A Systematic Literature Review of QCA in Spatial Sciences Session: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 | 13-02-2018

1 |

Faculty of Spatial Sciences Department of Spatial Planning & Environment

11-04-2018

s.verweij@rug.nl www.stefanverweij.eu @Stefan_Verweij stefanverweij

A Systematic Literature Review of QCA in Spatial Sciences

International QCA Summer Workshop, University of Wuppertal, May 28-30, 2018 Session: Closing Debate

2 | 13-02-2018

What is Spatial Planning?

› Spatial Planning System: the methods and approaches used by the public and private sector to influence the organization of people and activities in spaces at various scales (local, regional, national, international) › Spatial Planning: the coordination of policies and practices affecting the socio-spatial

• rganization

› Alexander: “there is no planning, only planning practices”

Sources: Wikipedia (2018); Alexander (2016)

2

3 | 13-02-2018

What is Spatial Planning?

4 | 13-02-2018

What is Spatial Planning?

› Objects (‘what’): people and activities in spaces and the environment at various scales › Context (‘where’): the social-institutional environment of spatial planners’ practices › Tools (‘how’): methods and approaches, including skills and competences, for effective practices › Purpose (‘what for’): much debated; intervening in the public interest? › Spatial Design & Institutional Design

Source: adapted from Alexander (2016)

4

5 | 13-02-2018

Spatial Planning Research

› Providing input for policy change and institutional-spatial design in order to guide spatial and social developments › In some way or another, this involves comparison

• Either between cases…
• Or with a framework ultimately built on

known examples and previously researched cases › Booth: “the desire to make comparisons [has] been fundamental to research activity in the field of spatial planning”

Source: Alexander (2016); Booth (2015)

5

6 | 13-02-2018

Spatial Planning Research

› Comparison and transfer of knowledge (case ←→ case & case ←→ existing knowledge) is challenging:

• Spatial planning practices and conditions

are very context-specific

• So how and to what extent do lessons

learned transfer to other cases? › Booth: “the conditions that make a policy or practice work in one place are unlikely to

• btain in another”

› This is where QCA comes in

Source: Booth (2015); Janssen-Jansen et al. (2008)

6

7 | 13-02-2018

C I M Outcome Y Cases 1 1 1 1 ZUID, NOORD, IJSS, SIJT , WEST 1 1 C LENT , SCHEL 1 1 1 PERK, DELFT 1 WIER 1 1 1 BROEK 1 C WAAL, GOUW 1 ??? 1 DIEF

7

8 | 13-02-2018

Introducing QCA

› Yet little used; errors

• ccurring

› Introducing QCA to the Spatial Sciences; educating the new disciplines › How?

• Systematic literature

review of QCA in SPARD (‘Spatial Planning and Related Disciplines’)

Book: Gerrits & Verweij (2018)

8

9 | 13-02-2018

Research Questions

• 1. When, where, and how is QCA used in

SPARD?

• Descriptive analysis of QCA-studies in

SPARD

• 2. How does SPARD in those respects compare

to other disciplines?

• Comparison of QCA-studies in SPARD with

larger-n of QCA-studies (e.g., Rihoux et al., 2011; 2013, Seny

Kan et al., 2016)

• 3. What are the ways forward for QCA in spatial

planning research?

• Analysis of ‘good practices’ in the QCA-

studies in SPARD (Schneider & Wagemann, 2010)

• Analysis of stated usefulness of QCA

9

10 | 13-02-2018

Method and Data

Selecting articles

• 1. Subject fields in Scopus of ‘Geography,

Planning and Development’, ‘Transportation’ and ‘Urban Studies’ (427,255 documents)

• 2. Limiting: articles, in English, years 1987-2017

(282,267 articles)

• 3. Limiting: QCA-keywords (349 articles)
• 4. Selecting (independent coding) only empirical

QCA-articles that are actually are in SPARD (33 articles) Coding articles › Independent coding using coding scheme based on previous literature reviews

Keywords based on: Seny Kan et al. (2016); Gerrits & Verweij (2016; 2018)

10

11 | 13-02-2018

RQ1: Variants of QCA

11

12 | 13-02-2018

RQ1: Disciplines and UoA

12

13 | 13-02-2018

RQ1: Data Sources

13

14 | 13-02-2018

RQ1: Cases and Conditions

Tab le 2: Div e rs ity

• f c

as e s a nd c

• nditio

ns in the QCA-s tudie s

Co nditio ns To tal Few ≤4 Many >4 Cas e s Few ≤20 8 applications (24%) 15 applications (33%) 7 applications (21 %) 8 applications (17%) 1 5 (45%) 23 (50%) Many >20 6 applications (1 8%) 8 applications (17%) 1 2 applications (36%) 15 applications (33%) 1 8 (55%) 23 (50%) To tal 1 4 (42%) 23 (50%) 1 9 (58%) 23 (50%) 33 (1 00%) 46 (100%) ş

14

15 | 13-02-2018

RQ1: Software & Visualization

é ‘ ’ Fig ure 3: S

• ftw

are us e and v is ualizatio n o f re s ults in the QCA-s tudie s ‘ ’ í

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

S

• ftware

5 10 15 20 25 30 Regular table XY-plot Formula Flow diagram No results

Visualization

15

16 | 13-02-2018

RQ2: Comparison Disciplines

› SPARD largely in line with larger population › Differences regarding the units of analysis

su b c a t e g

• r

y ‘ r e g i

• n

a l / su b n a t i

• n

a l ’ i s d i f f e r e n t r e se a r c h d i sc i p l i n e s’ f

• c

i Table 3: Units

• f a

naly s is in QCA-s tudie s ac ro s s dis c ip line s

To tal (Riho ux e t al., 2013) Public Po lic y (Riho ux e t al., 2011) Manag e m e nt S tudie s (S e ny Kan e t al., 2016) S PARD (this s tudy ) Macro (total) Transnational Country Regional/subnational 49% 92% 6% 55% 31% 1 6% 16% 52% 12% 12% 28% Meso (total) Organization Project 21 % 6% 6% 31 % 31% 27% 12% 15% Micro (total) 21 % 2% 29% 21 % Other 24% Total 91 % 1 00% 1 00% 1 00% N=313 N=143 N=95 N=33

p p l i c a t i

• n

s wi t h f e w c

• n

d i t i

• n

s ( ฀ 4 ) a n d m a n y c a se s ฀ ( ฀ 4 )

16

17 | 13-02-2018

RQ3: Good Practices

› Often unclear which analytical choices have been made  discussion: instigating good practices; how?

Tab le 4: As s e s s m e nt o f g

• d prac

tic e s in the QCA-s tud ie s (N=33)

Adhe re d to the g

• d

prac tic e ? Go

• d Prac

tic e s Ye s S

• m

e w hat No The case selection should be explicitly detailed and the scope conditions should be clear 67% 15% 18% The calibration of case’s scores should be explicitly detailed 70% 15% 15% The appropriate terminology should be used 70% 9% 21% The analysis of necessity should be conducted separately and before the truth table analysis 39% 3% 58% The choice for consistency and coverage scores should be supported with arguments 48% 9% 42% The various solution formulas from the truth table analysis (complex, intermediate, parsimonious) should be reported 24% 3% 73% The outcome and non-outcome should be dealt with in separate truth table analyses9 55% – 45% The raw data matrix should be reported 33% 36% 30% The truth table should be reported 58% 6% 36% The consistency and coverage measures for the results should be reported 79% – 21%

17

18 | 13-02-2018

RQ3: Stated Usefulness

› QCA is sensitive to context (N=10) › QCA enables small-n and bridging qualitative- quantitative gap (N=14) › QCA enables studying complex wholes (N=21): conjunctural causation, asymmetry, complexity theory

18

19 | 13-02-2018

Discussion

› Getting it right: ensuring good QCA-practices in new areas of application

• Good practices: which are they?
• Transparency in articles with tight word

limits about analytical choices

• Calibration of qualitative data (recently: De Block & Vis)

› Addressing time and dynamics with QCA › Areas of applications: applying QCA in evaluation practice (the world of policymaking)

19

20 | 13-02-2018

References

› Alexander, E.R. (2016). There is no planning – Only planning practices: Notes for spatial planning

• theories. Planning Theory, 15(1), 91–103.

› Booth, P. (2015). What can we learn from France? Some reflections on the methodologies of cross-national research. In E.A. Silva, P. Healey, N. Harris, & P. Van den Broeck (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Planning Research Methods (84–96). Abingdon: Routledge. › De Block, D., & Vis, B. (2018). Addressing the challenges related to transforming qualitative into quantitative data in qualitative comparative analysis. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. › Gerrits, L.M., & Verweij, S. (2016). Qualitative comparative analysis as a method for evaluating complex cases: An overview of literature and a stepwise guide with empirical application. Zeitschrift für Evaluation, 15(1), 7–22. › Gerrits, L.M., & Verweij, S. (2018). The Evaluation of Complex Infrastructure Projects: A guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. › Janssen-Jansen, L., Spaans, M., & Van der Veen, M. (2008). New Instruments in Spatial Planning: An International Perspective on Non-Financial Compensation. Amsterdam: IOS Press. › Rihoux, B., Rezsöhazy, I., & Bol, D. (2011). Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) in public policy analysis: An extensive review. German Policy Studies, 7(3), 9–82. › Rihoux, B., Âlamos-Concha, P., Bol, D., Marx, A., & Rezsöhazy, I. (2013). From niche to mainstream method? A comprehensive mapping of QCA applications in journal articles from 1984 to 2011. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 175–184. › Schneider, C.Q., & Wagemann, C. (2010). Standards of good practice in qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and fuzzy-sets. Comparative Sociology, 9(3), 397–418. › Seny Kan, A.K., Adegbite, E., El Omari, S., & Abdellatif, M. (2016). On the use of qualitative comparative analysis in management. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1458–1463. › Wikipedia (2018). Spatial Planning. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_planning.

20