The catalogue contains study descriptions in various languages. The system searches with your search terms from study descriptions available in the language you have selected. The catalogue does not have ‘All languages’ option as due to linguistic differences this would give incomplete results. See the User Guide for more detailed information.
London Stakeholders on London Governance, 2020-2021
Creator
Wojciechowska, M
Study number / PID
855392 (UKDA)
10.5255/UKDA-SN-855392 (DOI)
Data access
Restricted
Series
Not available
Abstract
The dataset consists of semi-structured interviews with governance stakeholders in London: representatives of London boroughs, the Greater London Authority, business organisations and non-governmental organisations. The interviews focused on: how the governance system in London works, how individual actors responded to the Covid-19 pandemic, how the pandemic influenced Londoners’ local socio-economic status, and how individual actors envision an ideal London governance.This project responds to three global challenges: unequal urbanisation, growing complexity of the governance systems and a crisis of trust in democracy. More than half of the world population currently live in cities and this share is expected to increase. Modern urban areas are highly unequal, with vast shares of the population living in poverty and struggling to access city-services (Tonkiss 2018). The growing complexity of governance systems leads to an increased number of non-state actors who are not held democratically accountable and whose actions are difficult to control or regulate (Jervis 1997). Finally, along dropping trust in democratic governance, there is rising support for populism and growing acceptance for authoritarian practices (Foa and Mounk 2016). Due to the global impact and interconnected nature of these challenges, any social-scientific response to these problems cannot treat them separately. Existing interdisciplinary research tends to focus on solutions to some of these challenges, often without acknowledging its broader impact. For example, research on governing complex urban polities is focused on top-down and technocratic tools, which contributes to the deepening of the democratic crisis and further inequality (e.g. Kubler and Lefevre 2017). In turn, democratic and participatory solutions to urban inequality often rely on bottom-up communities and face-to-face decision-making, while ignoring the wider complexity of urban decision-making. Finally, research on the...
Terminology used is generally based on DDI controlled vocabularies: Time Method, Analysis Unit, Sampling Procedure and Mode of Collection, available at CESSDA Vocabulary Service.
Methodology
Data collection period
01/10/2020 - 30/09/2021
Country
United Kingdom
Time dimension
Not available
Analysis unit
Individual
Organization
Universe
Not available
Sampling procedure
Not available
Kind of data
Text
Data collection mode
Semi-structured interviews with elite participants.
Funding information
Grant number
ES/V009346/1
Access
Publisher
UK Data Service
Publication year
2022
Terms of data access
The Data Collection is available for download to users registered with the UK Data Service.