What is the difference between a literature survey and a conceptual paper?
Here are my definitions:

A literature review is a study that searches for scholarly studies on a specified topic, synthesizes and reports the results. The explicit purpose of a literature review is to present other scholars' work.

A conceptual paper is a study that does not analyze any data. It is contrasted with an empirical study, one that analyzes data, whether quantitative (numerical, e.g. statistics) or qualitative (non-numerical, e.g. interviews).

Now, to answer a question you didn't ask but maybe you imply: Is a literature review a conceptual paper? I personally say most certainly NO, a literature review is not conceptual; it is empirical. Literature reviews analyze other people's research as their data source--the unit of analysis is one scholarly study. To me, that is definitely empirical research (even though it is often called a "secondary" study, as distinguished from a so-called "primary" study that treats a subject directly). 

In the case of meta-analysis (a literature review where quantitative data from the constituent studies is analyzed statistically) most people would agree that a meta-analysis is not conceptual. There is, however, some controversy or confusion with literature reviews that "only discuss" other people's research. Some people might call such a literature review a conceptual paper mainly because they don't clearly see any analysis of numbers. I disagree with that view, but I do realize that some people take that perspective.