Design and quality criteria for archetype analysis

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage6eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue3eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleEcology and Societyeng
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume24eng
dc.contributor.authorEisenack, Klaus
dc.contributor.authorVillamayor-Tomas, Sergio
dc.contributor.authorEpstein, Graham
dc.contributor.authorKimmich, Christian
dc.contributor.authorMagliocca, Nicholas
dc.contributor.authorManuel-Navarrete, David
dc.contributor.authorOberlack, Christoph
dc.contributor.authorRoggero, Matteo
dc.contributor.authorSietz, Diana
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-22T08:49:35Z
dc.date.available2021-10-22T08:49:35Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractA key challenge in addressing the global degradation of natural resources and the environment is to effectively transfer successful strategies across heterogeneous contexts. Archetype analysis is a particularly salient approach in this regard that helps researchers to understand and compare patterns of (un)sustainability in heterogeneous cases. Archetype analysis avoids traps of overgeneralization and ideography by identifying reappearing but nonuniversal patterns that hold for well-defined subsets of cases. It can be applied by researchers working in inter-or transdisciplinary settings to study sustainability issues from a broad range of theoretical and methodological standpoints. However, there is still an urgent need for quality standards to guide the design of theoretically rigorous and practically useful archetype analyses. To this end, we propose four quality criteria and corresponding research strategies to address them: (1) specify the domain of validity for each archetype, (2) ensure that archetypes can be combined to characterize single cases, (3) explicitly navigate levels of abstraction, and (4) obtain a fit between attribute configurations, theories, and empirical domains of validity. These criteria are based on a stocktaking of current methodological challenges in archetypes research, including: to demonstrate the validity of the analysis, delineate boundaries of archetypes, and select appropriate attributes to define them. We thus contribute to a better common understanding of the approach and to the improvement of the research design of future archetype analyses. © 2019 by the author(s).eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/7091
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.34657/6138
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherWolfville, Nova Scotia : Resilience Allianceeng
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10855-240306
dc.relation.essn1195-5449
dc.relation.essn1708-3087
dc.rights.licenseCC BY-NC 4.0 Unportedeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/eng
dc.subject.ddc333,7eng
dc.subject.ddc570eng
dc.subject.otherAbstractioneng
dc.subject.otherArchetype analysiseng
dc.subject.otherGeneralizationeng
dc.subject.otherIdeographic trapeng
dc.subject.otherInterdisciplinary collaborationeng
dc.subject.otherPanaceaeng
dc.subject.otherPatterneng
dc.subject.otherQualitativeeng
dc.subject.otherQuantitativeeng
dc.subject.otherResearch designeng
dc.subject.otherSocial-ecological systemseng
dc.subject.otherValidityeng
dc.titleDesign and quality criteria for archetype analysiseng
dc.typeArticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorPIKeng
wgl.subjectUmweltwissenschafteneng
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikeleng
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ES-2019-10855.pdf
Size:
233.94 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: