The political economy of contrasting agroecologies: agrarian movements and agricultural research institutions envisioning alternatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agroecology has gained traction among actors advocating for an alternative agriculture by integrating ecological and social principles to transform the agri-food system. However, the meaning of this transformation varies across different perspectives, with actors holding contrasting views on what agroecology entails and their role in driving its development. This article analyzes two contrasting cases of actors envisioning agroecological alternatives: a) the agrarian movement represented by La Via Campesina (LVC) and its affiliated members in Colombia; and b) agricultural research institutions exemplified by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), within the framework of its “Initiative on Agroecology” (AE-I), which engages with agroecological transitions through co-designing technologies, policies, and business models with various agri-food actors. Drawing on the frameworks of political economy of agroecological transitions and economic alternatives to capitalism, the analysis contrasts the power dynamics and strategies of social movements and agricultural research institutions. In doing so, the article seeks to move beyond dichotomous narratives by offering insights into the plural ways in which agroecological alternatives are 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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".