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 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Archetype
- Land systems
- Social-ecological system
- Sustainability
- Vulnerability
Cite this
}
Archetype analysis in sustainability research : meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making. / Oberlack, Christoph; Sietz, Diana; Bonanomi, Elisabeth Bürgi; De Bremond, Ariane; Dell'Angelo, Jampel; Eisenack, Klaus; Ellis, Erle C.; David, M.; Giger, Markus; Heinimann, Andreas; Kimmich, Christian; Kok, Marcel Tj; Navarrete, David Manuel; Messerli, Peter; Meyfroidt, Patrick; Václavík, Tomá!; Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio.
In: Ecology and Society, Vol. 24, No. 2, 26, 01.07.2019.Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Archetype analysis in sustainability research
T2 - meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making
AU - Oberlack, Christoph
AU - Sietz, Diana
AU - Bonanomi, Elisabeth Bürgi
AU - De Bremond, Ariane
AU - Dell'Angelo, Jampel
AU - Eisenack, Klaus
AU - Ellis, Erle C.
AU - David, M.
AU - Giger, Markus
AU - Heinimann, Andreas
AU - Kimmich, Christian
AU - Kok, Marcel Tj
AU - Navarrete, David Manuel
AU - Messerli, Peter
AU - Meyfroidt, Patrick
AU - Václavík, Tomá!
AU - Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio
PY - 2019/7/1
Y1 - 2019/7/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Archetype
KW - Land systems
KW - Social-ecological system
KW - Sustainability
KW - Vulnerability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070838129&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85070838129&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5751/ES-10747-240226
DO - 10.5751/ES-10747-240226
M3 - Article
VL - 24
JO - Ecology and Society
JF - Ecology and Society
SN - 1708-3087
IS - 2
M1 - 26
ER -