Social Software Infrastructure for e-Participation

Porwol, Lukasz; Ojo, Adegboyega; Breslin, John G.

doi:10.1016/j.giq.2016.01.002

Cited by 33 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the risk of shift from monitoring social media activity to outright surveillance is often overlooked in those studies, or in government communication (see e.g. Porwol et al, 2018). By contrast, reports such as the State of Internet Freedoms in Africa, published by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) each year, has highlighted surveillance and other government actions to increase government control on discussions in the cyberspace, which can negatively impact the attractiveness of e-participation for citizens.…”

Section: Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

E-participation: A Quick Overview of Recent Qualitative Trends

Blanc¹

2020

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper briefly takes stock of two decades of e-participation initiatives based on a limited review of the academic literature. The purpose of the paper is to complement the results of the e-government Survey 2020. As such, the emphasis is on aspects that the e-government survey (based on analysis of e-government portals and on quantitative indicators) does not capture directly. Among those are the challenges faced by e-participation initiatives and key areas of attention for governments. The paper maps the field of e-participation and related activities, as well as its relationships with other governance concepts. Areas of recent development in terms of e-participation applications are briefly reviewed. The paper selectively highlights conclusions from the literature on different participation tools, as well as a list of key problematic areas for policy makers. The paper concludes that while e-participation platforms using new technologies have spread rapidly in developed countries in the first decade of the 2000s and in developing countries during the last 10 years, it is not clear that their multiplication has translated into broader or deeper citizen participation. Beyond reasons related to technology access and digital skills, factors such as lack of understanding of citizens' motivations to participate and the reluctance of public institutions to genuinely share agenda setting and decision-making power seem to play an important role in the observed limited progress.

show abstract

Section: Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

E-participation: A Quick Overview of Recent Qualitative Trends

Blanc¹

2020

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As participation has no limited areas, ePfw identifies as a component of the framework anything that is represented as a scalable entity. Similarly, [35], [39], [51], [60], [75] define the use of different participation techniques (some authors use the term ''methods'' with the same semantic connotation) in their proposals. Based on [45], ePfw uses the term method to include in its frameworks the various interaction techniques between actors that occur in an electronic participation process.…”

Section: Yet Another E-participation Framework: Epfwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several authors [15], [26], [27], [32], [42]- [44], [54], [57], [60], [62]- [64], [76] mention the various areas in which e-Participation projects are applied. These areas are as diverse as the fields of application and vary according to each particular initiative.…”

Section: E-participation Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in e-Participation: A perspective of Last Years

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The opinions of citizens are now being given ever-increasing consideration. Today, many government administrations have set up public participation processes as one more of the inputs required to make a decision on several aspects of governance. e-Participation initiatives make it easier for citizens to access such processes. At the present time, there is no clear and accepted field definition due to the wide diversity of theoretical proposals and the interdisciplinary nature of the initiatives, many of which have been developed ad-hoc. This paper reviews the present literature in the field of e-Participation by means of a systematic mapping of the research work carried out in the timeframe 2000-2019, together with some earlier relevant proposals in the area, with the aim of obtaining a conceptual guide to e-Participation components. This review analyses the findings and clusters the results into a conceptual e-Participation framework, which we call ePfw. The results show the diversity of the conceptualizations of many authors (25% on average) in the identification of tools, areas and levels in the field of e-participation and the almost null incorporation of fundamental aspects like trust, security, or transparency. We also found a lack of systems development (13.3%) that would prove and allow the proposed theories to be put into practice.

show abstract

“…Most of this government citizen-sourcing research is focusing on 'active citizen-sourcing', which uses government agencies' social media accounts (or even web-sites) in order to pose a specific social problem or public policy (existing or under development), and solicit relevant information, knowledge, opinions and ideas from the general public [6,12,26,27,32,[35][36][37]. For instance [35] has developed a framework for the description and analysis of government agencies citizen-sourcing initiatives, which includes four main types of them: a) contest (=competition-driven citizensourcing, with material (usually monetary) incentives (e.g.…”

Section: Government Citizen-sourcingmentioning

confidence: 99%