Archetype analysis in sustainability research: methodological portfolio and 
analytical frontiers

Sietz, Diana; Frey, U.; Roggero, M.; Gong, Y.; Magliocca, N.; Tan, R.; Janssen, P.; Vaclavik, T.

doi:10.5751/ES-11103-240334

アイテム詳細

登録内容を編集ファイル形式で保存

一時保存へ追加

タグ情報を表示リリース履歴を表示詳細要約

公開

学術論文

Archetype analysis in sustainability research: methodological portfolio and analytical frontiers

Authors

/persons/resource/Diana.Sietz

Sietz, Diana
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

Frey, U.
External Organizations;

Roggero, M.
External Organizations;

Gong, Y.
External Organizations;

Magliocca, N.
External Organizations;

Tan, R.
External Organizations;

Janssen, P.
External Organizations;

Vaclavik, T.
External Organizations;

URL

There are no locators available

フルテキスト (公開)

8619oa.pdf
(出版社版), 2MB

付随資料 (公開)

There is no public supplementary material available

引用

Sietz, D., Frey, U., Roggero, M., Gong, Y., Magliocca, N., Tan, R., Janssen, P., & Vaclavik, T. (2019). Archetype analysis in sustainability research: methodological portfolio and analytical frontiers. Ecology and Society, 24(3):. doi:10.5751/ES-11103-240334.

引用: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_23368

要旨

In sustainability research, archetype analysis reveals patterns of factors and processes that repeatedly shape social-ecological systems. These patterns help improve our understanding of global concerns, including vulnerability, land management, food security, and governance. During the last decade, the portfolio of methods used to investigate archetypes has been growing rapidly. However, these methods differ widely in their epistemological and normative underpinnings, data requirements, and suitability to address particular research purposes. Therefore, guidance is needed for systematically choosing methods in archetype analysis. We synthesize strengths and weaknesses of key methods used to identify archetypes. Demonstrating that there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach, we discuss advantages and shortcomings of a range of methods for archetype analysis in sustainability research along gradients that capture the treatment of causality, normativity, spatial variations, and temporal dynamics. Based on this discussion, we highlight seven analytical frontiers that bear particular potential for tackling methodological limitations. As a milestone in archetype analysis, our synthesis supports researchers in reflecting on methodological implications, including opportunities and limitations related to causality, normativity, space, and time considerations in view of specific purposes and research questions. This enables innovative research designs in future archetype analysis, thereby contributing to the advancement of sustainability research and decision-making.