Hiroka Mita: Interview Surveys and "Firsthand Voices"

2023/05/11

There are quantitative and qualitative research methods in political science, which forms the foundation of public policy and local government. A common criticism of qualitative research is the small number of cases handled and the difficulty of generalizing from the details of individual cases. This is certainly a valid point, and I do not intend to deny it. However, I believe there are insights that can only be gained through qualitative research.

One difference between qualitative and quantitative research is the number of cases (N). Qualitative research primarily uses process tracing to make inferences about a small number of cases or a single case. It considers the case (outcome) and traces back to its causes. In contrast, quantitative research primarily targets a large number of cases, using statistical analysis to make inferences about a population and showing how suspected causes influenced the outcome. Furthermore, qualitative research focuses on the processes related to the cases, sometimes comparing changes over time to infer causal relationships. Another difference is that quantitative research often compares a wide range of cases at the same point in time to infer causality.

In other words, I believe the strengths of qualitative research lie in cases where one wants to clarify the chronological process by which a phenomenon occurred, or when a phenomenon is rare but represents an important case and one wants to clarify why it happened, or when one wants to understand the relationship between changes in stakeholder (actor) involvement and the phenomenon.

For example, one might compare the factors behind the abolition of earmarked tax revenues for roads—which were also used for local road development—and their conversion into general revenues, by looking at the changes in actors and systems surrounding the cabinet that made the decision. Other examples include analyzing factors in the process of public works reform or regional public transport reform in a few pioneering municipalities, or the process by which landscape ordinances were enacted or decisions hindering the landscape were made. In such cases, factors behind the decisions are uncovered by obtaining information on the background, municipal organizational structure, and relationships between actors through interview surveys with the relevant stakeholders.

In qualitative research using interview surveys, the number of cases handled is small, but this allows for a thorough investigation of the content of each case, clarifying processes and actor motivations that cannot be understood through numbers alone. I also believe there is the advantage of being able to reflect the "firsthand voices" obtained from meeting stakeholders and the conflicts leading up to the decision-making process within the case analysis.