Understanding how spatially-variable selection shapes adaptation is an area of longstanding interest in evolutionary ecology. Recent meta-analyses have quantified the extent of local adaptation, but the relative importance of abiotic and biotic factors in driving population divergence remains poorly understood. To address this gap, we combined a quantitative meta-analysis and a qualitative meta-synthesis to (1) quantify the magnitude of local adaptation to abiotic and biotic factors and (2) characterize major themes that influence the motivation and design of experiments that seek to test for local adaptation. Using local-foreign contrasts as a metric of local adaptation (or maladaptation), we found that local adaptation was greater in the presence than absence of a biotic interactor, especially for plants. We also found that biotic environments had stronger effects on fitness than abiotic environments when ignoring whether those environments were local versus foreign. Finally, biotic effects were stronger at low latitudes and abiotic effects were stronger at high latitudes. Our qualitative analysis revealed that the lens through which local adaptation has been examined differs for abiotic and biotic factors. It also revealed biases in the design and implementation of experiments that make quantitative results challenging to interpret and provided directions for future research.