[DATAGOV Core] [DATAGOV] literature review vs theoretical framing

[Stefania Milan]

Dear all
I have been talking about this email for months. Now you get it, but remember this was prepared for my Master thesis supervisees (especially the part on the forest, see below), so apologies if this sounds banal.

TASK: We need to chart the theoretical framework of DATAGOV. This is a daunting prospect, since the project was written by me (before any LLM, even), but we are many, and (by design) very diverse in terms of trajectories, backgrounds, etc. But we should have some agreement on what we mean by what. Imagine a sort of modular structure, with some “strongholds” and some “sidekicks”.

First, a distinction.

The LIT REVIEW answers: What do we already know about this topic (in discipline x)?

The theoretical framework answers: How am I going to understand and interpret my case? (In other words, what is my disciplinary and conceptual scaffolding?)

The literature review says: "Here is the state of knowledge” (also known as “the state of the art”)
The goal is to maps AND DIGEST existing scholarship:
•     what have other researchers found?
•     what debates exist?
•     [important] where do scholars agree and disagree?
•     what gaps remain?
•     [very important] WHERE DO I/(my study) SIT(s)?
Its purpose is to position your study within the field.

The TH FRAMEWORK = MY lens
It identifies and introduces the concepts and theories that will guide my analysis.
•     What concepts/approaches help me make sense of my data?
•     How do I define key phenomena?
•     What am I looking for in the empirical material?
The two marked in yellow are of particular importance for us as a group as well.

Now, the DATAGOV theoretical framework is in large part defined in the project application, but I would like to freshen it up and especially “mold” it on this very unique group of people we are.
Of course, each PhD project / paper … may then have its own theoretical framework, but we need some agreement among us on what “makes DATAGOV” sort to speak.

Here the invite: we will make room for this session (@Giulia Campaioli<mailto:g.campaioli at uva.nl> and @Jonas Breuer<mailto:j.a.breuer at uva.nl> please help with the when, since I am away now), but in the meantime, please do some homework. PhDs: please do so in relation to your respective areas of concentration/cases. All: embrace a disciplinary perspective to share with us.

More will follow.
st.

=============
the forest exercise
Imagine you want to study a forest.
Lit review = reading everything previous researchers have written about that forest:
•     its trees
•     animals
•     climate
•     its indigenous groups
ect.

Th framework = choosing the pair of glasses through which you will look at the forest:
•     political ecology?
•     feminist geography?
•     infrastructure studies?
ect.

>> different theories make you notice different things.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ghserv.net/pipermail/core/attachments/20260914/34260286/attachment-0001.htm>