case study methods in international political economy

CIAO DATE: 8/00

Case Study Methods in International Political Economy

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law

International Relations

• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Case Study Methods in International Relations

Introduction, textbooks and monographs.

• What Is a Case Study?
• Case Study Design
• Case Studies and Understanding Concepts
• Case Studies, Theory Testing, and Theory Generation
• Case Studies and Causality
• Case Studies and Process-Tracing
• Case Studies and Interpretive Research

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Experiments
• Interviews and Focus Groups
• The Empirical Testing of Formal Models

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Crisis Bargaining
• History of Brazilian Foreign Policy (1808 to 1945)
• Indian Foreign Policy
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Case Study Methods in International Relations by Christopher K. Lamont LAST REVIEWED: 11 July 2019 LAST MODIFIED: 29 November 2017 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0225

Case studies are perhaps the most widely used research design in international relations (IR). Across the discipline’s subfields of security studies, international political economy, foreign policy analysis, and international political theory, case studies have become ubiquitous. As such, it is not surprising that case studies have been the subject of debate as to what constitutes a case study, how to conduct or design case studies, the potential contribution of case studies to general, or case specific, knowledge in the field of IR, and of course, how to evaluate case studies. To be sure, debates on case study research in IR mirror the field’s methodological pluralism and broader debates on methodology. Case studies have been widely used by interpretivist and positivist scholars of IR alike. It is for this reason that literature on case study design contains scholarship that on the one hand aims to emphasize how case study design, and case selection strategies, can help generalize findings beyond specific cases to literature on the other hand that emphasizes the historic, contextual and descriptive richness of case studies. However, it will become apparent in this bibliography that most scholarship that deals explicitly with the case study method has done so from a positivist perspective on the social sciences. Indeed, each methodological standpoint advances distinct claims as to the purpose and contribution of case studies to IR. Therefore, as we will see in the overview of scholarship presented here within this bibliography, early methodological literature on case studies in IR, political science, and comparative politics, attempted to evaluate the utility, or contribution, of case studies along the lines of the extent to which case studies could contribute to causal explanation and generalizability. However, it is also the case that today, as in the past, IR scholarship that utilizes case study design cuts across both methodological traditions as not all scholars of IR deploy case studies for the purpose of explanation. Indeed, although there has been much discussion in the literature on case study design with an aim to maximize causal inference within the positivist tradition, this bibliography will highlight scholarship on case studies that includes both positivist debates on causality, inference, and generalization, and scholarship that embraces case studies as a means of producing deeper context-dependent knowledge on a given topic, notion, or concept. The first sections will present general texts and journals on case study research relevant to IR. The following texts are general textbooks or monographs on case study research design and methods. While there is a growing body of methodological scholarship that focuses on case studies in the social science that makes reference to research in IR, most of the texts below have a broader disciplinary focus. This is because debates over case study methods have tended to center around wider philosophy of social science debates on causal inference and the study of the social world.

In recent years the growing popularity of case studies in international relations (IR) has coincided with a growth in textbooks and monographs that examine case study methods. These range from broad texts on research methods in the social sciences ( Blatter and Haverland 2012 , Burton 2000 ) that sometimes contain collections of essays on case study design and research ( Gomm, et al. 2000 ) or provide examples of case studies drawn from a wide range of cognate disciplines ( Yin 2004 ). For scholars of IR, the most discipline-specific broader text is Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences ( George and Bennett 2005 ), while Qualitative Methods in International Relations ( Klotz and Prakash 2008 ) also contains contributions that explicitly address case study methods, or methods such as process tracing, that are relevant to case study research. Also of note are texts that provide readers with guidance on how to conduct case studies ( Thomas 2016 , Yin 2014 ). An example of a text that both reflects on case study methods and also provides practical how-to guidance is Case Study Research ( Gerring 2017 ).

Blatter, Joachim, and Markus Haverland. Designing Case Studies: Explanatory Approaches in Small-N Research . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

DOI: 10.1057/9781137016669

This text presents an overview of case study methods that makes the case for a pluralist case study epistemology. Blatter and Haverland explore case study design in the context of co-variational analysis, causal process tracing, and congruence analysis.

Burton, Dawn. Research Training for Social Scientists . London: SAGE, 2000.

DOI: 10.4135/9780857028051

This is a broad text on research methods in the social sciences that contains specific chapters relevant to case study research that provide a basic introduction to case study research. See in particular chapter 16, which sets out uses of case studies in social science research.

George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences . Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005.

This text provides an in-depth assessment of case study research design for researchers whose focus is on designing case studies for theory testing. While the first part of the book provides an in-depth overview of social science debates on the merits of case studies, the second part provides a guide for researchers to conduct case study research. This text draws upon examples from both international relations and political science research.

Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . 2d ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

This textbook provides an overview of case study research design that primarily addresses strategies for maximizing causal inference in case study research, but also provides an overview of descriptive case studies. This text contains a practical guide to doing case study research and analyzing findings.

Gomm, Roger, Martyn Hammersley, and Peter Foster, eds. Case Study Methods: Key Issues, Key Texts . London: SAGE, 2000.

This is a general collection of essays that addresses core elements of case study design and research. It contains numerous contributions on case studies and generalizability and case studies and theory. The latter includes a contribution by Harry Eckstein on case study research in political science.

Klotz, Audie, and Deepa Prakash, eds. Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide . New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008.

This volume contains numerous useful contributions relevant to case study methods that range from Klotz’s chapter on case selection to a contribution on process tracing by Jeffrey Checkel.

Thomas, Garry. How to Do Your Case Study . 2d ed. London: SAGE, 2016.

This is an accessible guide for case study research whose primary audience is students. It begins with defining case studies and strategies for case design before presenting a practical guide to carrying out case study research.

Yin, Robert K. The Case Study Anthology . London: SAGE, 2004.

This collection of essays includes examples of case studies drawn from IR, political science, sociology, and other related disciplines.

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 5th ed. London: SAGE, 2014.

This textbook provides a comprehensive overview of case study research. Starting from providing definitions for case studies, this textbook goes on to provide a practical guide for students to conduct their own case studies.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About International Relations »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Academic Theories of International Relations Since 1945
• Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
• Arab-Israeli Wars
• Arab-Israeli Wars, 1967-1973, The
• Armed Conflicts/Violence against Civilians Data Sets
• Arms Control
• Asylum Policies
• Audience Costs and the Credibility of Commitments
• Authoritarian Regimes
• Balance of Power Theory
• Bargaining Theory of War
• Brazilian Foreign Policy, The Politics of
• Canadian Foreign Policy
• Case Study Methods in International Relations
• Casualties and Politics
• Causation in International Relations
• Central Europe
• Challenge of Communism, The
• China and Japan
• China's Defense Policy
• China’s Foreign Policy
• Chinese Approaches to Strategy
• Cities and International Relations
• Civil Resistance
• Civil Society in the European Union
• Cold War, The
• Colonialism
• Comparative Foreign Policy Security Interests
• Comparative Regionalism
• Complex Systems Approaches to Global Politics
• Conflict Behavior and the Prevention of War
• Conflict Management
• Conflict Management in the Middle East
• Constructivism
• Contemporary Shia–Sunni Sectarian Violence
• Counterinsurgency
• Countermeasures in International Law
• Coups and Mutinies
• Criminal Law, International
• Critical Theory of International Relations
• Cuban Missile Crisis, The
• Cultural Diplomacy
• Cyber Security
• Cyber Warfare
• Decision-Making, Poliheuristic Theory of
• Demobilization, Post World War I
• Democracies and World Order
• Democracy and Conflict
• Democracy in World Politics
• Deterrence Theory
• Development
• Digital Diplomacy
• Diplomacy, Gender and
• Diplomacy, History of
• Diplomacy in the ASEAN
• Diplomacy, Public
• Disaster Diplomacy
• Diversionary Theory of War
• Drone Warfare
• Eastern Front (World War I)
• Economic Coercion and Sanctions
• Economics, International
• Embedded Liberalism
• Emerging Powers and BRICS
• Empirical Testing of Formal Models
• Energy and International Security
• Environmental Peacebuilding
• Epidemic Diseases and their Effects on History
• Ethics and Morality in International Relations
• Ethnicity in International Relations
• European Migration Policy
• European Security and Defense Policy, The
• European Union as an International Actor
• European Union, International Relations of the
• Face-to-Face Diplomacy
• Fascism, The Challenge of
• Feminist Methodologies in International Relations
• Feminist Security Studies
• Food Security
• Forecasting in International Relations
• Foreign Aid and Assistance
• Foreign Direct Investment
• Foreign Policy Decision-Making
• Foreign Policy of Non-democratic Regimes
• Foreign Policy of Saudi Arabia
• Foreign Policy, Theories of
• French Empire, 20th-Century
• From Club to Network Diplomacy
• Future of NATO
• Game Theory and Interstate Conflict
• Gender and Terrorism
• Genocide, Politicide, and Mass Atrocities Against Civilian...
• Genocides, 20th Century
• Geopolitics and Geostrategy
• Germany in World War II
• Global Citizenship
• Global Civil Society
• Global Constitutionalism
• Global Environmental Politics
• Global Ethic of Care
• Global Governance
• Global Justice, Western Perspectives
• Globalization
• Governance of the Arctic
• Grand Strategy
• Greater Middle East, The
• Greek Crisis
• Hague Conferences (1899, 1907)
• Hierarchies in International Relations
• History and International Relations
• Human Nature in International Relations
• Human Rights
• Human Rights and Humanitarian Diplomacy
• Human Rights, Feminism and
• Human Rights Law
• Human Security
• Hybrid Warfare
• Ideal Diplomat, The
• Identity and Foreign Policy
• Ideology, Values, and Foreign Policy
• Illicit Trade and Smuggling
• Imperialism
• Indian Perspectives on International Relations, War, and C...
• Indigenous Rights
• Industrialization
• Intelligence
• Intelligence Oversight
• Internal Displacement
• International Conflict Settlements, The Durability of
• International Criminal Court, The
• International Economic Organizations (IMF and World Bank)
• International Health Governance
• International Justice, Theories of
• International Law, Feminist Perspectives on
• International Monetary Relations, History of
• International Negotiation and Conflict Resolution
• International Nongovernmental Organizations
• International Norms for Cultural Preservation and Cooperat...
• International Organizations
• International Relations, Aesthetic Turn in
• International Relations as a Social Science
• International Relations, Practice Turn in
• International Relations, Research Ethics in
• International Relations Theory
• International Security
• International Society
• International Society, Theorizing
• International Support For Nonstate Armed Groups
• Internet Law
• Interstate Cooperation Theory and International Institutio...
• Intervention and Use of Force
• Iran, Politics and Foreign Policy
• Iraq: Past and Present
• Japanese Foreign Policy
• Just War Theory
• Kurdistan and Kurdish Politics
• Law of the Sea
• Laws of War
• Leadership in International Affairs
• Leadership Personality Characteristics and Foreign Policy
• League of Nations
• Lean Forward and Pull Back Options for US Grand Strategy
• Mediation and Civil Wars
• Mediation in International Conflicts
• Mediation via International Organizations
• Memory and World Politics
• Mercantilism
• Middle East, The Contemporary
• Middle Powers and Regional Powers
• Military Science
• Minorities in the Middle East
• Minority Rights
• Morality in Foreign Policy
• Multilateralism (1992–), Return to
• National Liberation, International Law and Wars of
• National Security Act of 1947, The
• Nation-Building
• Nations and Nationalism
• NATO, Europe, and Russia: Security Issues and the Border R...
• Natural Resources, Energy Politics, and Environmental Cons...
• New Multilateralism in the Early 21st Century
• Nonproliferation and Counterproliferation
• Nonviolent Resistance Datasets
• Normative Aspects of International Peacekeeping
• Normative Power Beyond the Eurocentric Frame
• Nuclear Proliferation
• Peace Education in Post-Conflict Zones
• Peace of Utrecht
• Peacebuilding, Post-Conflict
• Peacekeeping
• Political Demography
• Political Economy of National Security
• Political Extremism in Sub-Saharan Africa
• Political Learning and Socialization
• Political Psychology
• Politics and Islam in Turkey
• Politics and Nationalism in Cyprus
• Politics of Extraction: Theories and New Concepts for Crit...
• Politics of Resilience
• Popuism and Global Politics
• Popular Culture and International Relations
• Post-Civil War State
• Post-Conflict and Transitional Justice
• Post-Conflict Reconciliation in the Middle East and North ...
• Power Transition Theory
• Preventive War and Preemption
• Prisoners, Treatment of
• Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs)
• Process Tracing Methods
• Pro-Government Militias
• Proliferation
• Prospect Theory in International Relations
• Psychoanalysis in Global Politics and International Relati...
• Psychology and Foreign Policy
• Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
• Public Opinion and the European Union
• Quantum Social Science
• Race and International Relations
• Rebel Governance
• Reconciliation
• Reflexivity and International Relations
• Religion and International Relations
• Religiously Motivated Violence
• Reputation in International Relations
• Responsibility to Protect
• Rising Powers in World Politics
• Role Theory in International Relations
• Russian Foreign Policy
• Russian Revolutions and Civil War, 1917–1921
• Sanctions in International Law
• Science Diplomacy
• Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945), The
• Secrecy and Diplomacy
• Securitization
• Self-Determination
• Shining Path
• Sinophone and Japanese International Relations Theory
• Small State Diplomacy
• Social Scientific Theories of Imperialism
• Sovereignty
• Soviet Union in World War II
• Space Strategy, Policy, and Power
• Spatial Dependencies and International Mediation
• State Theory in International Relations
• Status in International Relations
• Strategic Air Power
• Strategic and Net Assessments
• Sub-Saharan Africa, Conflict Formations in
• Sustainable Development
• Systems Theory
• Teaching International Relations
• Territorial Disputes
• Terrorism and Poverty
• Terrorism, Geography of
• Terrorist Financing
• Terrorist Group Strategies
• The Changing Nature of Diplomacy
• The Politics and Diplomacy of Neutrality
• The Politics and Diplomacy of the First World War
• The Queer in/of International Relations
• the Twenty-First Century, Alliance Commitments in
• The Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relation...
• Theories of International Relations, Feminist
• Theory, Chinese International Relations
• Time Series Approaches to International Affairs
• Transnational Actors
• Transnational Law
• Transnational Social Movements
• Tribunals, War Crimes and
• Trust and International Relations
• UN Security Council
• United Nations, The
• United States and Asia, The
• Uppsala Conflict Data Program
• US and Africa
• US–UK Special Relationship
• Voluntary International Migration
• War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714)
• Weapons of Mass Destruction
• Western Balkans
• Western Front (World War I)
• Westphalia, Peace of (1648)
• Women and Peacemaking Peacekeeping
• World Economy 1919-1939
• World Polity School
• World War II Diplomacy and Political Relations
• World-System Theory
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|162.248.224.4]
• 162.248.224.4

• Undergraduate Degrees

International Political Economy

The International Political Economy (IPEC) major provides students with a deeper understanding of local, national and international interactions between political and economic forces.

IPEC students study how these interactions determine outcomes of policy, trade, finance, development and more. By analyzing the convergence of business, government and diplomatic interests, students learn a range of methodologies to explain how political economy impacts international relations. An interdisciplinary major, IPEC teaches students to evaluate political and economic theories by using a broad range of tools, including modeling, comparative methods and statistics.

Courses in the major cover a range of geographical regions to examine how states and political institutions organize economies and how international institutions shape trade and competition between countries. The skills emphasized in the IPEC major will enable students to approach problems of globalization, economic development and the role of politics in economic policy.

Students in the IPEC major will:

• Combine knowledge of the disciplines of economics and political science to form an interdisciplinary approach to understanding complex global issues.
• Utilize existing and emerging methodologies from both economic and political fields of inquiry, including statistical modeling and qualitative case studies.
• Gain an understanding of different economic and political concerns across a broad range of economies and governments in various stages of development.

Through a wide range of courses in international trade, finance, politics, diplomacy and methodology, students in the IPEC major equip themselves with critical research and analysis skills that empower them to analyze the many intersections of politics and economics on the global stage.

Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative analysis forms the backbone of the IPEC major. In order to test hypotheses, compare theories and study trends in political economy, students become well-versed in statistics and econometrics. After gaining a strong grounding in statistical methods, students interpret and critique statistical analyses in courses that examine peer-reviewed research. These foundational courses allow students to practice statistical techniques prior to their senior seminar research.

Students’ strong backgrounds in mathematics complement a robust curriculum of international relations, trade and finance courses in the International Political Economy major. In addition to gaining a foundation in economic tools, students are able to design their studies around specific areas of interest, such as trade and trade law, development and international organizations. 

Qualitative Techniques

Qualitative methods are essential to analyzing and understanding political economics. In classes, IPEC professors use teaching approaches incorporating case methods, process-tracing and comparative case study to develop the skills invaluable to a career in international political economy. These skills will be introduced to students through their substantive coursework, and students will put these to practice in course-related papers. 

Because effective writing is essential to communicating the complex ideas of political economics, all students are required to take a course with a research paper or thesis component and topic courses in the major emphasize reading and writing research papers.

Academic Spotlight

“IPEC appealed to me because it emphasized the interdependent relationship between politics and economics and introduced nuance to familiar concepts.”

Varsha Menon (SFS’21, MSFS’22) had always been passionate about economics, but she wanted an education that would also allow her to explore her interests in policy, advocacy and development. She found the perfect fit in International Political Economy (IPEC), where she was able to combine quantitative analysis with writing and research on how to tangibly improve people’s lives. For her senior thesis, Menon conducted research on how household internet access impacts infant mortality rates and access to adequate prenatal care in Louisiana and Mississippi. “I’d like to work in the international development sector,” she explains. “SFS gave me foundational theories, quantitative methods and the writing skills to use in the sector.”

Read more about IPEC alumna Varsha Menon here.

Student Experience

IPEC majors take advantage of SFS’s unique position in Washington, DC, and its connections around the world to gain hands-on experience in international political economy. Many students hone their skills and knowledge through DC-based internships that they can complete during the semester alongside their studies, while study abroad programs and undergraduate research initiatives enable students to pursue their passions through research and further study.

Study in the Heart of Washington, DC

Our location in the heart of Washington, DC, gives students a front-row seat to the latest events in domestic and international affairs. IPEC students can engage with national and international financial institutions in both the public and private sectors. They have the opportunity to connect and intern with multinational corporations, government agencies, think tanks, embassies and policy groups in the nation’s capital to understand their inner workings.

Learn more about student life in DC.

International Opportunities

Through SFS and Georgetown’s extensive study abroad and internship options, IPEC students can observe the convergence of international political and economic issues firsthand by immersing themselves in the workings of a particular locale, organization or embassy. In the past five years, IPEC majors have studied abroad in Barcelona, Spain; Jakarta, Indonesia; Kigali, Rwanda; Amman, Jordan and numerous other locations in Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America.

Learn more about international opportunities at SFS.

Global Experience Spotlight

In the summer of 2019, IPEC major Jack Resnick (SFS’22) had the opportunity to work abroad in not one but two countries! He spent a month traveling between Bangkok and Chiang Rai, Thailand, where he worked with the Mae Fah Luang Foundation to conduct research on global drug usage and trafficking trends between the 1990s and today. Later in the summer, he interned with the Mann Deshi Bank and Foundation in Mhaswad, India as a GU Impacts Fellow . 

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

At the very core of every major is a commitment to recognizing and celebrating cultural diversity and fostering an inclusive environment for all students. SFS is dedicated to welcoming students from all backgrounds to our community and the SFS Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Office leads school-wide efforts to enhance DEI in the SFS curriculum, faculty and recruitment of students and staff. 

No matter their background or interests, students are sure to find like-minded and supportive peers here on the Hilltop. Whether through  campus ministry ,  student groups  or  engaging with neighbors in DC , you can find your community at Georgetown.

Find out more about DEI at SFS.

Student Spotlight

“I believe that social sciences are best approached through a combination of multiple complementary disciplines, including politics, economics and international relations.”

Alumna Elinor Walker (SFS’20) chose Georgetown in large part because of the opportunities in the IPEC major and on campus. Walker studied international political economy both in the classroom and as part of the Carroll Round Steering Committee, which organizes an annual international economics research conference on the Hilltop. She also became president of Georgetown’s FinTech club, where she emphasized female empowerment and fostered a community of peers interested in technology start-ups. In the future, she would like to join the ranks of SFS professors and alumni working at the World Bank or IMF.

Read more about IPEC alumna Elinor Walker here.

Faculty in the IPEC program are world-renowned practitioners, scholars and educators. Many are frequently called upon by governments, multilateral institutions and media outlets to share their expertise and analyses on the most pressing issues in international politics and economics. Students in the IPEC major work closely with faculty mentors as they complete research projects and find their passions within the field.

“Real world economic policies are driven not just by the exigencies of supply and demand, but also by political constraints and incentives. IPEC students are motivated to gain the tools to understand the complex interactions between economic forces and political institutions and then apply them to solving important social problems facing the world today.” Yuhki Tajima, IPEC Professor

IPEC Faculty

IPEC Curricular Dean

Recent Faculty Publication

Diana Kim, Empires of Vice: The Rise of Opium Prohibition across Southeast Asia (Princeton University Press)

During the late nineteenth century, opium was integral to European colonial rule in Southeast Asia. The taxation of opium was a major source of revenue for British and French colonizers, who also derived moral authority from imposing a tax on a peculiar vice of their non-European subjects. Yet between the 1890s and the 1940s, colonial states began to ban opium, upsetting the very foundations of overseas rule―how did this happen?  Empires of Vice  traces the history of this dramatic reversal, revealing the colonial legacies that set the stage for the region’s drug problems today.

Careers & Alumni

The IPEC major prepares students for careers in a number of different fields, including in the private and public sector, non-profits, NGOs and international organizations. Alumni will have the skills to interpret overlaps between economic and political concerns, priming them for success in business, finance, development, consulting, management and more.

Building a Career at Georgetown

With DC on their doorstep, students can pursue career opportunities that can take them all over the world. IPEC students take advantage of the many internship opportunities here in the capital to begin building real-world work experience even before they graduate. 

At Georgetown, students connect with the Cawley Career Education Center , where they can meet with professional advisors who can help with everything from developing a perfect resume to nailing job interviews and exploring how to break into a new industry or field. And the Hoya network students build throughout their time at Georgetown can help unlock new opportunities throughout their careers. 

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

Process Tracing and International Political Economy

Jeffrey T. Checkel is Professor and Chair in International Politics, Department of Political and Social Sciences, European University Institute, Florence, Italy, and Global Fellow, Peace Research Institute Oslo.

• Published: 10 November 2021
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

As a methodological choice, process tracing and qualitative International Political Economy (IPE) would seem a natural fit. These scholars employ case study research designs and theorize in terms of processes and mechanisms—a combination that leads to process tracing as a key method. Yet, in qualitative IPE, one sees little process tracing; or better said, it is there, but only partly operationalized or used implicitly. Surveying the contemporary qualitative IPE literature, this chapter advances two arguments. First, these scholars utilize a narrative style that hides their methods, including process tracing. The result is an empirics–method disconnect, where readers are unsure how data for the narrative was gathered and causal inferences or interpretive understandings gleaned from it. Second, qualitative IPE scholars should do their process tracing better. However, in making this methodological move they should resist the temptation to pull process tracing “off the shelf” and use it. Rather, they should address three cutting-edge issues for process tracers: transparency and formalization; within process-tracing methods; and developing a robust interpretive variant.

Introduction

Over the past 15 years, process tracing has advanced significantly as a method ( George and Bennett 2005 ; Bennett and Checkel 2015 ; Beach and Pedersen 2019 ). We have gone from a situation where many liked process tracing—“process tracing is good!”—to one where we have clear standards and best practices for the method. Researchers can now examine a particular application of the method and conclude “this is an instance of good process tracing” ( Waldner 2011 , 7).

Qualitative International Political Economy (IPE) scholars have not kept up with this methodological evolution. Work in this tradition typically presents its findings via narrative case studies, often to very good effect. Kirshner’s (2007) study of financial sectors as a buffer against war and Ban’s (2016) examination of how global neoliberal economic ideas diffuse and “go local” are exemplars of this IPE genre. Yet, as process tracing qua method has advanced and our more general expectations and standards for qualitative methods have risen, one could argue a methods gap/lacunae/neglect has arisen in qualitative IPE.

Reflecting on this gap, I advance two arguments. First, the majority of qualitative IPE scholars utilize a narrative case study style that hides their methods, process tracing as well. The result is an empirics–method disconnect, where readers are unsure how data for the narrative was gathered and causal inferences or interpretive understandings gleaned from it. Second, these scholars can and should do their process tracing better. However, in making this methodological move they should resist the temptation simply to pull process tracing “off the shelf.” Rather, they should use their interest in the method to address three cutting-edge issues for process tracers.

The chapter proceeds as follows. I begin with a survey of the contemporary (2010–2020) IPE literature, assessing its use of qualitative methods and, especially of process tracing. My main finding is this work has been good at taking on board the case study method, but less attentive to the natural follow-on: the within case methods needed to carry out the case study. This is surprising as the methods literature on such within-case methods (process tracing, interviews, document analysis, discourse, ethnography) is by now quite substantial.

If my first section is backward looking, the next looks to the future. As qualitative IPE scholars begin to utilize methods such as process tracing, I argue they should not be passive consumers of the technique. Instead, they should use the turn to process tracing to advance it in three ways. For one, they should push process tracing to be more transparent, but not by applying Bayesian logic. In addition, these scholars are well-placed to help process tracers address a neglected issue: the additional methods process tracing requires to gather data on its causal mechanisms. I will call this the challenge of developing within-process-tracing methods. Finally, those qualitative IPE scholars who work interpretatively should help develop the currently missing interpretative variant of process tracing.

I offer one caveat before beginning. Qualitative IPE is not alone in its neglect of process tracing or the operational use of qualitative methods more generally. This methods–empirics disconnect is also evident in constructivist international relations (IR) theory ( Checkel 2018 ), while historical institutionalists and students of comparative historical analysis confront serious methodological challenges in measuring one of their central concepts: critical junctures ( Symposium 2017 ). Thus, while my arguments and critiques here address qualitative IPE, they likely generalize to other political science subfields where qualitative methods play an important role.

Process Tracing and IPE—An Overview

How do qualitative IPE researchers use their methods? To answer this question, I focus on the period 2010–2020, and survey the following literature and sources: the journals Review of International Political Economy ( RIPE ), New Political Economy ( NPE ), International Studies Quarterly ( ISQ ), and International Organization ( IO ) 1 ; qualitative IPE books published by Cambridge University Press and Routledge; 2 and publications by leading qualitative IPE scholars (Mark Blyth, Kathleen McNamara, Craig Parsons, Leonard Seabrooke). In addition, we asked the last group of scholars about other IPE researchers using qualitative methods/process tracing; their recommendations produced six additional names: Rawi Abdelal, Cornel Ban, Jacqueline Best, Nicolas Jabko, Jonathan Kirshner, and James Ashley Morrison. 3

I present the findings in three steps, beginning with some over-arching results. Next, I work through several examples, designed to capture the modal way in which qualitative IPE uses process tracing. Finally, I turn to a small body of IPE literature where the process tracing is well executed. This work represents the proverbial “exception that proves the rule.”

General findings—where is the process tracing?

My review of the literature indicates the methodological debate on process tracing has only partially reached qualitative IPE and there is room for improvement in how these researchers use the method; this is seen in six ways. 4 First, it is worrying that many IPE scholars claim to use process tracing, but do not cite any methodological article or book. At a minimum, such a connection is needed so readers can better understand the type of process tracing being used: deductive, inductive, Bayesian, or interpretive.

In a similar fashion, scholars frequently refer to process tracing as a within-case method in their qualitative study, but it seems to be more a label rather than a method that comes with certain requirements, considerations, and best practices. This is process tracing more as metaphor than as methodological tool. It is puzzling that one stills sees this usage, as by 2015, the methods literature had elaborated the techniques and best practices for using the method in a rigorous manner ( Beach and Pedersen 2013 ; Bennett and Checkel 2015 ).

Data from the two leading qualitative IPE/political economy journals support these points. For RIPE , 12 out of the 26 articles explicitly employing process tracing between 2010 and 2020 do not cite any methodological text. That is, in nearly half the cases (46 percent), the reader is told a key method will be process tracing, but given zero information on how the method will be used to make causal inferences or reconstruct interpretive narratives. Four articles do have one citation to the process tracing literature, but it is to George and Bennett (2005) . While this is certainly a foundational text—it put process tracing on the map for political scientists—it lacks the operational focus of later work (how do I use it? what can go wrong?). 5

For New Political Economy , the numbers are similar. Of the 12 articles between 2010 and 2020 that explicitly use process tracing, fully half (6 out of 12) do not cite any methodological text.

Second and consistent with a lack of engagement with the methodological literature, process tracing, even when it is the explicit method of choice for IPE scholars, is poorly defined ( Thiemann, Birk, and Friedrich 2018 ) or weakly operationalized ( Helgadóttir 2016 ; Röper 2020 ). Several inductive studies do not specify in their method section that they will employ inductive process tracing ( Quaglia 2012 ; Steinlin and Trampusch 2012 ; Piroska and Podvršič 2020 ). Others seem to mistake process tracing for content/discourse analysis ( Wood and Ausserladscheider 2020 ). Indeed, researchers often use “process tracing” to mean nothing more than her/his case study has a temporal element.

Third, the meta-theoretical and theoretical understanding of causal mechanisms is often underdeveloped in qualitative IPE. Without hypothesized mechanisms, the use of process tracing makes little sense, as its whole purpose is to measure their observable implications. One sees too many instances where the language of causal mechanisms is used, but the case study is in fact tracking the effect of independent variables in a historical narrative ( Ciplet 2017 ; Kluge 2017 ).

Fourth, qualitative IPE case studies tend to be heavily empirical. That is, they relate a richly documented historical narrative that is neither theory-guided nor refers explicitly to the hypothesized factors, variables, or mechanisms. It is not uncommon for these scholars to theorize a causal connection, then narrate a case study where they carefully explain how certain negotiations or policy bargains unfolded and then—only in the last paragraph (article) or concluding chapter (book)—transition back from the empirics to the theoretical claims. If there is no theory in the case study, then there is no need for methods like process tracing ( Eagleton-Pierce 2012 ; Trumball 2014 ; Avigor-Eshel and Mandelkern 2020 ).

Fifth, and a more general point on how qualitative IPE is using methods, discussions on transparency or ethics are largely missing. This is odd given the attention these issues have gotten in the general political science literature since 2014–2015 ( Moravcsik 2014 ; Cronin-Furman and Lake 2018 ). Specifically on transparency, Van Evera’s four tests for sharpening the inferences drawn from process-tracing evidence ( Van Evera 1997 , 30–4) are virtually never utilized; the same holds true for using Bayesian analysis ( Fairfield and Charman 2017 ) to improve the method’s transparency. 6

Sixth, in my sample, there is a special issue in New Political Economy devoted to process tracing ( Palier and Trampusch 2016 ). Yet, its content confirms that the method is not a priority for qualitative IPE. For one, most of the contributors are not IPE scholars, but researchers who have participated in the more general debates over mechanisms and process tracing (Derek Beach, Tulia Falleti, James Mahoney, Renate Mayntz). More important, the collection concludes with an essay by a prominent political economist expressing significant hesitation and worry over any use of process tracing ( Hay 2016 ). Overall, the special issue makes for an interesting methodological read, but it does not connect process tracing to IPE.

Qualitative IPE—process tracing (not) in action

In this section, I turn from trends to specific examples, working through two cases that capture the modal ways in which qualitative IPE uses process tracing. The first is an instance where process tracing as invoked as a main method, but then vanishes or is implicit in the empirical sections. The second captures the use of a narrative case study where the theoretical set-up—mechanisms, process—is primed for the use of process tracing, but it is not used. The overwhelming majority of the literature I surveyed falls into one or the other of these modal patterns.

In selecting two specific scholars, my intent is not to “name and shame.” Each has produced a very good piece of research, and their use/non-use of process tracing is very much in keeping with qualitative IPE community standards. This chapter argues those standards—in regards to the operationalization of methods—need to be raised, but the chosen scholars are doing no worse than the vast majority of their colleagues.

Published in 2012, Francisco González’s Creative Destruction? Economic Crises and Democracy in Latin America is an exemplar of my first modal type of qualitative IPE research. The book explores the relation between economic crises in the 1930s and 1980s and democratic development in Latin America. González situates his study within comparative historical analysis ( Mahoney and Thelen 2015 ) and—like many in this tradition—structures his narrative around a number of case study chapters.

Within the case studies, he uses process tracing for measuring the theorized causal mechanisms. To be more precise, this is the claim in the book’s opening pages ( González 2012 , 5–7), where he defines process tracing as identifying the causal chain and causal mechanism between the independent variable(s) and the outcome of the dependent variable ( González 2012 , 5—drawing upon George and Bennett 2005 , 206). This is an excellent start, but the book has little more to say about the method. Ideally, the author would have used these opening pages also to operationalize the process tracing. That is, given the three mechanisms González theorizes, their observable implications in the data would be X, Y, and Z. Unfortunately, this does not happen.

As a result, in the case studies that constitute Parts I and II of the book, the process tracing is implicit. The mechanisms are there in the cases, but it is not clear to the reader how process tracing is being used to measure their effects. Nor is there any effort to deal with the problem that bedevils mechanism-based theorizing: equifinality. This means that alternative causal mechanisms can very well lead to the same outcome. Testing for equifinality would have required even more explicit process tracing in the chapters. In sum, González’s nicely argued book highlights a key feature of many qualitative IPE studies: Process tracing is invoked as a main method, but then vanishes/ is implicit in the empirical sections.

Cornel Ban’s 2016 book, Ruling Ideas: How Global Neoliberalism Goes Local , fits my second modal pattern. This is a richly documented account of the how economic ideas with global reach are translated into different national settings, where domestic translators make these ideas “go local,” in Ban’s apt phrase. Two of the case study chapters (6, 7) explicitly theorize and document the “mechanisms” (socialization, diffusion) through which this spread and translation occurred. Overall, the book offers a carefully argued and detailed study of the various ways in which economic ideas diffused and were then translated locally.

Methodologically, the set-up is there for Ban to employ within-case methods like process tracing. At the outset, he situates his study within the comparative historical analysis tradition ( Ban 2016 , 30–1), one of whose defining features is case studies theorized in terms of causal mechanisms that are measured with process tracing ( Mahoney and Thelen 2015 , 12–20). Indeed, the latter method would seem a perfect fit for Ban’s Chapters 6 and 7, where he is mapping the mechanisms through which ideas diffused to and were translated in Spain and Romania. Yet, there are no within-case methods in these chapters, and certainly no process tracing. This makes it difficult for the reader to evaluate how Ban is gathering evidence for the argument ( Ban 2016 , Chapters 6, 7).

Qualitative IPE—the exceptions

In this last section, I consider a small body of IPE literature—a total of six publications in my sample—where the process tracing is well executed; this demonstrates that methodological operationalization and transparency are possible for qualitative IPE. These scholars clearly define the method, carefully operationalize their mechanisms, make their tests explicit, and are transparent about evidence. In all six exemplars, the process tracing is of the deductive, theory testing type. I work through one study here, and refer the reader to the others.

Lisa Kastner’s (2018) study of the relation between civil society activism and financial regulation in the wake of the 2008 crisis is a smartly designed and rigorously executed example of theory-testing process tracing. Specifically, she explains “how diffuse interests were translated into post-crisis financial regulatory policy by systematically applying process-tracing to test the presence or absence of a hypothesized causal mechanism” ( Kastner 2018 , 34).

Kastner does this by referencing the process tracing literature ( Beach and Pedersen 2013 ; Bennett and Checkel 2015 ) and—more importantly—by operationalizing the method, asking what are the observable implications of her theorized mechanisms. After each case study, she summarizes the evidence, showing the causal chain and whether each step is supported by the empirics. This is an exemplary and transparent use of process tracing. 7

Process Tracing and IPE—The Future

My argument in the previous section is that the qualitative IPE/ process tracing relation is best characterized as one of benign neglect. These scholars are aware of the method, but too often fail to use it or apply it in an implicit, metaphorical, and non-operationalized way. This a good news/ bad news situation. The bad is this neglect is undermining the rigour, quality, and transparency of their case studies. However, the good news and silver lining is that qualitative IPE—as a newcomer/ latecomer to the method—can utilize its outsider perspective to rethink and address, in new ways, three cutting-edge issues for process tracing: transparency and formalization; within-process-tracing methods; and developing a robust interpretive variant. This rethink will benefit qualitative IPE and all the many others—international relations theorists ( Evangelista 2015 ), comparativists ( Wood 2003 ; Waldner 2015 ), students of comparative historical analysis ( Gibson 2019 )—who also regularly use the method.

To begin, how did I establish the “cutting edge” for process tracing? In short, I consider how we teach the method and what we publish about it. Regarding pedagogy, courses at key fora such as the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) methods schools, the Syracuse Institute for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research (IQMR), and APSA short courses consist of process tracing basics plus sessions on formalization; the latter includes applications of Bayesian logic, set theory ( Barrenechea and Mahoney 2019 ), or causal graphs ( Waldner 2015 ). 8 On research and publications, 55 percent of the journal articles, newsletter contributions, and book articles on process tracing in the period January 2017–August 2020 have been devoted in whole or in part to formalization. 9

The cutting edge is thus defined by what the literature has prioritized—formalization—and what it has neglected. Formalization is one of the last steps in the use of process tracing, helping us with data analysis. By focusing so intently on it, scholars have neglected what comes before: how one does the data collection (within-process-tracing methods) and, more fundamentally, meta-theory (the missing interpretive variant).

Transparency and formalization

The debate over transparency among process tracers is linked to the broader debate in the discipline over data access and research transparency, or DA-RT for short. 10 Despite a professed epistemological pluralism, these discussions have mostly been among positivists. Indeed, of the 13 reports released by the “Qualitative Transparency Deliberations” in January 2019, only two addressed transparency from an interpretive perspective. 11

Consistent with a core positivist tenet that seeing is believing ( Johnson 2006 ), much of the DA-RT/transparency debate and recommendations have come down to some version of “show me the goods.” This might mean archiving one’s data in qualitative data repositories ( Mannheimer et al. 2019 ); or using active citation ( Moravcsik 2010 ); or attaching numbers to our causal hunches in process tracing to make the logic behind them more visible ( Bennett 2015 ). These are all sensible proposals, but note that they are premised on a separation between the researcher and what she studies—something again consistent with the positivist worldview.

So, how might we operationalize transparency principles for a qualitative IPE researcher using process tracing, with—say—interviews as a key method for data collection? The answer for some students of process tracing is to employ a combination of active citation and Bayesian logic. However, such a choice would be incomplete as there is a prior, interpretive operationalization of transparency that one needs to consider.

Active citation works in the following manner. A footnote citing an interview is linked to a transparency index that contains interview transcripts or excerpts. A reader—by perusing the index—can better understand the evidence behind a causal claim the author advances in her text ( Moravcsik 2014 ).

If we stop at this point, however, we are missing important information that allows us to understand the interview excerpt and what it is telling us. As ethnographers would argue—and interviews are a key method for them as well ( Gusterson 1996 ; Gusterson 2008 ; Holmes 2009 )—one needs to ask how that interview data has been shaped and changed by the researcher. How has her gender, skin color, identity, and the power relation inherent in the interview affected how the interviewee answered? In ethnographic/interpretive jargon, this is to reflect upon one’s positionality—and how it has influenced both participants in the interview ( Borneman and Hammoudi 2009 ; see also Borneman 2014 ).

Returning to active citation’s transparency index, then, more than the raw data would be required. We also need to record—in a positionality index?—how a researcher thinks the interview answers/dialogue were a function of her gender, the way she asked a question, and the like. Transparency is now defined not by what we see, but by clarification of context and researcher–interviewee interaction. Reflecting on positionality also pushes a researcher to consider the ethical dimension of her work. For a transparency debate that has too often failed to take ethics seriously ( Parkinson and Wood 2015 ; Monroe 2018 ), this can only be welcomed.

My argument is not to do away with active citation and transparency indices; rather, we need an additional—more foundational—layer of transparency. For the latter, Lee Ann Fujii’s work on relational interviewing provides excellent advice—from a fellow political scientist no less—on how to establish one’s positionality in an interview context ( Fujii 2017 ; see also Fujii 2010 ). If Moravcsik’s transparency index allows us to see the data, a positionality index helps one better understand the social process through which that data was constructed.

Her interview data now in hand, transparently collected, the IPE process tracer now needs to figure out what that data means—the data analysis. What causal inferences can she glean from it? This is where Bayesianism enters the picture, with the argument being that it improves and make more visible the logic behind the causal inferences we make in process tracing ( Bennett 2015 ; Fairfield and Charman 2017 ; Fairfield and Charman 2019 ). A number of leading scholars support it and Bayesian process tracing is being taught widely, as shown above.

Does the use of Bayesianism result in better, more rigorous and transparent applications of process tracing? Proponents cautiously answer in the affirmative ( Fairfield and Charman 2017 ), while critics argue that the application of Bayesian logic is undercut by a number of logical and practical challenges ( Zaks 2021 ). My own view accords more with the critics. Bayesian process tracing offers little improvement over the way the method has been carried out previously—for three reasons.

First, Bayesian logic cannot work with inductive forms of process tracing, as one has no (deductively derived) theoretical priors to which values can be assigned. This was a limitation recognized early in the debate ( Bennett 2015 , 276), but which has since been forgotten. Second, applying Bayesian logic and its accompanying mathematical formulas requires the assignment of estimated probabilities on the prior likelihood a theory is true as well as the likelihood of finding evidence (in two different ways). Bayesian analysis is impossible without these three estimated probabilities, which are derived in a subjective manner lacking any transparency.

Bayesian process tracers are aware of this problem ( Bennett 2015 , 280–1), but it is not clear how one fixes it. Maybe we need a transparency index (another one!), where a researcher explains what data she drew upon to fix a certain probability, assuring us that cognitive bias played no role, and that she did not cherry pick the data to get a probability that will make her favored theory work. I am being facetious here, but the lack of attention to how estimated probabilities are assigned simply pushes to a deeper level the transparency challenges that process tracing faces.

Third, much of the application of Bayesianism to date has been to process tracing greatest hits, especially Wood (2003) and Tannenwald (2007) . Yet, none of the Bayesians who replicate Wood or Tannenwald demonstrates where the Bayesian approach improves the process tracing. As Zaks argues, “Wood and Tannenwald are excellent data collectors, analyzers, and writers—skills that consistently prove to be the most central assets to good (and transparent) process tracing. Until Bayesian proponents can demonstrate where their method reveals new conclusions or more nuanced inferences, the costs of adoption will continue to outweigh the benefits” ( Zaks 2021 , 71).

In the end, Peter Hall—in an early intervention in the DA-RT, transparency debates—got it right. The best theoretical-empirical qualitative research already does what proponents of enhanced transparency—including Bayesians—seek. For Hall, it is a commitment to “research integrity”—policed by peer-review processes and scientific research programs—that ensures a particular author takes methodological transparency seriously ( Hall 2016 ). Hall’s argument is only strengthened when one considers the opportunity costs as well of learning the logic and mathematics of Bayesianism. For a qualitative IPE seeking to use process tracing in a transparent manner, Bayesian logic is an analytic bridge too far.

Within-process-tracing methods

Going forward, process tracers must devote more pedagogy and research to the techniques needed to do the method’s “front end”—the data collection—well. When teaching process tracing, I am struck that most students think it starts when we measure those observable implications of a causal mechanism. But the data for measuring those mechanisms comes from somewhere—typically, interviews, fieldwork and ethnography/ political ethnography, archives, surveys, and discourse analysis.

Thanks to the revolution in qualitative methods since the early years of the new millennium, we have a wealth of practical, “how to” literature devoted to these various within-process-tracing techniques. These include Mosley (2013) and Fujii (2017) on interviewing; Kapiszewski, MacLean, and Read (2015) and Schatz (2009) on fieldwork and political ethnography; Trachtenberg (2006) on archival research; Fowler (2013) and Bryman and Bell (2019 , Chs 5–7) on surveys; and Hansen (2006) and Hopf and Allan (2016) on discourse analysis.

Teaching these methods must become a part of our process tracing pedagogy. Instead of devoting half the short course on process tracing at the APSA convention to Bayesian analysis, 12 we should instead be giving more attention to these within-process-tracing, data collection methods, which easily constitute the majority of one’s time and effort in a process tracing study. Bayesian analysis requires high-quality data, gathered with diverse methods; without such data, the application of Bayesianism is simply not possible.

Many scholars cite Elisabeth Wood’s (2003) book on the Salvadoran civil war as a process tracing exemplar ( Lyall 2015 , 189–91). It is a model because of the richness and quality of her data, gleaned from interviews, political ethnography, and her ethnographic map-making workshops. Her process tracing works because she devotes an entire article and a part of her conclusions to operationalizing her within-process-tracing methods, discussing how she will use them to draw inferences on insurgent preferences, threats to the validity of those inferences, and the like ( Wood 2003 , Ch. 2, 243–6). The data she has gathered is of a very high quality; it sets the stage and provides the raw material for her process tracing. Wood’s use of the method is exemplary and transparent because of all this “front-end” work.

For process tracing as method, we thus need to make time in our teaching and space in our research for these data-gathering methods. Process tracers need to get right the balance between front-end methods training and back-end data analysis. Zaks (2021 , 72) nicely captures these trade-offs and balancing act.

In the context of qualitative research, scholars have a lot more access to training in the analysis of data than they do in the research processes that get them the data in the first place. But the process of research and the processes we are researching are inextricable. Researchers would likely yield greater benefits from intensive training in ethnographic, interview, and sampling techniques; understanding the politics and biases associated with archival work; or even just additional and specialized language training needed to conduct research on a specific topic.

For a qualitative IPE turning to process tracing, this means less training on analysis (set theory, Bayesianism) and more on within-process-tracing methods.

A greater focus on the methods utilized within process tracing would have the additional—and much needed—benefit of bringing research ethics to the fore. This is a topic on which process tracers have been largely silent. 13 In process tracing’s less scientific days, I would tell students that it gets you down in the trenches and really close to what you are studying. This is true, and the “what” is often policymakers, activists, civil war insurgents, and the like—human subjects in ethics talk. Teaching those additional methods as a part of process tracing—and especially the interviews, field work, and ethnography—would drive home the need to address and operationalize the research ethics of the method.

We do not need a separate research program on the ethics of process tracing, but we should teach more about how one operationalizes the challenging ethics of immersive within- process-tracing methods such as interpretive interviewing and ethnography. Addressing ethics also forces a scholar to confront her positionality in the research process. At a minimum, and since transparency is currently much discussed among process tracers, we need to build modules into our process tracing curricula on the ethics/transparency relation and how we operationalize core ethical precepts (do no harm) in an era of open science. In making this pedagogical move, there is a rich and growing applied ethics literature upon which we could draw ( Wood 2006 ; Parkinson and Wood 2015 ; Fujii 2017 ; Monroe 2018 ; Cronin-Furman and Lake 2018 ; Delamont and Atkinson 2018 ; Kaplan, Kuhnt, and Steinert 2020 ).

An interpretive process tracing

I start with three facts. Fact #1 is that process tracing has adopted a meta-theoretical stance where there is a place for both positivist and interpretative variants ( Bennett and Checkel 2015 , 10–16). Interpretive scholars in political science—fact #2—have become increasingly interested in process—a move most clearly seen in the “practice turn” ( Neumann 2002 ; Adler and Pouliot 2011 ). Practices are “inarticulate, practical knowledge that makes what is to be done appear ‘self-evident’ or commonsensical” ( Pouliot 2008 , 258). Practices are built on a relational ontology that mediates between structure and agency ( Adler and Pouliot 2015 ); meta-theoretically, they thus capture process and social mechanisms ( Guzzini 2011 ). In terms of method, this means interpretive scholars need techniques that gather data on and measure process—something like process tracing.

Given these first two observations, fact #3 is a surprise: There is little interpretive process tracing. It is taught virtually nowhere, perhaps because our leading process tracing texts have almost nothing to say about it ( Bennett and Checkel 2015 ; Beach and Pedersen 2019 ). 14 Regarding empirical applications, there are but a handful of published works that utilize interpretive process tracing ( Guzzini 2012 ; Norman 2015 ; Pouliot 2015 ; Norman 2016 ; Robinson 2017 ; Cecchini and Beach 2020 ).

This small literature is quite diverse and there is no agreement on what constitutes an interpretive form of the method. For some ( Norman 2016 ), interpretive process tracing is similar to mainstream, positivist/scientific-realist efforts, but operates inductively. Others ( Robinson 2017 ) favor a stronger grounding in an interpretive meta-theory, but it is not clear what the actual process tracing does.

Scholars working on practices have come the furthest in developing an interpretive form of process tracing—perhaps not surprising as social practices are all about process. Pouliot (2015) is explicit on this point: What he calls “practice tracing” is interpretive process tracing. True to an interpretive ethos, he crafts a process tracing that operates inductively, but also takes considerable effort to show how it would work. Pouliot does this by engaging with Bennett and Checkel’s (2015 , Ch. 1) 10 best practices for process tracing, and how they must be modified to work interpretively. His resulting practice tracing occupies a meta-theoretical middle ground, showing how practices create meaning (interpretism), but also thinking hard about how to measure the process through which those practices operate (scientific-realist). 15

Other scholars working on social practices build upon Pouliot, but argue for additional within practice tracing methods. Whereas Pouliot (2015) captures practices through ethnography and interviews, Cornut and Zamaroczy (2020) add an interpretive form of document analysis to this mix. All this work is promising and exciting, as it marks the beginning of a conceptually clear and empirically operationalized interpretive process tracing.

At the same time, practice tracers will need to address two challenges. First, it is not clear how either interviews or document analysis can measure social practices. 16 Recall that such practices are “inarticulate, practical knowledge”—in layperson’s terms, stuff that is implicit and in the deep background. Ethnography, with its commitment to immersion, is best placed to access such background knowledge; however, it is not clear how asking questions or reading documents can do the same. With interviews, the researcher is interfering with and indeed likely changing the interviewee—through the questions she asks, her gender, etc. ( Fujii 2017 ). Accessing implicit background knowledge through all this distortion seems next to impossible.

Second, whatever additional methods they decide upon, practice tracers need to operationalize them in greater detail. Consider ethnography, which is the “gold standard” method for practice tracers ( Pouliot 2010 ). When done well, ethnography addresses—before going to the field—two issues that bedevil it: access and ethics. Thinking about the former requires operational plans for dealing with gatekeepers ( Gusterson 2008 ), while getting the ethics right involves much more than ticking the boxes on documents submitted to your institution’s ethics review board ( Delamont and Atkinson 2018 ). Practice tracers—to date—have been silent on both issues.

For process tracing as method, there is a rich pedagogical and research agenda to be pursued. It would rethink and broaden the manner in which process tracing operationalizes research transparency; deepen it (within-process-tracing methods; ethics); and expand it to interpretive forms. This agenda is meant to complement—and not replace—the focus on formalization and transparency. There is nothing wrong with the latter. Perhaps process tracing needs further formalization, but we should do this with an appreciation of the likely opportunity costs. We may get a more rigorous, transparent version of one type of process tracing: deductive, scientific-realist/positivist. But we will miss an opportunity to develop a richer, more ethically grounded, meta-theoretically plural method.

Conclusions

The “qualitative” in qualitative IPE is in need of renewal. Scholars working in this tradition have made very good use of the case study method, producing a number of excellent articles and volumes structured around case study narratives ( Blyth 2002 ; Kirshner 2007 ; Blyth 2013 ; Helleiner 2014 ; Ban 2016 ; see also Odell 2001 ). However, while IPE scholars stayed with the case method, the qualitative methods literature moved on, arguing that one needed additional methods—within the case—to structure all that data collection ( George and Bennett 2005 ; Mahoney and Thelen 2015 ; Beach and Pedersen 2016 ).

This chapter considered one particular additional method—process tracing—that should be of special interest to qualitative IPE. Yet, as my review demonstrates, IPE has at best a tenuous relation to the method. Too often, process tracing is employed, but in an implicit way that makes its application invisible to the reader; in other cases, it is explicitly used, but in a metaphorical and non-operational manner. One could consider these criticisms as nothing more than methodological nitpicks, but they matter: weakening the validity of the causal and interpretive claims advanced by these scholars.

Certainly, qualitative IPE is not alone in its non- or misuse of process tracing; one sees similar methodological misfires in other subfields (international relations) and literatures (comparative historical analysis). In addition, the expectations for how we use an array of qualitative methods have been rising fast in recent years. This latter fact alone makes it almost impossible for qualitative IPE to meet the methodological concerns of a sympathetic but critical analyst applying contemporary standards.

While this context is important, it does not change the chapter’s bottom line: Qualitative IPE needs to finish the job. The case study narratives it has mastered need to be followed and complemented by methods like process tracing. Above, I outlined a three-fold agenda for IPE to pursue as it applies process tracing. The reaction of some may be: “Is Checkel serious?” “Does he want to make us methodologists?” My reply: “No and no!”

I answer in this way for three reasons. First and conceptually, process tracing ain’t rocket science. It is true that to use it well requires a clear understanding of causal mechanisms and the different, processual understanding of cause they carry. However, this is nothing like getting one’s head around, say, the Boolean logic of qualitative comparative analysis. More important, for the aspiring process tracer, the literature now offers clear, operational discussions of such mechanisms ( Hedstroem and Ylikoski 2010 ; Bennett 2013 ; Beach and Pedersen 2016 , Chs 3–4).

Second, while my research agenda for process tracing may look daunting to a qualitative IPE scholar new to the technique, it is not. Its starting point is the shared understanding we now have of process tracing as method. 17 Yes, it needs corrections and adjustments, but these are fine tuning what we already have. In practical terms, for the IPE scholar wanting to use process tracing, the start-up costs are therefore not high. She should begin with one of the foundational texts ( Bennett and Checkel 2015 ; Beach and Pedersen 2019 ) and then turn to the work of specific scholars for getting the operational details correct—be it on applied ethics, practice tracing, or Bayesian process tracing. In this chapter, I purposely provided extensive citations—for the IPE scholar seeking this operational detail.

Third, qualitative IPE is already producing excellent work where the parts are there for the application of process tracing. Consider Sending and Neumann’s (2011) study of the World Bank’s social practices, where they trace the emergence of multiple practices within the Bank and how these define the boundary between it and member states; this is an application of practice tracing in all but name.

Process tracing is not manna from heaven. Done well, it can take considerable time, and it has an inferiority complex dating back to the days when leading methodology texts considered it little more than journalistic “soaking and poking” ( Gerring 2006 , Ch. 7). There are also parts of IPE where it likely has no role to play—Marxist approaches, world-system theory, or research based on experimental designs. 18 Yet for that substantial body of qualitative IPE surveyed in this chapter—with its interest in historical processes and dynamics, in causal mechanisms, in capturing the complex interplay between the global political economy and domestic politics—process tracing is a practical tool that will help it make better arguments, which, in turn, will be read by a broader set of scholars. The investment is worth it.

Acknowledgments

I thank Martha Snodgrass and, especially, Wolfgang Minatti for excellent research assistance. For comments on earlier versions, I thank Jon Pevehouse, Len Seabrooke, James Wood, and the IR Theory Working Group at the European University Institute.

Adler, Emanuel , and Vincent Pouliot . 2011 . “ International Practices. ” International Theory 3 (1): 1–36.

Google Scholar

Adler, Emanuel , and Vincent Pouliot . 2015. “Fulfilling the Promises of Practice Theory.” ISQ Blog (December) ( http://www.isanet.org/Publications/ISQ/Posts/ID/4956/FulfillingThe-Promises-of-Practice-Theory-in-IR ).

Avigor-Eshel, Amit , and R. Mandelkern . 2020. “Training the Public: Advancing Neoliberal Reforms through Model Experiences.” New Political Economy (Published Online, 22.04.20: https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2020.1755244 ).

Ban, Cornel.   2016 . Ruling Ideas: How Global Neoliberalism Goes Local . Oxford University Press.

Google Preview

Barrenechea, Rodrigo , and James Mahoney . 2019 . “ A Set-Theoretic Approach to Bayesian Process Tracing. ” Sociological Methods & Research 48 (3): 451–84.

Beach, Derek , and Rasmus Pedersen . 2013 . Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines . University of Michigan Press.

Beach, Derek , and Rasmus Pedersen . 2016 . Causal Case Study Methods: Foundations and Guidelines for Comparing, Matching, and Tracing . University of Michigan Press.

Beach, Derek , and Rasmus Pedersen . 2019 . Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines, Second Edition . University of Michigan Press.

Bennett, Andrew.   2013 . “ The Mother of All Isms: Causal Mechanisms and Structured Pluralism in International Relations Theory. ” European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 459–81.

Bennett, Andrew.   2015 . “Disciplining our Conjectures: Systematizing Process Tracing with Bayesian Analysis.” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool , edited by Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel , Appendix. Cambridge University Press.

Bennett, Andrew , and Jeffrey T. Checkel , eds. 2015 . Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool . Cambridge University Press.

Blyth, Mark.   2002 . Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century . Cambridge University Press.

Blyth, Mark.   2013 . Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea . Oxford University Press.

Borneman, John.   2014 . “ Containment in Interlocution-Based Fieldwork Encounters: Thought, Theory, and Transformative Thinking. ” Anthropological Theory 14 (4): 442–61.

Borneman, John , and A. Hammoudi . 2009 . Being There: The Fieldwork Encounter and the Making of Truth . University of California Press.

Bryman, Alan , and Edward Bell . 2019 . Social Research Methods , 5th ed. Oxford University Press.

Cecchini, Mathilde , and Derek Beach . 2020. “Bringing Back the Social: Interpretivism and Social Process Tracing.” Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Convention, Virtual (9–13 September 2020).

Checkel, Jeffrey T.   2018 . “Methods in Constructivist Approaches.” In Oxford Handbook of International Security , edited by Alexandra Gheciu and William Wohlforth , Chapter 11. Oxford University Press: 152–66.

Ciplet, D.   2017 . “ Subverting the Status Quo? Climate Debt, Vulnerability and Counter-Hegemonic Frame Integration in United Nations Climate Politics—A Framework for Analysis. ” Review of International Political Economy 24 (6): 1052–75.

Cornut, Jeremie , and Nicolas de Zamaroczy . 2020. “How Can Documents Speak about Practices? Practice Tracing, the Wikileaks Cables, and Diplomatic Culture.” Cooperation and Conflict (OnlineFirst, Published Online, 22.11.20: https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836720972426 ).

Cronin-Furman, Kate , and Milli Lake . 2018 . “ Ethics Abroad: Fieldwork in Fragile and Violent Contexts. ” PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (3): 607–14.

Delamont, Sara and Paul Atkinson . 2018 . “The Ethics of Ethnography.” In Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics , edited by Ron Iphofen and Martin Tolich . Sage Publications: 119–32.

Dunning, Thad.   2015 . “Improving Process Tracing: The Case of Multi-Method Research.” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool , edited by Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel , Chapter 8. Cambridge University Press: 211–36.

Eagleton-Pierce, Matthew.   2012 . Symbolic Power in the World Trade Organization . Oxford University Press.

Evangelista, Matthew.   2015 . “Explaining the Cold War’s End: Process Tracing all the Way Down?” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool , edited by Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel , Chapter 6. Cambridge University Press: 153–85.

Fairfield, Tasha , and Andrew Charman . 2017 . “ Explicit Bayesian Analysis for Process Tracing: Guidelines, Opportunities, and Caveats. ” Political Analysis 25 (3): 363–80.

Fairfield, Tasha , and Andrew Charman . 2019 . “ A Dialogue with the Data: The Bayesian Foundations of Iterative Research in Qualitative Social Science. ” Perspectives on Politics 17 (1): 154–67.

Fowler, Floyd.   2013 . Survey Research Methods , 5th ed. Sage Publications.

Fujii, Lee Ann.   2010 . “ Shades of Truth and Lies: Interpreting Testimonies of War and Violence. ” Journal of Peace Research 47 (2): 231–41.

Fujii, Lee Ann.   2017 . Interviewing in Social Science Research: A Relational Approach . Routledge.

George, Alexander , and Andrew Bennett . 2005 . Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences . MIT Press.

Gerring, John.   2006 . Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . Cambridge University Press.

Gibson, Christopher.   2019 . Movement-driven Development: The Politics of Health and Democracy in Brazil . Stanford University Press.

González, Francisco.   2012 . Creative Destruction? Economic Crises and Democracy in Latin America . Johns Hopkins University Press.

Gusterson, Hugh.   1996 . Nuclear Rites: A Weapons Laboratory at the End of the Cold War . University of California Press.

Gusterson, Hugh.   2008 . “Ethnographic Research.” In Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide , edited by Audie Klotz and D. Prakash , Chapter 7. Palgrave Macmillan: 93–113.

Guzzini, Stefano.   2011 . “ Securitization as a Causal Mechanism. ” Security Dialogue 42 (4–5): 329–41.

Guzzini, Stefano.   2012 . “Social Mechanisms as Micro-Dynamics in Constructivist Analysis.” In The Return of Geopolitics in Europe? Social Mechanisms and Foreign Policy Identity Crises , edited by Stefano Guzzini , Chapter 11. Cambridge University Press.

Hall, Peter.   2016 . “ Transparency, Research Integrity and Multiple Methods. ” Comparative Politics Newsletter: The Organized Section in Comparative Politics of the American Political Science Association 26 (1): 28–31.

Hansen, Lene.   2006 . Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War . Routledge.

Hay, Colin.   2016 . “ Process Tracing: A Laudable Aim or a High-Tariff Methodology? ” New Political Economy 21 (5): 500–4.

Hedstroem, Peter , and Petri Ylikoski . 2010 . “ Causal Mechanisms in the Social Sciences. ” Annual Review of Sociology 36: 49–67.

Helgadóttir, Oddný . 2016 . “ The Bocconi Boys Go to Brussels: Italian Economic Ideas, Professional Networks and European Austerity. ” Journal of European Public Policy 23 (3): 392–409.

Helleiner, Eric.   2014 . Forgotten Foundations of Bretton Woods: International Development and the Making of the Postwar Order . Cornell University Press.

Holmes, Douglas.   2009 . “Experimental Identities (after Maastricht).” In European Identity , edited by Jeffrey T. Checkel and Peter J. Katzenstein . Cambridge University Press: 52–80.

Hopf, Ted.   2002 . Social Construction of International Politics: Identities & Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999 . Cornell University Press.

Hopf, Ted.   2007 . “The Limits of Interpreting Evidence.” In Theory and Evidence in Comparative Politics and International Relations , edited by Richard Ned Lebow and Mark Lichbach , Chapter 3. Palgrave Macmillan: 55–84.

Hopf, Ted , and Bentley Allan , eds. 2016 . Making Identity Count: Building a National Identity Database . Oxford University Press.

Isaac, Jeffrey.   2015 . “For a More Public Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics 13 (2): 269–83.

Jacobs, Alan , and Tim Buthe . 2021. “The Qualitative Transparency Deliberations: Insights and Implications.” Perspectives on Politics (First View, Published Online, 06.01.21: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592720001164 ).

Johnson, James.   2006 . “ Consequences of Positivism: A Pragmatist Assessment. ” Comparative Political Studies 39 (2): 224–52.

Kapiszewski, Diana , Lauren MacLean , and Benjamin Read . 2015 . Field Research in Political Science: Practices and Principles . Cambridge University Press.

Kaplan, Lennart , J. Kuhnt , and J. Steinert . 2020. “ Do No Harm? Field Research in the Global South: Ethical Challenges Faced by Research Staff. ” World Development 127 (March): 1–3. ( https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104810 )

Kastner, Lisa.   2018 . Civil Society and Financial Regulation: Consumer Finance Protection and Taxation after the Financial Crisis . Routledge.

Kirshner, Jonathan.   2007 . Appeasing Bankers: Financial Caution on the Road to War . Princeton University Press.

Kluge, J. N.   2017 . “ Foreign Direct Investment, Political Risk and the Limited Access Order. ” New Political Economy 22 (1): 109–27.

Lyall, Jason.   2015 . “Process Tracing, Causal Inference and Civil War.” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool , edited by Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel , Chapter 7. Cambridge University Press: 186–208.

Mahoney, James , and Kathleen Thelen , eds. 2015 . Advances in Comparative Historical Analysis . Cambridge University Press.

Mannheimer, Sara , Amy Pienta , Dessislava Kirilova , Colin Elman , and Amber Wutich . 2019 . “ Qualitative Data Sharing: Data Repositories and Academic Libraries as Key Partners in Addressing Challenges. ” American Behavioral Scientist 63 (5): 643–64.

Meissner, Katharina.   2019 . “ Cherry Picking in the Design of Trade Policy: Why Regional Organizations Shift between Inter-Regional and Bilateral Negotiations. ” Review of International Political Economy 26 (5): 1043–67.

Monheim, Kai.   2014 . How Effective Negotiation Management Promotes Multilateral Cooperation: The Power of Process in Climate, Trade, and Biosafety Negotiations . Routledge.

Monroe, Kristen.   2018 . “ The Rush to Transparency: DA-RT and the Potential Dangers for Qualitative Research. ” Perspectives on Politics 16 (1): 141–8.

Moravcsik, Andrew.   2010 . “ Active Citation: A Precondition for Replicable Qualitative Research. ” PS: Political Science & Politics 43 (1): 29–35.

Moravcsik, Andrew.   2014 . “ Transparency: The Revolution in Qualitative Research. ” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 48–53.

Mosley, Layna , ed. 2013 . Interview Research in Political Science . Cornell University Press.

Neumann, Iver.   2002 . “ Returning Practice to the Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy. ” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 31 (3): 627–51.

Norman, Ludvig.   2015 . “ Interpretive Process Tracing and Causal Explanations. ” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 13 (2): 4–9.

Norman, Ludvig.   2016 . The Mechanisms of Institutional Conflict in the European Union . Routledge.

Odell, John.   2001 . “ Case Study Methods in International Political Economy. ” International Studies Perspectives 2 (2): 161–76.

Palier, Bruno , and Christine Trampusch , eds. 2016 . “ Process Tracing: The Understandings of Causal Mechanisms. ” Special Issue of New Political Economy 21 (5): 437–504.

Parkinson, Sarah , and Elisabeth J. Wood . 2015 . “ Transparency in Intensive Research on Violence: Ethical Dilemmas and Unforeseen Consequences. ” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 22–7.

Piroska, D. , and A. Podvršič . 2020 . “ New European Banking Governance and Crisis of Democracy: Bank Restructuring and Privatization in Slovenia. ” New Political Economy 25 (6): 992–1006.

Pouliot, Vincent.   2007 . “‘ Sobjectivism’: Toward a Constructivist Methodology. ” International Studies Quarterly 51 (2): 359–84.

Pouliot, Vincent.   2008 . “ The Logic of Practicality: A Theory of Practice of Security Communities. ” International Organization 62 (2): 257–88.

Pouliot, Vincent.   2010 . International Security in Practice: The Politics of NATO-Russia Diplomacy . Cambridge University Press.

Pouliot, Vincent.   2015 . “Practice Tracing.” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool , edited by Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel , Chapter 9. Cambridge University Press: 237–59.

Quaglia, L.   2012 . “ The ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Politics of Financial Services Regulation in the European Union. ” New Political Economy 17 (4): 515–35.

Robinson, Corey.   2017 . “ Tracing and Explaining Securitization: Social Mechanisms, Process Tracing and the Securitization of Irregular Migration. ” Security Dialogue 48 (6): 505–23.

Röper, Nils.   2020 . “ Between Substantive and Symbolic Influence: Diffusion, Translation and Bricolage in German Pension Politics. ” Review of International Political Economy (Published Online, 09.07.20: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1790405 ).

Schatz, Edward , ed. 2009 . Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power . University of Chicago Press.

Sending, Ole Jacob , and Iver B. Neumann . 2011 . “Banking on Power: How Some Practices in an International Organization Anchor Others.” In International Practices , edited by Emanuel Adler and Vincent Pouliot , Chapter 9. Cambridge University Press: 231–54.

Steinlin, S. , and C. Trampusch . 2012 . “ Institutional Shrinkage: The Deviant Case of Swiss Banking Secrecy. ” Regulation & Governance 6 (2): 242–59.

Symposium. 2014 . “ Openness in Political Science. ” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 19–83.

Symposium. 2015 . “ Transparency in Qualitative and Multi-Method Research. ” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 2–64.

Symposium. 2016 . “ Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT). ” Comparative Politics Newsletter: The Organized Section in Comparative Politics of the American Political Science Association 26 (1): 10–64.

Symposium. 2017 . “ Critical Junctures and Historical Legacies. ” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 15 (1): 2–47.

Tannenwald, Nina.   2007 . The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons Since 1945 . Cambridge University Press.

Thiemann, Matthias , Marius Birk , and Jan Friedrich . 2018 . “ Much Ado About Nothing? Macro-Prudential Ideas and the Post-Crisis Regulation of Shadow Banking. ” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 70: 259–86.

Trachtenberg, Mark.   2006 . The Craft of International History: A Guide to Method . Princeton University Press.

Trampusch, Christine.   2014 . “ Why Preferences and Institutions Change: A Systematic Process Analysis of Credit Rating in Germany. ” European Journal of Political Research 53 (2): 328–44.

Trumball, G.   2014 . Consumer Lending in France and America: Credit and Welfare . Cambridge University Press.

Van Evera, Stephen.   1997 . Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science . Cornell University Press.

Waldner, David. 2011. “Process Tracing, Its Promise, and Its Problems.” Paper presented at the Research Group on Qualitative and Multi-Method Analysis. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University (June).

Waldner, David.   2015 . “What Makes Process Tracing Good? Causal Mechanisms, Causal Inference and the Completeness Standard in Comparative Politics.” In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool , edited by Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel , Chapter 5. Cambridge University Press: 126–52.

Weinhardt, Clara.   2017 . “ Playing Different Games: Uncertain Rules in EU–West Africa Trade Negotiations. ” International Studies Quarterly 61 (2): 284–96.

Weiss, Moritz.   2020 . “ Varieties of Privatization: Informal Networks, Trust and State Control of the Commanding Heights. ” Review of International Political Economy (Published Online, 26.02.20: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1726791 ).

Wood, Elisabeth J.   2003 . Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador . Cambridge University Press.

Wood, Elisabeth J.   2006 . “ The Ethical Challenges of Field Research in Conflict Zones. ” Qualitative Sociology 29 (3): 373–86.

Wood, James , and Valentina Ausserladscheider . 2020. “Populism, Brexit, and the Manufactured Crisis of British Neoliberalism.” Review of International Political Economy (Published Online, 03.07.20: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1786435 ).

Zaks, Sherry.   2021 . “ Updating Bayesian(s): A Critical Evaluation of Bayesian Process Tracing. ” Political Analysis 29 (1): 58–74.

Keyword search terms: “process tracing” and “qualitative studies.”

Keyword search term: “process tracing.”

A few comments on the data are necessary. First, despite sampling limitations, I am confident of the conclusions drawn—both because the findings are so strong and because they are consistent with my own “outsider” sense of qualitative IPE. Second, we searched for both “process tracing” and “qualitative studies” as it quickly became apparent that “process tracing” alone would miss the many instances when the method was being used implicitly. Third, the time span chosen (2010–2020) captures the most recent and methodologically advanced qualitative IPE. In addition, by 2015—the mid-point of this period—process tracing as method had come into its own, as evidenced by the publication of two well-received “how to” volumes: Beach and Pedersen 2013 ; and Bennett and Checkel 2015 .

My thanks to Wolfgang Minatti for the data collection and part of the analysis in this section.

In the remaining 10 articles, the reference for process tracing is simply to cite another scholar using the method in her study.

In the surveyed literature, we found only one instance where the author emphasized transparency, in this case, including an appendix to outline the logic behind his analytic reasoning: Meissner 2019 .

The other good examples of deductive process tracing in qualitative IPE are: Trampusch (2014) ; Monheim (2014) ; Weinhardt (2017) ; Meissner (2019) ; and Weiss (2020) .

The data on course content comes from my own involvement in the APSA short courses, plus a review of online syllabi/course-descriptions for the other schools and institutes, for the years 2018–2020. See also Zaks (2021 , 59).

For the period from January 2017 to August 2020, I searched: (1) the journals Political Analysis , Perspectives on Politics , and Sociological Methods & Research ; (2) publications listed in Google Scholar for Tasha Fairfield, Andrew Bennett, Derek Beach, and James Mahoney; and (3) the International Bibliography of Social Sciences database. Keywords used were “process tracing,” “Bayesian,” “set theory,” “formalization,” and “qualitative methods.” The search resulted in 20 articles, book articles, and newsletter contributions on process tracing. Of these, 11—or 55 percent—dealt in whole or in part with formalization, understood as Bayesianism, set theory, or causal graphs.

For background on DA-RT and the debates it has spurred, see Symposium (2014) ; Symposium (2015) ; Symposium (2016) ; Hall (2016) ; and Monroe (2018) .

See https://www.qualtd.net/ . These deliberations and subsequent reports were organized by the American Political Science Association’s Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research; see Jacobs and Buthe (2021) for an overview of the process and findings. On the dominant positivist impulses shaping DA-RT, see also Isaac (2015) .

I have been one of the lecturers at the APSA short course most years since 2014.

Neither of the two main process tracing textbooks— Bennett and Checkel (2015) ; Beach and Pedersen (2019) —devote a chapter or even a section of a chapter to research ethics.

On the teaching data, see n. 8 .

More generally, the most exciting and innovative theoretical-methodological work occupies precisely this epistemological middle ground. See Hopf (2002) ; Hopf (2007) ; Pouliot (2007) ; Hopf and Allan (2016) .

While recognizing they are a clear second best, Pouliot (2010 , 66–72) offers a more optimistic take on the ability of interviews to access practices.

To appreciate the extent of this understanding, see the broadly similar way the method is now being taught at the ECPR summer and winter methods schools, IQMR in Syracuse, and the APSA short courses.

However, see Dunning (2015) for a brilliant argument that experimental designs actually require a prior stage of process tracing.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Even more »

Account Options

• Try the new Google Books
• Advanced Book Search
• Barnes&Noble.com
• Books-A-Million
• Find in a library
• All sellers  »

Get Textbooks on Google Play

Rent and save from the world's largest eBookstore. Read, highlight, and take notes, across web, tablet, and phone.

Go to Google Play Now »

From inside the book

Other editions - view all, common terms and phrases, about the author  (2004), bibliographic information.

Advertisement

Toward a framework for selecting indicators of measuring sustainability and circular economy in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review

• LIFE CYCLE SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT
• Published: 02 March 2022

Cite this article

• Cecilia Silvestri   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2528-601X 1 ,
• Luca Silvestri   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6754-899X 2 ,
• Michela Piccarozzi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9717-9462 1 &
• Alessandro Ruggieri 1  

2865 Accesses

11 Citations

9 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

A Correction to this article was published on 24 March 2022

This article has been updated

The implementation of sustainability and circular economy (CE) models in agri-food production can promote resource efficiency, reduce environmental burdens, and ensure improved and socially responsible systems. In this context, indicators for the measurement of sustainability play a crucial role. Indicators can measure CE strategies aimed to preserve functions, products, components, materials, or embodied energy. Although there is broad literature describing sustainability and CE indicators, no study offers such a comprehensive framework of indicators for measuring sustainability and CE in the agri-food sector.

Starting from this central research gap, a systematic literature review has been developed to measure the sustainability in the agri-food sector and, based on these findings, to understand how indicators are used and for which specific purposes.

The analysis of the results allowed us to classify the sample of articles in three main clusters (“Assessment-LCA,” “Best practice,” and “Decision-making”) and has shown increasing attention to the three pillars of sustainability (triple bottom line). In this context, an integrated approach of indicators (environmental, social, and economic) offers the best solution to ensure an easier transition to sustainability.

Conclusions

The sample analysis facilitated the identification of new categories of impact that deserve attention, such as the cooperation among stakeholders in the supply chain and eco-innovation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the temporal distribution of the articles under analysis

Source: Authors’ elaborations. Notes: The graph shows the time distribution of articles from the three major journals

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the composition of the sample according to the three clusters identified by the analysis

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution of articles over time by cluster

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the network visualization

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the overlay visualization

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the classification of articles by scientific field

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: Article classification based on their cluster to which they belong and scientific field

Source: Authors’ elaboration

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution of items over time based on TBL

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the Pareto diagram highlighting the most used indicators in literature for measuring sustainability in the agri-food sector

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution over time of articles divided into conceptual and empirical

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the classification of articles, divided into conceptual and empirical, in-depth analysis

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the geographical distribution of the authors

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the distribution of authors according to the continent from which they originate

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: The graph shows the time distribution of publication of authors according to the continent from which they originate

Source: Authors’ elaboration. Notes: Sustainability measurement indicators and impact categories of LCA, S-LCA, and LCC tools should be integrated in order to provide stakeholders with best practices as guidelines and tools to support both decision-making and measurement, according to the circular economy approach

Similar content being viewed by others

Common Methods and Sustainability Indicators

Transition heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions

Hamid El Bilali

Research on agro-food sustainability transitions: where are food security and nutrition?

Change history, 24 march 2022.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02038-9

Acero AP, Rodriguez C, Ciroth A (2017) LCIA methods: impact assessment methods in life cycle assessment and their impact categories. Version 1.5.6. Green Delta 1–23

Accorsi R, Versari L, Manzini R (2015) Glass vs. plastic: Life cycle assessment of extra-virgin olive oil bottles across global supply chains. Sustain 7:2818–2840. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7032818

Adjei-Bamfo P, Maloreh-Nyamekye T, Ahenkan A (2019) The role of e-government in sustainable public procurement in developing countries: a systematic literature review. Resour Conserv Recycl 142:189–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.12.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Aivazidou E, Tsolakis N, Vlachos D, Iakovou E (2015) Water footprint management policies for agrifood supply chains: a critical taxonomy and a system dynamics modelling approach. Chem Eng Trans 43:115–120. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1543020

Alhaddi H (2015) Triple bottom line and sustainability: a literature review. Bus Manag Stud 1:6–10

Allaoui H, Guo Y, Sarkis J (2019) Decision support for collaboration planning in sustainable supply chains. J Clean Prod 229:761–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.367

Alshqaqeeq F, Amin Esmaeili M, Overcash M, Twomey J (2020) Quantifying hospital services by carbon footprint: a systematic literature review of patient care alternatives. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104560

Anwar F, Chaudhry FN, Nazeer S et al (2016) Causes of ozone layer depletion and its effects on human: review. Atmos Clim Sci 06:129–134. https://doi.org/10.4236/acs.2016.61011

Aquilani B, Silvestri C, Ruggieri A (2016). A Systematic Literature Review on Total Quality Management Critical Success Factors and the Identification of New Avenues of Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2016-0003

Aramyan L, Hoste R, Van Den Broek W et al (2011) Towards sustainable food production: a scenario study of the European pork sector. J Chain Netw Sci 11:177–189. https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2011.Qpork8

Arfini F, Antonioli F, Cozzi E et al (2019) Sustainability, innovation and rural development: the case of Parmigiano-Reggiano PDO. Sustain 11:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184978

Assembly UG (2005) Resolution adopted by the general assembly. New York, NY

Avilés-Palacios C, Rodríguez-Olalla A (2021) The sustainability of waste management models in circular economies. Sustain 13:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137105

Azevedo SG, Silva ME, Matias JCO, Dias GP (2018) The influence of collaboration initiatives on the sustainability of the cashew supply chain. Sustain 10:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062075

Bajaj S, Garg R, Sethi M (2016) Total quality management: a critical literature review using Pareto analysis. Int J Product Perform Manag 67:128–154

Banasik A, Kanellopoulos A, Bloemhof-Ruwaard JM, Claassen GDH (2019) Accounting for uncertainty in eco-efficient agri-food supply chains: a case study for mushroom production planning. J Clean Prod 216:249–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.153

Barth H, Ulvenblad PO, Ulvenblad P (2017) Towards a conceptual framework of sustainable business model innovation in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review. Sustain 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091620

Bastas A, Liyanage K (2018) Sustainable supply chain quality management: a systematic review

Beckerman W (1992) Economic growth and the environment: whose growth? Whose environment? World Dev 20:481–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(92)90038-W

Belaud JP, Prioux N, Vialle C, Sablayrolles C (2019) Big data for agri-food 4.0: application to sustainability management for by-products supply chain. Comput Ind 111:41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2019.06.006

Bele B, Norderhaug A, Sickel H (2018) Localized agri-food systems and biodiversity. Agric 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8020022

Bilali H El, Calabrese G, Iannetta M et al (2020) Environmental sustainability of typical agro-food products: a scientifically sound and user friendly approach. New Medit 19:69–83. https://doi.org/10.30682/nm2002e

Blanc S, Massaglia S, Brun F et al (2019) Use of bio-based plastics in the fruit supply chain: an integrated approach to assess environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Sustain 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092475

Bloemhof JM, van der Vorst JGAJ, Bastl M, Allaoui H (2015) Sustainability assessment of food chain logistics. Int J Logist Res Appl 18:101–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2015.1015508

Bonisoli L, Galdeano-Gómez E, Piedra-Muñoz L (2018) Deconstructing criteria and assessment tools to build agri-sustainability indicators and support farmers’ decision-making process. J Clean Prod 182:1080–1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.055

Bonisoli L, Galdeano-Gómez E, Piedra-Muñoz L, Pérez-Mesa JC (2019) Benchmarking agri-food sustainability certifications: evidences from applying SAFA in the Ecuadorian banana agri-system. J Clean Prod 236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.07.054

Bornmann L, Haunschild R, Hug SE (2018) Visualizing the context of citations referencing papers published by Eugene Garfield: a new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis. Scientometrics 114:427–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2591-8

Boulding KE (1966) The economics of the coming spaceship earth. New York, 1-17

Bracquené E, Dewulf W, Duflou JR (2020) Measuring the performance of more circular complex product supply chains. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104608

Burck J, Hagen U, Bals C et al (2021) Climate Change Performance Index

Calisto Friant M, Vermeulen WJV, Salomone R (2020) A typology of circular economy discourses: navigating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm. Resour Conserv Recycl 161:104917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104917

Campbell BM, Beare DJ, Bennett EM et al (2017) Agriculture production as a major driver of the earth system exceeding planetary boundaries. Ecol Soc 22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09595-220408

Capitanio F, Coppola A, Pascucci S (2010) Product and process innovation in the Italian food industry. Agribusiness 26:503–518. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.20239

Caputo P, Zagarella F, Cusenza MA et al (2020) Energy-environmental assessment of the UIA-OpenAgri case study as urban regeneration project through agriculture. Sci Total Environ 729:138819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138819

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Chabowski BR, Mena JA, Gonzalez-Padron TL (2011) The structure of sustainability research in marketing, 1958–2008: a basis for future research opportunities. J Acad Mark Sci 39:55–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0212-7

Chadegani AA, Salehi H, Yunus M et al (2017) A comparison between two main academic literature collections : Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Soc Sci 9:18–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18

Chams N, Guesmi B, Gil JM (2020) Beyond scientific contribution: assessment of the societal impact of research and innovation to build a sustainable agri-food sector. J Environ Manage 264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110455

Chandrakumar C, McLaren SJ, Jayamaha NP, Ramilan T (2019) Absolute sustainability-based life cycle assessment (ASLCA): a benchmarking approach to operate agri-food systems within the 2°C global carbon budget. J Ind Ecol 23:906–917. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12830

Chaparro-Africano AM (2019) Toward generating sustainability indicators for agroecological markets. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 43:40–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2019.1566192

Colicchia C, Strozzi F (2012) Supply chain risk management: a new methodology for a systematic literature review

Conca L, Manta F, Morrone D, Toma P (2021) The impact of direct environmental, social, and governance reporting: empirical evidence in European-listed companies in the agri-food sector. Bus Strateg Environ 30:1080–1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2672

Coppola A, Ianuario S, Romano S, Viccaro M (2020) Corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms: the relationship between CSR actions and firm’s performance. AIMS Environ Sci 7:542–558. https://doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2020034

Corona B, Shen L, Reike D et al (2019) Towards sustainable development through the circular economy—a review and critical assessment on current circularity metrics. Resour Conserv Recycl 151:104498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104498

Correia MS (2019) Sustainability: An overview of the triple bottom line and sustainability implementation. Int J Strateg Eng 2:29–38.  https://doi.org/10.4018/IJoSE.2019010103

Coteur I, Marchand F, Debruyne L, Lauwers L (2019) Structuring the myriad of sustainability assessments in agri-food systems: a case in Flanders. J Clean Prod 209:472–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.066

CREA (2020) L’agricoltura italiana conta 2019

Crenna E, Sala S, Polce C, Collina E (2017) Pollinators in life cycle assessment: towards a framework for impact assessment. J Clean Prod 140:525–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.058

D’Eusanio M, Serreli M, Zamagni A, Petti L (2018) Assessment of social dimension of a jar of honey: a methodological outline. J Clean Prod 199:503–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.157

Dania WAP, Xing K, Amer Y (2018) Collaboration behavioural factors for sustainable agri-food supply chains: a systematic review. J Clean Prod 186:851–864

De Pascale A, Arbolino R, Szopik-Depczyńska K et al (2021) A systematic review for measuring circular economy: the 61 indicators. J Clean Prod 281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124942

De Schoenmakere M, Gillabel J (2017) Circular by design: products in the circular economy

Del Borghi A, Gallo M, Strazza C, Del Borghi M (2014) An evaluation of environmental sustainability in the food industry through life cycle assessment: the case study of tomato products supply chain. J Clean Prod 78:121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.083

Del Borghi A, Strazza C, Magrassi F et al (2018) Life cycle assessment for eco-design of product–package systems in the food industry—the case of legumes. Sustain Prod Consum 13:24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2017.11.001

Denyer D, Tranfield D (2009) Producing a systematic review. In: Buchanan B (ed) The sage handbook of organization research methods. Sage Publications Ltd, Cornwall, pp 671–689

Google Scholar  

Dietz T, Grabs J, Chong AE (2019) Mainstreamed voluntary sustainability standards and their effectiveness: evidence from the Honduran coffee sector. Regul Gov. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12239

Dixon-Woods M (2011) Using framework-based synthesis for conducting reviews of qualitative studies. BMC Med 9:9–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-39

do Canto NR, Bossle MB, Marques L, Dutra M, (2020) Supply chain collaboration for sustainability: a qualitative investigation of food supply chains in Brazil. Manag Environ Qual an Int J. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2019-0275

dos Santos RR, Guarnieri P (2020) Social gains for artisanal agroindustrial producers induced by cooperation and collaboration in agri-food supply chain. Soc Responsib J. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2019-0323

Doukidis GI, Matopoulos A, Vlachopoulou M, Manthou V, Manos B (2007) A conceptual framework for supply chain collaboration: empirical evidence from the agri‐food industry. Supply Chain Manag an Int Journal 12:177–186. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540710742491

Durach CF, Kembro J, Wieland A (2017) A new paradigm for systematic literature reviews in supply chain management. J Supply Chain Manag 53:67–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12145

Durán-Sánchez A, Álvarez-García J, Río-Rama D, De la Cruz M (2018) Sustainable water resources management: a bibliometric overview. Water 10:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10091191

Duru M, Therond O (2015) Livestock system sustainability and resilience in intensive production zones: which form of ecological modernization? Reg Environ Chang 15:1651–1665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0722-9

Edison Fondazione (2019) Le eccellenze agricole italiane. I primati europei e mondiali dell’Italia nei prodotti vegetali. Milan (IT)

Ehrenfeld JR (2005) The roots of sustainability. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 46(2)46:23–25

Elia V, Gnoni MG, Tornese F (2017) Measuring circular economy strategies through index methods: a critical analysis. J Clean Prod 142:2741–2751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.196

Elkington J (1997) Cannibals with forks : the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone, Oxford

Esposito B, Sessa MR, Sica D, Malandrino O (2020) Towards circular economy in the agri-food sector. A systematic literature review. Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12187401

European Commission (2018) Agri-food trade in 2018

European Commission (2019) Monitoring EU agri-food trade: development until September 2019

Eurostat (2018) Small and large farms in the EU - statistics from the farm structure survey

FAO (2011) Biodiversity for food and agriculture. Italy, Rome

FAO (2012) Energy-smart food at FAO: an overview. Italy, Rome

FAO (2014) Food wastage footprint: fool cost-accounting

FAO (2016) The state of food and agriculture climate change, agriculture and food security. Italy, Rome

FAO (2017) The future of food and agriculture: trends and challenges. Italy, Rome

FAO (2020) The state of food security and nutrition in the world. Transforming Food Systems for Affordable Healthy Diets. Rome, Italy

Fassio F, Tecco N (2019) Circular economy for food: a systemic interpretation of 40 case histories in the food system in their relationships with SDGs. Systems 7:43. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems7030043

Fathollahi A, Coupe SJ (2021) Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) of road drainage systems for sustainability evaluation: quantifying the contribution of different life cycle phases. Sci Total Environ 776:145937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145937

Ferreira VJ, Arnal ÁJ, Royo P et al (2019) Energy and resource efficiency of electroporation-assisted extraction as an emerging technology towards a sustainable bio-economy in the agri-food sector. J Clean Prod 233:1123–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.030

Fiksel J (2006) A framework for sustainable remediation. JOM 8:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1021/es202595w

Flick U (2014) An introduction to qualitative research

Franciosi C, Voisin A, Miranda S et al (2020) Measuring maintenance impacts on sustainability of manufacturing industries : from a systematic literature review to a framework proposal. J Clean Prod 260:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121065

Gaitán-Cremaschi D, Meuwissen MPM, Oude AGJML (2017) Total factor productivity: a framework for measuring agri-food supply chain performance towards sustainability. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 39:259–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppw008

Galdeano-Gómez E, Zepeda-Zepeda JA, Piedra-Muñoz L, Vega-López LL (2017) Family farm’s features influencing socio-economic sustainability: an analysis of the agri-food sector in southeast Spain. New Medit 16:50–61

Gallopín G, Herrero LMJ, Rocuts A (2014) Conceptual frameworks and visual interpretations of sustainability. Int J Sustain Dev 17:298–326. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2014.064183

Gallopín GC (2003) Sostenibilidad y desarrollo sostenible: un enfoque sistémico. Cepal, LATIN AMERICA

Garnett T (2013) Food sustainability: problems, perspectives and solutions. Proc Nutr Soc 72:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665112002947

Garofalo P, D’Andrea L, Tomaiuolo M et al (2017) Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains in Italy: the case of the whole-peeled tomato production under life cycle assessment methodology. J Food Eng 200:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2016.12.007

Gava O, Bartolini F, Venturi F et al (2018) A reflection of the use of the life cycle assessment tool for agri-food sustainability. Sustain 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010071

Gazzola P, Querci E (2017) The connection between the quality of life and sustainable ecological development. Eur Sci J 7881:1857–7431

Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken N, Hultink EJ (2017) The circular economy – a new sustainability paradigm ? The circular economy – a new sustainability paradigm ? J Clean Prod 143:757–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048

Georgescu-Roegen N (1971) The entropy low and the economic process. Harward University Press, Cambridge Mass

Book   Google Scholar  

Gerbens-Leenes PW, Moll HC, Schoot Uiterkamp AJM (2003) Design and development of a measuring method for environmental sustainability in food production systems. Ecol Econ 46:231–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00140-X

Gésan-Guiziou G, Alaphilippe A, Aubin J et al (2020) Diversity and potentiality of multi-criteria decision analysis methods for agri-food research. Agron Sustain Dev 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00650-3

Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S (2016) A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J Clean Prod 114:11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007

Godoy-Durán Á, Galdeano- Gómez E, Pérez-Mesa JC, Piedra-Muñoz L (2017) Assessing eco-efficiency and the determinants of horticultural family-farming in southeast Spain. J Environ Manage 204:594–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.09.037

Gold S, Kunz N, Reiner G (2017) Sustainable global agrifood supply chains: exploring the barriers. J Ind Ecol 21:249–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12440

Goucher L, Bruce R, Cameron DD et al (2017) The environmental impact of fertilizer embodied in a wheat-to-bread supply chain. Nat Plants 3:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.12

Green A, Nemecek T, Chaudhary A, Mathys A (2020) Assessing nutritional, health, and environmental sustainability dimensions of agri-food production. Glob Food Sec 26:100406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100406

Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G et al (2011) Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future †. Environ Sci Technol 45:90–96. https://doi.org/10.1021/es101316v

Guiomar N, Godinho S, Pinto-Correia T et al (2018) Typology and distribution of small farms in Europe: towards a better picture. Land Use Policy 75:784–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.012

Gunasekaran A, Patel C, McGaughey RE (2004) A framework for supply chain performance measurement. Int J Prod Econ 87:333–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2003.08.003

Gunasekaran A, Patel C, Tirtiroglu E (2001) Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. Int J Oper Prod Manag 21:71–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570110358468

Hamam M, Chinnici G, Di Vita G et al (2021) Circular economy models in agro-food systems: a review. Sustain 13

Harun SN, Hanafiah MM, Aziz NIHA (2021) An LCA-based environmental performance of rice production for developing a sustainable agri-food system in Malaysia. Environ Manage 67:146–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01365-7

Harvey M, Pilgrim S (2011) The new competition for land: food, energy, and climate change. Food Policy 36:S40–S51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.11.009

Hawkes C, Ruel MT (2006) Understanding the links between agriculture and health. DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, USA

Hellweg S, Milà i Canals L (2014) Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science (80)344:1109LP–1113. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1248361

Higgins V, Dibden J, Cocklin C (2015) Private agri-food governance and greenhouse gas abatement: constructing a corporate carbon economy. Geoforum 66:75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.09.012

Hill T (1995) Manufacturing strategy: text and cases., Macmillan

Hjeresen DD, Gonzales R (2020) Green chemistry promote sustainable agriculture?The rewards are higher yields and less environmental contamination. Environemental Sci Techonology 103–107

Horne R, Grant T, Verghese K (2009) Life cycle assessment: principles, practice, and prospects. Csiro Publishing, Collingwood, Australia

Horton P, Koh L, Guang VS (2016) An integrated theoretical framework to enhance resource efficiency, sustainability and human health in agri-food systems. J Clean Prod 120:164–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.092

Hospido A, Davis J, Berlin J, Sonesson U (2010) A review of methodological issues affecting LCA of novel food products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:44–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0130-4

Huffman T, Liu J, Green M et al (2015) Improving and evaluating the soil cover indicator for agricultural land in Canada. Ecol Indic 48:272–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.008

Ilbery B, Maye D (2005) Food supply chains and sustainability: evidence from specialist food producers in the Scottish/English borders. Land Use Policy 22:331–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.06.002

Ingrao C, Faccilongo N, Valenti F et al (2019) Tomato puree in the Mediterranean region: an environmental life cycle assessment, based upon data surveyed at the supply chain level. J Clean Prod 233:292–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.056

Iocola I, Angevin F, Bockstaller C et al (2020) An actor-oriented multi-criteria assessment framework to support a transition towards sustainable agricultural systems based on crop diversification. Sustain 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135434

Irabien A, Darton RC (2016) Energy–water–food nexus in the Spanish greenhouse tomato production. Clean Technol Environ Policy 18:1307–1316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-1076-9

ISO 14040:2006 (2006) Environmental management — life cycle assessment — principles and framework

ISO 14044:2006 (2006) Environmental management — life cycle assessment — requirements and guidelines

ISO 15392:2008 (2008) Sustainability in building construction–general principles

Istat (2019) Andamento dell’economia agricola

Jaakkola E (2020) Designing conceptual articles : four approaches. AMS Rev 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

Jin R, Yuan H, Chen Q (2019) Science mapping approach to assisting the review of construction and demolition waste management research published between 2009 and 2018. Resour Conserv Recycl 140:175–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.029

Johnston P, Everard M, Santillo D, Robèrt KH (2007) Reclaiming the definition of sustainability. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 14:60–66. https://doi.org/10.1065/espr2007.01.375

Jorgensen SE, Burkhard B, Müller F (2013) Twenty volumes of ecological indicators-an accounting short review. Ecol Indic 28:4–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.12.018

Joshi S, Sharma M, Kler R (2020) Modeling circular economy dimensions in agri-tourism clusters: sustainable performance and future research directions. Int J Math Eng Manag Sci 5:1046–1061. https://doi.org/10.33889/IJMEMS.2020.5.6.080

Kamilaris A, Gao F, Prenafeta-Boldu FX, Ali MI (2017) Agri-IoT: a semantic framework for Internet of Things-enabled smart farming applications. In: 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things, WF-IoT 2016. pp 442–447

Karuppusami G, Gandhinathan R (2006) Pareto analysis of critical success factors of total quality management: a literature review and analysis. TQM Mag 18:372–385. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780610671048

Kates RW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 47:8–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2005.10524444

Khounani Z, Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha H, Moustakas K et al (2021) Environmental life cycle assessment of different biorefinery platforms valorizing olive wastes to biofuel, phosphate salts, natural antioxidant, and an oxygenated fuel additive (triacetin). J Clean Prod 278:123916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123916

Kitchenham B, Charters S (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering version 2.3. Engineering 45. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500

Korhonen J, Nuur C, Feldmann A, Birkie SE (2018) Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. J Clean Prod 175:544–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111

Kuisma M, Kahiluoto H (2017) Biotic resource loss beyond food waste: agriculture leaks worst. Resour Conserv Recycl 124:129–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.04.008

Laso J, Hoehn D, Margallo M et al (2018) Assessing energy and environmental efficiency of the Spanish agri-food system using the LCA/DEA methodology. Energies 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11123395

Lee KM (2007) So What is the “triple bottom line”? Int J Divers Organ Communities Nations Annu Rev 6:67–72. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9532/cgp/v06i06/39283

Lehmann RJ, Hermansen JE, Fritz M et al (2011) Information services for European pork chains - closing gaps in information infrastructures. Comput Electron Agric 79:125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2011.09.002

León-Bravo V, Caniato F, Caridi M, Johnsen T (2017) Collaboration for sustainability in the food supply chain: a multi-stage study in Italy. Sustainability 9:1253

Lepage A (2009) The quality of life as attribute of sustainability. TQM J 21:105–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542730910938119

Li CZ, Zhao Y, Xiao B et al (2020) Research trend of the application of information technologies in construction and demolition waste management. J Clean Prod 263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121458

Lo Giudice A, Mbohwa C, Clasadonte MT, Ingrao C (2014) Life cycle assessment interpretation and improvement of the Sicilian artichokes production. Int J Environ Res 8:305–316. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijer.2014.721

Lueddeckens S, Saling P, Guenther E (2020) Temporal issues in life cycle assessment—a systematic review. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:1385–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01757-1

Luo J, Ji C, Qiu C, Jia F (2018) Agri-food supply chain management: bibliometric and content analyses. Sustain 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051573

Lynch J, Donnellan T, Finn JA et al (2019) Potential development of Irish agricultural sustainability indicators for current and future policy evaluation needs. J Environ Manage 230:434–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.070

MacArthur E (2013) Towards the circular economy. J Ind Ecol 2:23–44

MacArthur E (2017) Delivering the circular economy a toolkit for policymakers, The Ellen MacArthur Foundation

MacInnis DJ (2011) A framework for conceptual. J Mark 75:136–154. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.136

Mangla SK, Luthra S, Rich N et al (2018) Enablers to implement sustainable initiatives in agri-food supply chains. Int J Prod Econ 203:379–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.012

Marotta G, Nazzaro C, Stanco M (2017) How the social responsibility creates value: models of innovation in Italian pasta industry. Int J Glob Small Bus 9:144–167. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGSB.2017.088923

Martucci O, Arcese G, Montauti C, Acampora A (2019) Social aspects in the wine sector: comparison between social life cycle assessment and VIVA sustainable wine project indicators. Resources 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8020069

Mayring P (2004) Forum : Qualitative social research Sozialforschung 2. History of content analysis. A Companion to Qual Res 1:159–176

McKelvey B (2002) Managing coevolutionary dynamics. In: 18th EGOS Conference. Barcelona, Spain, pp 1–21

McMichael AJ, Butler CD, Folke C (2003) New visions for addressing sustainability. Science (80- ) 302:1191–1920

Mehmood A, Ahmed S, Viza E et al (2021) Drivers and barriers towards circular economy in agri-food supply chain: a review. Bus Strateg Dev 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.171

Mella P, Gazzola P (2011) Sustainability and quality of life: the development model. In: Kapounek S (ed) Enterprise and competitive environment. Mendel University: Brno, Czechia. 542–551

Merli R, Preziosi M, Acampora A (2018) How do scholars approach the circular economy ? A systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 178:703–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.112

Merli R, Preziosi M, Acampora A et al (2020) Recycled fibers in reinforced concrete: a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 248:119207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119207

Miglietta PP, Morrone D (2018) Managing water sustainability: virtual water flows and economic water productivity assessment of the wine trade between Italy and the Balkans. Sustain 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020543

Mitchell MGE, Chan KMA, Newlands NK, Ramankutty N (2020) Spatial correlations don’t predict changes in agricultural ecosystem services: a Canada-wide case study. Front Sustain Food Syst 4:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.539892

Moraga G, Huysveld S, Mathieux F et al (2019) Circular economy indicators: what do they measure?. Resour Conserv Recycl 146:452–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.045

Morrissey JE, Dunphy NP (2015) Towards sustainable agri-food systems: the role of integrated sustainability and value assessment across the supply-chain. Int J Soc Ecol Sustain Dev 6:41–58. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSESD.2015070104

Moser G (2009) Quality of life and sustainability: toward person-environment congruity. J Environ Psychol 29:351–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.02.002

Muijs D (2010) Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London

Muller MF, Esmanioto F, Huber N, Loures ER (2019) A systematic literature review of interoperability in the green Building Information Modeling lifecycle. J Clean Prod 223:397–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.114

Muradin M, Joachimiak-Lechman K, Foltynowicz Z (2018) Evaluation of eco-efficiency of two alternative agricultural biogas plants. Appl Sci 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/app8112083

Naseer MA, ur R, Ashfaq M, Hassan S, et al (2019) Critical issues at the upstream level in sustainable supply chain management of agri-food industries: evidence from Pakistan’s citrus industry. Sustain 11:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051326

Nattassha R, Handayati Y, Simatupang TM, Siallagan M (2020) Understanding circular economy implementation in the agri-food supply chain: the case of an Indonesian organic fertiliser producer. Agric Food Secur 9:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-020-00264-8

Nazari-Sharabian M, Ahmad S, Karakouzian M (2018) Climate change and eutrophication: a short review. Eng Technol Appl Sci Res 8:3668–3672. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2532694

Nazir N (2017) Understanding life cycle thinking and its practical application to agri-food system. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol 7:1861–1870. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.7.5.3578

Negra C, Remans R, Attwood S et al (2020) Sustainable agri-food investments require multi-sector co-development of decision tools. Ecol Indic 110:105851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105851

Newsham KK, Robinson SA (2009) Responses of plants in polar regions to UVB exposure: a meta-analysis. Glob Chang Biol 15:2574–2589. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01944.x

Niemeijer D, de Groot RS (2008) A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecol Indic 8:14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2006.11.012

Niero M, Kalbar PP (2019) Coupling material circularity indicators and life cycle based indicators: a proposal to advance the assessment of circular economy strategies at the product level. Resour Conserv Recycl 140:305–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.002

Nikolaou IE, Tsagarakis KP (2021) An introduction to circular economy and sustainability: some existing lessons and future directions. Sustain Prod Consum 28:600–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.017

Notarnicola B, Hayashi K, Curran MA, Huisingh D (2012) Progress in working towards a more sustainable agri-food industry. J Clean Prod 28:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.007

Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Renzulli PA, Monforti F (2017) Energy flows and greenhouses gases of EU (European Union) national breads using an LCA (life cycle assessment) approach. J Clean Prod 140:455–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.150

Opferkuch K, Caeiro S, Salomone R, Ramos TB (2021) Circular economy in corporate sustainability reporting: a review of organisational approaches. Bus Strateg Environ 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2854

Padilla-Rivera A, do Carmo BBT, Arcese G, Merveille N, (2021) Social circular economy indicators: selection through fuzzy delphi method. Sustain Prod Consum 26:101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.015

Pagotto M, Halog A (2016) Towards a circular economy in Australian agri-food industry: an application of input-output oriented approaches for analyzing resource efficiency and competitiveness potential. J Ind Ecol 20:1176–1186. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12373

Parent G, Lavallée S (2011) LCA potentials and limits within a sustainable agri-food statutory framework. Global food insecurity. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 161–171

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Pattey E, Qiu G (2012) Trends in primary particulate matter emissions from Canadian agriculture. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 62:737–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2012.672058

Pauliuk S (2018) Critical appraisal of the circular economy standard BS 8001:2017 and a dashboard of quantitative system indicators for its implementation in organizations. Resour Conserv Recycl 129:81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.019

Peano C, Migliorini P, Sottile F (2014) A methodology for the sustainability assessment of agri-food systems: an application to the slow food presidia project. Ecol Soc 19. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06972-190424

Peano C, Tecco N, Dansero E et al (2015) Evaluating the sustainability in complex agri-food systems: the SAEMETH framework. Sustain 7:6721–6741. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7066721

Pearce DW, Turner RK (1990) Economics of natural resources and the environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, Herts

Pelletier N (2018) Social sustainability assessment of Canadian egg production facilities: methods, analysis, and recommendations. Sustain 10:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051601

Peña C, Civit B, Gallego-Schmid A et al (2021) Using life cycle assessment to achieve a circular economy. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26:215–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01856-z

Perez Neira D (2016) Energy sustainability of Ecuadorian cacao export and its contribution to climate change. A case study through product life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 112:2560–2568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.003

Pérez-Neira D, Grollmus-Venegas A (2018) Life-cycle energy assessment and carbon footprint of peri-urban horticulture. A comparative case study of local food systems in Spain. Landsc Urban Plan 172:60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.01.001

Pérez-Pons ME, Plaza-Hernández M, Alonso RS et al (2021) Increasing profitability and monitoring environmental performance: a case study in the agri-food industry through an edge-iot platform. Sustain 13:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010283

Petti L, Serreli M, Di Cesare S (2018) Systematic literature review in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:422–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1135-4

Pieroni MPP, McAloone TC, Pigosso DCA (2019) Business model innovation for circular economy and sustainability: a review of approaches. J Clean Prod 215:198–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.036

Polit DF, Beck CT (2004) Nursing research: principles and methods. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA

Porkka M, Gerten D, Schaphoff S et al (2016) Causes and trends of water scarcity in food production. Environ Res Lett 11:015001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/1/015001

Prajapati H, Kant R, Shankar R (2019) Bequeath life to death: state-of-art review on reverse logistics. J Clean Prod 211:503–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.187

Priyadarshini P, Abhilash PC (2020) Policy recommendations for enabling transition towards sustainable agriculture in India. Land Use Policy 96:104718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104718

Pronti A, Coccia M (2020) Multicriteria analysis of the sustainability performance between agroecological and conventional coffee farms in the East Region of Minas Gerais (Brazil). Renew Agric Food Syst. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170520000332

Rabadán A, González-Moreno A, Sáez-Martínez FJ (2019) Improving firms’ performance and sustainability: the case of eco-innovation in the agri-food industry. Sustain 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205590

Raut RD, Luthra S, Narkhede BE et al (2019) Examining the performance oriented indicators for implementing green management practices in the Indian agro sector. J Clean Prod 215:926–943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.139

Recanati F, Marveggio D, Dotelli G (2018) From beans to bar: a life cycle assessment towards sustainable chocolate supply chain. Sci Total Environ 613–614:1013–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.187

Redclift M (2005) Sustainable development (1987–2005): an oxymoron comes of age. Sustain Dev 13:212–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.281

Rezaei M, Soheilifard F, Keshvari A (2021) Impact of agrochemical emission models on the environmental assessment of paddy rice production using life cycle assessment approach. Energy Sources. Part A Recover Util Environ Eff 1–16

Rigamonti L, Mancini E (2021) Life cycle assessment and circularity indicators. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01966-2

Risku-Norja H, Mäenpää I (2007) MFA model to assess economic and environmental consequences of food production and consumption. Ecol Econ 60:700–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.001

Ritzén S, Sandström GÖ (2017) Barriers to the circular economy – integration of perspectives and domains. Procedia CIRP 64:7–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.005

Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K et al (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a

Roos Lindgreen E, Mondello G, Salomone R et al (2021) Exploring the effectiveness of grey literature indicators and life cycle assessment in assessing circular economy at the micro level: a comparative analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01972-4

Roselli L, Casieri A, De Gennaro BC et al (2020) Environmental and economic sustainability of table grape production in Italy. Sustain 12.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093670

Ross RB, Pandey V, Ross KL (2015) Sustainability and strategy in U.S. agri-food firms: an assessment of current practices. Int Food Agribus Manag Rev 18:17–48

Royo P, Ferreira VJ, López-Sabirón AM, Ferreira G. (2016) Hybrid diagnosis to characterise the energy and environmental enhancement of photovoltaic modules using smart materials. Energy 101:174–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.01.101

Ruggerio CA (2021) Sustainability and sustainable development: a review of principles and definitions. Sci Total Environ 786:147481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481

Ruiz-Almeida A, Rivera-Ferre MG (2019) Internationally-based indicators to measure agri-food systems sustainability using food sovereignty as a conceptual framework. Food Secur 11:1321–1337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00964-5

Ryan M, Hennessy T, Buckley C et al (2016) Developing farm-level sustainability indicators for Ireland using the Teagasc National Farm Survey. Irish J Agric Food Res 55:112–125. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijafr-2016-0011

Saade MRM, Yahia A, Amor B (2020) How has LCA been applied to 3D printing ? A systematic literature review and recommendations for future studies. J Clean Prod 244:118803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118803

Saitone TL, Sexton RJ (2017) Agri-food supply chain: evolution and performance with conflicting consumer and societal demands. Eur Rev Agric Econ 44:634–657. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbx003

Salim N, Ab Rahman MN, Abd Wahab D (2019) A systematic literature review of internal capabilities for enhancing eco-innovation performance of manufacturing firms. J Clean Prod 209:1445–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.105

Salimi N (2021) Circular economy in agri-food systems BT - strategic decision making for sustainable management of industrial networks. In: International S (ed) Rezaei J. Publishing, Cham, pp 57–70

Salomone R, Ioppolo G (2012) Environmental impacts of olive oil production: a life cycle assessment case study in the province of Messina (Sicily). J Clean Prod 28:88–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.004

Sánchez AD, Río DMDLC, García JÁ (2017) Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. Eur Res Manag Bus Econ 23:8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2016.02.001

Saputri VHL, Sutopo W, Hisjam M, Ma’aram A (2019) Sustainable agri-food supply chain performance measurement model for GMO and non-GMO using data envelopment analysis method. Appl Sci 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9061199

Sassanelli C, Rosa P, Rocca R, Terzi S (2019) Circular economy performance assessment methods : a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 229:440–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.019

Schiefer S, Gonzalez C, Flanigan S (2015) More than just a factor in transition processes? The role of collaboration in agriculture. In: Sutherland LA, Darnhofer I, Wilson GA, Zagata L (eds) Transition pathways towards sustainability in agriculture: case studies from Europe, CPI Group. Croydon, UK, pp. 83

Seuring S, Muller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16:1699–1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020

Silvestri C, Silvestri L, Forcina A, et al (2021) Green chemistry contribution towards more equitable global sustainability and greater circular economy: A systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126137

Smetana S, Schmitt E, Mathys A (2019) Sustainable use of Hermetia illucens insect biomass for feed and food: attributional and consequential life cycle assessment. Resour Conserv Recycl 144:285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.01.042

Sonesson U, Berlin J, Ziegler F (2010) Environmental assessment and management in the food industry: life cycle assessment and related approaches. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge

Soussana JF (2014) Research priorities for sustainable agri-food systems and life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 73:19–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.061

Soylu A, Oruç C, Turkay M et al (2006) Synergy analysis of collaborative supply chain management in energy systems using multi-period MILP. Eur J Oper Res 174:387–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.02.042

Spaiser V, Ranganathan S, Swain RB, Sumpter DJ (2017) The sustainable development oxymoron: quantifying and modelling the incompatibility of sustainable development goals. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 24:457–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2016.1235624

Stewart R, Niero M (2018) Circular economy in corporate sustainability strategies: a review of corporate sustainability reports in the fast-moving consumer goods sector. Bus Strateg Environ 27:1005–1022. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2048

Stillitano T, Spada E, Iofrida N et al (2021) Sustainable agri-food processes and circular economy pathways in a life cycle perspective: state of the art of applicative research. Sustain 13:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052472

Stone J, Rahimifard S (2018) Resilience in agri-food supply chains: a critical analysis of the literature and synthesis of a novel framework. Supply Chain Manag 23:207–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2017-0201

Strazza C, Del Borghi A, Gallo M, Del Borghi M (2011) Resource productivity enhancement as means for promoting cleaner production: analysis of co-incineration in cement plants through a life cycle approach. J Clean Prod 19:1615–1621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.05.014

Su B, Heshmati A, Geng Y, Yu X (2013) A review of the circular economy in China: moving from rhetoric to implementation. J Clean Prod 42:215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.020

Suárez-Eiroa B, Fernández E, Méndez-Martínez G, Soto-Oñate D (2019) Operational principles of circular economy for sustainable development: linking theory and practice. J Clean Prod 214:952–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.271

Svensson G, Wagner B (2015) Implementing and managing economic, social and environmental efforts of business sustainability. Manag Environ Qual an Int Journal 26:195–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-09-2013-0099

Tasca AL, Nessi S, Rigamonti L (2017) Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains: an LCA comparison between two alternative forms of production and distribution of endive in northern Italy. J Clean Prod 140:725–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.170

Tassielli G, Notarnicola B, Renzulli PA, Arcese G (2018) Environmental life cycle assessment of fresh and processed sweet cherries in southern Italy. J Clean Prod 171:184–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.227

Teixeira R, Pax S (2011) A survey of life cycle assessment practitioners with a focus on the agri-food sector. J Ind Ecol 15:817–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00421.x

Tobergte DR, Curtis S (2013) ILCD Handbook. J Chem Info Model. https://doi.org/10.278/33030

Tortorella MM, Di Leo S, Cosmi C et al (2020) A methodological integrated approach to analyse climate change effects in agri-food sector: the TIMES water-energy-food module. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217703

Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidenceinformed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br J Manag 14:207–222

Trivellas P, Malindretos G, Reklitis P (2020) Implications of green logistics management on sustainable business and supply chain performance: evidence from a survey in the greek agri-food sector. Sustain 12:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410515

Tsangas M, Gavriel I, Doula M et al (2020) Life cycle analysis in the framework of agricultural strategic development planning in the Balkan region. Sustain 12:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051813

Ülgen VS, Björklund M, Simm N (2019) Inter-organizational supply chain interaction for sustainability : a systematic literature review.

UNEP S (2020) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products and organizations 2020.

UNEP/SETAC (2009) United Nations Environment Programme-society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. France

United Nations (2011) Guiding principles on business and human rights. Implementing the United Nations “protect, respect and remedy” framework

United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. sustainabledevelopment.un.org

Van Asselt ED, Van Bussel LGJ, Van Der Voet H et al (2014) A protocol for evaluating the sustainability of agri-food production systems - a case study on potato production in peri-urban agriculture in the Netherlands. Ecol Indic 43:315–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.027

Van der Ploeg JD (2014) Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty. J Peasant Stud 41:999–1030. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.876997

van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84:523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

Van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2019) Manual for VOSviwer version 1.6.10. CWTS Meaningful metrics 1–53

Vasa L, Angeloska A, Trendov NM (2017) Comparative analysis of circular agriculture development in selected Western Balkan countries based on sustainable performance indicators. Econ Ann 168:44–47. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V168-09

Verdecho MJ, Alarcón-Valero F, Pérez-Perales D et al (2020) A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains. Cent Eur J Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-019-00668-3

Vergine P, Salerno C, Libutti A et al (2017) Closing the water cycle in the agro-industrial sector by reusing treated wastewater for irrigation. J Clean Prod 164:587–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.239

WCED (1987) Our common future - call for action

Webster K (2013) What might we say about a circular economy? Some temptations to avoid if possible. World Futures 69:542–554

Wheaton E, Kulshreshtha S (2013) Agriculture and climate change: implications for environmental sustainability indicators. WIT Trans Ecol Environ 175:99–110. https://doi.org/10.2495/ECO130091

Wijewickrama MKCS, Chileshe N, Rameezdeen R, Ochoa JJ (2021) Information sharing in reverse logistics supply chain of demolition waste: a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 280:124359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124359

Woodhouse A, Davis J, Pénicaud C, Östergren K (2018) Sustainability checklist in support of the design of food processing. Sustain Prod Consum 16:110–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2018.06.008

Wu R, Yang D, Chen J (2014) Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited Sustain 6:4200–4226. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6074200

Yadav S, Luthra S, Garg D (2021) Modelling Internet of things (IoT)-driven global sustainability in multi-tier agri-food supply chain under natural epidemic outbreaks. Environ Sci Pollut Res 16633–16654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11676-1

Yee FM, Shaharudin MR, Ma G et al (2021) Green purchasing capabilities and practices towards Firm’s triple bottom line in Malaysia. J Clean Prod 307:127268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127268

Yigitcanlar T (2010) Rethinking sustainable development: urban management, engineering, and design. IGI Global

Zamagni A, Amerighi O, Buttol P (2011) Strengths or bias in social LCA? Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:596–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0309-3

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Economy, Engineering, Society and Business Organization, University of “Tuscia, ” Via del Paradiso 47, 01100, Viterbo, VT, Italy

Cecilia Silvestri, Michela Piccarozzi & Alessandro Ruggieri

Department of Engineering, University of Rome “Niccolò Cusano, ” Via Don Carlo Gnocchi, 3, 00166, Rome, Italy

Luca Silvestri

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cecilia Silvestri .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Communicated by Monia Niero

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: a number of ill-placed paragraph headings were removed and the source indication "Authors' elaborations" was added to Tables 1-3.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 31 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Silvestri, C., Silvestri, L., Piccarozzi, M. et al. Toward a framework for selecting indicators of measuring sustainability and circular economy in the agri-food sector: a systematic literature review. Int J Life Cycle Assess (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02032-1

Download citation

Received : 15 June 2021

Accepted : 16 February 2022

Published : 02 March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02032-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Agri-food sector
• Sustainability
• Circular economy
• Triple bottom line
• Life cycle assessment
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research