MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416299153 · doi:10.1177/23996544251398332

Social movements and the circulation of agroecology in Madrid’s policy and sociopolitical landscapes

2025· article· en· W4416299153 on OpenAlexaff
Émilie Houde-Tremblay, Geneviève Cloutier, Nathan McClintock, Alain Olivier

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning C Politics and Space · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial movementCitizen journalismCivil societyCirculation (fluid dynamics)AgroecologyLimitingMobilitiesParticipatory action researchTransformational leadership

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The policy mobilities framework aims to understand the things, spaces, moments and people that contribute to the diffuse, non-linear and power-laden processes involved in the circulation and mobilization of ideas in cities. Recent contributions work to strengthen the framework’s ability to capture the role of social movements and civil society members therein, notably when it comes to the mobilities of counterhegemonic ideas. Here, we investigate the circulation of agroecology in Madrid, Spain, using a combination of participatory and non-participatory observations, semi-directed interviews and documentary research. Our results highlight a dual role played by movement actors in the circulation of the agroecological framework: on the one hand, they disseminate the project while, on the other, they protect its transformational imaginary by limiting its circulation. These results attest to the contribution of ordinary practices and spaces in the dissemination and infiltration of counterhegemonic ideas, as well as to a wide range of new ideas and practices arising from a social movement’s interactions with local administrations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning C Politics and SpaceSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207