Stefan Partelow, S. Villamayor‐Tomas, Klaus Eisenack, Graham Epstein, Elke Kellner, Matteo Roggero, Maurice Tschopp
{"title":"SES 框架案例研究的元分析:确定二元和三元原型","authors":"Stefan Partelow, S. Villamayor‐Tomas, Klaus Eisenack, Graham Epstein, Elke Kellner, Matteo Roggero, Maurice Tschopp","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\nThere is a need to synthesize the vast amount of empirical case study research on social‐ecological systems (SES) to advance theory. Innovative methods are needed to identify patterns of system interactions and outcomes at different levels of abstraction. Many identifiable patterns may only be relevant to small sets of cases, a sector or regional context, and some more broadly. Theory needs to match these levels while still retaining enough details to inform context‐specific governance. Archetype analysis offers concepts and methods for synthesizing and explaining patterns of interactions across cases. At the most basic level, there is a need to identify two and three independent variable groupings (i.e. dyads and triads) as a starting point for archetype identification (i.e. as theoretical building blocks). The causal explanations of dyads and triads are easier to understand than larger models, and once identified, can be used as building blocks to construct or explain larger theoretical models.\n\nWe analyse the recurrence of independent variable interactions across 71 quantitative SES models generated from qualitative case study research applying Ostrom's SES framework and examine their relationships to specific outcomes (positive or negative, social or ecological). We use hierarchical clustering, principal component analysis and network analysis tools to identify the frequency and recurrence of dyads and triads across models of different sizes and outcome groups. We also measure the novelty of model composition as models get larger. We support our quantitative model findings with illustrative visual and narrative examples in four case study boxes covering deforestation in Indonesia, pollution in the Rhine River, fisheries management in Chile and renewable wind energy management in Belgium.\n\nFindings indicate which pairs of two (dyads) and three (triads) variables are most frequently linked to either positive or negative, social or ecological outcomes. We show which pairs account for most of the variation of interactions across all the models (i.e. the optimal suite). Both the most frequent and optimal suite sets are good starting points for assessing how dyads and triads can fulfil the role of explanatory archetype candidates. We further discuss challenges and opportunities for future SES modelling and synthesis research using archetype analysis.\n\nRead the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":508650,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A meta‐analysis of SES framework case studies: Identifying dyad and triad archetypes\",\"authors\":\"Stefan Partelow, S. Villamayor‐Tomas, Klaus Eisenack, Graham Epstein, Elke Kellner, Matteo Roggero, Maurice Tschopp\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pan3.10630\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\n\\nThere is a need to synthesize the vast amount of empirical case study research on social‐ecological systems (SES) to advance theory. Innovative methods are needed to identify patterns of system interactions and outcomes at different levels of abstraction. Many identifiable patterns may only be relevant to small sets of cases, a sector or regional context, and some more broadly. Theory needs to match these levels while still retaining enough details to inform context‐specific governance. Archetype analysis offers concepts and methods for synthesizing and explaining patterns of interactions across cases. At the most basic level, there is a need to identify two and three independent variable groupings (i.e. dyads and triads) as a starting point for archetype identification (i.e. as theoretical building blocks). The causal explanations of dyads and triads are easier to understand than larger models, and once identified, can be used as building blocks to construct or explain larger theoretical models.\\n\\nWe analyse the recurrence of independent variable interactions across 71 quantitative SES models generated from qualitative case study research applying Ostrom's SES framework and examine their relationships to specific outcomes (positive or negative, social or ecological). We use hierarchical clustering, principal component analysis and network analysis tools to identify the frequency and recurrence of dyads and triads across models of different sizes and outcome groups. We also measure the novelty of model composition as models get larger. We support our quantitative model findings with illustrative visual and narrative examples in four case study boxes covering deforestation in Indonesia, pollution in the Rhine River, fisheries management in Chile and renewable wind energy management in Belgium.\\n\\nFindings indicate which pairs of two (dyads) and three (triads) variables are most frequently linked to either positive or negative, social or ecological outcomes. We show which pairs account for most of the variation of interactions across all the models (i.e. the optimal suite). Both the most frequent and optimal suite sets are good starting points for assessing how dyads and triads can fulfil the role of explanatory archetype candidates. We further discuss challenges and opportunities for future SES modelling and synthesis research using archetype analysis.\\n\\nRead the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"People and Nature\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"People and Nature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10630\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"People and Nature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10630","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
有必要综合大量有关社会生态系统(SES)的实证案例研究,以推进理论的发展。需要采用创新方法来确定不同抽象程度的系统互动模式和结果。许多可识别的模式可能只与小部分案例、部门或地区背景相关,而有些模式则更为广泛。理论需要与这些层面相匹配,同时仍要保留足够的细节,以便为特定背景下的治理提供信息。原型分析为综合和解释不同案例之间的互动模式提供了概念和方法。在最基本的层面上,需要确定两个和三个独立变量分组(即二元组和三元组),作为原型识别的起点(即作为理论构件)。与更大的模型相比,二元组和三元组的因果解释更容易理解,而且一旦确定,就可用作构建或解释更大理论模型的基石。我们运用奥斯特罗姆的社会经济地位框架,分析了从定性案例研究中生成的 71 个定量社会经济地位模型中自变量相互作用的重复性,并研究了它们与特定结果(积极或消极、社会或生态)之间的关系。我们使用分层聚类、主成分分析和网络分析工具来识别不同规模和结果组模型中的二元组和三元组的频率和重复性。随着模型规模的扩大,我们还测量了模型构成的新颖性。我们通过四个案例研究框中的可视化和叙述性实例来支持我们的定量模型发现,这四个案例研究框分别涉及印度尼西亚的森林砍伐、莱茵河的污染、智利的渔业管理和比利时的可再生风能管理。研究结果表明,哪些两变量对(二元组)和三变量对(三元组)最频繁地与积极或消极的社会或生态结果相关联。我们显示了哪些变量对占所有模型中相互作用变化的大部分(即最佳组合)。最常见组合和最佳组合都是评估二元组和三元组如何发挥解释原型候选者作用的良好起点。我们进一步讨论了未来使用原型分析进行 SES 建模和综合研究的挑战与机遇。
A meta‐analysis of SES framework case studies: Identifying dyad and triad archetypes
There is a need to synthesize the vast amount of empirical case study research on social‐ecological systems (SES) to advance theory. Innovative methods are needed to identify patterns of system interactions and outcomes at different levels of abstraction. Many identifiable patterns may only be relevant to small sets of cases, a sector or regional context, and some more broadly. Theory needs to match these levels while still retaining enough details to inform context‐specific governance. Archetype analysis offers concepts and methods for synthesizing and explaining patterns of interactions across cases. At the most basic level, there is a need to identify two and three independent variable groupings (i.e. dyads and triads) as a starting point for archetype identification (i.e. as theoretical building blocks). The causal explanations of dyads and triads are easier to understand than larger models, and once identified, can be used as building blocks to construct or explain larger theoretical models.
We analyse the recurrence of independent variable interactions across 71 quantitative SES models generated from qualitative case study research applying Ostrom's SES framework and examine their relationships to specific outcomes (positive or negative, social or ecological). We use hierarchical clustering, principal component analysis and network analysis tools to identify the frequency and recurrence of dyads and triads across models of different sizes and outcome groups. We also measure the novelty of model composition as models get larger. We support our quantitative model findings with illustrative visual and narrative examples in four case study boxes covering deforestation in Indonesia, pollution in the Rhine River, fisheries management in Chile and renewable wind energy management in Belgium.
Findings indicate which pairs of two (dyads) and three (triads) variables are most frequently linked to either positive or negative, social or ecological outcomes. We show which pairs account for most of the variation of interactions across all the models (i.e. the optimal suite). Both the most frequent and optimal suite sets are good starting points for assessing how dyads and triads can fulfil the role of explanatory archetype candidates. We further discuss challenges and opportunities for future SES modelling and synthesis research using archetype analysis.
Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.