Advertisement

Methodology

  • Boris Braun
  • Bérénice Preller
  • Christian Schulz
  • Julia Affolderbach
Chapter
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)

Abstract

This methodological chapter argues for a multisited approach to urban green building transitions driven by the objective to understand different drivers of and barriers behind green building innovations rather than a directed comparison between cases. The approach offers a broader scope of analysis without neglecting the in-depth analysis of the single cases. The chapter presents the interactive research design and discusses the mixed-methods approach applied throughout the exploratory, the main empirical and the validation phase of the research project. Methods include document analysis, stakeholder and expert interviews, media and discourse analyses and interactive formats (World Café, stakeholder workshops). The chapter ends with reflections on the limitations of the approach.

Keywords

Interactive methodology Participatory research Co-production of knowledge World Café 

References

  1. Affolderbach J, Preller B, Schulz C (2018) Urban energy transitions through innovations in green building. In: König A (ed) Sustainability science 3.0 as social learning: Equipping science and citizens for meeting complex existential challenges. Routledge, London, pp 218–233Google Scholar
  2. Aldred R (2011) From community participation to organizational therapy? World cafe and appreciative inquiry as research methods. Community Dev J 46(1):57–71.  https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsp039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2016) Regional population growth, Australia. http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3218.0. Accessed 28 Dec 2016
  4. Baker T, McGuirk P (2016) Assemblage thinking as methodology: commitments and practices for critical policy research. Territ Politic Gov 5:425–442.  https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2016.1231631 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barbier C (2015) Des études urbaines comparatistes à une sociologie croisée des politiques urbaines. Espaces et sociétés 163(4):25.  https://doi.org/10.3917/esp.163.0025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BC-Stats (2016) Population estimates. http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/StatisticsBySubject/Demography/PopulationEstimates.aspx. Accessed 18 Nov 2016
  7. Bosman R, Loorbach D, Frantzeskaki N, Pistorius T (2014) Discursive regime dynamics in the Dutch energy transition. Environ Innov Soc Trans 13:45–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2014.07.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown J (2001) The World Café: living knowledge through conversations that matter. Syst Thinker 12(5):1–5Google Scholar
  9. Bulkeley H, Castán Broto V, Hodson M, Marvin S (eds) (2011) Cities and low carbon transitions. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. City of Freiburg (2016) Klimabilanz. http://www.freiburg.de/pb/,Lde/598103.html. Accessed 28 Dec 2016
  11. Denters B, Mossberger K (2006) Building blocks for a methodology for comparative urban political research. Urban Aff Rev 41(4):550–571.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087405282607 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dryzek JS (2013) The politics of the earth: environmental discourses, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Feindt PH, Netherwood A (2011) Making sense of climate change: notes on interpretive policy analysis and discourse analysis in sustainability research. In: Franklin A, Blyton P (eds) Researching sustainability. a guide to social science methods, practice and engagement. Earthscan, Oxon, pp 159–174Google Scholar
  14. Feindt PH, Oels A (2005) Does discourse matter? Discourse analysis in environmental policy making. J Environ Policy Plann 7(3):161–173.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339638 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fischer F (2003) Reframing public policy - discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fischer F (2007) Policy analysis in critical perspective: the epistemics of discursive practices. Crit Policy Stud 1(1):97–109.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2007.9518510 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Flyvbjerg B (2006) Five misunderstandings about case study research. Qual Inq 12(2):219–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fouché C, Light G (2010) An invitation to dialogue: ‘The World Café’ in social work research. Qual Soc Work 10(1):28–48.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325010376016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fuenfschilling L, Truffer B (2014) The structuration of socio-technical regimes—conceptual foundations from institutional theory. Res Policy 43(4):772–791.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Geels FW, Verhees B (2011) Cultural legitimacy and framing struggles in innovation journeys: a cultural-performative perspective and a case study of Dutch nuclear energy (1945–1986). Technol Forecast Soc Change 78(6):910–930.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Geertz C (1973) Thick description: toward an interpretive theory of culture. In: Geertz C (ed) The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books, New York, pp 3–30Google Scholar
  22. Genus A (2014) Governing sustainability: a discourse-institutional approach. Sustainability 6(1):283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hajer M (1995) The politics of environmental discourse. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Hajer M, Versteeg W (2005) A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives. J Environ Policy Plan 7(3):175–184.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339646 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hermwille L (2016) The role of narratives in socio-technical transitions—Fukushima and the energy regimes of Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Energy Res Soc Sci 11:237–246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Herrick C (2013) Comparative urban research and mass participation running events: methodological reflections. Qual Res 15(3):296–313.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113509260 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hessels LK, van Lente H (2008) Re-thinking new knowledge production: a literature review and a research agenda. Res Policy 37(4):740–760.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hopwood B, Mellor M, O’Brien G (2005) Sustainable development: mapping different approaches. Sustain Dev 13(1):38–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. International Energy Agency (2013) Transition to sustainable building - strategies and opportunities to 2050. Energy technology perspectives. IEA, ParisCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Keller R (2011) Diskursforschung - Eine Einführung für SozialwissenschaftlerInnen, 4th edn. VS Verlag, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  32. Kindon S, Pain R, Kesby M (2007) Participatory action research approaches and methods. Connecting people, participation and place. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lawhon M, Murphy JT (2012) Socio-technical regimes and sustainability transitions: Insights from political ecology. Prog Hum Geogr 36(3):354–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Markard J, Suter M, Ingold K (2016) Socio-technical transitions and policy change – advocacy coalitions in Swiss energy policy. Environ Innov Soc Trans 18:215–237.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.05.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martin S (2010) Co-production of social research: strategies for engaged scholarship. Public Money Manage 30(4):211–218.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2010.492180 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mayring P (2000) Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qual Soc Res 1(2):38–48Google Scholar
  37. Meadowcroft J (2011) Engaging with the politics of sustainability transitions. Environ Innov Soc Trans 1(1):70–75.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Metro Vancouver (2013) 2010 Lower fraser valley air emissions inventory and forecast and backcast. Final Report and summarized results. VancouverGoogle Scholar
  39. Newton J, Parfitt A (2011) Striving for mutuality in research relationships: the value of participatory action research principles. In: Franklin A, Blyton P (eds) Researching sustainability. A guide to social science, methods, practice and engagement. Earthscan, New York, pp 71–88Google Scholar
  40. North P (2013) Knowledge exchange, ‘impact’ and engagement: exploring low-carbon urban transitions. Geogr J 179(3):211–220.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00488.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pain R (2004) Social geography: participatory research. Prog Hum Geogr 28(5):652–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pesch U (2015) Tracing discursive space: agency and change in sustainability transitions. Technol Forecast Soc Change 90:379–388.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Preller B, Affolderbach J, Schulz C, Fastenrath S, Braun B (2017) Interactive knowledge generation in urban green building transitions. Prof Geogr 69(2):212–224.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2016.1208104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Prewitt V (2011) Working in the café: lessons in group dialogue. Learn Org 18(3):189–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Raven RPJM, Geels FW (2010) Socio-cognitive evolution in niche development: comparative analysis of biogas development in Denmark and the Netherlands (1973–2004). Technovation 30(2):87–99.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2009.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Raven R, Schot J, Berkhout F (2012) Space and scale in socio-technical transitions. Environ Innov Soc Trans 4:63–78.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.08.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Robinson J (2016) Comparative urbanism: new geographies and cultures of theorizing the urban. Int J Urban Reg Res 40(1):187–199.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rohracher H, Späth P (2014) The interplay of urban energy policy and socio-technical transitions: the eco-cities of Graz and Freiburg in retrospect. Urban Stud 51(7):1415–1431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Scrase JI, Ockwell DG (2010) The role of discourse and linguistic framing effects in sustaining high carbon energy policy—an accessible introduction. Energy Policy 38(5):2225–2233.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sheridan K, Adams-Eaton F, Trimble A, Renton A, Bertotti M (2010) Community engagement using World Café. Groupwork 20(3):32–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith A, Kern F (2009) The transitions storyline in Dutch environmental policy. Environ Polit 18(1):78–98.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010802624835 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smith A, Voß J-P, Grin J (2010) Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: the allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Res Policy 39(4):435–448.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Späth P, Rohracher H (2010) ‘Energy regions’: the transformative power of regional discourses on socio-technical futures. Res Policy 39(4):449–458.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stake RE (2005) Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 3rd edn. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, pp 443–466Google Scholar
  55. STATEC (2016) Le Luxembourg en chiffres. Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  56. Statistisches Landesamt Baden-Württemberg (2016) Bevölkerung, Gebiet und Bevölkerungsdichte. http://www.statistik.baden-wuerttemberg.de/BevoelkGebiet/Bevoelkerung/01515020.tab?R=KR315. Accessed 28 Dec 2016
  57. The World Café Community Foundation (2015) Café to Go! A quick reference guide for hosting World Café. https://www.theworldcafe.com
  58. UNEP (2011) Towards a green economy: pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradicationGoogle Scholar
  59. Vancouver (2016) Geography. City of Vancouver. http://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/geo.aspx. Accessed 18 Nov 2016
  60. Ward K (2008) Editorial—toward a comparative (re)turn in Urban studies? Some reflections. Urban Geogr 29(5):405–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. WorldBank (2016) Total greenhouse gas emissions (kt of CO2 equivalent). http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.GHGT.KT.CE. Accessed 18 Nov 2016
  62. Yanow D (2007) Interpretation in policy analysis: on methods and practice. Crit Policy Stud 1(1):110–122.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2007.9518511 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Boris Braun
  • Bérénice Preller
  • Christian Schulz
    • 1
  • Julia Affolderbach
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Geography and Spatial PlanningUniversity of LuxembourgEsch-sur-AlzetteLuxembourg
  2. 2.Department of Geography, School of Environmental SciencesUniversity of HullHullUK

Personalised recommendations