Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making

Christoph Oberlack, Diana Sietz, Elisabeth Bürgi Bonanomi, Ariane De Bremond, Jampel Dell' Angelo, Klaus Eisenack, Erle C. Ellis, M. David, Markus Giger, Andreas Heinimann, Christian Kimmich, Marcel Tj Kok, David Manuel Navarrete, Peter Messerli, Patrick Meyfroidt, Tomá! Václavík, Sergio Villamayor-Tomas

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    11 Citations (Scopus)

    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 languageEnglish (US)
    Article number26
    JournalEcology and Society
    Volume24
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jul 2019

    Fingerprint

    policy making
    sustainability
    pattern recognition
    typology
    analysis
    sustainable development

    Keywords

    • Archetype
    • Land systems
    • Social-ecological system
    • Sustainability
    • Vulnerability

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Ecology

    Cite this

    Oberlack, C., Sietz, D., Bonanomi, E. B., De Bremond, A., Dell' Angelo, J., Eisenack, K., ... Villamayor-Tomas, S. (2019). Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making. Ecology and Society, 24(2), [26]. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10747-240226

    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, 07.2019.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Oberlack, C, Sietz, D, Bonanomi, EB, De Bremond, A, Dell' Angelo, J, Eisenack, K, Ellis, EC, David, M, Giger, M, Heinimann, A, Kimmich, C, Kok, MT, Navarrete, DM, Messerli, P, Meyfroidt, P, Václavík, T & Villamayor-Tomas, S 2019, 'Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making', Ecology and Society, vol. 24, no. 2, 26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10747-240226
    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. / Archetype analysis in sustainability research : meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making. In: Ecology and Society. 2019 ; Vol. 24, No. 2.
    @article{8d9fe40850f94d4a87903ef2c866069a,
    title = "Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making",
    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.",
    keywords = "Archetype, Land systems, Social-ecological system, Sustainability, Vulnerability",
    author = "Christoph Oberlack and Diana Sietz and Bonanomi, {Elisabeth B{\"u}rgi} and {De Bremond}, Ariane and {Dell' Angelo}, Jampel and Klaus Eisenack and Ellis, {Erle C.} and M. David and Markus Giger and Andreas Heinimann and Christian Kimmich and Kok, {Marcel Tj} and Navarrete, {David Manuel} and Peter Messerli and Patrick Meyfroidt and Tom{\'a}! V{\'a}clav{\'i}k and Sergio Villamayor-Tomas",
    year = "2019",
    month = "7",
    doi = "10.5751/ES-10747-240226",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "24",
    journal = "Ecology and Society",
    issn = "1708-3087",
    publisher = "The Resilience Alliance",
    number = "2",

    }

    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

    Y1 - 2019/7

    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

    AN - SCOPUS:85070838129

    VL - 24

    JO - Ecology and Society

    JF - Ecology and Society

    SN - 1708-3087

    IS - 2

    M1 - 26

    ER -