The Foundation for Municipal Development conducts annual surveys covering opinions on local (municipal) democracy, local government, local economy and services. Respondents are generally local inhabitants, municipal managers and the chairpersons of municipal boards. The data enable comparison between the opinions of the inhabitants on the one hand, and the managers and chairpersons on the other. The surveys also study municipal managers' views on the policies of the Government of Finland and the functionality of local co-operation. The survey series was launched in 1992. The FSD collections cover data from 1992 to 2010.
The survey studied Finnish citizens' views on municipalities and municipal service provision. One theme pertained to the forthcoming parliamentary elections.
First, views were probed on the sufficiency of municipal service provision in different issues, for instance, care for the elderly, health services, public transport, sports facilities, library and cultural services, primary and lower secondary schools. The respondents were presented with a list of services and asked which could be cut down if municipalities had to reduce costs. The services mentioned were educational institutions, child day care, care for the elderly, social assistance, and health care. They were also presented with a list of social problems, such as rising prices, prostitution, racism, crime, income disparity, high taxation, and asked which were the three problems the future parliament and government should focus on.
Next, the respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with a number of attitudinal statements relating to the financing of services, cutting down services, democracy, economic and social disparity, minimum income guarantee, public political influence, raising the municipal tax rate etc. Some questions focused on what methods the respondents would find acceptable to ensure the financing and services of municipalities. The methods mentioned included, for instance, raising the municipal tax rate, increasing borrowing, cutting/delaying investments, decreasing the quality of municipal services, lowering wages.
The forthcoming parliamentary elections in Finland were covered with questions on what characteristics the parliamentary candidate the respondents would vote for should have and what policies their candidate supported (for instance, cutting public expenditure, harsher punishments for crime, promoting the interests of minorities). Views were probed on the characteristics and policies of different political parties. Finally, the respondents were asked whether they would be willing to go abroad for medical treatment or rehabilitation in the future.
Background variables included the respondent's gender, age, economic activity and occupational status, education, employment status, region of residence (NUTS3), major region (NUTS2), degree of urbanity of the municipality, household composition, household gross income, number of persons in the household, which political party R would vote if the parliamentary elections were held at that time, and which party R had voted for in the previous parliamentary elections.
The sample was drawn in three stages. In the first stage, the number of subjects required by the survey was regionally divided by major regions (NUTS2). In the second stage, the number of subjects was further subdivided within each major region by the type of municipality. Municipality type was determined in two different ways: city municipalities were divided into large and small cities according to their population size, and rural municipalities into three groups based on the occupational structure of the population. The survey municipalities were representatively selected on the basis of the forementioned strata. In the third stage, starting points (addresses) were selected in each municipality. The number of starting point was based on the population size. The interviews were conducted by using the random-walk method. Four interviews were made starting from each of the randomly selected starting points. In each household, one member corresponding to the age and gender eligibility criteria was chosen for the interview.