Agricultural Extension and Rural Advisory Services: Theories, Approaches, Innovation Systems and Future Directions

Agricultural extension is being asked to support transitions that are ecological, economic and political rather than merely technical. Agroecology emphasises redesign of food systems through ecological principles, situated knowledge and social relations, whereas regenerative agriculture commonly begins with soil-centred practices or outcomes but lacks a settled definition. Their partial overlap raises questions about what advisory services should teach, whom they should serve and how success should be established. This critical narrative review integrates agronomic evidence with agricultural extension, innovation-systems, participatory learning and rural-development scholarship. Peer-reviewed literature published principally from 2000 to 18 August 2026 was assessed for conceptual relevance, methodological adequacy and alignment between intervention and reported outcomes, supplemented by foundational work. The evidence supports a shift from standardised technology transfer towards adaptive, pluralistic advisory arrangements combining ecological observation, facilitated experimentation and institutional brokerage. Yet farmer field schools show uneven effectiveness at scale; participatory co-creation does not consistently alter decision-making power; and peer-to-peer or digital dissemination is vulnerable to exclusion and weak follow-through. Agronomic findings are likewise conditional: diversified systems can support multiple ecosystem services, but yield effects, soil-carbon outcomes and transition profitability depend on management combinations, ecological setting, time horizon and measurement choices. A central weakness is the limited causal separation of advisory contributions from credit, market access, farmer selection and policy support. The review advances an integrated framework linking advisory capabilities, farmer agency, practice persistence, territorial institutions and multidimensional outcomes. Priorities include longitudinal comparative evaluations, costed learning interventions, distribution-sensitive indicators and robust testing of ecological claims. Extension can enable transition, but its effectiveness should be judged by sustained adaptive capacity and equitable, verified outcomes rather than participation counts or nominal adoption alone.