Researchers studying local governance, especially alternative service delivery arrangements, have long relied on the ICMA ASD survey to examine the scope and nature of service provision and production at the local level. Building upon Lamothe et al. (Public Administration Review, 2018, 78: 613) findings that raise questions concerning the accuracy of the ASD survey and resulting misconceptions about service provision, this paper refines how provision can be conceptualized and measured to promote a better understanding of local governance. Utilizing a unique survey design that incorporates, but also extends the ASD format, we demonstrate that service provision is multifaceted, and jurisdictions participate in varying degrees of provision activities based on the sector of the producing entity. Our findings highlight the importance of properly accounting for provision activities and call into question the efficacy of the conventional contracting framework as the primary theoretical underpinning of most studies of local service delivery arrangements.

中文翻译：

---

更好地了解本地服务的提供：研究生产选择的决定因素的意义

研究地方治理，特别是替代性服务提供安排的研究人员长期以来一直依靠 ICMA ASD 调查来研究地方一级服务提供和生产的范围和性质。以 Lamothe 等人为基础。（《公共行政评论》，2018，78：613）调查结果提出了有关 ASD 调查准确性的问题以及由此产生的对服务提供的误解，本文完善了如何概念化和衡量服务提供，以促进更好地了解地方治理。利用纳入并扩展了 ASD 格式的独特调查设计，我们证明服务提供是多方面的，并且司法管辖区根据生产实体的部门参与不同程度的提供活动。我们的研究结果强调了正确核算提供活动的重要性，并对传统承包框架作为大多数本地服务提供安排研究的主要理论基础的有效性提出了质疑。