Data Collection Methods
1. Physical Observation (Counting Houses, Pedestrians)
● Description: Physically counting the number of houses or pedestrians in specific areas
to estimate housing density, foot traffic, or population density.
● Strengths:
○ Easy to conduct and requires minimal equipment.
○ Offers real-time data that reflects immediate conditions.
○ Direct and cost-effective, making it accessible to most researchers.
● Weaknesses:
○ Can be time-consuming and prone to human error.
○ Limited accuracy in busy or fluctuating environments.
○ Does not provide context on reasons behind observed numbers.
2. Interviews
● Description: Conducting structured or semi-structured conversations with residents,
business owners, or local authorities to gather qualitative data on poverty, policy
perceptions, or social issues.
● Strengths:
○ Provides in-depth, nuanced information directly from the source.
○ Allows for probing questions and adaptability based on responses.
● Weaknesses:
○ Can be time-intensive and difficult to standardize.
○ May include biased responses based on the interviewer’s influence or social
desirability bias.
○ Difficult to quantify results without extensive coding and analysis.
3. Questionnaires
● Description: Distributing structured forms with specific questions about respondents'
perceptions of their neighborhood, rebranding policies, environmental conditions, and
overall satisfaction.
● Strengths:
○ Efficient way to collect data from a large number of respondents.
○ Provides quantifiable data that’s easier to analyze statistically.
○ Can be distributed remotely or online to increase reach.
● Weaknesses:
○ Potential for low response rates, especially if not incentivized.
○ Responses may be superficial or not fully representative if respondents skip
questions or give minimal answers.
○ Misinterpretation of questions by respondents may impact data reliability.
4. Portable Sensors (Air Quality, Decibel Meters)
● Description: Using portable devices to measure environmental factors, such as air
quality and noise pollution, in various urban areas.
● Strengths:
○ Provides precise, objective data on environmental quality.
○ Enables comparisons across locations and time, revealing trends.
● Weaknesses:
○ Requires technical expertise to operate and interpret data accurately.
○ Initial cost can be high, especially for advanced sensors.
○ May not capture all environmental variables impacting quality, such as transient
noise sources.
5. pH Strips (for Water Quality Analysis)
● Description: Simple tool to assess water quality by measuring pH levels in urban
waterways, indicating pollution levels.
● Strengths:
○ Cost-effective and easy to use.
○ Provides instant feedback on water quality status.
● Weaknesses:
○ Only measures pH, not other pollutants.
○ May not provide an accurate representation if water is influenced by temporary
contaminants.
○ Requires follow-up lab analysis for comprehensive water quality assessments.
6. Photographs and Sketches
● Description: Visual documentation of urban landscapes, housing conditions, green
spaces, and signage to illustrate socio-economic status or effects of urban policies.
● Strengths:
○ Provides a visual, contextual understanding of the area.
○ Useful for qualitative analysis and supporting quantitative data.
● Weaknesses:
○ Subjective interpretations can affect the analysis.
○ Photographs may not capture changes over time or different environmental
conditions.
○ Limited ability to convey quantitative data unless paired with other methods.
7. Environmental Surveys (Evaluating Green Space and Littering)
● Description: Using structured survey checklists to assess the quality of green spaces,
litter prevalence, and overall environmental cleanliness.
● Strengths:
○ Straightforward to administer and repeatable for longitudinal studies.
○ Can provide a broad picture of environmental management success or
challenges.
● Weaknesses:
○ Limited to surface-level observations.
○ May not capture underlying environmental factors like soil quality or pollution
sources.
8. Pedestrian Flow Counts
● Description: Recording the number of pedestrians in specific areas over a given time
period to assess foot traffic patterns and activity levels.
● Strengths:
○ Simple to conduct and provides real-time data on urban vibrancy.
○ Can indicate commercial activity and potential socio-economic vitality.
● Weaknesses:
○ Limited in explaining pedestrian purpose or demographics.
○ Counts alone cannot reveal qualitative insights about visitors' reasons for being
in the area.
