Show simple item record

2019Zeitschriftenartikel DOI: 10.18452/20648
Design and quality criteria for archetype analysis
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.accessioned2019-11-08T15:29:36Z
dc.date.available2019-11-08T15:29:36Z
dc.date.issued2019none
dc.identifier.other10.5751/ES-10855-240306
dc.identifier.urihttp://edoc.hu-berlin.de/18452/21463
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.eng
dc.language.isoengnone
dc.publisherHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin
dc.rights(CC BY 4.0) Attribution 4.0 Internationalger
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectabstractioneng
dc.subjectarchetype analysiseng
dc.subjectgeneralizationeng
dc.subjectideographic trapeng
dc.subjectinterdisciplinary collaborationeng
dc.subjectpanaceaeng
dc.subjectpatterneng
dc.subjectresearch designeng
dc.subjectsocial-ecological systemseng
dc.subjectqualitativeeng
dc.subjectquantitativeeng
dc.subjectvalidityeng
dc.subject.ddc333.7 Natürliche Resourcen, Energie und Umweltnone
dc.subject.ddc570 Biologienone
dc.titleDesign and quality criteria for archetype analysisnone
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:kobv:11-110-18452/21463-0
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.18452/20648
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionnone
local.edoc.container-titleEcology and societynone
local.edoc.pages12none
local.edoc.anmerkungThis article was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Open Access Publication Fund of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.none
local.edoc.type-nameZeitschriftenartikel
local.edoc.institutionLebenswissenschaftliche Fakultätnone
local.edoc.container-typeperiodical
local.edoc.container-type-nameZeitschrift
local.edoc.container-publisher-nameResilience Alliancenone
local.edoc.container-publisher-placeWolfville, Nova Scotianone
local.edoc.container-volume24none
local.edoc.container-issue3none
dc.description.versionPeer Reviewednone
local.edoc.container-articlenumber6
dc.identifier.eissn1708-3087

Show simple item record