A declaration of commitments toward agroecology pluralities: A critical gaze on the U.S. Agroecology Summit 2023

First paragraphs: The U.S. Agroecology Summit was held May 22–25, 2023, at the Elms Hotel in Excelsior Springs, Missouri. One of the first agroecology convenings of its kind, the summit was funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and organized by researchers across prominent U.S. universities. The gathering brought together scholars, researchers, farmers, activists, and movement leaders to create a “roadmap for agroecological research in the U.S.” This declaration, written, edited, and affirmed by us, the undersigned subgroup of summit participants, aims to archive and communicate the challenges we grappled with during and after this gathering while also advocating for an unwavering commitment toward agroecological pluralities. Like all lands commonly known as the United States, the location for the convening, the Elms Hotel, is on stolen Indigenous land. The rolling hills of Northwest Missouri where the convening took place are the historical hunting, foraging, and fishing grounds, and farming areas of the region’s original peoples, which include the Ioway, Missouria, Osage, Otoe, and Sac and Fox nations. Through a series of treaties in the 1800s, all tribes were forcibly and systematically removed from what became Missouri to make way for white European settlers. None of the aforementioned tribes currently have a land base in Missouri, nor are there any federally or state-recognized tribes remain­ing in the state. Approximately 50 miles to the west and across the Missouri River, the state of Kansas is now home to the nearest federally recognized Tribal Nations: the Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska, Kickapoo Tribe of Kansas, Prairie Band Potawatomie, and Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas and Nebraska. There was no representation from these tribes or any other local or regional Black, Indigenous, or communities of color in the summit’s organizing committee. Subsequently, the summit’s conceptual framings, design, and decision-making lacked grounding in the histories, ethics, and practices of local Indigenous and other regionally based frontline communities. . . .