What is the Future of Survey-Based Data Collection for Local Government Research? Trends, Strategies, and Recommendations

《What is the Future of Survey-Based Data Collection for Local Government Research? Trends, Strategies, and Recommendations》

打印

作者: Rachel M. Krause

来源: URBAN AFFAIRS REVIEW,Vol.60,Issue3,P.

语言: 英文

关键字

作者单位

摘要: IntroductionData limitations shape empirical research on local government politics, policy, and decision-making. Although the numerosity of local governments—more than 90,000 in the United States alone (US Census 2019)—offers an extraordinary opportunity to explain variation in policy dynamics across a range of substantive issues (John 2009), it also makes it extremely difficult to gather data on the full population of local governments. There are relatively few comprehensive datasets that provide comparable data on local government policies, operations, and institutional structures. Moreover, local governments vary considerably in terms of whether and how extensively they make data about their functioning publicly available. Thus, the questions local government scholars can answer and the research designs they use are often determined by their ability to create an appropriate dataset from scratch (Sumner, Farris, and Holman 2020), frequently a laborious and time-consuming task. These challenges can push scholars toward focusing on other levels of government where data issues are less daunting (e.g., states) or toward examining a small number of local government cases at a single time point. In turn, this has contributed to urban research being considered underdeveloped relative to research on other levels of government (Sapotichne, Jones, and Wolfe 2007; Trounstine 2009). Still, urban research persists.Scholars of urban policy and administration often investigate factors that explain local governments’ decisions to adopt new programs or policies as well as variations in their impacts and outcomes. These aims motivate empirical studies of local government decision-making around issues as diverse as environmental protection (Arnold and Nguyen Long 2019; Krause et al. 2019), gun safety (Godwin and Schroedel 2000), and immigration (Huang and Liu 2018). An important consideration when gathering the data needed to answer these questions is the tension between the often-substantial resource investment necessary to collect local government data and the aim of producing generalizable conclusions based on analysis of a large sample.1 Two main approaches that quantitative studies use to gather local policy data are surveys and archival analysis (e.g., analysis of government documents, newspaper articles, and public social media activity). In this research note, we explore trends affecting a survey approach commonly used by urban policy scholars: querying individuals who represent cities and counties as staff members or elected or appointed officials.Surveys are a flexible research tool that can be used to access a broad range of governance and policy data, including information about informal practices and priorities that may not be documented elsewhere. Urban scholars use surveys to collect information from diverse populations, ranging from randomly selected residents of a locality (e.g., Krause et al. 2013; Douglas, Russell, and Scott 2019), to representatives of particular community or cultural groups (e.g., Chu and Song 2008; Hinkle et al. 2022), to individuals within local governments with specific professional experiences (e.g., city planners, city council members; e.g., Arnold and Nguyen Long 2019; Krause and Hawkins 2021). Because they are targeted for their particular expertise, local government officials may be considered elite or semi-elite survey respondents. The perspectives and information these actors share about their own experiences and the governments they represent can significantly advance understanding of local government administration, policy, and decision-making. It is thus important to ensure that surveys of these actors are well-designed and yield representative, quality data. While plenty of studies and textbooks are dedicated to improving and refining survey methods, most focus on samples of the general population rather than key informants (Vis and Stolwijk 2021). Fewer still examine patterns in survey-based data collection specifically targeting local government officials.This research note is motivated by our experiences as urban scholars who often survey local officials. Over the last 12 years, the authors have administered a total of six US nationwide surveys of local government officials and four surveys of local officials in one or multiple states. During this time we have experienced increasing challenges in eliciting responses, particularly when administering surveys online. We wondered whether our experiences are unique or shared by other scholars, and whether there are strategies which can boost falling response rates. To that end, we combine insights from a systematic analysis of the literature and a survey experiment.We proceed by providing additional context about surveying local government officials and then assess the survey methods and response rates documented in scholarly articles on urban policy published since 2010. Next, we introduce an experiment we recently conducted as part of an effort to increase the response rate of a survey of city officials concerning their city's preparation for environmental hazards. We conclude by making recommendations for future research and discussing trends we expect in future efforts to survey local officials for scholarly research.