significant declines.

Moreover, the evolution of scientific literature on food sovereignty has been shaped by the emergence of new concerns surrounding social inequality and equitable access to resources. This is evidenced by the expansion of research that not only considers food availability but also addresses social justice and resilience, which are pivotal elements in the discourse on food sovereignty. The analysis demonstrates that while publications in journals and countries such as the United States, Canada, and the Netherlands receive the greatest number of citations, the diversity of approaches and relevance of the topic are broadened based on these global concerns.

While the United States accounts for the highest number of citations, which may suggest a considerable impact, it is essential to acknowledge that this phenomenon may be shaped by the visibility and prestige of the journals in which these studies are published. Similarly, the high concentration of publications in a limited number of journals and countries reflects a growing focus on food sovereignty issues. Nevertheless, the overall trend indicates a balanced and progressive expansion of research in this domain, which is evolving to address global challenges such as climate change and food security.

The mounting apprehension surrounding climate change and its ramifications for the accessibility of food and natural resources underscores the necessity for a critical examination of our actions to safeguard the planet. The evidence presented in this bibliometric analysis demonstrates that both humans and the environment are experiencing significant impacts as a result of extreme weather conditions. This scenario highlights the critical need for the development of effective strategies to address the challenges of food sovereignty and resilience in a world that is increasingly vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

As observed in the results obtained from the bibliometric analysis, the countries with the highest scientific output and sustained investment in the field of food sovereignty and climate change are primarily developed nations, including the United States, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United Kingdom, as well as others from the European region. This concentration of publications and research activity suggests a more systematic and structured concern in these countries regarding the challenges posed by food security in the context of climate crises.

This finding is consistent with the data presented in Figure 10, which shows that North America, Europe, and South Asia report the lowest levels of malnutrition. Although these levels may be attributed to multiple factors—such as political, economic, and environmental conditions—they also reflect the types of food available and the social conditions under which food is consumed. This implies that in contexts where greater food security is perceived, as in many developed nations, there is a stronger institutional capacity to anticipate the effects of climate change on food systems, which in turn is reflected in a higher volume of scientific production.

Furthermore, Figure 11, which presents the distribution of CO₂ emissions by country in 2022, shows that Canada, one of the countries with the highest scientific production in this field, has relatively low emission levels compared to other Latin American countries such as Brazil or Mexico. This may be linked to more favorable conditions for the development of sustainable food policies. These data allow us to establish a relationship between scientific interest, environmental management, and structured concern for food sovereignty in contexts with lower climate impact. While the dataset is limited, this analysis provides a valuable approximation that should be expanded in future studies with broader variable coverage.

In this regard, a number of institutions have been involved in the development of strategies designed to mitigate the impact of food and resource generation on human survival. However, the availability of resources has not been the sole focus of attention for these institutions. It is also crucial to ensure that these strategies do not exacerbate existing inequalities within society. This is why the concept of food security has emerged as a significant area of study in recent years.

Conversely, the objective is not merely to diminish disparities in food accessibility and ensure the fair distribution of food resources; it is also to guarantee the right to free food and equal access to essential nutrients for all, which is where the concept of food sovereignty becomes pertinent. In light of these considerations, resilience emerges as a pivotal aspect within the discourse on food sovereignty. The concept of resilience is viewed from the standpoint of diverse farmers and Indigenous communities with regard to the provision of adequate food, and it also permits unhindered access and the advancement of various nutrients.

It is imperative to contemplate the strategies that can be employed to facilitate the conservation of the planet and guarantee the sustained existence of humanity on it. As reported by Sophie Kirby, Julie Louvrier, a resident of Berlin, has developed an open-source application that maps the city’s tree population, comprising 800,000 trees. This initiative allows volunteers to identify which trees have been watered and which require attention, thereby facilitating the watering of trees that the city’s official capacity is unable to reach.

This panorama suggests that not only are humans experiencing extreme hunger, but also animals and trees are dying of thirst. It is evident that environmental and water stress are already prevalent, and food scarcity is occurring in various regions across the globe, including both economically developed and developing countries. This can be attributed to a number of factors, including elevated temperatures, harsh winters, intense precipitation, and heat waves.

Ethics and consent

Ethical approval and Consent were not required.