Abstract
Public Administration (PA) is a broad multidisciplinary field (Mele et al., 2020; Riccucci, 2010), characterized by a variety of epistemological approaches and methods to advance the understanding of complex phenomena around the public domain. To avoid methodological fragmentation, scholars are increasingly discussing the methodological roots of PA research, conducting assessments of both quantitative and qualitative (Ospina et al., 2018; Pitts and Fernandez, 2009) research practice, and elaborating frameworks for cross-methodology comparisons (Mele et al., 2020).  Core to these efforts to map and systematically review research methods in the PA field is the need to strengthen the dialogue between different methodological traditions and to advance a multifaceted understanding of the topics of PA research. 

Within this broader trend, country-based systematic analyses of PA research are still rare. In particular, while a number of Italian scholars have contributed to the debate on the methodological roots and directions of PA research at the international level, we lack a comprehensive understanding and mapping of the empirical research in PA in the Italian context.  Our chapter aims to fill this gap by providing the first comprehensive overview of the state of the art of methods and approaches of PA research in Italy. The work is holistic in nature, tracing the development of both qualitative and quantitative perspectives, as well as of specific methods within each perspective. 

Drawing on a large longitudinal database of articles (2000–2023) covering empirical research on Italian PA from major PA and management journals, we combine bibliometric and thematic-based analyses to accomplish three main objectives.  First, we reconstruct the prevalence and evolution of qualitative and quantitative perspectives over time and by journal. Next, we disentangle the main collaboration networks among academic institutions at both national and international levels. Finally, we dig into five specific methods—(single and multiple) case studies and ethnographies, quantitative observational methods, surveys, and experiments—to explore the linkage between topics and methods, and to analyze the core common methodological features of research adopting each method. 

Together, our findings offer the first systematic overview of the methodological tradition of PA research in Italy and provide recommendations to enhance the debate on how different methodological perspectives can contribute to the study of contemporary PA in Italy.