Investigations
A lot gets repeated about food forests — by us too. Here, we check: in the studies, the official figures, the field measurements. Then we write what we find, including when it proves us wrong.
Feeding more, or feeding better?
Does a food forest feed people better than a field? We read the studies: calories, protein, micronutrients — where the argument holds, and where it breaks.
-
What does a food forest earn? The first economic study, decoded
Can a food forest support a farm? The first economic study (ILVO) decoded: the conditions for profitability, its limits, and what changes in Wallonia.
ILVO cost-benefit analysis, 2024 August 4, 2026 · 5 min read -
The drier it gets, the more trees store carbon: agroforestry's edge against scorching summers
A 2025 global meta-analysis shows it: agroforestry stores the most soil carbon where it is driest. A climate argument for a drying Wallonia.
global meta-analysis, 2025 July 24, 2026 · 4 min read -
A hundred times more woodlice than a field: the proof that food forests regenerate the soil
A Belgian-Dutch study compared 15 food forests to fields and grasslands. Their soil comes to resemble a forest's. Here are the numbers.
15 food forests measured July 24, 2026 · 5 min read -
Farm-funded hedges: what the numbers really say
Real footprint, Walloon support, fodder, wood: what science establishes about the profitability of farm hedges — and what it doesn't.
Walloon figures and agronomic literature July 23, 2026 · 9 min read
An investigation is still an article: it keeps its place in the journal, filed in its layer. What sets it apart is the checking — and the fact that we also write down what we could not establish.