Agroecological strategies for reactivating the agrarian sector: The case of Agrolab in Madrid

sustainability Article Agroecological Strategies for Reactivating the Agrarian Sector: The Case of Agrolab in Madrid Marina García-Llorente 1,* , Irene Pérez-Ramírez 1, Clara Sabán de la Portilla 1, Carmen Haro 2and Alejandro Benito 1 1Department of Applied Research and Agricultural Extension, Madrid Institute for Rural, Agricultural and Food Research and Development (IMIDRA), Ctra. Madrid-Barcelona (N-II) KM. 38.200, 28802 Alcaláde Henares, Madrid, Spain; irene.perez.ramir[email protected]g (I.P.-R.); [email protected] (C.S.d.l.P.); [email protected]g (A.B.) 2Departamento de Historia Moderna, Contemporánea y de América, Periodismo y Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Valladolid, Plaza del Campus s/n, 47011 Valladolid, Spain; [email protected] *Correspondence: marina.garcia.llor[email protected]g or marinagllor[email protected]; Tel.: +34-918879392 Received: 27 November 2018; Accepted: 19 February 2019; Published: 23 February 2019   Abstract: Considering the social and ecological obsolescence of the conventional agricultural model and the crisis faced by rural areas, innovative models based on collective initiatives and agroecological practices are emerging. Here, we present the use of a participatory farming lab as a space to reactivate the agrarian sector in rural and periurban areas of Madrid. The specific objectives of this study are: (1) to describe the project; (2) to identify participants’ profiles and motivations and (3) to identify the most socially valued ecosystem services and the actions collectively taken to enhance them. To do so, we have used the living lab conceptual approach and the ecosystem service lens. Data gathering included a combination of qualitative and quantitative techniques, including participant observation, informal and formal meetings, interviews, workshops and surveys. We found a diversity of motivations for enrolling in the program and 20 ecosystem services were selected as socially important. We also describe how the project has contributed to adopting agroecological practices to sustain those ecosystem services. Finally, we discuss the contribution of the project towards new and integrated rural development strategies, including its potential to promote cooperative solutions that enhance farming activity by also providing ecosystem services. Keywords: agricultural landscape; agroecology; ecosystem service; living lab; open farming laboratory; participatory approach; people-nature bond; rural-urban interaction; social innovation 1. Introduction The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) promoted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Bank for a period of three years (2005–2008) recognized how, despite the scientific and technological achievements to improve agricultural productivity, insufficient attention has been paid to the environmental and social consequences of the prevailing agrifood model [ 1 ]. According to the International Millennium Ecosystems Assessment, agroecosystems are in a vulnerable situation, especially because of the decline of cultural values and regulating ecosystem services (ESs; [ 2 ]). The intensification and globalization of food systems has created detrimental impacts related to the following: (1) abandonment of rural areas due to the low profitability for smallholders and relocation of production; (2) aging and masculinization of rural populations, lack of generational replacement and loss of cultural memory; (3) high dependence on fossil fuels and changes in demand in international Sustainability 2019,11, 1181; doi:10.3390/su11041181 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 2 of 19 markets; (4) climate change and greater vulnerability to environmental changes and (5) slowing down of the food system due to the degradation of the basic ESs responsible for food production in terms of soil fertility, water availability and regulation, pollination and so forth [3–8]. In addition to these impacts, in the case of the Madrid region (centre Spain), there has been a reduced economic weight of the agrarian sector in the territorial economy, together with a discredit of the profession, difficulties in land access for new farmers, a lack of training programs or education opportunities, a lack of a culture of innovation, an individualistic mindset, a disconnect among agents in the food value chain and a lack of integration with other sectors (e.g., tourism, health, environment and education) [ 9 , 10 ]. Madrid is one of the most densely populated regions of Europe; at the same time, it has considerable agrarian potential that has deteriorated (agrarian land, institutions and infrastructure) over the years. There has been a replacement of vegetable crops as orchards and fruit trees, especially in irrigated areas, by extensions of arable crops [ 9 , 11 ]. It has been favoured by the fact that arable crops are easily mechanizable requiring smaller workforces. Following the data reported by Madrid Statistical Institute, in the last 30 years, agricultural lands have decreased an 18% (from 276,100 ha in 1985 to 226,792 ha in 2015); where orchards have suffered a significant decreased of a 76% (from 8901 ha in 1985 to 2130 ha in 2015), while cereals have decreased a 22% (from 103.605 ha in 1985 to 81.098 ha in 2015) and grain legumes have increased a 38% (from 5175 ha in 1985 to 7154 ha in 2015). In ten years (from 1999 to 2009), Madrid has lost 15% of its utilised agricultural area [ 12 ]. In contrast, urban areas have almost double its surface during the last four decades (from 42,510 ha in 1981 to 81,499 ha in 2017), together with a population increase from 4,686,895 inhabitants in 1981 to 6,436,996 in 2015. Following this pattern, for decades, agrarian activity has declined and many rural and periurban areas have been reduced to dormitory towns, weekend leisure spaces for urban people or, simply, depressed, isolated and abandoned territories. It is essential to rebalance territorial relations between the countryside and the city and between local communities and their surrounding agricultural landscapes, with farming activities following agroecological principles being a potential connector. Agroecology was developed to address the problems generated by industrial agriculture following basic principles of sustainability, integrity, equity, productivity and stability [ 13 ]. The concept of agroecology has undergone scientific and technical development since the early 1990s [ 14 ]. It is presented as a practice, scientific discipline and socio-political movement that applies ecological concepts in the management of agrarian systems [ 15 ]. From a socioecological perspective, agroecology requires a break with reductionist visions. A holistic point of view is needed to envision the complex relationships that are generated among ecological functioning, human wellbeing, economic profitability, models of governance and territorial policies. Agroecology considers that the problems of the agrarian system cannot be studied isolated of the human communities that depend on it [ 13 ]. Thus, it has as one of its principles the inclusion of all the actors involved [ 16 ]. Agroecosystems are one of the ecosystem types most directly managed by humans. For this reason, farmers assume special importance and responsibility through the practices they carry out, which can contribute to the custody or deterioration of ESs [ 17 ]. Currently, there is an interest in studying collective action as a way to enhance ESs at agricultural landscapes [ 18 ]. Therefore, agroecology works towards action and participation to enhance a transition from the current models [15]. In this regard, living labs are a new research area and phenomenon in which human ideas and needs, from a multi-actor and participatory perspective (usually including a public-private partnerships), are established as a starting point in innovation and transition towards new productive, governance, consuming and living models. Living labs have the purpose of creating, validating and testing new products, services, business ideas, markets and technologies in the real world. The concept emerged in the context of information technology development in the beginning of 2000 to test modern technologies in a real-life context [ 19 , 20 ]. Since then, the concept has been extended towards many other sectors, such as health, mobility, energy, rural development, education and so forth; this diversity could be found in the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). Others Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 3 of 19 have adapted the concept to the context of sustainability, especially in urban areas, through the development of urban living labs [ 21 ]. Here, we operationalize the living lab approach with the aim of exploring ways to reactivate the agrarian sector in rural and periurban areas in Madrid following sustainable agroecological practices by engaging local communities in participatory farming labs (hereafter Agrolabs). The initiative was born in 2015 by a Madrid Regional Government’s commitment on Agriculture and the Environment regarding “the creation of agricultural laboratories for training and entrepreneurship in rural areas” (commitment No. 248). Agrolabs seek to recover the relations between rural, periurban and urban areas with economic, environmental and sociocultural solutions based on agrarian activity. Principally, Agrolabs are focused on: (1) designing a practical training program including land access to promote professionalization in the agrarian sector; (2) enhancing social inclusion and local communities’ cooperation to strengthen rural-urban bonds and agrarian sector networks and (3) promoting sustainability through agroecological practices that enhance ESs and opportunities to interact with agricultural landscapes. The principal aim of this study is to introduce the Agrolab project as a living lab to reactive the agrarian sector in rural and periurban areas in the Madrid region through the embracement of socioecological and agroecological principles. The specific objectives of this manuscript are: (1) to describe Agrolab principles and Agrolab pathway development, articulating the steps given during the period 2015–2018; (2) to identify and characterize participants in terms of their profiles and motivations and (3) to identify the most socially valued ESs (and non-ES benefits) and the actions collectively taken to enhance them. Finally, we discuss the contribution of the project towards new integrated rural development strategies, including its potential to support innovative policies that promote agroecological transitions. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Study Area Description The program is run at two municipalities within the Madrid region, Spain. It first started in 2015 in Perales de Tajuña, a municipality located in the Las Vegas agrarian district (southeast Madrid); then, in 2018, a second Agrolab program was initiated in El Escorial, a municipality located in the Guadarrama water basin (central-west Madrid; Figure 1). Las Vegas agrarian district is a semiarid territory located in the Tajo water basin, its landscapes are crossed by the Tajo River and two of its tributaries, Jarama and Tajuña and are composed of fluvial terraces. The agriculture includes horticultural crops and cereals (mainly corn, wheat and barley), olive groves and vineyards interspersed with thyme, rockrose, lavender, rosemary or esparto and dry cereals, legumes and other annual crops [ 22 ]. Regarding the socioeconomic aspects, the Las Vegas agrarian district includes 23 municipalities, with a total area of 1378 km 2 . The area has a population density of 112.3 inhabitants/km 2 , which provides its rural character (Table 1). During the last few years, financial and global crises have battered this region, with an unemployment rate of 26.85% (13.8% in the Madrid region according to the Spanish National Statistics Institute-INE for 2017). Traditionally, its economy has been based mainly on the farming sector and related agri-food industries. Due to Perales de Tajuña agrarian character and suitable distance to Madrid city (38 km), it is possible to distribute and sell the products produced in Perales de Tajuña in Madrid [ 10 ]. In recent decades, several projects with an agroecological emphasis have been initiated (ex. Under the Asphalt is the Orchard, or, in its Spanish acronym, BAH or Meplanto), with the aim of producing quality organic food with a minimum distribution distance. These projects have served to connect farmers in the area to exchange expertise and seeds and to conserve and maintain traditional irrigation channels and horticultural production. Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 4 of 19 Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 20 Figure 1. Agrolab locations in the Madrid region, in SE Madrid (Perales de Tajuña in Las Vegas agrarian district) and NW Madrid (El Escorial in Guadarrama basin district). Madrid region map (central map), differentiated municipalities in terms of their population, including rural (with < 5000 inhabitants or < 10,000 inhabitants), intermediate or periurban (10,000–25,000 inhabitants and 25,000– 50,0000 inhabitants, respectively) and urban municipalities (>50,000 inhabitants). Side images represent the most representative land use of each municipality; El Escorial (left) has a greater representation of woody crops and pasturelands, while Perales de Tajuña (right) has a mixture of the woody crops, pasturelands and arable crops. Agrolab-El Escorial is in the Guadarrama water basin (central-west Madrid, Figure 1). There are several legally recognized areas of habitat and species protection, with Sierra de Guadarrama National Park (declared in 2013) being worth mentioning. Regarding its vegetation, in the northernmost area (highest elevations), there are perennial vegetation formations and high mountain pastures, below which pine forests dominate. In the area of the middle course of the Guadarrama river, we can distinguish the plain areas (with a clear dominance of rainfed crops) and the mountain plate (with important extensions of holm oaks, accompanied by juniper and some reforested pine groves), as well as the presence of important gallery forest formations linked to the main river ecosystems (fluvial, ash, willow and poplar). Regarding the socioeconomic aspects, the Guadarrama basin district includes 19 municipalities with a total area of 764 km2. The area has a population density of 358.8 inhabitants/km2, which provides its periurban character (Table 1). El Escorial is located within a transition zone between the mountains and the plain. Traditionally, its economy has been based mainly on forestry and livestock, with meat production in the mountain areas and agriculture in the flat areas of the piedmont. Currently, the economic activity in El Escorial is based in the service sector and agriculture has remained a symbolic activity, while livestock farming still maintains a certain importance thanks to good-quality pastures that favour the breeding of livestock, including fighting bulls and cattle of different autochthonous breeds. A few projects have been initiated with an agroecological emphasis (Community Supported Agriculture Zarzalejo, Sierra Oeste Agroecologica). Figure 1. Agrolab locations in the Madrid region, in SE Madrid (Perales de Tajuña in Las Vegas agrarian district) and NW Madrid (El Escorial in Guadarrama basin district). Madrid region map (central map), differentiated municipalities in terms of their population, including rural (with <5000 inhabitants or <10,000 inhabitants), intermediate or periurban (10,000–25,000 inhabitants and 25,000–50,0000 inhabitants, respectively) and urban municipalities (>50,000 inhabitants). Side images represent the most representative land use of each municipality; El Escorial ( left ) has a greater representation of woody crops and pasturelands, while Perales de Tajuña ( right ) has a mixture of the woody crops, pasturelands and arable crops. Agrolab-El Escorial is in the Guadarrama water basin (central-west Madrid, Figure 1). There are several legally recognized areas of habitat and species protection, with Sierra de Guadarrama National Park (declared in 2013) being worth mentioning. Regarding its vegetation, in the northernmost area (highest elevations), there are perennial vegetation formations and high mountain pastures, below which pine forests dominate. In the area of the middle course of the Guadarrama river, we can distinguish the plain areas (with a clear dominance of rainfed crops) and the mountain plate (with important extensions of holm oaks, accompanied by juniper and some reforested pine groves), as well as the presence of important gallery forest formations linked to the main river ecosystems (fluvial, ash, willow and poplar). Regarding the socioeconomic aspects, the Guadarrama basin district includes 19 municipalities with a total area of 764 km 2 . The area has a population density of 358.8 inhabitants/km 2 , which provides its periurban character (Table 1). El Escorial is located within a transition zone between the mountains and the plain. Traditionally, its economy has been based mainly on forestry and livestock, with meat production in the mountain areas and agriculture in the flat areas of the piedmont. Currently, the economic activity in El Escorial is based in the service sector and agriculture has remained a symbolic activity, while livestock farming still maintains a certain importance thanks to good-quality pastures that favour the breeding of livestock, including fighting bulls and cattle of different autochthonous breeds. A few projects have been initiated with an agroecological emphasis (Community Supported Agriculture Zarzalejo, Sierra Oeste Agroecologica). Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 5 of 19 Table 1. Environmental, socio-economic and farming characteristics of both study areas. Characteristics Descriptors Las Vegas Agrarian District Guadarrama Water Basin Climatic and physical characteristics Location SE Madrid NW Madrid Water basin and main rivers Tajo water basing, including Tajo River and two of its tributaries (Jarama and Tajuña) and its fluvial terraces. Guadarrama water basin, including Guadarrama River and it tributary (Aulencia) Surface 1(Km2)1378 (49 corresponds to Perales de Tajuña) 764 (68 corresponds to El Escorial) Climate Semiarid Mountain climate to continental Mediterranean Average yearly temperature 2 (◦C) 15 7.8 Average yearly rainfall 2 (mm) 365 1325 Altitude range (m.a.s.l) 500 to 840 600 to 2000 Socio-economic characteristics Municipalities 23 municipalities (3 urban and 20 rural) 19 municipalities (11 urban and 8 rural) Population 3154,801 (2817 inhabitants in Perales de Tajuña) 274,223 (15,562 inhabitants correspond to El Escorial) Percentage (%) of Madrid Region (6,507,184 inhabitants) 2.4 4.2 Population density 1 (inhabitants/km2) 112.3 (57.1 in Perales de Tajuña) 358.8 (226.1 in El Escorial) Farming surface 2 of each crop type (Km2) Pasturelands (pasture and pasture with scrub or woods) 404 (29%) 418 (54%) Arable crops (cultivated lands with orchards and cereals) 519 (37%) 79 (10%) Forest areas 80 (6%) 101 (13%) Olive groves 189 (14%) 0.3 (0.04%) Vineyards 37 (3%) 0.5 (0.1%) Fruit crops 13 (0.9%) 0.4 (0.05%) 1 Geographical Information System of agricultural plots of the Government of Spain; 2 State Meteorological Agency; 3Madrid Statistics Institute-Almudena (according to data from 2017). 2.2. Data Collection Procedure and Analysis To address specific objective 1, we used our own experience and knowledge to describe the main project principles and the training itinerary considering the viewpoints of the various stakeholders involved, mainly local authorities, rural development organizations operating in the area and the farmers working on the project as agroecological trainers (Figure 2). The agroecological trainers are local farmers with experience on organic farming and collaborative processes contract by the project to provide technical support and practical advice. The data have been systematized following the principles that are commonly used to assess the impact of living labs [ 19 , 23 ]. Then, we described the project in terms of the specific principles derived from applying the living lab concept to the context of the promotion of agroecological practices by engaging local communities. The training itinerary was described following its main stages and the number of participants and organizations involved each year. The information used to cover specific objective 2 is based on an application form that is submitted individually by people interested in enrolling in the project. The call for new participants is announced at the beginning of every year on different platforms, mainly the Regional Government of Madrid website, municipality websites, project websites and social media. The application form includes information regarding three main sections: sociodemographic characteristics, motivations to participate Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 6 of 19 and previous relationships with the farming sector. To indicate their motivations to become involved in the project, participants provided spontaneous responses to an open-format question that was later codified. Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 20 includes information regarding three main sections: sociodemographic characteristics, motivations to participate and previous relationships with the farming sector. To indicate their motivations to become involved in the project, participants provided spontaneous responses to an open-format question that was later codified. To cover objective 3, we present the results of an ES participatory assessment workshop that is conducted annually after four to six months of enrollment in the project, in which participants select the most socially relevant ESs that they perceive from their engagement in the project. These workshops serve to identify common representations of the provision of key ESs by agroecosystems [24]. Participants completed individual questionnaires on ES preferences including a list of a wide array of provisioning, regulating and cultural ESs provided by agroecosystems. The idea of this first exercise is to give participants time to think individually on the topic. Then, they are split into groups to choose by consensus the top five ESs provided by Agrolab to social wellbeing, discussing the rationale for their relevance. In total, the workshop was conducted 12 times (twice per year during the first three years and four workshops during the fourth year) with 91 participants who were split into 17 small discussion groups. In addition, we provide a description of the collective actions that are being conducted in association with the project to enhance agrarian ESs. During the participatory workshops, in addition to the ES exercise, we also provide participants with a list of other potential benefits of being involved in the project. All of these were ranked following a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Differences in perceived importance among all these benefits were tested using a non-parametric Kruskal Wallis test, then Dunn's test was used to test for differences between categories. Figure 2. Description of the methodological process of the data collection based on Agrolab process and study objectives. 3. Results 3.1. Agrolab Principles The project follows the common principles of living labs: Continuity: The project has a long-term orientation period, which enhances cooperation and trust among actors. To guarantee continuity, the project should be approved and supported by local municipalities during a council plenary session. A key aspect has also been to build on trust with external stakeholders, such as landowners, who progressively are more willing to make their lands available to new farmers who have been part of the project. In addition, this continuity provides the opportunity to assess the project periodically and improve it in an iterative way. Openness: The project welcomes people of multiple backgrounds for the exchange of knowledge and experiences. The training itinerary and the plot design and distribution are open to innovative Figure 2. Description of the methodological process of the data collection based on Agrolab process and study objectives. To cover objective 3, we present the results of an ES participatory assessment workshop that is conducted annually after four to six months of enrollment in the project, in which participants select the most socially relevant ESs that they perceive from their engagement in the project. These workshops serve to identify common representations of the provision of key ESs by agroecosystems [ 24 ]. Participants completed individual questionnaires on ES preferences including a list of a wide array of provisioning, regulating and cultural ESs provided by agroecosystems. The idea of this first exercise is to give participants time to think individually on the topic. Then, they are split into groups to choose by consensus the top five ESs provided by Agrolab to social wellbeing, discussing the rationale for their relevance. In total, the workshop was conducted 12 times (twice per year during the first three years and four workshops during the fourth year) with 91 participants who were split into 17 small discussion groups. In addition, we provide a description of the collective actions that are being conducted in association with the project to enhance agrarian ESs. During the participatory workshops, in addition to the ES exercise, we also provide participants with a list of other potential benefits of being involved in the project. All of these were ranked following a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Differences in perceived importance among all these benefits were tested using a non-parametric Kruskal Wallis test, then Dunn’s test was used to test for differences between categories. 3. Results 3.1. Agrolab Principles The project follows the common principles of living labs: Continuity: The project has a long-term orientation period, which enhances cooperation and trust among actors. To guarantee continuity, the project should be approved and supported by local municipalities during a council plenary session. A key aspect has also been to build on trust with external stakeholders, such as landowners, who progressively are more willing to make their lands available to new farmers who have been part of the project. In addition, this continuity provides the opportunity to assess the project periodically and improve it in an iterative way. Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 7 of 19 Openness: The project welcomes people of multiple backgrounds for the exchange of knowledge and experiences. The training itinerary and the plot design and distribution are open to innovative ideas and changes every year. The training program also has an open format in which any interested person can attend the sessions and participants could propose new content or act as trainers at suggested sessions. Realism: Participants learn from real market data regarding project cost (materials, machinery, irrigation system, etc.). Participants also have a field notebook to regularly record data (ex. harvest, crop calendars, etc.). Participants (in the second training year) also participate in local markets to learn about the most demanded products, prices or market strategies. Finally, participants design cultivated surfaces on the basis of consumer demand. Empowerment: Participants’ needs, suggestions and priorities are considered through multiple channels of communication, including day-by-day interactions, periodic assemblies, discussions in small groups and so forth. In addition, participants organize working groups according to their interest, which are mainly focused on organizing irrigation turns, the custody of local varieties, assistance attending visits, knowledge documentation and project communication. Spontaneity: The project is a dynamic process open to new creative and innovative ideas over time. In addition to the common principles of living labs, Agrolab holds principles related to the promotion of agroecological transitions in agrarian socioecological systems, which has been mainly based on: Participatory: Agrolab is codesigned and coproduced based on technical and experiential knowledge, promoting collaborative and experiential learning between rural communities and urban dwellers. All stakeholders participate according to their level of interest or competence in the development of a project, responding to a collective demand or proposing solutions to problems that affect the community. This principle rests on the idea of enhancing agroenvironmental benefits through collective action; defining collective action as the voluntary involvement of a group of people with a shared interest and with common action that works in pursuit of that shared interest (based on [25]). Inclusive social agriculture: The project is based on the promotion of social inclusion and equal opportunities. Here, we understand that interacting with agrarian landscapes produces physical, psychological, emotional, social, cognitive-educational and social and labour integration benefits [26,27] . The project prioritizes the inclusion of vulnerable participants, such as those who are unemployed or have a low income. In addition, some plots are reserved for organizations following environmental, sociocultural or health goals. Hybrid governance system: A hybrid model promotes dialogue and facilitates shared visions and innovative solutions. The project is run thanks to the collaboration among local authorities, a research institute, the Intermunicipal Association Red Terrae for Local Development and Employment Policies through Agroecology in Spain, the agroecological trainers and the participants themselves. Experimental: The epistemology of the word involves controlled conditions but a living laboratory provides the possibility of examining and experimenting in both real life and uncontrolled contexts as a key to enhancing innovation [28]. Modern technologies and technical knowledge: Two of the principal technologies are the development of a drop irrigation system that works through solar energy panels and the design of a weather station to measure meteorological conditions in the area. In this way, Agrolab acts as a demonstrative space or showroom for participants and for farmers and students who visit the project of how technologies are used to find solutions to limitations in the agrarian sector. Circular economy and low carbon food: the products cultivated are seasonal products, which are sold in local markets, optimizing the materials and energy used for its production and distribution. In addition, agrocomposting activities are conducted. Scientific and scalable: Instruments such as scales, surveys and workshops are used to evaluate participants’ preferences and progress. This project is intended to facilitate (in a gradual and Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 8 of 19 documented way) the creation of a model that can be extended and applied to other municipalities in the Madrid region, with an emphasis on internal coherence and collaboration. 3.2. Agrolab Pathway Development In the case of individual participants, a training method was designed based on the guidelines provided by the Intermunicipal Association Red Terrae for Local Development and Employment Policies Through Agroecology in Spain [ 29 ] and adapted following participants’ suggestions (ex. ensuring the existence of plots for local varieties, meeting and resting areas or agrocomposting zones). One of the main pillars of this approach is the development of a practical training itinerary in agroecology made up of several stages of technical, socioeconomic and environmental accompaniment (in contrast to more intensive and time-bound training). Each phase is undertaken for one year to complete an annual crop cycle. During phase I (total surface between 3000–4000 m 2 ), participants work collectively at community orchards and then apply the lessons they have learned at self-consumption (not for sale) and individual orchards of 50 m 2 (N = 24/25 individual orchards available). During this first stage, participants receive weekly training regarding land planning, sowing, planting, harvesting and other complementary skills (Figure 3). In phase II (total surface between 4000–5000 m 2 ), participants aiming to professionalize move to larger orchards (between 200 m 2 and 1000 m 2 ) and initiate small-scale marketing activities. At this stage, the training is also focused on recruiting consumers, participating in local markets organized at the municipality level, developing business ideas, business plans and communication and complementary training, such as product transformation through the canning of vegetables. At this stage, there is an effort to enhance the benefits of collective and cooperative strategies for crop production and commercialization. At a third year, the incorporation of new agents into the agrarian sector takes place through the establishment of small businesses or cooperatives. During the stage, local authorities mediate between participants who want to acquire (by sale or lease) land at an affordable price and landowners. Other participants could opt to establish their own productive orchard with a self-consumption purpose. In the case of entities, they follow and remain at phase I. Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 20 3.2. Agrolab Pathway Development In the case of individual participants, a training method was designed based on the guidelines provided by the Intermunicipal Association Red Terrae for Local Development and Employment Policies Through Agroecology in Spain [29] and adapted following participants’ suggestions (ex. ensuring the existence of plots for local varieties, meeting and resting areas or agrocomposting zones). One of the main pillars of this approach is the development of a practical training itinerary in agroecology made up of several stages of technical, socioeconomic and environmental accompaniment (in contrast to more intensive and time-bound training). Each phase is undertaken for one year to complete an annual crop cycle. During phase I (total surface between 3000-4000 m 2 ), participants work collectively at community orchards and then apply the lessons they have learned at self-consumption (not for sale) and individual orchards of 50 m 2 (N=24/25 individual orchards available). During this first stage, participants receive weekly training regarding land planning, sowing, planting, harvesting and other complementary skills (Figure 3). In phase II (total surface between 4000-5000 m 2 ), participants aiming to professionalize move to larger orchards (between 200 m 2 and 1000 m 2 ) and initiate small-scale marketing activities. At this stage, the training is also focused on recruiting consumers, participating in local markets organized at the municipality level, developing business ideas, business plans and communication and complementary training, such as product transformation through the canning of vegetables. At this stage, there is an effort to enhance the benefits of collective and cooperative strategies for crop production and commercialization. At a third year, the incorporation of new agents into the agrarian sector takes place through the establishment of small businesses or cooperatives. During the stage, local authorities mediate between participants who want to acquire (by sale or lease) land at an affordable price and landowners. Other participants could opt to establish their own productive orchard with a selfconsumption purpose. In the case of entities, they follow and remain at phase I. Since February 2015, the initiative has held four annual implementations, four in Perales de Tajuña and one in El Escorial (Table 2). It has involved 126 individual participants and six entities, together with agroecological trainers, local authorities, the local action group operating in this region and an agrarian research institute (IMIDRA) as mentors. Figure 3. Agrolab training. (A). Participants of Agrolab-Perales de Tajuña carrying out soil preparation work for spring planting. (B). Association of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) and chives (Allium schoenoprasum L.) crops. (C). Pre-Columbian polyculture formed by corn (Zea mays L.), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duchesne) and cayenne (Capsicum annuum L.) at Agrolab-El Escorial; at the picture corn (Zea mays L.) and beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) are seen. In total, 27 people and one socioeducative entity working toward the integration of children and young people were registered in 2015 (first edition). Of these participants, 10 began the second stage and then four opted to grow their own vegetables for self-consumption purposes in the third year (Table 2). During the second edition (2016), 20 people started the project together with the same socioeducative entity. Of these participants, four began the second stage. Overall, three participants Figure 3. Agrolab training. ( A ). Participants of Agrolab-Perales de Tajuña carrying out soil preparation work for spring planting. ( B ). Association of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) and chives (Allium schoenoprasum L.) crops. ( C ). Pre-Columbian polyculture formed by corn (Zea mays L.), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duchesne) and cayenne (Capsicum annuum L.) at Agrolab-El Escorial; at the picture corn (Zea mays L.) and beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) are seen. Since February 2015, the initiative has held four annual implementations, four in Perales de Tajuña and one in El Escorial (Table 2). It has involved 126 individual participants and six entities, together with agroecological trainers, local authorities, the local action group operating in this region and an agrarian research institute (IMIDRA) as mentors. Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 9 of 19 In total, 27 people and one socioeducative entity working toward the integration of children and young people were registered in 2015 (first edition). Of these participants, 10 began the second stage and then four opted to grow their own vegetables for self-consumption purposes in the third year (Table 2). During the second edition (2016), 20 people started the project together with the same socioeducative entity. Of these participants, four began the second stage. Overall, three participants established their own business; two of them focus on productive initiatives of organic products sold at short-supply chains and a third focuses on the dynamization of abandoned lands and the integration of displaced people. At least three of the participants from the second edition are running self-consumption plots. Table 2. Participants’ engagement in different program stages for four years. P: Perales de Tajuña, E: El Escorial. Project Edition First training Stage (First Year) Second Training Stage (Second Year) Professionalization (Third Year) Life Style Change (Third Year) 2015 27 individuals 1 entity 10 0 4 2016 20 individuals 1 entity 4 3 3 2017 31 individuals 2 entities 7 2 0 2018 48 individuals (18-P and 30-E) 4 entities 13 (6-P and 7-E) In 2017 (third edition), 31 participants joined the project together with two entities. One of the entities included the staff and residents of an elderly people rest home. The purpose was to create opportunities to interact with society (going beyond other residents or the family of the residents); at the same time, it created opportunities for young participants to learn from elder participants about traditional methods for growing crops, different varieties of crops and the agrarian sector in the past decades. It was also a training opportunity for the residence staff, who had created an occupational orchard at the residence. Finally, it was an incentive to introduce new products and vegetables into the residents’ diet. The second entity was an environmental organization enhancing environmental activities in Madrid city. Among their activities, they offer a training program in collective home gardening to urban dwellers for one year. Those who want to continue have the possibility to join the Agrolab horticulture plots, which provides them with an opportunity for continuity and the option to engage in horticultural activities in a productive agrarian and rural environment. During the third iteration, 7 participants continued in the program to reach the second training stage, of whom two began productive initiatives. Finally, in 2018 (fourth edition), 48 participants joined the program (18 of them at Perales de Tajuña and 30 of them at El Escorial), together with two entities at each site (Table 2). At Perales de Tajuña, one of the entities was the environmental organization operating in Madrid city mentioned above and the other was the municipality school. In El Escorial, one entity works on the preservation of the natural and cultural history of El Escorial through the organization of environmental activities, the planting of native trees and the promotion of organic farming and so forth. The other one is a parents’ association for the integration of people with functional diversity into society through leisure activities and training workshops (gardening, cooking, crafts, etc.) in El Escorial and its surroundings. Of these participants, 13 expressed their interest in starting the second stage in 2019 (six of them at Perales de Tajuña and seven of them at El Escorial). Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 16 of 19 by participants and to create a space to discuss their importance and interactions and ways to enhance them. Overall, 20 ESs were mentioned, with obtaining quality food products, conserving local varieties, knowledge exchange, satisfaction for agricultural landscape preservation and sense of belonging within a community being the top five ESs. In the project, participants are encouraged to work in a cooperative way and to dedicate an important amount of time to managing the plot, introducing agroecological practices that will affect ESs improvement, such as enhancing crop associations, growing green manure, leaving areas with aromatic flowers and field margins to attract pollinators and other beneficial insects and so forth. Nevertheless, some of the main barriers of collective actions are related to the free-rider effect (associated with those members who benefit without contributing) or the related high transaction cost (derived from negotiating and reaching agreements), skeptical members and the uncertainty of the future direction of government support or policy instruments [ 37 ]. To guarantee the permanence of these practices once participants have become established, a combination of collective actions, supported by market and government incentives, will be necessary. In this case, Agrolab aims to contribute to the renaissance of the farming sector in the Madrid region. Its activities are part of the local and regional priority measures for sustainability and rural development. At the regional level, Agrolab contributes to the objective of promoting “intelligent, sustainable and inclusive growth” of the Community of Madrid’s Rural Development Programme 2014/2020 (CM-RDP 2014/2020), approved by the European Commission in 2015. In this sense, Agrolab promotes knowledge transfer and innovation; improve the viability of agroecological farms, the promotion of short food supply chains and low carbon economy, the preservation of agroecosystems and the economic development in rural areas. The regional government has supported the project by providing research guidelines, technical assistance, facilitation and financial assistance to partially cover the cost. In parallel, other strategies to ensure agricultural landscape sustainability are being developed. One of them is the Strategy to Revitalize Rural Municipalities of Madrid region [ 42 ]. This strategy, approved in 2018, was designed for 78 municipalities with less than 2500 inhabitants to encourage population growth in rural municipalities and seeks to reduce dependence on nearby urban areas with different measures, some of them focused on the promotion of traditional crops and organic production. Another example is the Strategy of Air Quality and Climate Change of Madrid region for the period 2013–2020, with measures related with the application of sustainable tillage practices, incentives towards organic farming, promotion of organic food products and training programs for farmers [ 43 ]. Finally, in 2018, 26 regional operational groups has been established in Madrid region as instruments of the European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI) programmed at the Rural Development Programmes (CM-RDP 2014/2020, measures 16.1 and 16.2 [ 44 ]) during the period 2014–2020. Finally, at the local level, Agrolab lines up with the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact objectives, which have been signed by more than 120 cities around the world committed to advancing food system development based on the principles of sustainability and social justice. At this stage, it is key to reinforce policies and fix institutional arrangements to guarantee the establishment of this project or others looking for agroecological transitions. At the time of writing this manuscript, three new local authorities have stated their interest in beginning the project in their municipalities. 5. Conclusions In this article, we have described and analyzed living lab principles in the context of agriculture with the purpose of reactivating the agrarian sector in rural and periurban areas of Madrid with agroecological practices enhanced by collective action and cooperation. Based on our findings, the Agrolab project follows the common principles of living labs in relation to continuity, openness, realism, empowerment and spontaneity together with the promotion of an agroecological transition following socioecological system thinking by enhancing participation, social inclusion, circular economy and a combination of knowledge systems by using an experimental and scientific design that ensures monitoring. Since February 2015, the initiative has held four annual implementations and has Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 17 of 19 involved 126 individual participants and six entities working in the promotion of environmental, sociocultural and health goals together with the technical support and advice of agroecological trainers, local authorities and an agrarian research institute as mentors. The project constitutes an empirical experience for agricultural landscapes reactivation in rural and periurban areas, enhancing innovative organizational models among actors related to the agrarian sector, researchers and managers. The participatory approach and collective action followed in the project have affect ESs social recognition and improvement and could be conceived as a viable alternative towards agroecological transitions. To ensure agricultural landscape sustainability and to guarantee projects in this direction, we appeal for a solid integration of these types of initiatives in landscape planning and agrarian development strategies. Author Contributions: A.B., C.H. and M.G.-L. conceived and designed the project; I.P.-R., C.S.d.l.P., M.G.-L., C.H. performed the project; M.G.-L., I.P.-R. and C.S.d.l.P. compiled and analyzed the data; M.G.-L. wrote the original draft preparation; A.B., C.H., I.P.-R. and C.S.d.l.P. edited and reviewed the manuscript, I.R.-P. designed the map presented in Figure 1. Funding: This research was funded by IMIDRA research projects: Creating open and collaborative spaces of participation through agriculture (FP16-COLAB), Social farming viability in Madrid Region (FP16-VAS), Assessment of ecosystem services provided by agroecosystems (FP16-ECO), Open technologies to support agriculture at Madrid region (FP16-TECN) and the Creation of open and inclusive spaces through participatory agriculture at Madrid Region (FP17-AGROLAB2.0). MGL was funded by a postdoctoral grant from the Spanish National Institute for Agriculture and Food Research and Technology co-funded by the Social European Fund (Doc-INIA CCAA). Acknowledgments: We thank the constant assistance provided by Red Terrae, specially thanks to F. Llobera, M. Martín and M. Redondo. We sincerely thank C. Hervas, A. Jimenez and A. Pérez for acting as agroecological trainers, local authorities from Perales de Tajuña and El Escorial municipalities, ARACOVE rural development organization and all the participants. We honestly thank them for all the time, effort, energy and illusions placed in turning this project into reality. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References 1. McIntyre, B.D.; Herren, H.R.; Wakhungu, J.; Watson, R.T. (Eds.) International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD): Global Report; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2009. 2. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. 3. Matson, P.A.; Parton, W.J.; Power, A.G.; Swift, M.J. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 1997,277, 504–509. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 4. Power, A.G. Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2010 ,365, 2959–2971. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 5. Tscharntke, T.; Clough, Y.; Wanger, T.C.; Jackson, L.; Motzke, I.; Perfecto, I.; Vandermeer, J.; Whitbread, A. Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biol. Conserv. 2012,151, 53–59. [CrossRef] 6. Cumming, G.S.; Buerkert, A.; Hoffmann, E.M.; Schlecht, E.; von Cramon-Taubadel, S.; Tscharntke, T. Implications of agricultural transitions and urbanization for ecosystem services. Nature 2014 ,515, 50–57. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 7. Infante Amate, J.; González de Molina, M. ‘Sustainable de-growth’ in agriculture and food: An agro-ecological perspective on Spain’s agri-food system (year 2000). J. Clean. Prod. 2013 ,38, 27–35. [CrossRef] 8. Tilman, D. Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: The need for sustainable and efficient practices. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999,96, 5995–6000. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 9. Moran Alonso, N. Dimensión Territorial de los Sistemas Alimentarios Locales. El caso de Madrid. Ph.D. Thesis, Superior Technical School of Architecture, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain, 2015. Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 18 of 19 10. Red2Red Consultores Balance de la Actividad de la Asociación de Desarrollo Rural-Aranjuez-Comarca de las Vegas (ARACOVE) Durante el Periodo 2007–2013: Evaluación del Territorio, Lecciones Aprendidas y Perspectivas de Futuro. 2015. Available online: http://www.aracove.com/docs/EDL/diagnostico_vegas. pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019). 11. Mata Olmo, R.; Rodríguez-Chumillas, I. Propiedad y explotación agrarias en el regadío de las “vegas” de Madrid. Agric. Y Soc. 1987,42, 149–180. 12. Soler, C.; Fernández, F. Estudio Estructura de la Propiedad de Tierras en España. Concentración y Acaparamiento. 2015. Available online: https://regiondemurcia.podemos.info/wp-content/uploads/ 2016/12/Estudio-Estructura-de-la-propiedad-de-tierras-en-Espana.-Concentracion-y-acaparamiento.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019). 13. Wibbelmann, M.; Schmutz, U.; Wright, J.; Udall, D.; Rayns, F.; Kneafsey, M.; Trenchard, L.; Bennett, J.; Lennartsson, M. Mainstreaming Agroecology: Implications for Global Food and Farming Systems; Centre for Agroecology and Food Security Discussion Paper; Centre for Agroecology and Food Security: Coventry, UK, 2013; ISBN 978-1-84600-0454. 14. Altieri, M.A. Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture, 2nd ed.; Westview Press: Boulder, CO, USA, 1995; ISBN 978-0-8133-1718-2. 15. Peeters, A.; Dendoncker, N.; Jacobs, S. Enhancing ecosystem services in Belgian agriculture through agroecology: A vision for a farming with a Future. In Ecosystem Services: Global Issues, Local Practices; Jacobs, S., Dendoncker, N., Keune, H., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; Chapter 22, pp. 285–304, ISBN 978-0-12-419964-4. 16. Hatt, S.; Artru, S.; Brédart, D.; Lassois, L.; Francis, F.; Haubruge, E.; Garré, S.; Stassart, P.M.; Dufrêne, M.; Monty, A.; et al. Towards sustainable food systems: The concept of agroecology and how it questions current research practices. A review. Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 2016,20, 215–224. 17. Swinton, S.M.; Lupi, F.; Robertson, G.P.; Hamilton, S.K. Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits. Ecol. Econ. 2007,64, 245–252. [CrossRef] 18. Science for Environment Policy. Agri-Environmental Schemes: How to Enhance the Agriculture-Environment Relationship. Thematic Issue 57. Issue Produced for the European Commission DG Environment by the Science Communication Unit. UWE: Bristol, UK. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/AES_impacts_on_ agricultural_environment_57si_en.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019). 19. Bergvall-Kareborn, B.; Stahlbrost, A. Living lab-An open and citizen centric approach for innovation. Int. J. Innov. Reg. Dev. 2009,1, 56–370. [CrossRef] 20. Ståhlbröst, A. A set of key principles to assess the impact of living labs. Int. J. Prod. Dev. 2012 ,17, 60–75. [CrossRef] 21. Voytenko, Y.; McCormick, K.; Evans, J.; Schliwa, G. Urban living labs for sustainability and low carbon cities in Europe: Towards a research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 2016,123, 45–54. [CrossRef] 22. Gómez-Mendoza, J. La agricultura periurbana. Su estudio, sus cambios, sus políticas. Agric. Y Soc. 1987 ,42, 109–146. 23. CoreLabs. Living Labs Roadmap 2007–2010: Recommendations on Networked Systems for Open User-Driven Research, Development and Innovation; Open Document; Luleå University of Technology, Centrum for Distance Spanning Technology: Luleå, Sweden, 2007. 24. Barnaud, C.; Corbera, E.; Muradian, R.; Salliou, N.; Sirami, C.; Vialatte, A.; Choisis, J.P.; Dendoncker, N.; Mathevet, R.; Moreau, C.; et al. Ecosystem services, social interdependencies and collective action: A conceptual framework. Ecol. Soc. 2018, 23. [CrossRef] 25. Meinzen-Dick, R.; DiGregorio, M.; McCarthy, N. Methods for studying collective action in rural development. Agric. Syst. 2004,82, 197–214. [CrossRef] 26. Di Iacovo, F.; O’Connor, D. Supporting Policies for Social Farming in Europe: PROGRESSING Multifunctionality in Responsive Rural Areas. SoFar project: Supporting EU Agricultural Policies; ARSIA, LCD: Firenze, Italy, 2009. 27. García-Llorente, M.; Rossignoli, C.M.; Di Iacovo, F.; Moruzzo, R. Social farming in the promotion of social-ecological sustainability in rural and periurban areas. Sustainability 2016,8, 1238. [CrossRef] 28. Evans, J.; Karvonen, A. Living laboratories for sustainability: exploring the politics and epistemology of urban transition. In Cities and Low Carbon Transitions; Bulkeley, H., Castan-Broto, V., Hodson, M., Marvin, S., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2011; Volume 35, pp. 130–140. Sustainability 2019,11, 1181 19 of 19 29. Llobera, F.; Redondo, M. Dinamización de iniciativas locales agroecológicas: El método Terrae. Consumo gusto. Diseñando estrategias de transición agroecológica desde la iniciativa de las administraciones locales. 2013. Available online: http://www.tierrasagroecologicas.es/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Manual- Terrae-vwebdef2.pdf (accessed on 19 November 2018). 30. Laurent, C.; Cerf, M.; Labarthe, P. Agricultural extension services and market regulation: Learning from a comparison of six EU countries. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2006,12, 5–16. [CrossRef] 31. Labarthe, P. Extension services and multifunctional agriculture. Lessons learnt from the French and Dutch contexts and approaches. J. Environ. Manag. 2009,90, S193–S202. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 32. Knickel, K.; Brunori, G.; Rand, S.; Proost, J. Towards a better conceptual framework for innovation processes in agriculture and rural development: From linear models to systemic approaches. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2009 , 15, 131–146. [CrossRef] 33. Kroma, M.M.K. Organic farmer networks: Facilitating learning and innovation for sustainable agriculture. J. Sustain. Agr. 2006,28, 5–28. [CrossRef] 34. Gullino, P.; Battisti, L.; Larcher, F. Linking multifunctionality and sustainability for valuing peri-urban farming: A case Study in the Turin Metropolitan Area (Italy). Sustainability 2018,10, 1625. [CrossRef] 35. Stallman, H.R. Ecosystem services in agriculture: Determining suitability for provision by collective management. Ecol. Econ. 2011,71, 131–139. [CrossRef] 36. Bennett, N.J.; Whitty, T.S.; Finkbeiner, E.; Pittman, J.; Bassett, H.; Gelcich, S.; Allison, E.H. Environmental stewardship: A conceptual review and analytical framework. Environ. Manag. 2018 ,61, 597–614. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 37. OECD. Providing Agri-Environmental Public Goods through Collective Action; OECD Publishing: Paris, France; ISBN 978-92-64-19720-6. 38. Duru, M.; Therond, O.; Fares, M. Designing agroecological transitions: A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2015 , 35, 1237–1257. [CrossRef] 39. Cockburn, J.; Cundill, G.; Shackleton, S.; Rouget, M. Towards place-based research to support social–ecological stewardship. Sustainability 2018,10, 1434. [CrossRef] 40. Dendoncker, N.; Boeraeve, F.; Crouzat, E.; Dufrêne, M.; König, A.; Barnaud, C. How can integrated valuation of ecosystem services help understanding and steering agroecological transitions? Ecol. Soc. 2018 ,23. [CrossRef] 41. Bodin, Ö.; Robins, G.; McAllister, R.; Guerrero, A.; Crona, B.; Tengö, M.; Lubell, M. Theorizing benefits and constraints in collaborative environmental governance: A transdisciplinary social-ecological network approach for empirical investigations. Ecol. Soc. 2016,21. [CrossRef] 42. Comunidad de Madrid. Estrategia para Revitalizar los Municipios Rurales. 2018. Available online: http: //sierradelrincon.com/uploads/Estrategia%20revitalizar%20municipios%20rurales.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019). 43. Comunidad de Madrid Estrategia de Calidad del Aire y Cambio Climático de la Comunidad de Madrid 2013–2020. Planazul+. Available online: http://www.madrid.org/es/transparencia/sites/default/files/ plan/document/577_189_memoria_estrategia_de_calidad_del_aire_de_la_comunidad_de_madrid_2013- 2020_0.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019). 44. Comunidad de Madrid. Programa de Desarrollo Rural 2014–2020-Comunidad de Madrid. Available online: http://www.madrid.org/es/transparencia/sites/default/files/plan/document/cma_agr_pdr_ v02.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019). © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).