• About this site|
• Site index|
• Contact us|
• Jobs

A Survey of Local Government Authorities Urban Design Capability

1.0 Executive Summary

2.0 Introduction

3.0 Methodology

4.0 Current urban design capacity

5.0 Building urban design capacity

Appendix A: Questionnaire

Appendix B: Urban design qualifications

Appendix C: Verbatim

3.0 Methodology

Given the nature of the survey population and the nature of the information outlined in the previous section of this report, the benchmark survey of urban design capacity was completed online. This was considered to be the most appropriate methodology due to being more convenient for respondents (i.e. because of their work commitments, etc.), being more able to survey the entire population of interest, and being more time and cost-efficient.

3.1 Overview of research approach

Interviewing for the benchmark survey was completed online, hosted on Research New Zealand's website, between the 23rd of May and the 6th of June 2006.

The research approach used is detailed in the following sections.

3.1.1 Respondent definition

Respondents were recruited for the survey with the direct assistance of the local government authorities that were invited to participate in the survey. In other words, the survey respondents were those people considered by their own employing organisations to be the 'most qualified' to complete the interview.

3.1.2 Sample selection & recruitment, sample size

The recruitment process was as follows:

• All local government organisations (n=85) were first sent a letter from the Ministry for the Environment informing them of the survey, asking them to nominate and provide the contact details for the person within their council who would be in the best position to respond to the survey.
• The Ministry then followed up with non-responding local government organisations in order to maximise the number of participating organisations.
• A total of n=74 local government authorities provided contact details for a nominated staff member, prior to the survey going live.

3.1.3 Interviewing process

The survey interviewing process was as follows:

• The survey questionnaire was designed in consultation with the Ministry for the Environment, and once a preliminary version had been agreed to, it was then converted to an online format and piloted.
• Following the piloting, minor changes to the wording of some questions were recommended before being implemented (see Appendix A for a copy of the questionnaire).
• All participating local government authorities were then sent an email inviting them to respond to the online survey on the 23rd May 2006. This email briefly outlined the purpose of the survey and provided a link and password to the survey.
• Two reminder emails were then sent, encouraging those who had not yet responded to the survey, to do so.
• The survey was effectively held open for three weeks and closed off on the 6th June.

3.1.4 Survey response

An overall response rate of n=55, or 74% was achieved for this survey and as such, we can be confident that the results presented and discussed in this report are representative.

The sample was divided into the following four 'sector groups' as defined by local government New Zealand (LGNZ).

• Metropolitan Group (populations exceeding 90,000).
• Provincial Group (populations between 20,000 and 90,000).
• Rural Group (populations below 20,000).
• Regional Group (regional local government authorities and unitary authorities).

Given that this breakdown is widely recognised by local government authorities and used by LGNZ for its analysis and reporting, the Ministry decided that categorisation was the most appropriate to use.

The following table breaks down this response by sector group, in relation to the potential sample that could have responded to the survey.

Table 1: Survey response

3.1.5 Respondent profile

The key characteristics of the n=55 respondents who completed the survey may be summarised as follows (Table 2 to Table 4):

• As noted earlier, the sample is well represented in terms of Metropolitan and Provincial local government authorities, given the original numbers approached to participate in the survey. Reflecting this, more than half of the total sample of n=55 respondents comprises respondents from Metropolitan (n=11) and Provincial (n=21) local government authorities.
• In terms of position title, one in three survey respondents (n=18) were Managers, about one in four (n=13) were Senior technical advisors (non-management positions), and approximately one in five (n=10) reported their role within their local government authority as a Director.
• In line with this, the main background of the survey respondents varied. Most respondents (n=36) reported their main background as being District planning or resource management planning, while one in three (n=18) reported that their main background was in Strategic planning. Transport planning or engineering was also the main background for a further one in four (n=13) respondents.
• The length of time respondents claimed that they had been in their current role also varied. One in ten (n=6) reported that they had been in their current role for less than one year, one in three (n=20) reported that they had been in their current role for 1-2 years, and more than one in four (n=15) respondents claimed that they had been in their current role for 3-5 years. A further one in four (n=13) claimed that they had been in their current role for 6 or more years.

Table 2: Position title

Q1. First of all, which of the following best describes your current role within your council?

Table 3: Main background of respondent

Q3. What is your main background (i.e. training, experience, qualification)?

Table 4: Length of time in current role

Q2. And how long have you been in this role?

3.1.6 Survey accuracy (constraints & limitations)

In our professional opinion, there are no major limitations or constraints impacting on the results of this survey. As noted earlier, with a response rate of 74%, the overall results can be considered to be representative of the sector.

However, because the response from Rural and particularly Regional local government authorities (less than half the potential sample) was below that for Metropolitan and Provincial local government authorities, the results for these local government authorities must be treated with caution.

3.1.7 Approach to analysis

The results of the survey have primarily been analysed in terms of the four 'sector groups' (viz. Metropolitan, Provincial, Regional, Rural), as agreed with the Ministry for the Environment.

Reflecting the objectives of this baseline survey, this report is divided into the following two sections:

1. Current urban design capacity.
2. Building urban design capacity.

These sections contain an overview of the main findings against the research objectives, as well as providing the results to key questions in tabular form.