Compromise in the making of urban agroecology: grassroots initiatives and the politics of experimentation in Madrid, Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In some cities, food movements are mobilizing around agroecology, using the materiality of their lived environment and their social interactions to put their vision of future food systems into practice. These initiatives unfold in contexts where resources are often limited, forcing trade-offs between activists’ visions of agroecology and what they can do in the immediate future. Drawing on documentary research, 26 semi-structured interviews, and over 100 hours of observation, we examine the evolution of agroecology in Madrid, Spain, focusing on the deployment of three initiatives. We find that to cope with precarity, some activists adapt their practices by adopting scaling-up strategies that involve increasing the number of participants and collaborating with the City of Madrid. However, the political dimension of the simple acts like gardening or procuring agroecological food becomes less clear, raising questions and spurring debate within the social movement. The compromises made and the reflexive stance on what is gained and what is lost, we argue, ultimately are testament and contribute to agroecology’s political vision and goals, albeit in ways that are perhaps quite different from those initially envisioned.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".