As noted above, agroecology as a movement differs from other, more piecemeal approaches to solving individual problems in the food industry by espousing a holistic, transformative approach to subvert top-down food regimes, centering the small-scale farmer as the driver, actor, and agent of this agricultural revolution. As such, the ‘transformational’ approach of the agroecological movement is paramount, as “agroecology from below seeks to transform the food system, while the institutional or corporate versions seek to ‘conform’ agroecology to the current industrial model and paint it a little green” ^[7] (p. 21). Gender equality is central to transformation. A feminist agroecology which values the equitable contributions of all stakeholders leads to a more creative, versatile, and successfully transformative movement. As Lopes and Jomalinis ^[8] (p. 17) write, women’s disempowerment directly hinders agroecological imperatives, as “male dominance commonly manifests itself as an impediment to the advancement of agroecology transition by hindering women’s free expression, their creative development and, finally, restricting their contribution to the productive unit”. As the HLPE principles ^[3] demonstrate, agroecology is not only about lowering agrichemical inputs and increasing sustainability; it is about self-determination and reclaiming control of one’s own food, land, and body—a right that has been stripped from the majority of producers by a productionist and profit-driven industrial agricultural paradigm. As agroecology inherently encompasses a normative commitment to redressing unequal power dynamics in the food system, agroecological approaches cannot be discussed without addressing the power (im)balances based on gender and other axes of marginalization that embed food systems and their actors and stakeholders ^[4]. Agroecology that lives up to its name centers food sovereignty as well as the more mainstream goal of food security, taking social relations based on gender, socioeconomic status, Indigenous identities, and their intersections into account. Many scholars and activists have argued that agroecology’s transformational and justice-oriented imperative make the movement and feminism a ‘natural’ pairing, as both question and challenge unequal power relations and entrenched systems ^[9]. In the words of Seibert et al. ^[4], “feminism in food crisis struggles finds its best representation in the agroecology and food sovereignty paradigm, applying the practices of solidarity by collective actions that challenge gender roles as well as paradigms of inequality, oppression and exploitation” ^[4] (p. 46). Furthermore, Milgroom ^[10] (no page number) highlights that agroecology, food sovereignty, and feminism are “intertwined emancipatory movements and political projects that fight for autonomy, self-determination, egalitarianism, epistemic reconstitution and social justice.” As such, agroecological transitions and transformations are often recognized for their potential to support the empowerment of marginalized groups and individuals and reduce gender inequities in agricultural communities “if they are designed to address underlying power imbalances women face, such as norms, relationships and institutional structures that perpetuate discrimination and imbalance” ^[11] (p. 236). However, such transitions will not automatically advance social equality unless this outcome is targeted deliberately and methodically ^[7][8][12]. Toward this end, “agroecology as a science, practice and social movement needs to develop ways of knowing, knowledge, and practices informed by a feminist agroecology that challenges patriarchy and forms of structural violence against women in particular” ^[13] (p. 56). While there are many definitions and many kinds of feminism, for the purposes of this paper feminism refers to a broad movement and lens which seeks to examine and uproot the underlying causes of inequality and disempowerment—not just for women but for all marginalized people—by challenging patriarchal and colonial power structures ^[4][5]. A feminist agroecology focuses on redressing unequal gender relations as well as other intersecting relations of marginalization such as race, class, caste, and ethnic identity. Rather than flattening women's experience in food systems as one of unilateral victimhood and exploitation, or positioning women as environmental saviors, an intersectional analysis recognizes that their experiences are complex, dynamic, heterogenous, and shifting ^[14]. Taking a feminist approach to agroecological transformation also means understanding and addressing the myriad ways in which gender intersects with, influences, and is impacted by all aspects of food systems, as power relations underpin food systems in their entirety, not just their patently social dimensions. A review of the 13 agroecological principles ^[3] through a feminist lens, carried out in the following section, illuminates the centrality of gender relations and feminist-informed transformation throughout all agroecological undertakings. Agroecological pursuits which do not consider the complex and shifting ways that women and marginalized peoples will be uplifted or constrained by systems changes risk perpetuating or accentuating their marginalization. The following is an illustrative, rather than comprehensive, analysis of the relevance of gender in agroecology. This analysis serves as an invitation to formulate a more overtly feminist approach, whereby agroecology can achieve a more just systems transformation.