Abstract
Archetypes are increasingly used as a methodological approach to understand recurrent patterns in variables and processes that shape the sustainability of social-ecological systems. The rapid growth and diversification of archetype analyses has generated variations, inconsistencies, and confusion about the meanings, potential, and limitations of archetypes. Based on a systematic review, a survey, and a workshop series, we provide a consolidated perspective on the core features and diverse meanings of archetype analysis in sustainability research, the motivations behind it, and its policy relevance. We identify three core features of archetype analysis: Recurrent patterns, multiple models, and intermediate abstraction. Two gradients help to apprehend the variety of meanings of archetype analysis that sustainability researchers have developed: (1) understanding archetypes as building blocks or as case typologies and (2) using archetypes for pattern recognition, diagnosis, or scenario development. We demonstrate how archetype analysis has been used to synthesize results from case studies, bridge the gap between global narratives and local realities, foster methodological interplay, and transfer knowledge about sustainability strategies across cases. We also critically examine the potential and limitations of archetype analysis in supporting evidence-based policy making through context-sensitive generalizations with case-level empirical validity. Finally, we identify future priorities, with a view to leveraging the full potential of archetype analysis for supporting sustainable development.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 26 |
Number of pages | 19 |
Journal | Ecology and Society |
Volume | 24 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Jul 2019 |
Funding
We gratefully acknowledge comments by Volker Beckmann and participants of the “Second Research Workshop on Archetype Analysis in Sustainability Research” (HU Berlin, 28 February-2 March 2018), which improved an earlier draft of the paper. Marlène Thibault provided valuable language editing. This work has received financial support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant IZ32Z0_173396); the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement 677140 MIDLAND; https://erc-midland.earth); the Institute of Geography, University of Bern (research cluster “Governing telecoupled resource systems for environmental justice”); the Centre of Development and Environment, University of Bern; the Mittelbauvereinigung, University of Bern; Humboldt-Univeristät zu Berlin (Resource Economics Group); and the NASA ROSES Land Cover Land Use Change project LCLUC project (award NNX17AI15G). This study contributes to the Global Land Programme (https://glp. earth).
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
Centre of Development and Environment, University of Bern | |
Institute of Geography, University of Bern | |
Mittelbauvereinigung, University of Bern | |
Volker Beckmann | |
National Aeronautics and Space Administration | NNX17AI15G |
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme | 677140 |
European Research Council | |
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung | IZ32Z0_173396 |
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin |
Keywords
- Archetype
- Land systems
- Social-ecological system
- Sustainability
- Vulnerability