Applying analytic eclecticism to wicked problems and sustainability transitions: A step-by-step guide to building middle-range conceptual frameworks

Sustainability transitions research draws on a wide range of theoretical traditions, yet relatively little attention has been paid to how concepts from different theories can be combined in a transparent and systematic way. In response to calls for stronger knowledge accumulation through middle-range theorising, this paper clarifies how analytic eclecticism can be operationalised as a methodological approach for constructing problem-driven conceptual frameworks in transition studies. Rather than proposing a new theory or extending existing transition frameworks, the paper explicates a three-step analytic procedure that involves 1) scoping an analytical problem and identifying shared concerns across theories, 2) reflecting on ontological differences and analytical tensions, and 3) assembling a provisional conceptual framework tailored to the problem at hand. The procedure is illustrated through a single example situated in the context of contested energy transitions, drawing selectively on concepts from strategic action field theory, the advocacy coalition framework, and framing scholarship. The example is explicitly illustrative and non-generalizable and serves to demonstrate analytic reasoning rather than to offer substantive explanations. By foregrounding analytic procedure over theoretical synthesis, the paper contributes to ongoing debates on theory development in sustainability transitions research by providing a transparent and replicable approach to middle-range conceptual work.