Yosef JabareenpersName (2009date). “Building a Conceptual Framework: Philosophy, Definitions, and Procedure.” International Journal of Qualitative Methodstitle·j.
Object of study — the conceptual frameworkterm itself - what a conceptterm is, what a network of conceptsterm is, and how one is built from a multidisciplinary literature
Research question — how can a conceptual frameworkterm for a multidisciplinary phenomenon be built systematically, when the terms 'conceptual frameworkterm' and 'theoretical framework' are themselves used vaguely
Contribution — redefines 'conceptterm', 'conceptual frameworkterm' and 'conceptual framework analysisterm', and gives an eight-phase procedure for building a network of conceptsterm out of a multidisciplinary literature
phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | a term used constantly and defined loosely - 'conceptual framework' and 'theoretical framework' in current usage - with no systematic method for producing the thing it names — “Despite the extensive literature that provides logical guidelines for qualitatively deriving theories from text and data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Harris, 2003; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Myers, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1990), there is a lack of a qualitative systematic method for building conceptual frameworks. This is particularly noticeable in the multidisciplinary literature.” | |
| claim-type | method — “Yet, the existing conceptual analysis technique is inadequate for theorizing the concepts that emerge from the text. Therefore, in this article I propose a new technique, which I refer to as conceptual framework analysis, as a grounded theory technique, or tactic, that aims to generate, identify, and trace a phenomenon’s major concepts, which together constitute its theoretical framework.” | |
| method — evidence | — “The aim of this phase is to deconstruct each concept; to identify its main attributes, characteristics, assumptions, and role; and, subsequently, to organize and categorize the concepts according to their features and ontological, epistemological, and methodological role. The result of this phase is a table that includes four columns. The first includes the names of the concepts; the second includes a description of each concept; the third categorizes each concept according to its ontological, epistemological, or methodological role; and the fourth presents the references for each concept.” | |
| object of study — evidence | — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | |
| research question — evidence | — “Despite the extensive literature that provides logical guidelines for qualitatively deriving theories from text and data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Harris, 2003; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Myers, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1990), there is a lack of a qualitative systematic method for building conceptual frameworks. This is particularly noticeable in the multidisciplinary literature.” | |
| contribution — evidence | — “Concept has some components that define it. All concepts are characterized by a number of features: an irregular contour defined by its components; a history, some “bits” or components that come from other concepts, and elements that can be traced back to other concepts.” | |
| transfer | from philosophy (Deleuze and Guattari): the definition of what a concept IS is taken from philosophy and adapted for social-science methodology: a concept has components and is defined by them — “What is a concept? When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15).” | transfers[0] |
| transfer | from grounded theory (qualitative methodology): conceptual framework analysis is built as a procedure of theorization on the grounded theory method — “Conceptual framework analysis offers a procedure of theorization for building conceptual frameworks based on grounded theory method.” | transfers[1] |
| mechanism | A CONCEPT IS DEFINED BY ITS COMPONENTS, AND CARRIES PIECES OF OTHER CONCEPTS. `Every concept usually contains BITS OR COMPONENTS ORIGINATING FROM OTHER CONCEPTS` and `All concepts relate back to other concepts` — “2. Every concept has a history. 3. Every concept usually contains “bits” or components originating from other concepts. 4. All concepts relate back to other concepts. 5. A concept is always created by something (and cannot be created from nothing).” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | and it is historical: `Every concept has a history` - which is why a concept must be understood `relative to its own components, to other concepts, to the plane on which it is defined, and to the problem it is supposed to resolve` — “When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “components, or what defines the consistency of the concept; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no concept with only one component” (p. 15).” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | A FRAMEWORK IS A NETWORK, NOT A PILE. `A conceptual framework is not merely a collection of concepts but, rather, a construct in which each concept plays an integral role`, and each plays `an ontological or epistemological role` — “A conceptual framework is not merely a collection of concepts but, rather, a construct in which each concept plays an integral role. According to Miles and Huberman (1994), a conceptual framework “lays out the key factors, constructs, or variables, and presumes relationships among them” (p. 440).” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | AND THE PROCEDURE'S OUTPUT IS A TAGGED RECORD WITH ITS SOURCES. Phase 4 produces `a table that includes four columns. The first includes the names of the concepts; the second includes a description of each concept; the third categorizes each concept according to its ontological, epistemological, or methodological role; and the fourth presents the references for each concept` — “The aim of this phase is to deconstruct each concept; to identify its main attributes, characteristics, assumptions, and role; and, subsequently, to organize and categorize the concepts according to their features and ontological, epistemological, and methodological role. The result of this phase is a table that includes four columns. The first includes the names of the concepts; the second includes a description of each concept; the third categorizes each concept according to its ontological, epistemological, or methodological role; and the fourth presents the references for each concept.” | mechanisms[3] |
| mechanism | the phase before it expects disagreement rather than avoiding it: the result of identifying and naming concepts is `a list of numerous competing and sometimes contradictory concepts` — “The aim in this phase is to read and reread the selected data and “discover” concepts (Glaser & Strauss. 1967; Strauss & Corbin. 1990). Its result is a list of numerous competing and sometimes contradictory concepts.” | mechanisms[4] |
| mechanism | COUNTING A TERM IS NOT THEORIZING WITH IT. Existing conceptual analysis chooses a concept and `the analysis involves, among other things, quantifying and tallying its presence` - and Carley: `the focus on concepts implicit to traditional content analysis often results in an overestimation of the similarity of texts because meaning is neglected` — “In the existing techniques of conceptual analysis, “a concept is chosen for examination, and the analysis involves, among other things, quantifying and tallying its presence” (Palmquist, Carley, & Dale, 1997; see also Finney & Corbett, 2007).” | mechanisms[5] |
| mechanism | THE FRAMEWORK IS EXPECTED TO CHANGE, AND THAT IS A PROPERTY NOT A DEFECT - `A theory or a theoretical framework representing a multidisciplinary phenomenon will always be dynamic and may be revised according to new insights, comments, literature` — “A theory or a theoretical framework representing a multidisciplinary phenomenon will always be dynamic and may be revised according to new insights, comments, literature, and so on.” | mechanisms[6] |
| mechanism | and validation is social rather than statistical: `Validating a theoretical framework is a process that STARTS WITH THE RESEARCHER, WHO THEN SEEKS VALIDATION AMONG OUTSIDERS` — “The question is whether the proposed framework and its concepts make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners. Does the framework present a reasonable theory for scholars studying the phenomenon from different disciplines? Validating a theoretical framework is a process that starts with the researcher, who then seeks validation among “outsiders.”” | mechanisms[7] |
| critiques | the current usage of 'conceptual framework' and 'theoretical framework', which the paper calls vague and imprecise — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | claim_relations[0] |
| critiques | existing conceptual analysis, which quantifies a chosen concept's presence and cannot theorise the concepts that emerge from the text — “In the existing techniques of conceptual analysis, “a concept is chosen for examination, and the analysis involves, among other things, quantifying and tallying its presence” (Palmquist, Carley, & Dale, 1997; see also Finney & Corbett, 2007).” | claim_relations[1] |
| extends | grounded theory method, applied here to a multidisciplinary literature in which discipline-oriented theories become the empirical data — “7. The sources of data consist of many discipline-oriented theories that become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysis. Although conceptual framework analysis generates theories or conceptual frameworks from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge, metasynthesis, a systematic synthesis of findings across qualitative studies, seeks to generate new interpretations for which there is a consensus within a particular field of study” | claim_relations[2] |
| extends | Deleuze and Guattari's account of the concept in 'What Is Philosophy?', adapted as the definition of what a tagged concept has to be — “When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “components, or what defines the consistency of the concept; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no concept with only one component” (p. 15).” | claim_relations[3] |
| sense | `concept` (Deleuze and Guattari, adapted) - a multiplicity whose components are `distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable`, and `there is no concept with only one component` — “When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “components, or what defines the consistency of the concept; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no concept with only one component” (p. 15).” | senses[0] |
| sense | `conceptual framework` (this paper) - `a network, or a plane, of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon` — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | senses[1] |
| sense | `conceptual framework` vs `model` - the first is built on concepts, the second on variables or factors; the paper stipulates the split to stop loose usage — “To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” | senses[2] |
| sense | `conceptual framework analysis` - a grounded-theory technique that `aims to generate, identify, and trace a phenomenon's major concepts` — “Yet, the existing conceptual analysis technique is inadequate for theorizing the concepts that emerge from the text. Therefore, in this article I propose a new technique, which I refer to as conceptual framework analysis, as a grounded theory technique, or tactic, that aims to generate, identify, and trace a phenomenon’s major concepts, which together constitute its theoretical framework.” | senses[3] |
| sense | `skeletal framework` (Morse et al.) - characteristics from previous inquiry giving an internal structure and a starting point, which multidisciplinary phenomena usually do not even have — “Despite the extensive literature that provides logical guidelines for qualitatively deriving theories from text and data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Harris, 2003; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Myers, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1990), there is a lack of a qualitative systematic method for building conceptual frameworks. This is particularly noticeable in the multidisciplinary literature.” | senses[4] |
| control | requiring the framework to be validated by outsiders - scholars and practitioners from the disciplines it draws on, not only by its author — partial — “Although conceptual framework analysis certainly has its limitations - such as the fact that different researchers may have different conceptions of the same phenomenon and may create different “planes” and conceptual frameworks, and possible difficulties finding suitable texts and data - it also offers some important advantages.” — rules out a framework that coheres only for the person who built it; the multidisciplinary claim is exactly the one its author cannot check alone — “The question is whether the proposed framework and its concepts make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners. Does the framework present a reasonable theory for scholars studying the phenomenon from different disciplines? Validating a theoretical framework is a process that starts with the researcher, who then seeks validation among “outsiders.”” | controls[0] |
| control | letting the concepts emerge from the literature rather than starting from a chosen concept - Phase 3 reads and rereads before naming — held — “I also aims to develop concepts—each of which has its own attributes, characteristics, assumptions, limitations, distinct perspectives, and specific function within the conceptual framework—that shed more light on the phenomenon represented by the concepts themselves” — rules out the inductive tenet being violated by beginning with the concept rather than the phenomenon, which Morse et al. name as a threat to validity — “The aim in this phase is to read and reread the selected data and “discover” concepts (Glaser & Strauss. 1967; Strauss & Corbin. 1990). Its result is a list of numerous competing and sometimes contradictory concepts.” | controls[1] |
| control | categorising each concept by discipline and by representative power within its discipline before the concepts are integrated — held — “The conceptual analysis undertaken along the lines laid down in the first part of this article identified seven distinct concepts that make up the theoretical world of sustainability (Jabareen, 2008).” — rules out one discipline's vocabulary dominating a framework that claims to span several - the mapping phase is explicitly a 'fishing trip' across all of them — “7. The sources of data consist of many discipline-oriented theories that become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysis. Although conceptual framework analysis generates theories or conceptual frameworks from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge, metasynthesis, a systematic synthesis of findings across qualitative studies, seeks to generate new interpretations for which there is a consensus within a particular field of study” | controls[2] |
| weight | the current usage of 'conceptual framework' and 'theoretical framework', which the paper calls vague and imprecise — 0.9 — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | claim_relations[0] |
| weight | existing conceptual analysis, which quantifies a chosen concept's presence and cannot theorise the concepts that emerge from the text — 0.9 — “In the existing techniques of conceptual analysis, “a concept is chosen for examination, and the analysis involves, among other things, quantifying and tallying its presence” (Palmquist, Carley, & Dale, 1997; see also Finney & Corbett, 2007).” | claim_relations[1] |
| weight | grounded theory method, applied here to a multidisciplinary literature in which discipline-oriented theories become the empirical data — 0.9 — “7. The sources of data consist of many discipline-oriented theories that become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysis. Although conceptual framework analysis generates theories or conceptual frameworks from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge, metasynthesis, a systematic synthesis of findings across qualitative studies, seeks to generate new interpretations for which there is a consensus within a particular field of study” | claim_relations[2] |
| weight | Deleuze and Guattari's account of the concept in 'What Is Philosophy?', adapted as the definition of what a tagged concept has to be — 0.85 — “When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “components, or what defines the consistency of the concept; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no concept with only one component” (p. 15).” | claim_relations[3] |
| note | conceptual framework —distinct-from→ model — 'To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.' A stipulative definition offered as a remedy for observed drift - and the paper says which drift. — “To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” | concept_edges[0] |
| relation | conceptual framework —distinct-from→ model — the paper reserves one word for a construct built on concepts and the other for one built on variables or factors - a naming rule proposed precisely to stop the first term being used loosely — “To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” — “I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” | concept_edges[0] |
| weight | conceptual framework —distinct-from→ model — 0.95 — “To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” | concept_edges[0] |
| note | conceptual framework —contrasted-with→ quantitative models — 'Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative models, conceptual frameworks provide understanding.' Paired with the paper's own 'Conceptual frameworks are indeterminist in nature and therefore do not enable us to predict an outcome' - the inability is declared, not conceded. ENDPOINT NOTE, 2026-08-24 the project: an internal tool flags this edge's 'from' as IN THE SPAN ONLY AS A SUBSTRING and predicts the gate will reject it. THE GATE ACCEPTS IT. Checked rather than assumed: the paper's surface form here is the PLURAL 'conceptual frameworks' and the declared concept is the singular, so the two checks disagree about whether a regular trailing-s inflection attests a term. That is an earlier note of ours, still open - and it is now visible as a DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO CHECKS rather than as a question about one. The edge stands because the gate is the authority and because the plural is the paper's own word for the concept. — “3. Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative models, conceptual frameworks provide understanding.” | concept_edges[1] |
| relation | conceptual framework —contrasted-with→ quantitative models — a quantitative model offers theoretical explanation and a conceptual framework offers understanding - the difference is in what each is for, not in rigour — “3. Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative models, conceptual frameworks provide understanding.” — “Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative models, conceptual frameworks provide understanding.” | concept_edges[1] |
| weight | conceptual framework —contrasted-with→ quantitative models — 0.95 — “3. Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative models, conceptual frameworks provide understanding.” | concept_edges[1] |
| outcome | control — partial — “The question is whether the proposed framework and its concepts make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners. Does the framework present a reasonable theory for scholars studying the phenomenon from different disciplines? Validating a theoretical framework is a process that starts with the researcher, who then seeks validation among “outsiders.”” — “Although conceptual framework analysis certainly has its limitations - such as the fact that different researchers may have different conceptions of the same phenomenon and may create different “planes” and conceptual frameworks, and possible difficulties finding suitable texts and data - it also offers some important advantages.” | controls[0] |
| outcome | control — held — “The aim in this phase is to read and reread the selected data and “discover” concepts (Glaser & Strauss. 1967; Strauss & Corbin. 1990). Its result is a list of numerous competing and sometimes contradictory concepts.” — “I also aims to develop concepts—each of which has its own attributes, characteristics, assumptions, limitations, distinct perspectives, and specific function within the conceptual framework—that shed more light on the phenomenon represented by the concepts themselves” | controls[1] |
| outcome | control — held — “7. The sources of data consist of many discipline-oriented theories that become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysis. Although conceptual framework analysis generates theories or conceptual frameworks from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge, metasynthesis, a systematic synthesis of findings across qualitative studies, seeks to generate new interpretations for which there is a consensus within a particular field of study” — “The conceptual analysis undertaken along the lines laid down in the first part of this article identified seven distinct concepts that make up the theoretical world of sustainability (Jabareen, 2008).” | controls[2] |
| limitation | THE PAPER NAMES THIS PROJECT'S OWN INTER-RATER RISK AS ITS OWN LIMITATION - `DIFFERENT RESEARCHERS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT CONCEPTIONS OF THE SAME PHENOMENON AND MAY CREATE DIFFERENT PLANES AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS`, along with `possible difficulties finding suitable texts and data` — “Although conceptual framework analysis certainly has its limitations - such as the fact that different researchers may have different conceptions of the same phenomenon and may create different “planes” and conceptual frameworks, and possible difficulties finding suitable texts and data - it also offers some important advantages.” | limitations[0] |
| limitation | and the method declares that it cannot predict: `Conceptual frameworks are indeterminist in nature and therefore do not enable us to predict an outcome` - stated as a design choice, which also means no failed prediction can falsify one — “5. Conceptual frameworks are indeterminist in nature and therefore do not enable us to predict an outcome. Levering (2002) has suggested that “the idea that human behavior can be explained and predicted is roughly based on the concept of external factors being caught in an accidental cohesion, and the idea that human actions can be understood, but not predicted, is based on the concept of freedom” (p. 38).” | limitations[1] |
| limitation | the validation criterion is whether it makes sense to other scholars - `The question is whether the proposed framework and its concepts make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners`, with a conference presentation named as the venue. There is no measure and no threshold — “The question is whether the proposed framework and its concepts make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners. Does the framework present a reasonable theory for scholars studying the phenomenon from different disciplines? Validating a theoretical framework is a process that starts with the researcher, who then seeks validation among “outsiders.”” | limitations[2] |
| limitation | the integration phase reduces the concept count by judgement - `integrate and group together concepts that have similarities to one new concept. This phase reduces the number of concepts drastically and allows us to manipulate to a reasonable number` - with `reasonable` undefined — “The aim in this phase is to integrate and group together concepts that have similarities to one new concept. This phase reduces the number of concepts drastically and allows us to manipulate to a reasonable number of concepts.” | limitations[3] |
| limitation | and the demonstration case is one the paper itself calls unsettled - existing definitions of sustainable development are `vague`, `devoid of operative definitions`, `fraught with contradictions`, and authors `are not even in agreement on what it is that needs to be sustained` — “Some have argued that the existing definitions of sustainable development are vague (Gow, 1992; Mozaffar, 2001), devoid of operative definitions (Villanueva, 1997), and fraught with contradictions (Redclift, 1987), and that the topic itself is confused (Berke & Conroy, 2000; Redclift, 1994). Others have pointed out that authors on the subject employ unclear symbolic rhetoric (Andrews, 1997; Solow, 1992) and are not even in agreement on what it is that needs to be sustained” | limitations[4] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | — “2. Every concept has a history. 3. Every concept usually contains “bits” or components originating from other concepts. 4. All concepts relate back to other concepts. 5. A concept is always created by something (and cannot be created from nothing).” | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | — “A conceptual framework is not merely a collection of concepts but, rather, a construct in which each concept plays an integral role. According to Miles and Huberman (1994), a conceptual framework “lays out the key factors, constructs, or variables, and presumes relationships among them” (p. 440).” | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | — “The aim of this phase is to deconstruct each concept; to identify its main attributes, characteristics, assumptions, and role; and, subsequently, to organize and categorize the concepts according to their features and ontological, epistemological, and methodological role. The result of this phase is a table that includes four columns. The first includes the names of the concepts; the second includes a description of each concept; the third categorizes each concept according to its ontological, epistemological, or methodological role; and the fourth presents the references for each concept.” | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | — “The aim in this phase is to read and reread the selected data and “discover” concepts (Glaser & Strauss. 1967; Strauss & Corbin. 1990). Its result is a list of numerous competing and sometimes contradictory concepts.” | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | — “Although conceptual framework analysis certainly has its limitations - such as the fact that different researchers may have different conceptions of the same phenomenon and may create different “planes” and conceptual frameworks, and possible difficulties finding suitable texts and data - it also offers some important advantages.” | content_tags.findings[6] |
| quantity | 8 phases — mapping, reading and categorising, identifying and naming, deconstructing, integrating, synthesising, validating, rethinking — “A theory or a theoretical framework representing a multidisciplinary phenomenon will always be dynamic and may be revised according to new insights, comments, literature, and so on.” | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| value source note | quantity — THE VALUE DRAWS ON THE PAPER BEYOND THIS QUOTE: it counts the paper's phases ('Phase 8: Rethinking the conceptual framework'); this quote is the text of the last one. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 7 concepts — identified as 'distinct concepts that make up the theoretical world of sustainability' — “The conceptual analysis undertaken along the lines laid down in the first part of this article identified seven distinct concepts that make up the theoretical world of sustainability (Jabareen, 2008).” | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| definition | concept — “When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “components, or what defines the consistency of the concept; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no concept with only one component” (p. 15).” | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | conceptual framework — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | conceptual framework analysis — “Yet, the existing conceptual analysis technique is inadequate for theorizing the concepts that emerge from the text. Therefore, in this article I propose a new technique, which I refer to as conceptual framework analysis, as a grounded theory technique, or tactic, that aims to generate, identify, and trace a phenomenon’s major concepts, which together constitute its theoretical framework.” | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | model — “To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| concept | concept — not defined in this paper's own words; after Deleuze and Guattari - a multiplicity with components that define it, never with only one component — “When defining of the term concept, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every concept has components and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “components, or what defines the consistency of the concept; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no concept with only one component” (p. 15).” | concepts[0] |
| concept | conceptual framework — a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon — “Current usage of the terms conceptual framework and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual framework as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena.” | concepts[1] |
| concept | conceptual framework analysis — not defined in this paper's own words; the proposed grounded-theory technique for generating, identifying and tracing a phenomenon's major concepts — “Yet, the existing conceptual analysis technique is inadequate for theorizing the concepts that emerge from the text. Therefore, in this article I propose a new technique, which I refer to as conceptual framework analysis, as a grounded theory technique, or tactic, that aims to generate, identify, and trace a phenomenon’s major concepts, which together constitute its theoretical framework.” | concepts[2] |
| concept | components — not defined in this paper's own words; what a concept is defined by, and what it borrows from other concepts - 'bits' originating elsewhere — “2. Every concept has a history. 3. Every concept usually contains “bits” or components originating from other concepts. 4. All concepts relate back to other concepts. 5. A concept is always created by something (and cannot be created from nothing).” | concepts[3] |
| concept | model — not defined in this paper's own words; the term this paper reserves for a construct built on variables or factors, to keep 'conceptual framework' for one built on concepts alone — “To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual framework, I propose basing conceptual frameworks not on variable or factors but on concepts alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term model.” | concepts[4] |
| concept | quantitative models — not defined in this paper's own words; what offers theoretical explanation, against which conceptual frameworks are defined as offering understanding — “3. Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative models, conceptual frameworks provide understanding.” | concepts[5] |
| concept | description — not defined in this paper's own words; what content, thematic and conceptual analysis are good for - and what this paper distinguishes from theorization — “These methods are limited for a variety of reasons, “including lack of simple routines, time-consuming data preparation, difficulties in relating textual data to other data, and a lack of a strong theoretical basis” (Carley, 1993, p. 77). They are therefore good for providing description but not for generating theorization.” | concepts[6] |
| concept | metasynthesis — not defined in this paper's own words; a systematic synthesis across qualitative studies seeking consensus within ONE field - distinguished here from analysis across many — “7. The sources of data consist of many discipline-oriented theories that become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysis. Although conceptual framework analysis generates theories or conceptual frameworks from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge, metasynthesis, a systematic synthesis of findings across qualitative studies, seeks to generate new interpretations for which there is a consensus within a particular field of study” | concepts[7] |
| concept | ontological — not defined in this paper's own words; one of the roles a concept plays inside a framework - knowledge of 'the way things are' - beside the epistemological and methodological — “The concepts that constitute a conceptual framework support one another, articulate their respective phenomena, and establish a framework-specific philosophy. Conceptual frameworks possess ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions, and each concept within a conceptual framework plays an ontological or epistemological role.” | concepts[8] |
| concept | indeterminist — not defined in this paper's own words; the property that makes conceptual frameworks unable to predict an outcome, by construction rather than by weakness — “5. Conceptual frameworks are indeterminist in nature and therefore do not enable us to predict an outcome. Levering (2002) has suggested that “the idea that human behavior can be explained and predicted is roughly based on the concept of external factors being caught in an accidental cohesion, and the idea that human actions can be understood, but not predicted, is based on the concept of freedom” (p. 38).” | concepts[9] |
| concept | sustainable development — not defined in this paper's own words; the demonstration case - a phenomenon whose existing definitions the paper reports as vague, contradictory and not even agreed on what is to be sustained — “Some have argued that the existing definitions of sustainable development are vague (Gow, 1992; Mozaffar, 2001), devoid of operative definitions (Villanueva, 1997), and fraught with contradictions (Redclift, 1987), and that the topic itself is confused (Berke & Conroy, 2000; Redclift, 1994). Others have pointed out that authors on the subject employ unclear symbolic rhetoric (Andrews, 1997; Solow, 1992) and are not even in agreement on what it is that needs to be sustained” | concepts[10] |
| a method with no measure, stated as such | — “The question is whether the proposed framework and its concepts make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners. Does the framework present a reasonable theory for scholars studying the phenomenon from different disciplines? Validating a theoretical framework is a process that starts with the researcher, who then seeks validation among “outsiders.”” | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| claim type | method — a second reading reaching the same value; recorded: method — “In this paper the author proposes a new qualitative method for building conceptual frameworks for phenomena that are linked to multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge.” | alternatives.claim_type |
| method | conceptual-analysis — a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value; recorded: conceptual-analysis — “Conceptual framework analysis offers a procedure of theorization for building conceptual frameworks based on grounded theory method.” | alternatives.method |
| phenomenon | what a conceptual framework is and how one can be built from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge — a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value; recorded: a term used constantly and defined loosely - 'conceptual framework' and 'theoretical framework' in current usage - with — “A conceptual framework is defined as a network or a “plane” of linked concepts.” | alternatives.phenomenon |
Full text — tagged
The reference list is not part of the text we hold for this paper. Our copy was extracted from the publisher's page and the bibliography did not survive that extraction, so the article below ends before its references. Nothing has been removed by us.
Article Building a Conceptual Frameworkterm: Philosophy, Definitions, and Procedure Yosef JabareenpersName Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning Technion—Israel Institute of Technology Technion City, Haifa, Israel © 2009 JabareenpersName. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract In this paper the author proposes a new qualitative method for building conceptual frameworksterm for phenomena that are linked to multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge. First, he redefines the key terms of conceptterm, conceptual frameworkterm, and conceptual framework analysisterm. Conceptterm has some componentsterm that define it. A conceptual frameworkterm is defined as a network or a “plane” of linked conceptsterm. Conceptual framework analysisterm offers a procedure of theorization for building conceptual frameworksterm based on grounded theory method. The advantages of conceptual framework analysisterm are its flexibility, its capacity for modification, and its emphasis on understanding instead of prediction. Keywords: conceptual frameworkterm, conceptsterm, conceptual framework analysisterm, qualitative methods, grounded theory, metasynthesisterm, sustainable developmentterm·dom 49 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Introduction In our contemporary times, most social phenomena are complex and linked to multiple bodies of knowledge that belong to different disciplines. For this reason, better understanding of such phenomena requires a multidisciplinary approach. Qualitative methods serve as adequate tools for investigating these complex phenomena. Despite the extensive literature that provides logical guidelines for qualitatively deriving theories from text and data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Harris, 2003; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Myers, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1990), there is a lack of a qualitative systematic method for building conceptual frameworksterm. This is particularly noticeable in the multidisciplinary literature. Usually, these multidisciplinary phenomena do not even have a skeletal framework, which is defined as characteristics identified from previous inquiry that provide an internal structure that provides a starting point for observations and interview questions, and for analysis. The researcher proceeds by building on these structures or categories, padding them out or “giving them flesh” and organizing the ways they fit together. (Morse, Hupcey, et al., 2002, p. 1) To address this gap, I will focus in this article on the process of building conceptual frameworksterm for multidisciplinary phenomena linked to different bodies of knowledge. Accordingly, I aim to redefine the term conceptual frameworkterm and to examine its underlying philosophy as well as to propose a new process of conceptual analysisterm·mth for reconstructing a unified theoretical framework from the multidisciplinary literature. I will then apply the proposed method in constructing a conceptual frameworkterm for the multidisciplinary phenomenon of sustainable developmentterm·dom. I will conclude with a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the new conceptual frameworkterm. Defining conceptterm and conceptual frameworkterm Conceptual frameworksterm are products of qualitative processes of theorization. To explore the process of building conceptual frameworksterm, I first define the terms conceptterm and conceptual frameworkterm and then outline the processes and procedures of conceptual frameworkterm building. What is a conceptterm? When defining of the term conceptterm, I follow and adapt the approach of Deleuze and Guattari in their What Is Philosophy? (1991), in which they hold that “every conceptterm has componentsterm and is defined by them” (p. 15). These “componentsterm, or what defines the consistency of the conceptterm; its endo-consistency; are distinct, heterogeneous and, yet, not separable” (p. 19). It is a multiplicity, but “not every multiplicity is conceptual,” and “there is no conceptterm with only one componentterm” (p. 15). Using this definition, we can point to a number of aspects of the term conceptterm: 1. Every conceptterm has an irregular contour defined by its componentsterm. 2. Every conceptterm has a history. 3. Every conceptterm usually contains “bits” or componentsterm originating from other conceptsterm. 4. All conceptsterm relate back to other conceptsterm. 5. A conceptterm is always created by something (and cannot be created from nothing). 6. Every conceptterm is “considered as the point of coincidence, condensation, or accumulation of its own componentsterm” (p. 20). 7. Every conceptterm must be understood “relative to its own componentsterm, to other conceptsterm, to the plane on which it is defined, and to the problem it is supposed to resolve” (p. 21). 50 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Redefining conceptual frameworkterm Current usage of the terms conceptual frameworkterm and theoretical framework are vague and imprecise. In this paper I define conceptual frameworkterm as a network, or “a plane,” of interlinked conceptsterm that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena. The conceptsterm that constitute a conceptual frameworkterm support one another, articulate their respective phenomena, and establish a framework-specific philosophy. Conceptual frameworksterm possess ontologicalterm, epistemological, and methodological assumptions, and each conceptterm within a conceptual frameworkterm plays an ontologicalterm or epistemological role. The ontologicalterm assumptions relate to knowledge of the “way things are,” “the nature of reality,” “real” existence, and “real” action (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). The epistemological assumptions relate to “how things really are” and “how things really work” in an assumed reality (p. 108). The methodological assumptions relate to the process of building the conceptual frameworkterm and assessing what it can tell us about the “real” world. Features of conceptual frameworksterm The main features of conceptual frameworksterm are as follows: 1. A conceptual frameworkterm is not merely a collection of conceptsterm but, rather, a construct in which each conceptterm plays an integral role. According to Miles and Huberman (1994), a conceptual frameworkterm “lays out the key factors, constructs, or variables, and presumes relationships among them” (p. 440). To discourage loose usage of the term conceptual frameworkterm, I propose basing conceptual frameworksterm not on variable or factors but on conceptsterm alone. When variables or factors are used, I suggest employing the term modelterm. 2. A conceptual frameworkterm provides not a causal/analytical setting but, rather, an interpretative approach to social reality. 3. Rather than offering a theoretical explanation, as do quantitative modelsterm, conceptual frameworksterm provide understanding. 4. A conceptual frameworkterm provides not knowledge of “hard facts” but, rather, “soft interpretation of intentions” (Levering, 2002, p. 38). 5. Conceptual frameworksterm are indeterministterm in nature and therefore do not enable us to predict an outcome. Levering (2002) has suggested that “the idea that human behavior can be explained and predicted is roughly based on the conceptterm of external factors being caught in an accidental cohesion, and the idea that human actions can be understood, but not predicted, is based on the conceptterm of freedom” (p. 38). 6. Conceptual frameworksterm can be developed and constructed through a process of qualitative analysis. 7. The sources of data consist of many discipline-oriented theories that become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysisterm. Although conceptual framework analysisterm generates theories or conceptual frameworksterm from multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge, metasynthesisterm, a systematic synthesis of findings across qualitative studies, seeks to generate new interpretations for which there is a consensus within a particular field of study (Jensen, & Allen, 1996; Nelson, 2006; Sandelowski, Docherty, & Emden, 1997). In metasynthesisterm, which is both hermeneutic and comparative in nature, the researcher aims to expand our interpretation (Sandelowski, 1993) beyond existing qualitative studies from the same discipline (Paterson et al., 2009). Moreover, whereas conceptual analysisterm·mth aims to produce conceptsterm, metasynthesisterm produces metaphors, ideas, conceptsterm, and more. Usually, metasynthesisterm initially selects studies and then identifies key metaphors, ideas, conceptsterm, and relations in each one (Nelson, 2006; see also Campbell et al., 2003; Noblit & Hare, 1988). 51 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Methods of building a conceptual frameworkterm In this article I suggest that building a conceptual frameworkterm from existent multidisciplinary literature is a process of theorization, which uses grounded theory methodology rather than a descriptionterm of the data and the targeted phenomenon. Strauss and Corbin (1990) identified two main points related to the difference between theory and descriptionsterm: First, theory uses conceptsterm. Similar data are grouped and given conceptual labels. This means placing interpretations on the data. Second, the conceptsterm are related by means of statements of relationships. In descriptionterm, data may be organized according to themes. These themes may be conceptualizations of data, but are more likely to be precise summaries of words taken directly from the data. There is little, if any, interpretation of data. Nor is there any attempt to relate the themes to form a conceptual scheme. (p. 20) In a broader sense, “qualitative studies ultimately aim to describe and explain a pattern of relationships, which can only be done with a set of conceptually specified categories” (Mishler, 1990, p. 431). Extensively used qualitative methods, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, conceptual analysisterm·mth, discourse analysis, and semiotic and metaphor analysis, aim, in principle, to assess the occurrence and presence of certain words, phrases, themes, metaphors, or constructs and conceptsterm within a given text. These methods are limited for a variety of reasons, “including lack of simple routines, time-consuming data preparation, difficulties in relating textual data to other data, and a lack of a strong theoretical basis” (Carley, 1993, p. 77). They are therefore good for providing descriptionterm but not for generating theorization. In conceptual analysisterm·mth, for example, a conceptterm is chosen for examination, and the analysis quantifies its presence and occurrence. On this basis, I hold that the grounded theory method is adequate and extremely useful for building conceptual frameworksterm from multidisciplinary texts. Grounded theory is adequate for conceptual frameworkterm building due also to its primary characteristics. It is a specific paradigm of inquiry that includes a number of distinct features and involves the use of coding paradigms to ensure conceptual development (Strauss, 1987). It is a research method aimed at the discovery of theory from systematically obtained data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss, 1987) and “an inductive, theory discovery methodology” (Martin & Turner, 1986, p. 141), which facilitates “the generation of theories of process, sequence, and change pertaining to organizations, positions, and social interaction” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. 114). Grounded theory perspective is one of the most widely used qualitative interpretive frameworks in the social sciences today because of its use of methods that conform to the “good science” modelterm (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Harris, 2003). Orlikowski (1993) has suggested that grounded theory is contextual, procedural, and inductive. Accordingly, it builds a “context-based, process-oriented descriptionterm and explanation of the phenomenon, rather than an objective, static descriptionterm expressed strictly in terms of causality” (Andersson, Hallberg, & Timpka, 2003, p. 50; see also Orlikowski, 1993). Conceptual framework analysisterm technique: Data, process, and procedure In the existing techniques of conceptual analysisterm·mth, “a conceptterm is chosen for examination, and the analysis involves, among other things, quantifying and tallying its presence” (Palmquist, Carley, & Dale, 1997; see also Finney & Corbett, 2007). The focus is on examining the occurrence of 52 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) selected implicit and explicit terms within texts. Moreover, Carley (1993) has suggested that “the focus on conceptsterm implicit to traditional content analysis often results in an overestimation of the similarity of texts because meaning is neglected” (p. 77). Yet, the existing conceptual analysisterm·mth technique is inadequate for theorizing the conceptsterm that emerge from the text. Therefore, in this article I propose a new technique, which I refer to as conceptual framework analysisterm, as a grounded theory technique, or tactic, that aims to generate, identify, and trace a phenomenon’s major conceptsterm, which together constitute its theoretical framework. I also aims to develop conceptsterm—each of which has its own attributes, characteristics, assumptions, limitations, distinct perspectives, and specific function within the conceptual frameworkterm—that shed more light on the phenomenon represented by the conceptsterm themselves (see Boyatzis, 1998; JabareenpersName, 2008; Morse & Mitcham, 2002). At the heart of this methodology lies the interplay among induction, derivation of conceptsterm from data, and deduction aimed at hypothesizing the relationship between conceptsterm (Patton, 2002). The data of conceptual framework analysisterm The texts selected for conceptual framework analysisterm should effectively represent the relevant social, cultural, political, and environmental phenomenon or social behavior, and the multidisciplinary literature that focuses on the phenomenon under study. An important point is that they should also represent practices that are related to the phenomenon. The data should therefore come from a variety of types, such as books, articles, newspapers, essays, interviews, and practices. Most texts and much data represent theories that belong to specific disciplines. When we embark on a multidisciplinary approach, these discipline-oriented theories become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysisterm. The process of conceptual framework analysisterm The proposed process is iterative, “requiring a steady movement between conceptterm and data, as well as comparative, requiring a constant comparison across types of evidence to control the conceptual level and scope of the emerging theory” (Orlikowski, 1993, p. 310, emphasis added). The technique, as required by grounded theory, suggests a continuous interplay between data collection and analysis (Myers, 2009). The procedure of conceptual framework analysisterm The proposed methodology is composed of the following main phases. Phase 1: Mapping the selected data sources The first task is to map the spectrum of multidisciplinary literature regarding the phenomenon in question. This process includes identifying text types and other sources of data, such as existing empirical data and practices. It must begin with an extensive review of the multidisciplinary texts, and it is also recommended to undertake initial interviews with practitioners, specialists, and scholars from various disciplines whose work focuses on the targeted phenomenon. Data collection should be a comprehensive and complete “fishing trip” or “scoping” (Morse & Richards, 2002), and should facilitate holistic mapping and complete data collection to ensure validity (Morse & Mitcham, 2002). 53 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Phase 2: Extensive reading and categorizing of the selected data The aim in this phase is to read the selected data and categorize it both by discipline and by a scale of importance and representative power within each discipline. This process maximizes the effectiveness of our inquiry and ensures effective representation of each discipline. Phase 3: Identifying and naming conceptsterm The aim in this phase is to read and reread the selected data and “discover” conceptsterm (Glaser & Strauss. 1967; Strauss & Corbin. 1990). Its result is a list of numerous competing and sometimes contradictory conceptsterm. Generally, this method allows conceptsterm to emerge from the literature. Indeed, Morse, Hupcey, et al. (2002) have suggested that “qualitative inquiry that commences with the conceptterm, rather than the phenomenon itself, is subject to violating the tenet of induction, thus is exposed to particular threats of invalidity” (p. 68). Phase 4: Deconstructing and categorizing the conceptsterm The aim of this phase is to deconstruct each conceptterm; to identify its main attributes, characteristics, assumptions, and role; and, subsequently, to organize and categorize the conceptsterm according to their features and ontologicalterm, epistemological, and methodological role. The result of this phase is a table that includes four columns. The first includes the names of the conceptsterm; the second includes a descriptionterm of each conceptterm; the third categorizes each conceptterm according to its ontologicalterm, epistemological, or methodological role; and the fourth presents the references for each conceptterm. Phase 5: Integrating conceptsterm The aim in this phase is to integrate and group together conceptsterm that have similarities to one new conceptterm. This phase reduces the number of conceptsterm drastically and allows us to manipulate to a reasonable number of conceptsterm. Phase 6: Synthesis, resynthesis, and making it all make sense The aim in this phase is to synthesize conceptsterm into a theoretical framework. The researcher must be open, tolerant, and flexible with the theorization process and the emerging new theory. This process is iterative and includes repetitive synthesis and resynthesis until the researcher recognizes a general theoretical framework that makes sense. Researchers should know how to build their conceptual frameworksterm. As Miles and Huberman (1994) have suggested, researchers who use qualitative methods “need to know how they are constructing ‘theory’ as analysis proceeds, because that construction will . . . inevitably influence and constrain data collection, data reduction, and the drawing and verification of conclusions” (p. 434). Phase 7: Validating the conceptual frameworkterm The aim in this phase is to validate the conceptual frameworkterm. The question is whether the proposed framework and its conceptsterm make sense not only to the researcher but also to other scholars and practitioners. Does the framework present a reasonable theory for scholars studying the phenomenon from different disciplines? Validating a theoretical framework is a process that starts with the researcher, who then seeks validation among “outsiders.” Presenting an evolving theory at a conference, a seminar, or some other type of academic framework provides an excellent opportunity for researchers to discuss and receive feedback. 54 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Phase 8: Rethinking the conceptual frameworkterm A theory or a theoretical framework representing a multidisciplinary phenomenon will always be dynamic and may be revised according to new insights, comments, literature, and so on. As the framework is multidisciplinary, the theory should make sense for those disciplines and enlarge their theoretical perspective on the specific phenomenon in question. Case study: The phenomenon of sustainable developmentterm·dom This case study focuses on the multidisciplinary phenomenon of sustainable developmentterm·dom. Sustainable developmentterm·dom has been addressed in a large number of disciplines, including geography, economics, ethics, law, sociology, anthropology, urban studies, planning, design, and architecture. A review of the multidisciplinary literature on sustainable developmentterm·dom (SD) reveals a lack of a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding the phenomenon and its complexities (JabareenpersName, 2004, 2006, 2008). Beatley and Manning (1998) hold that although sustainability is a good thing, it still requires definition and elaboration. Some have argued that the existing definitions of sustainable developmentterm·dom are vague (Gow, 1992; Mozaffar, 2001), devoid of operative definitions (Villanueva, 1997), and fraught with contradictions (Redclift, 1987), and that the topic itself is confused (Berke & Conroy, 2000; Redclift, 1994). Others have pointed out that authors on the subject employ unclear symbolic rhetoric (Andrews, 1997; Solow, 1992) and are not even in agreement on what it is that needs to be sustained (Redclift, 1993; Sachs, 1999; Satterthwaite, 1996). Applying the process of a conceptual framework analysisterm, described above, to the phenomenon of sustainable developmentterm·dom not only provides us with a case study of theoretical framework building but also sheds new light on the phenomenon of sustainable developmentterm·dom itself. Findings: Conceptsterm of sustainability The conceptual analysisterm·mth undertaken along the lines laid down in the first part of this article identified seven distinct conceptsterm that make up the theoretical world of sustainability (JabareenpersName, 2008). Conceptterm 1: Ethical paradox This conceptterm relates to the apparent contradiction between development, which requires environmental modification and intervention in nature and exhausts natural resources, and sustainability, which is a characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained for an indefinite period. The most frequently used definition of SD appears in the Brundtland report (World Commission for Environment and Development [WCED], 1987) and reads as follows: “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (p. 46). Thus, the role of SD is to mitigate this paradox and to provide a rapprochement between ecological (sustainability) and economic (development) interests to cope with the ecological crisis without affecting existing economic growth (Baeten, 2000; Sachs, 1993). Conceptterm 2: Natural capital stock This conceptterm relates to the natural resource assets involved with development. Natural capital stock includes all environmental and natural resource assets (Pearce, Barbier, & Markandya, 55 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) 1990). Sustainability requires that the stock of natural capital remain constant and not decrease in the long run in order not to endanger the opportunities of future generations to generate wealth and well-being (e.g., Costanza et al., 1997; England, 1998; Geldrop & Withagen, 2000). Conceptterm 3: Equity This conceptterm relates to the social aspects of SD. Equity is a broad term that encompasses environmental, social, and economic justice; social equity; equal rights for development; equal economic distribution; freedom; democracy; public participation; and empowerment. Sustainability can be achieved through an effective balancing of social, environmental, and economic objectives and through a more equitable distribution of resources (Agyeman, Bullard, & Evans, 2002; Berke & Kartez, 1995; Healey & Shaw, 1993; Meadows, Meadows, & Randers, 1992; Robinson & Tinker, 1998; Scruggs, 1993; Stymne & Jackson, 2000). Moreover, sustainability is also a matter of distributional equity, or intragenerational and intergenerational equity, emphasizing a need for present and future generations to share the capacity for well-being (Boyce, Klemer, Templet, & Willis, 1999; Solow, 1991; Stymne & Jackson, 2000). Conceptterm 4: Eco-form This conceptterm relates to the form and design of various human communities, urban spaces, and buildings that is most desirable from an ecological perspective (JabareenpersName, 2006, 2008). A key strand of research into sustainability strategies has focused on ecological design and on defining the urban forms that enable built environments and buildings to function in more sustainable ways than at present. This conceptterm suggests that better design contributes both to reducing air pollution and increasing energy efficiency. (e.g., Edwards, 1999; Haughton, 1999). Conceptterm 5: Integrative management This conceptterm represents the integrative strategy of sustainable developmentterm·dom, which suggests integrating social, economic, and environmental concerns in planning and management to achieve sustainability (Commission on Sustainable Developmentterm·dom, 2001; Council of Europe, 1993; Dodds, 2000; Robinson & Tinker, 1998; WCED, 1987). Conceptterm 6: Utopianism The utopian conceptterm envisages a sustainable human society and habitat based primarily on sustainable developmentterm·dom. Utopias related to SD often envision a perfect society in which justice prevails, people are content and live and flourish in harmony with nature, and life moves along smoothly without abuses and shortages. The power of utopian thinking, which is properly conceived of as a vision of a new society that questions all the presuppositions of present-day society, is its inherent ability to see the future in terms of radical new forms and values (e.g., Dobson, 1990; de Geus, 1999). Conceptterm 7: Global political agenda This conceptterm represents a new global, national boundary that transcends the practical and theoretical implications of the discourse of SD and that has become a central element of environmental policies around the globe (Dodds, 2000). Since the Rio Summit in 1992, sustainability has increasingly been conceived of as a challenge for global management to organize intelligent, scientific, and instrumental management of the earth. This conceptterm, however, reflects deep disputes between northern and southern countries (e.g. JabareenpersName, 2008; World Summit on Sustainable Developmentterm·dom, 2002). 56 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Table 1. Conceptual frameworkterm of sustainable developmentterm·dom and selected sources of data The Conceptterm Inquiry Character Selected Sources of Data Ethical paradox Natural capital stock Eco-form Utopianism Ontologicalterm conceptterm Epistemological conceptterm Methodological conceptterm Methodological conceptterm Philosophy and ethics Ecology, environmental studies Design, architecture, planning, and urban studies Literature Global political agenda Integrative management Equity Methodological conceptterm Methodological conceptterm Methodological conceptterm Civil society, political sciences Management and urban planning studies Ecology, environmental studies, ethnic studies, and feminist and gender studies The conceptual frameworkterm of sustainable developmentterm·dom Each of the seven conceptsterm identified above as collectively constituting the theoretical framework of sustainable developmentterm·dom represents distinctive aspects of the theoretical foundations of sustainability. As shown in Figure 1, these conceptsterm have interwoven relationships with one another. The conceptterm of ethical paradox is the framework’s ontologicalterm basis and sits at its core, articulating the paradox between sustainability and development in terms of ethics. In other words, the epistemological foundation of the theoretical framework of sustainable developmentterm·dom is based on the unresolved and fluid paradox of sustainability, which as such can simultaneously inhabit different and contradictory environmental ideologies and practices. Consequently, SD tolerates diverse interpretations and practices ranging from “light ecology,” which allows intensive intervention in nature, and “deep ecology,” which allows only minor intervention. Concluding thoughts In this article I have proposed a new qualitative method for building conceptual frameworksterm to better understand phenomenon linked to multiple bodies of knowledge situated in multiple disciplines. First, it includes a redefinition of conceptterm, conceptual frameworkterm, and conceptual framework analysisterm. Conceptterm has some componentsterm that define it. All conceptsterm are characterized by a number of features: an irregular contour defined by its componentsterm; a history, some “bits” or componentsterm that come from other conceptsterm, and elements that can be traced back to other conceptsterm. Conceptual frameworkterm is defined as a network, or “plane,” of linked conceptsterm that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon. Each conceptterm of a conceptual frameworkterm plays an ontologicalterm or epistemological role in the framework. Conceptual frameworksterm are not merely collections of conceptsterm but, rather, constructs in which each conceptterm plays an integral role. They provide not a causal/analytical setting but, rather, an interpretative approach to social reality. Finally, they are not determinist frameworks.
As we have seen, conceptual frameworksterm can be developed through an eight-phase qualitative process of analysis, referred to here as conceptual framework analysisterm. As building a conceptual frameworkterm is a process of theorization, it uses grounded theory method rather than a descriptionterm of the data and the targeted phenomenon. The sources of data are theories generated by theories in multiple disciplines, which become the empirical data of the conceptual framework analysisterm carried out in the article. The data themselves are composed of various texts addressing the social, cultural, political, or environmental phenomenon in question and the multidisciplinary literature on the subject.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2009, 8(4) Figure 1. The conceptual frameworkterm of sustainable developmentterm·dom Equity: Epistemological conceptterm Natural capital stock: Epistemological conceptterm Global agenda: Epistemological conceptterm Ethical paradox: Ontologicalterm conceptterm Integrative management: Epistemological conceptterm Eco-form: Epistemological conceptterm Utopia: Epistemological conceptterm “Eco-nomics”: Epistemological conceptterm Source: Modified from JabareenpersName (2006). Although conceptual framework analysisterm certainly has its limitations - such as the fact that different researchers may have different conceptions of the same phenomenon and may create different “planes” and conceptual frameworksterm, and possible difficulties finding suitable texts and data - it also offers some important advantages. Flexibility. It is based on flexible conceptual terms rather than rigid theoretical variables and causal relations. Capacity for modification. Conceptual frameworksterm can be reconceptualized and modified according to the evolution of the phenomenon in question or as a result of new data and texts that were not available at the time the framework was first developed. This is consistent with the basic premise that social phenomena are evolutionary and not static. Understanding. Conceptual frameworksterm aim to help us understand phenomena rather than to predict them.