Combining social, ecological and economic approaches in knowledge co‐production enables the identification of sustainable farming options

Abstract Farming systems face an increasing sustainability challenge requiring integrated solutions to minimize the trade‐offs between the social, ecological and economic dimensions of sustainability. Yet, most research remains siloed, limiting interdisciplinary understanding of farming systems as coupled social‐ecological systems (SESs) and precluding holistic solutions. Addressing this gap, we employed an interdisciplinary knowledge co‐production approach in Kilimanjaro, integrating social, ecological and economic data to understand the multidimensionality of the farming systems. We first surveyed 306 farmers and used multivariate analysis to categorize the farming systems. Based on data from semi‐structured interviews with 15 farmers and field observations of agricultural plots they own or manage, we conducted a cost–benefit analysis of each farming system. Through thematic analysis, we revealed the perceived impacts of farming practices on biodiversity, soil and yields. We triangulated these findings with those from ecological studies conducted on the same agricultural plots. We finally identified challenges to and solutions for sustainable farming, complemented by five key informant interviews. We found a heterogeneous agricultural landscape characterized by maize‐bean, homegarden and coffee farming systems. All systems were estimated to be profitable but sensitive to environmental and market‐related shocks. Farmers and key informants identified four major challenges, largely similar across farming systems: biophysical constraints, production costs and market constraints, infrastructure limitations and gaps in agricultural extension support. Proposed solutions included farm‐level interventions such as manuring, biological pest control and planting drought‐resistant crops, which were low‐cost practices and perceived to offer multiple benefits. Notably, using high‐cost agrochemicals, particularly in the maize‐bean system, was perceived to have long‐term negative environmental impacts. These perceptions were consistent with the findings from the ecological studies. Institutional‐level solutions involved leveraging cooperatives and improving agricultural information, while policy and government‐level solutions focused on subsidies, incentives for organic produce, market regulation and tax reductions. By integrating social, ecological and economic dimensions in an interdisciplinary knowledge co‐production approach, we identified context‐specific challenges and actionable solutions that account for local practices and structural support needs. This approach, which values farmers' experiential knowledge alongside ecological and economic insights, has the potential for wider utility in guiding sustainability in farming systems beyond Kilimanjaro. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.