The Journey to My Dissertation Exposé

The Journey to My Dissertation Exposé

Header-Image Credit: NASA Images at the Internet Archive

Dissertation Proposal: “Urban Narratives and Numerical Goals - Redefining Metrics for Urban Development”

“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

— Aristotle

I am currently developing the proposal for my upcoming dissertation at Fraunhofer IAO and the Department of Urban Systems Engineering, titled “Urban Narratives and Numerical Goals - Redefining Metrics for Urban Development”.

As the title suggests, my research idea focusses on the metrics and indicators used to evaluate and guide urban systems, with an emphasis on how quantitative (or numerical) metrics interact with qualitative (or narrative) data.

Managing complex human systems like cities often turns around quantitative economic metrics, which heavily influence decision-making. However, these numerical economic measures frequently fall short in areas where financial profit is not the primary objective, for example in culture, urban nature and in most sustainability-related topics.

Think for example of a city that might show a strong economic growth through quantitative indicators like GDP. But this doesn’t necessarily reflect the residents’ quality of life, happiness or the cities’ cultural richness - factors that are inherently qualitative.

This fundamental gap of economic theory has been recognised for quite a while 1. The discussions around it gave birth to new scientific fields like environmental economics and new concepts like the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ 2.

To address this gap, new, alternative metrics and indicators have been developed in recent decades to better include the value of these often neglected sectors by incorporating qualitative data alongside quantitative measures3 4 5. They attempt to bridge the gap by combining quantitative data, like numerical indicators of economic performance, with qualitative insights that include the nuances of e.g. cultural significance, community well-being and environmental health. The idea behind these alternative approaches is to provide decision-makers with neutral figures and charts, similar to those from traditional economic metrics, but designed to include the previously overlooked areas.

However, the difficulty lies in developing these new, alternative metrics without making things overly complex. This seems paradoxical because the main reason for creating a single figure to represent a sector’s status in city development is to make it easier to grasp. Yet, the world is inherently complex, with its diverse cities, administrations, people and site-specific characteristics. Qualitative factors like cultural richness, community well-being or environmental health are multifaceted and sometimes subjective, making them difficult to quantify accurately.

As a result, there is a growing number of metrics designed to fit narrow specific questions or specific locations. Not only has the number of these metrics increased, but their complexity has grown as they try to capture many real-world conditions that are difficult to quantify. This makes it challenging to know which metrics or indicators to use in specific cases, how to apply them properly and to understand their limitations.

My colleague from the SPARCS project, Aapo Huovila , examined an impressive collection of 1,500 smart and sustainable city indicators in his dissertation “Evaluation of Smart and Sustainable City Development: What Indicators Matter?”6.

Yet, despite all this progress in developing alternative indicators and metrics, the long-awaited shift towards sustainability at scale remains elusive.7

This brings me to my central question: What can we learn from the development of these metrics? And are there alternative pathways to integrate qualitative narratives with quantitative goals?

… My interest in this topic and on the interplay of quantitative and qualitative research did not develop overnight. It has taken time and I would like to share how my thoughts evolved:

My Journey Towards Understanding Qualitative Research

In the past, I worked with both quantitative and qualitative methods, but over time I began to realise the limitations of relying only on numbers. This realisation did not come immediately; it took time for me to fully appreciate the value of qualitative research.

While thinking about it, I figured that this subject had been on my mind for quite a while, though I was not able to express it clearly. Over the last year, after much thought and exploration, I could develop a clearer sense of the direction I want to take in my dissertation. Ultimately, my aim is to find ways to give greater emphasis to areas like urban nature, culture, knowledge and qualitative factors in urban development that are usually hard to measure. Rrather than focusing only on economic factors as the bottom line for decision-making.

Educational Background and Early Experiences

When I started my Bachelor’s in Renewable Resources and Bioenergy at the University of Hohenheim, I was very much focussed on numbers and facts. The natural sciences; biology, chemistry and the like; reinforced this way of thinking. I believed that data, calculations and statistics were the most reliable ways to understand the world’s questions. This belief was strengthened during my time as a student assistant at the Life-Cycle Engineering Department GaBi at the University of Stuttgart, where I got a glimpse into Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) models of materials, products and services. The LCA is a set of comprehensive methods for evaluating the environmental and social impacts (S-LCA) associated with all stages of a product’s life cycle. These models were highly detailed and well thought out, which fascinated me a lot.

I thought: Well, if we could calculate LCAs for all the products in this world, we’d be able to understand which screws to turn to make the whole system ‘sustainable’, right?

However, as I worked more with LCAs, I began to notice some things that did not sit right with me. For example, some LCA comparisons between organic and conventional farming showed that organic agriculture, despite its many social and environmental benefits, might require more land and resources due to lower yields. This could lead to less favourable outcomes in LCA scores and overall ‘sustainability’ rankings 8. Based on my experience working on a Demeter-certified organic farm (so called ‘biodynamic agriculture’ with strict standards for ecological and social responsibility)this did not seem to add up. I felt like something was missing.

Similarly, one LCA study found that single-use plastic bags have a lower environmental impact per use than reusable cotton bags in certain categories. The study suggested that reusable cotton bags would need to be used thousands of times to offset their higher impact in these categories9. Although the findings are most likely valid within the scope of the study, the conclusions one may draw from it seemed counterintuitive: Should we continue using plastic bags in the short run until the production of cotton bags becomes more environmentally friendly?… or should we eliminate shopping bags altogether? Especially given the obvious widespread environmental problems caused by plastic pollution, such as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Also, LCAs and their data are based on analysis of past observations of products and services, which makes future predictions become less reliable due to the growing influence of assumptions on the results. Yet, they provide exact numbers that suggest certainty.

Exposure to Qualitative Methods in Practice

A key experience in my journey came during my time studying in Clermont-Ferrand in France in the programme Ingénierie de Développement Territorial. The class involved working closely with towns and cities, using methods like expert interviews, group discussions, SWOT analysis and scenario planning. Applying these methods in a real-world context, in another country and setting, struggling with the language and understanding; having to re-read the documents and asking many questions, helped me to develop a better understanding of qualitative methods and their value beyond numbers.

I eventually completed my Bachelor’s and then began my Master in Bioeconomy at Hohenheim. During this time, I started working as a student assistant at the Chair of Environmental Management. Environmental Management involves finding ways to balance environmental protection with economic and social development, which resonated with me. I could get a glimpse in seeing how sustainability challenges could be tackled from multiple angles, including economics. And I started to see how qualitative and quantitative methods could work together.

When I joined Fraunhofer IAO as a student assistant to work in the UNaLab Project (Urban Nature Labs, a Horizon 2020 EU project on Nature-Based Solutions), my appreciation for qualitative methods continued to grow. For my Master’s thesis on “The Governance of Nature-Based Solutions”, I used qualitative methods such as expert interviews and grounded theory to better understand questions related to governance in urban re-greening. This experience really helped me to understand, what can be uncovered through qualitative approaches, going beyond what numbers can show. Until today I remember some of the arguments and insights my interwiewees shared with me. I was highly encouraged by the positive feedback I received, which reassured me that this was a path worth pursuing further.

After completing my Master’s, I joined the Chair of Societal Transition and Agriculture at Hohenheim, where I regularly attended a PhD colloquium. Listening to other students present their research and how they combine and apply both quantitative and qualitative methods in diverse contexts around the world helped me better understand the variety of contexts in which qualitative methods could be applied. I also participated in the Chair’s journal club and began teaching seminars to Bachelor’s students, sharing what I learned.

When I attended the ALTER-Net Summer School in the following, I observed a clear divide between researchers who relied on quantitative data and those who used qualitative methods. I got to understand better the divide between different framings of how to best assess and address a question…

And here I am:

Balancing Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches

Growing up in an education system based on the natural sciences that emphasised logical reasoning and empirical methods, I found it easier to follow and grasp straightforward calculations than detailed reasonings done with methods of social science. Yet, in the past years I realised that while numbers can often be more straightforward, qualitative research offers a depth of understanding that is just as essential, even though it can be more challenging to apply in broader contexts.

While quantitative metrics offer clarity and comparability, they sometimes are a difficult fit to capture the qualitative nuances of urban life.

My research aims to find methodologies that effectively integrate both, providing a more balanced framework for decision-making in urban development. My experiences have shaped a research question that I now feel deeply passionate about:

How can we further strengthen important topics that are hard to quantify. Like culture, nature and knowledge in city development? And how can we ensure that they are not overshadowed by economics and given the attention they deserve in decision-making processes?

Let’s see :)…

Check out the presentation I held for our PhD colloquium

References

  1. Knut Wicksell, a Swedish economist disucussed the concept as early as 1896: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knut_Wicksell. ↩

  2. A situation where individuals acting according to their self-interest can ultimately deplete shared resources, despite understanding that depleting these common resources is against everyone’s long-term best interests. See: Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248. ↩

  3. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2010). Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn’t Add Up. The New Press. ↩

  4. Coyle, D. (2014). GDP: A Brief but Affectionate History. Princeton University Press. ↩

  5. Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. Chelsea Green Publishing. ↩

  6. Huovila, A. (2024). Evaluation of Smart and Sustainable City Development: What Indicators Matter? VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Available at: https://cris.vtt.fi/en/publications/evaluation-of-smart-and-sustainable-city-development-what-indicat. ↩

  7. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., et al. (2009). A Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Nature, 461(7263), 472–475. ↩

  8. Clark, M., & Tilman, D. (2017). Comparative Analysis of Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Production Systems, Agricultural Input Efficiency and Food Choice. Environmental Research Letters, 12(6), 064016. ↩

  9. Danish Environmental Protection Agency. (2018). Life Cycle Assessment of Grocery Carrier Bags. Environmental Project No. 1985. Available at: https://www2.mst.dk/Udgiv/publications/2018/02/978-87-93529-80-4.pdf. ↩

Niklas Effenberger

Niklas Effenberger