A statewide telephone survey was conducted between January 20-30, 2006 as part of the review of the Oregon Transportation Plan. The purpose of this research was to gauge Oregonians’ attitudes and opinions about transportation improvement needs around the state, priorities for developing a transportation system, willingness to pay for additional improvements, and specific transportation related issues including public transit, traffic congestion, and the impact of transportation on the economy and air pollution. We interviewed 1,511 Oregonians age 18 and older (general population) using random digit dialing – 300 each from Metro, Northwest, Southwest, Central, and Eastern regions of the state. The survey averaged 15 minutes, and the overall margin of error for this study is +/-2.52%, at the 95% confidence level. Statewide results are reported based on data that is weighted to reflect the population distribution of the state. Any reports on regional differences reflect unweighted results. In general, residents of the state agree on approaches for improving traffic congestion, express a need for public transit service in their area, and believe transportation problems in the state will get worse over the next five years.The full written report, following the executive summary, elaborates on other subgroup findings (including gender, age, income, education, etc.).
Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall, Inc. (DHM) conducted the online survey from September 17 to 23, 2008, among 842 residents in the state of Oregon that lasted an average of 10 minutes. This research was conducted to assess public attitudes towards land use issues in the state in order to guide the Big Look Task Force in their comprehensive review of the state’s land use system. A stratified (rather than proportional) sample was used to better understand attitudes in the different areas of the state—Tri-County, Willamette Valley, and the Rest of State, with approximately 300 interviews completed in each of the three areas of the state. The effects of land use policies vary from urban to rural areas, while at the same time, Oregonians are ideologically divided across geographic regions resulting in consistent differences in how urban and rural residents view land use regulations and their visions for policy reform. Broadly speaking, urban residents are more comfortable with government regulation and higher taxes to protect and preserve natural spaces and farm land than their rural counterparts. Rural residents tend to be more suspect of government and favor less regulation and taxes.
The report summarizes the results of quantitative research which involved two statewide surveys of Oregonians about their attitudes toward forest management and sustainability issues. One survey used conventional techniques. The other used scaled comparison survey research, a technique which arrayed pairs of sustainable forest management goals to assess Oregonians’ relative priorities. The survey questions asked generally about forest management and sustainability issues, and specifically about federal and private forestlands. Although state forests were not singled out because of the added complexity, the survey results clearly encompass state forest management issues. Findings reveal shared concerns among Oregonians, including forest fire management, family-wage jobs and the future of natural-resource based economies in Oregon’s rural communities, and environmental quality concerns.