Gec Literature Positioning

---
name: gec-literature-positioning
description: Use when positioning a Global Environmental Change (GEC) manuscript against the relevant literatures. GEC is interdisciplinary, so the paper must engage more than one body of work — environmental social science, governance, the relevant domain literature — and speak across them. Shapes the framing and citations; it does not write the literature review.
---

# Literature Positioning (gec-literature-positioning)

GEC is **interdisciplinary**. A submission that engages only one literature (only climate science, or
only one governance debate) reads as off-fit. This skill helps you locate the paper at the
**intersection of the literatures GEC readers expect** and define the gap your contribution fills.

## When to trigger

- Drafting or revising the introduction and the "gap" the paper fills
- A reviewer said the framing "misses a key literature" or is "too disciplinary"
- Reconciling a domain literature (e.g., land-use science) with a social-science literature (e.g., governance)
- Choosing which debates to foreground for a broad, policy-relevant audience

## How GEC papers position themselves

1. **Engage at least two literatures.** Typically a **domain literature** (climate, water, land, food,
   oceans, biodiversity) plus a **human-dimensions literature** (vulnerability, governance, behavior,
   transitions, political ecology, environmental economics). Show how they meet on your question.
2. **State the gap as a contribution, not a hole.** "X is understudied" is weak; "the dominant framing
   of X cannot explain Y, and here is a framework / test that does" is strong.
3. **Cite across communities.** Engage the international, comparative, and policy literatures GEC
   draws on — not just your home subfield or your own region.
4. **Set up the framework.** Positioning should hand off cleanly to `gec-conceptual-framework`: the
   literature gap is what the framework is built to close.

## Cross-literature framing

| If your home base is… | Reach the rest of GEC's readership by… |
|------------------------|----------------------------------------|
| A biophysical domain | foregrounding the social drivers/consequences and the governance question |
| Governance / policy | grounding the claim in the specific environmental change and its scale |
| Economics | connecting valuation/incentives to institutions, equity, and behavior |
| Qualitative case study | drawing the transferable mechanism, not just the local narrative |

## Anti-patterns

- A single-literature review that ignores the human-dimensions or domain side of the question
- Citing only your own group / one region / one disciplinary silo
- Framing the gap as mere absence ("no one has looked at …") with no conceptual stake
- A literature review disconnected from the framework and the eventual policy claim

## Output format

```
【Literatures engaged】domain + human-dimensions (name them)
【Intersection】where they meet on this question
【Gap as contribution】the framing your paper changes or the test it settles
【Cross-community cites】beyond home subfield / region? [Y/N]
【Next】gec-conceptual-framework
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — data sources and reference managers
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — GEC scope and interdisciplinary remit