# [Thesis title: specific topic, population or context, and approach]

> Complete thesis or dissertation template for a master's or doctoral
> degree: front matter, the six core chapters, references and appendices,
> with guidance on purpose and expected length for each chapter and a
> writing timeline. Based on common academic practice; your university's
> thesis regulations and formatting guide always take precedence. Replace
> every `[bracketed]` value and every row marked *Example*.

<!--
Guidance: How to use this template
- Download your institution's thesis regulations first and record word
  limits, formatting rules and submission deadlines in Document control.
- Draft the Methodology chapter early; it is the chapter most often written
  too late and examined most closely.
- Keep one file per chapter while drafting if the thesis is long, then merge.
- For a thesis by publication, replace chapters 4 and 5 with the papers and
  add linking text that explains how they form one argument.
-->

## Document control

<!-- Guidance: For you and your supervisors. Remove from the submitted version. -->

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Candidate | [Full name], student ID [000000] |
| Degree | [PhD / MPhil / MSc by Research / MA] |
| Department / faculty | [Department, Faculty] |
| Institution | [University] |
| Principal supervisor | [@name] |
| Co-supervisor(s) | [@name] |
| Word limit | [80,000 words excluding references and appendices] |
| Citation style | [APA 7 / Harvard / Chicago author-date / IEEE] |
| Version | [0.1] |
| Status | [Drafting / Full draft with supervisors / Submitted for examination / Corrections / Final] |
| Submission deadline | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |

### Approvals

| Role | Name | Decision | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Principal supervisor | [@name] | [Ready for submission / Further revision] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Co-supervisor | [@name] | [Decision] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Graduate research office | [@name] | [Format check passed] | YYYY-MM-DD |

## Revision history

<!-- Guidance: Log chapter drafts and the feedback round they respond to. -->

| Version | Date | Author | Change summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@candidate] | Chapter 3 first draft |
| 0.2 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@candidate] | *Example:* Chapters 1-3 revised after supervisor meeting of YYYY-MM-DD |
| 0.9 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@candidate] | *Example:* Full draft circulated to supervisors |
| 1.0 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@candidate] | *Example:* Submitted for examination |
| 1.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@candidate] | *Example:* Minor corrections required by examiners |

## Contents

<!-- Guidance: The submitted thesis needs a generated table of contents with page numbers; this list mirrors it while drafting. -->

- [Front matter](#front-matter)
- [Chapter 1. Introduction](#chapter-1-introduction)
- [Chapter 2. Literature review](#chapter-2-literature-review)
- [Chapter 3. Methodology](#chapter-3-methodology)
- [Chapter 4. Results](#chapter-4-results)
- [Chapter 5. Discussion](#chapter-5-discussion)
- [Chapter 6. Conclusion](#chapter-6-conclusion)
- [Submission readiness checklist](#submission-readiness-checklist)
- [References](#references)
- [Appendices](#appendices)
- [Writing plan and timeline](#writing-plan-and-timeline)

### Chapter length guide

The proportions below are typical for an empirical thesis. Adjust for your
discipline; humanities theses are often organised by theme instead.

| Part | Share of main text | *Example* at 80,000 words |
|---|---|---|
| Chapter 1. Introduction | 5-10% | 6,000 |
| Chapter 2. Literature review | 20-25% | 18,000 |
| Chapter 3. Methodology | 15-20% | 14,000 |
| Chapter 4. Results | 25-30% | 22,000 |
| Chapter 5. Discussion | 15-20% | 15,000 |
| Chapter 6. Conclusion | 5% | 5,000 |

## Front matter

<!-- Guidance: Order and wording of front-matter items are usually prescribed by the institution. Check each item against the regulations. Front matter is normally paginated in lower-case Roman numerals. -->

### Title page

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | [Full thesis title] |
| Author | [Full name, previous degrees] |
| Statement | [A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy] |
| Institution | [Department, Faculty, University] |
| Month and year of submission | [Month YYYY] |

### Declaration of originality

[Use the exact wording your institution supplies. It usually states that the
work is your own, that it has not been submitted for another degree, which
parts were published or co-authored and what your contribution was, and how
any generative AI tools were used.]

### Abstract

[300-500 words, in one block. Cover: the problem and why it matters; the aim
or research questions; the approach and data; the main findings; and the
contribution. Write it last and do not cite references. *Example opening:*
"Small island states face rising coastal flood risk, yet little is known
about how local governments decide which adaptation projects to fund."]

### Acknowledgements

[Thank supervisors, funders (with grant numbers), participants, colleagues,
technical staff and family. Keep it to one page.]

### Table of contents

[Generated by your word processor or typesetting system from the chapter
headings, to three levels.]

### List of figures

[Generated list: figure number, caption and page.]

### List of tables

[Generated list: table number, caption and page.]

### List of abbreviations

| Abbreviation | Meaning |
|---|---|
| *Example:* SIDS | Small Island Developing States |
| *Example:* IPCC | Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |
| [Abbreviation] | [Meaning] |

### Publications arising from this thesis

[List papers published or submitted from the thesis, with your role, or state
"None".]

## Chapter 1. Introduction

<!-- Guidance: Expected length 5-10% of the thesis. Answer: what is the problem, why does it matter, what exactly will this thesis do, and how is it organised? Write a first version early and rewrite it last. -->

### 1.1 Background and context

[Set the scene: the field, the practical or theoretical problem, and why it
matters now.]

### 1.2 Problem statement

[State the specific problem or gap in one or two paragraphs that end with a
clear sentence such as "It remains unknown how ..."]

### 1.3 Aim and research questions

| ID | Research question | Addressed in |
|---|---|---|
| RQ1 | *Example:* What criteria do local governments use to prioritise adaptation projects? | Chapter 4.1 |
| RQ2 | *Example:* How do external funding conditions shape those criteria? | Chapter 4.2 |
| RQ3 | [Question] | [Chapter] |

### 1.4 Significance and contribution

[What the thesis adds: new evidence, a new method, a new theoretical account
or practical guidance. Be concrete.]

### 1.5 Scope and delimitations

[What the study covers and deliberately leaves out, and why.]

### 1.6 Structure of the thesis

[One short paragraph per chapter describing its role in the argument.
*Example:* "Chapter 2 reviews research on adaptation finance and local
decision-making and develops the framework used in the analysis. Chapter 3
explains the comparative case-study design. Chapter 4 reports the findings
for each research question, and Chapter 5 interprets them against the
framework. Chapter 6 states the contributions and recommendations."]

### 1.7 Key terms

| Term | Working definition in this thesis |
|---|---|
| *Example:* Adaptation project | A funded intervention whose stated purpose is to reduce exposure or vulnerability to a climate hazard |
| [Term] | [Definition and source] |

## Chapter 2. Literature review

<!-- Guidance: Expected length 20-25%. A critical synthesis organised by theme, not a list of summaries. It must end by showing the gap your research questions address. Common mistake: describing studies one by one without comparing them. -->

### 2.1 Approach to the review

[How sources were found and selected: databases, search terms, period,
inclusion criteria. For a systematic review, describe the protocol.]

### 2.2 [Theme 1]

[Synthesise what the literature agrees on, disagrees on, and why. Compare
methods, contexts and findings.]

### 2.3 [Theme 2]

[Second theme, same approach.]

### 2.4 [Theme 3]

[Third theme, same approach.]

### 2.5 Theoretical or conceptual framework

[The theory or framework that guides the study, how its concepts map to your
variables or analytical categories, and why it was chosen over alternatives.]

### 2.6 Summary and research gap

[Bring the themes together and state the gap; link each research question to
the part of the gap it addresses.]

| Gap identified | Evidence from the review | Research question |
|---|---|---|
| *Example:* Studies examine national adaptation plans but rarely local budget decisions | 31 of 38 reviewed studies analyse national level only | RQ1 |
| *Example:* Effect of donor conditions on local priorities is asserted but untested | Claims rest on 3 policy reports without primary data | RQ2 |
| [Gap] | [Evidence] | [RQ] |

## Chapter 3. Methodology

<!-- Guidance: Expected length 15-20%. Justify every choice, not only describe it. Examiners ask "why this design?", "why this sample?" and "how do you know the measures are valid?". Include enough detail to replicate the study. -->

### 3.1 Research philosophy and design

[Paradigm (for example post-positivist, interpretivist, pragmatist), overall
design (experimental, survey, case study, mixed methods, ethnography) and the
reasons they fit the research questions.]

### 3.2 Setting, population and sampling

[Population, sampling strategy, sample size and its justification (power
analysis or saturation), recruitment.]

### 3.3 Data collection

| Method | Instrument | Participants / sources | Period | Linked RQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| *Example:* Semi-structured interviews | Interview guide (Appendix B) | 24 council officers in 6 islands | YYYY-MM to YYYY-MM | RQ1, RQ2 |
| *Example:* Document analysis | Coding frame (Appendix C) | 142 budget and project documents | YYYY-MM to YYYY-MM | RQ1 |
| [Method] | [Instrument] | [Sources] | [Period] | [RQ] |

### 3.4 Data analysis

[Analytical procedures for each data type, software and version, and how
results were checked (inter-rater reliability, member checking, robustness
tests).]

### 3.5 Quality criteria

[For quantitative work: reliability, internal and external validity. For
qualitative work: credibility, transferability, dependability,
confirmability. Describe what you did to meet each.]

### 3.6 Ethical considerations

[Approval body and reference number, consent, confidentiality, data storage
and retention, risks to participants and researcher.]

### 3.7 Researcher positionality and limitations of the method

[Your relationship to the topic and setting and how it may shape the work;
known weaknesses of the design.]

## Chapter 4. Results

<!-- Guidance: Expected length 25-30%. Present findings organised by research question, without discussing their meaning at length. Every table and figure needs a number, a caption and a mention in the text. -->

### 4.1 Findings for RQ1

[Findings with supporting evidence: statistics with effect sizes and
confidence intervals, or themes with representative quotations attributed by
pseudonym.]

| Theme / variable | Key finding | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| *Example:* Visibility to voters | Projects near population centres were ranked higher in 5 of 6 councils | Interviews P03, P11, P17; budget papers 2019-2023 |
| [Theme] | [Finding] | [Evidence] |

### 4.2 Findings for RQ2

[Same structure.]

### 4.3 Findings for RQ3

[Same structure.]

Present results in a consistent format. For quantitative findings report
the test statistic, degrees of freedom, exact p value, effect size and 95%
confidence interval, for example "t(118) = 2.45, p = .016, d = 0.45, 95% CI
[0.08, 0.81]". For qualitative findings give the theme, how widely it
occurred and one or two short quotations that illustrate it.

### 4.4 Summary of findings

[A short synthesis table or paragraph that answers each research question
directly.]

## Chapter 5. Discussion

<!-- Guidance: Expected length 15-20%. Interpret the findings against the literature in Chapter 2 and the framework in 2.5. Explain surprises. This chapter shows examiners that you understand what your results mean. -->

### 5.1 Interpretation of key findings

[What the findings mean and how they answer the research questions.]

### 5.2 Relation to existing literature

[Where findings confirm, extend or contradict earlier work, and why.]

### 5.3 Theoretical implications

[How the findings refine or challenge the framework.]

### 5.4 Practical and policy implications

[Who should do what differently, based on the evidence.]

### 5.5 Limitations

[Limitations of design, sample, measurement and analysis, and their likely
effect on the conclusions.]

## Chapter 6. Conclusion

<!-- Guidance: Expected length about 5%. Restate the contribution clearly; no new findings. Examiners often read this chapter first. -->

### 6.1 Summary of the research

[Problem, approach and main answer to each research question in a few
paragraphs.]

### 6.2 Contributions to knowledge

[List each original contribution in one sentence.]

### 6.3 Recommendations and future research

[Specific recommendations and the next studies that would build on this one.]

### 6.4 Concluding remarks

[A final paragraph that returns to the problem stated in Chapter 1.]

## Submission readiness checklist

<!-- Guidance: Work through this list in the final month. Most delays at submission come from formatting, permissions and missing declarations, not from the research itself. -->

Before submission confirm each item with your supervisor or graduate office.

- [ ] Word count within the limit, counted the way the regulations specify
- [ ] Every research question in Chapter 1 is answered explicitly in Chapter 6
- [ ] Every table and figure is numbered, captioned and cited in the text
- [ ] Abbreviations defined at first use and listed in the front matter
- [ ] Copyright permission obtained for reproduced figures and published papers
- [ ] Declaration of originality and AI-use statement completed and signed
- [ ] Similarity check run and any matches explained
- [ ] References complete, consistent and checked against sources
- [ ] Pagination, margins, fonts and binding meet the formatting guide
- [ ] Data management plan updated and data deposited where required
- [ ] Examiners nominated and conflicts of interest checked

### Preparing for the examination

[List the questions examiners are most likely to ask: the original
contribution, why the design was chosen, the main limitation and what you
would do differently. Prepare a two-minute summary of the thesis and a
one-minute answer for each likely question. Re-read the thesis in full in
the week before the oral defence.]

## References

<!-- Guidance: One consistent style throughout. Check every in-text citation against the list. Use a reference manager from the first day. -->

[Full reference list in the chosen style, alphabetical for author-date
styles or numbered in order of citation for numeric styles.]

- *Example (APA 7):* [Author, A. A.] ([2023]). *[Title of book]* ([2nd ed.]).
  [Publisher]. https://doi.org/[10.xxxx/xxxxx]
- *Example (APA 7):* [Author, A. A., & Author, B. B.] ([2024]). [Article
  title]. *[Journal]*, *[18]*([2]), [101-118]. https://doi.org/[10.xxxx/xxxxx]

## Appendices

<!-- Guidance: Material that supports the thesis but would interrupt the argument. Number appendices with letters and refer to each from the main text. -->

| Appendix | Content |
|---|---|
| A | [Ethics approval letter] |
| B | [Interview guide or questionnaire] |
| C | [Coding frame or codebook] |
| D | [Additional tables and robustness checks] |
| E | [Participant information sheet and consent form] |

## Writing plan and timeline

<!-- Guidance: Plan backwards from the submission deadline. Allow at least four weeks for supervisor feedback on the full draft and two weeks for formatting and proof-reading. -->

The chart below shows a *sample* 12-month writing-up plan; replace dates and
durations with your own.

```mermaid
gantt
  title Thesis writing timeline
  dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD
  section Drafting
  Methodology chapter      :m, 2026-01-05, 45d
  Literature review update :l, after m, 40d
  Results chapter          :r, after l, 60d
  Discussion chapter       :d, after r, 45d
  Introduction and conclusion :i, after d, 25d
  section Review
  Supervisor feedback on full draft :f, after i, 30d
  Revisions                :v, after f, 30d
  section Submission
  Formatting and proof-reading :p, after v, 14d
  Submission               :milestone, after p, 0d
```

| Milestone | Target date | Status |
|---|---|---|
| *Example:* Ethics approval obtained | YYYY-MM-DD | Done |
| *Example:* Data collection complete | YYYY-MM-DD | Done |
| Full draft to supervisors | YYYY-MM-DD | [Planned] |
| Intention to submit notice | YYYY-MM-DD | [Planned] |
| Submission for examination | YYYY-MM-DD | [Planned] |
| Viva / oral defence | YYYY-MM-DD | [Planned] |

## Standard and licence note

Based on common academic practice for theses and dissertations in the
empirical sciences and social sciences. Institutional regulations,
formatting guides and declaration wording differ and take precedence over
this template. Original text written for this collection; examples are
illustrative. Template licence: MIT.