Four Models of eDemocracy Associate Professor Øystein Sæbø, CAHDE 2nd plenary, Strasbourg, October 07.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
National Center for Atmospheric Research Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center National Center for Supercomputing Applications Web100 Outreach George Brett.
Advertisements

Interviews If you get to the interview stage you basically meet the requirements for the job The purpose of the interview is to give the employer a chance.
Making consultation and community engagement meaningful David Jones in Scotland.
The Business Support Professional Career Pathway Leonardo Partnership Management Meeting CECA´s headquarter Seville, Spain March 2010.
22nd of SeptemberSimon Delakorda Center for e-democracy / Institute of Ecology 1 Models of Democracy and Slovenian Political Party Web Sites HCC7 – Human.
E-democracy in Development: A Case Study of d:mo in Molde Judith Molka-Danielsen, Beinta Jákupsstovu og Eli Kjersem.
Information and Communication Technology Research Initiative Supporting the self management of obesity: The role of ICTs University.
EEN [Canada] Forum Shelley Borys Director, Evaluation September 30, 2010 Developing Evaluation Capacity.
Dissemination pathways Science and policy
Info1409 De Montfort University1 Requirements Modelling Systems Analysis & Design Academic Year 2008/9 Info 1409 Lecture 7.
Intellectual Property and Bilateral Trade Agreements Moving towards effective participation.
Tools and Technologies in eParticipation: Insights from Project Evaluation Melanie Bicking and Maria A. Wimmer University of Koblenz (UKL) {bicking |
ICT TOOLS AND SOCIETY INVOLVEMENT AMONG THE EUPAN NETWORK HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE SURVEY RESULTS TANYA CHETCUTI EUROPEAN COMMISSION.
Symposium on E-democracy: new opportunities for enhancing civic participation Strasbourg, April 2007 Theme II: Beneath the hype: overcoming barriers.
IWRM PLAN PREPARED AND APPROVED. CONTENT Writing an IWRM plan The content of a plan Ensuring political and public participation Timeframe Who writes the.
Establishing Research and Evaluation Network on Child Issues in Indonesia Nuning Akhmadi Indonesia Research and Evaluation Network Manila, 7 – 8 November.
Innovative Schools toolkit
Curriculum and Assessment in Northern Ireland
Local Government Programming In-service October 22 & 23, 2014 Deliberative Governance: Civil Discourse and Public Engagement Presented by Bill Rizzo Professor.
Management & Technology Consultants A Good Practice Framework to Reinforce the Exchange of Good Practice in eGovernment IST4Balt WORKSHOP June.
Analysis Tools Shaping Tomorrow Animal Health Scanning Network 7 November 2011.
ISLLC Standard #2 Implementation
Identification of Development Context Patterns – demographic, environmental, economic, socio-cultural, institutional, political as the source of SWOT Rural.
E-participation and transparency in the decision making process Rauna Nerelli Ministry of Justice, Finland.
1 Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities (RFSC) Some useful functionalities for Finnish cities.
The European Credit system The European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET)
How to achieve impact? Dresden Training Workshop Pierre-Benoit Joly, INRA/TSV.
Bridging the divide between science and politics Annual Meeting of the African Science Academy Development Initiative (ASADI) Royal Society, London, 5.
Tony Karbo, Ph.D. AHSI/UPEACE Africa Program.  Action or inaction taken by interested entities such as NGOs, Think Tanks, government departments, ministries,
The Trust Company Strategic Partners Symposium Partnership & Collaboration October 2013.
THE Scheme Presentation Teaching developments in EA22120 Laboratory Techniques Stephen Tooth, IGES.
Public Participation in Tampere T A M P E R E E N K A U P U N K I Mr. Antti Leskinen Head of Local Democracy Unit City of Tampere, Finland.
Training Resource Manual on Integrated Assessment Session UNEP-UNCTAD CBTF Process of an Integrated Assessment Session 2.
Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education GRANT PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR CONTINUATION FUNDING.
Better Community Engagement Training for Trainers Course Day 1 This was developed as part of the Scottish Government’s Better Community Engagement Programme.
Alain Thomas Overview workshop Background to the Principles Definitions The National Principles for Public Engagement What.
ICT TOOLS AND SOCIETY INVOLVEMENT AMONG THE EUPAN NETWORK HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE SURVEY RESULTS TANYA CHETCUTI AND MARCO FICHERA - WORKSHOP EUROPEAN COMMISSION.
Summary of platform blueprint report LINKED Project Meeting
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
The new EC impact assessment: what for? EUROPEAN TRADE UNION CONFEDERATION Sophie Dupressoir.
How does classroom discussion affect students’ learning? For further school friendly resources visit
2013 Fall Forum Improving Health Outcomes : Finding Options for Better Access to Care Health Policy Advocacy & Action Plan Development.
DEVELOPING THE WORK PLAN
Fundamentals of Governance: Parliament and Government Understanding and Demonstrating Assessment Criteria Facilitator: Tony Cash.
Council of Europe workshop on the certification of e-voting systems Strasbourg, November 2009.
Global Partnership for Enhanced Social Accountability (GPESA) December 19, 2011 World Bank.
UKOLN is supported by: Using Blogs, Micro-blogs and Social Networks Effectively Within Your Library: Beyond Blogs: Micro-blogs & Social Networks Brian.
Collaborating for Resilience (CORE) Sharing the Learning Event-Experience from India Trip 19 February 2014.
Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 5: Implementing Rational Unified Process Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 5: Implementing Rational.
+ Welcome to PAHO/WHO Sustainable Development and Health Toolkit for the UN Global Conference RIO + 20 Welcome to PAHO/WHO Sustainable Development and.
Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Research Fellow,, Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Assistant professor, Dep. Public Administration, National Open.
true potential An Introduction to the Middle Manager Programme’s CMI Qualifications.
Chapter 10 POLITICS & THE MEDIA. Learning Objectives 1) Explain the role of the media in a democracy. 2) Summarize how television influences the conduct.
Pedagogical aspects in assuring quality in virtual education environments University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
true potential An Introduction to the First Line Manager Programme’s CMI Qualifications.
CLAN SOFT LEARNING VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT September 19, 2008 Kaunas 2nd Meeting.
Development and Cooperation Preparing the Communication on Local Authorities in Development: the Issue Paper Elena ASCIUTTI European Commission – EuropeAid.
This is a presentation template which can be used and adapted to communicate key introductory messages and stimulate discussion about the personalisation.
Contents Introducing the GSBPM Links to other standards
… guaranteed because our system makes implementing EIGHT NECESSARY STEPS very , very straightforward NEXT SLIDE EXPLAINS.
Locality.org.uk.
The Public Policy Process
The Center for IDEA Early Childhood Data Systems presents
Improving information exchange:
E-Governance and Development
Bilateral Relations under The Active Citizens Fund Slovakia
Contents Introducing the GSBPM Links to other standards
Knowledge Sharing Mechanism in Social Networking for Learning
Developing Strong and Effective College Student Associations
Date and venue: 23 September, MSFD PCG, DG Environment, Brussels
Presentation transcript:

Four Models of eDemocracy Associate Professor Øystein Sæbø, CAHDE 2nd plenary, Strasbourg, October 07

Why this paper? eDemocracy successes vary unpredictable results missing knowledge on the link between democracy and the use of ICT Starting point: we need to better understand the context we need to understand the link between technology and democracy (context) eDemocracy models explain variations in the democratic context try to explain how technology may show usefulness for various context Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 072

Models of eDemocracy Based on: inclusion in decisions to what degree are all citizens invited to participate? control of the agenda who decides what to be discussed? Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 073

Four Models of eDemocracy Citizens set the agenda PartisanDirect Governments set the agenda LiberalDeliberative Citizens implicitly included in decision-making Citizens explicitly included in decision-making Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 074

Liberal eDemocracy No changes in distribution of power politicians/governments in charge of decision making and agenda citizens mainly inform/ being informed eDemocracy: main focus: information exchange increase citizens’ opportunity to control and evaluate increase their opportunity to choose between candidates ICT applications (examples) discussion forum (focus on information exchange) feedback mechanisms distribution of candidates/parties viewpoints archive/ dissemination of information Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 075

Deliberative eDemocracy Citizens involved in decision making processes and agenda setting requires: politicians’ will to include citizens citizens’ will to participate real eDemocracy? real dialogue influence on agenda setting citizens could expect influence by participate ICT applications (examples) discussion forums (real discussions) control mechanisms quality of information exchange (two-ways) citizens panels Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 076

Direct eDemocracy radical alternative citizens are in charge no use for representatives ICT could help to coordinate, without middlemen currently: very few examples eDemocracy voting/ decision making agenda setting coordination mechanism ICT applications (examples) voting mechanism agenda setting mechanism Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 077

Partisan eDemocracy independent from traditional decision makings mechanisms citizens’ initiatives by using ICT opportunity to mass- communicate keep control of the agenda eDemocracy increase public debate? could not be led by government “speakers corner” ICT applications (examples) discussion forums (uninterrupted by government/politicians) blogs social networking activities Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 078

Why discuss eDemocracy models? eDemocracy initiatives need to understand context deliberation without politicians’ will to be influenced, or citizens’ will to participate successful projects may not be easily transferred design and management of ICT applications vary e.g. discussion forums should be designed according to objectives do not promise too much! if citizens are asked to influence, the should expect some influence! if they are asked “only” to inform, they should now.. Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 079

Implications for practice Consider context before technology technology is “easy” knowledge on how to utilise eDemocracy initiatives is difficult Involve major stakeholders in the development process citizens, politicians and government officials should discuss needs technological competence less important in the initial phase focus also on politicians very often taken for granted why should they be interested in more deliberation? the four models: only archetypes starting point for a discussion on democratic context and link to technology Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0710

eDemocracy tools Øystein Sæbø, CAHDE 2nd plenary, Strasbourg, October 07

Background Based on a DemoNet report “Current ICT to enable eParticipation” editors: Asta Thorleifsdottir and Maria Wimmer eDemocracy = rapidly developing report on tools are immediately out-dated thus: focus on framework on how to analyse may show importance also in the future opportunity to compare why tools, not technology? eDemocracy mainly based on generic technologies tools: applications developed to achieve some tasks eDemocracy: tools based on “known” technologies Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0712

eDemocracy areas communication needs and decision making mechanisms tools are developed to support eDemocracy areas more sustainable than tools Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0713

eDemocracy areas Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0714

Template to identify eDemocracy tools template to describe existing and future eDemocracy tools allows for comparison could be used to dynamically develop a “library” of various opportunities Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0715

Template to identify eDemocracy tools 1. general description 2. overall objectives 1. could be based on eDemocracy models 3. which area to support? 4. what are the major stakeholders’ views? 5. support which stages in the policy life cycle? 6. level of participation? 1. e.g. information exchange, deliberation, direct decision making? 7. security and privacy 8. accessibillity 9. channel availability 10. technologies used 11. evaluation Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0716

Template to identify eDemocracy tools Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0717

Overview core eDemocracy tools Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0718

Overview (generic) ICT tools extensively used in eDemocracy Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0719

Overview basic ICT tools needed in eDemocracy Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0720

Practical implications all tools are described in detail by the DemoNet project please let me know if you like the full report introduces a strategy on how to identify and compare eDemocracy tools could be used to develop libraries of tools for various purposes there no such thing as generic eDemocracy tools dependent on the purpose more knowledge is still needed on eDemocracy technologies what will happen when social networking technologies and web 2.0 is introduced? e.g how will Facebook, YouTube, MySpace and similar applications influence how will that change citizens’ expectations? Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0721

Øystein Sæbø: Four Models of eDemocracy, CAHDE 2nd plenary meeting, Strasbourg October 0722 Thank you for your attention! Questions? Comments? Main references: tools: models: Models of E-Democracy, (2006) Päivärinta Tero and Sæbø Øystein; Communication of AIS, vol 17, pp Models of E-Democracy Contact information: Øystein Sæbø (Oystein Sabo) University of Agder Department of Information systems Service box Kristiansand, Norway Phone: ,