A rewiring of the global agrifood system, the transition to sustainable agriculture that does not violate planetary boundaries, eradicating hunger and minimising nutritional inequalities are on top of the agenda in science and politics. As India and France confront the challenges as two nation states, as dynamic economies, as distressed farming communities, as farm and rural non-farm workers, and as concerned consumers at the receiving end of the agrifood system, this paper consolidates the evidence of sustainability transitions in Indian and French agrifood systems. What are the similarities and differences in the French and Indian agrifood systems, and their respective approaches to sustainability? Development economics has theoretically condemned agriculture to shrink, in its share in the economy (Gross Value Added) and in the workforce as economic development takes place. This is reflected in less than 2.5 percent of the workforce in French agriculture, compared to the 52 percent in Indian agriculture. Over the twentieth century, modernisation of agriculture for economic development, was made possible by several policy changes. These policy changes, initially stabilising quality (industrial standard) and market prices, generated more investments (public and private capital), productivity oriented scientific research and industrial inputs, production systems marked by commodity specialisation, new food cultures and consumption patterns. These policies have also been supported by a shift from small, place-based traditional communities to larger sectoral communities. Sectoral communities are composed of several emerging identities (professional farms, input companies, producer associations, processing cooperatives and companies) and are structured through informal interactions as well as within governance structures (trade unions and eventually inter-branch organisations and boards, as in the French and Indian dairy sectors). Sectoral communities are diverse in terms of the form and scale of their activities and the resources mobilised. They co-evolve with the form of the state, which legitimises them by delegating authority. The recent farmers' protests in France and India show that path dependency has led these modernised farmers to become dependent on public intervention, even though the modernisation social pact is no longer able to deliver on its initial promises in terms of farmers' income levels (equal to that of the rest of society for farmers who invest in the technical modernisation package and rural exodus accompanied by social measures) and societal benefits. At the same time, in both India and France, those left behind by modernisation have sought ways of maintaining their livelihoods. These alternatives are sometimes place-based (mountain farming in France and India; rainfed agriculture in India), sometimes skill-based (small multifunctional farms, artisanal food production), or a combination of the two. They are characterised by resources, breeds and varieties, as well as entities, skills and norms different from those resulting from modernisation. These alternatives have gradually gained momentum and have sometimes benefited from specific public policies. This is the case for GI and organic food chains in France and India, for natural farming or the integrated watershed approach in India, and for mountain farming in France (with a specific policy that recognises the handicaps and compensates for the additional production and investment costs). The French livestock law that supported the protection local breeds and the Indian recent initiatives to reinvest in local cows and buffalo are also part of the process. In other words, all these alternatives have benefited from protection against competition from modernised agri-food chains. Drawing on these evidences of successful alternative pathways in niche agro-ecosystems (often community-driven or supported by local government) and from well-intentioned national-level sustainability policies, we use a critical theoretical institutionalism as an analytical framework to examine recent attempts at sustainability transitions. The analysis highlights the opportunities and constraints posed by the important meso-level sub-national actors and policy processes. The challenge is to rethink the functions of agriculture, the diversity of resources mobilised and their labour/capital ratio. In other words, there is a need to move away from the paradigm of equivalence and the sole pursuit of economies of scale, which leads to the standardisation and globalisation of processes and the concentration of knowledge, resources and power. The fact that this meso-level marked by social and ecological diversity, justice and pluralism also opens up economic avenues, prosperity, nutrition and local food cultures, provides policy-makers with multiple options for action in the transition to sustainable agrifood systems.