Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

In recent years, hundreds of municipalities in the United States have adopted 311 systems—convenient channels for requesting non-emergency government services, often including a hotline (3-1-1) and internet applications. A major role of 311 is to collect reports of issues with public spaces and infrastructure, or what we might call the urban commons. 311 systems and the data they generate have received much attention from public administrators, popular media, and scholars alike, but a major question remains: how do we interpret these efforts to maintain the urban commons? Here I present a study that links a 311 database with a survey of 311 users and public voting records at the individual level to test two interpretations of the motivations associated with such reports. The first and more common treats the use of 311 as a function of a general civic disposition that extends to many forms of civic and political participation (e.g., volunteering, voting). The second argues that such reports are motivated by a capacity for territoriality (i.e., identifying with and claiming responsibility for spaces). The results suggest that self-reported territoriality largely drives the reporting of issues of public concern in one’s home neighborhood (where ~80% of reports are made). Participation in civic activities and voting only predict a greater likelihood of reporting in non-home neighborhoods (e.g., work). This dichotomy informs the interpretation and management of 311 systems, but also offers broader conceptual and methodological lessons on how we engage with “naturally-occurring” data that is rich in content but lacking in formal validation.