a) Good information can be obtained from the urban administrators

The inquiries and studies have provided information that is valid and reliable by asking questions of the urban administrators. They are an extremely important source of information, and they have often been overlooked in the process of urban information gathering. On certain specific issues, however, such as knowledge of larger international movements, or views of changes in such things as women's status, it is possible that the age, tenure, position, or gender of the respondent may affect their views. This is a common observation in the social sciences, and most attempts to obtain information from survey instruments are sensitive to this type of bias.


b) Stable administrative staffing makes for more effective problem solving

Where city personnel remain in the city for a long time, where it is a life-long career, the administration gains important experience and long term commitment for addressing problems. Where urban administrators remain only a short time, and see the position only as a stepping stone for advancement, city administration suffers.


c) Effective urban planning requires room and consolidated authority

The successful administrative actions we have seen here have often required expanding the geographic and administrative base of the city to provide for better planning. They also typically include a consolidated authority over the city's area, eliminating the patchwork of cross-cutting social and administrative units. Cross-cutting jurisdictions drastically reduce the capacity of administrators to deal effectively with their problems. We have heard this statement directly from administrators in many situations.


d) Combined population and development planning works well

When economic development planning pays proper attention to population and social problems, to reducing fertility and providing education and housing, the outcome is a higher quality of life.


e) Local authority and resource control make for better urban administration. Devolution makes sense

Because site conditions and local geography provide both constraints and opportunities, urban administrators need control over personnel and financial resources to address their problems adequately. Centralized control that takes resources out of the hands of local urban administrators, weakens the capacity to mobilize local intelligence and the incentive to deal with problems. Moreover, urban administrators typically rate their staff quality high, and wish they had more resources and more autonomy to use that staff effectively. Central governments too often discount local personnel capacities and fail to give city administrators the resources and autonomy that will permit them to work effectively.