Skip to main content

An Integrated Methodology for the Evaluation of ePetitions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Empowering Open and Collaborative Governance

Abstract

An ePetition is a petition that gathers support electronically. The review of existing ePetition cases reveals that the real impact of current ePetition practices is difficult to be addressed and evaluated. This difficulty is also due to the lack/incompleteness of specific and unified methodologies for the evaluation of ePetition results. In this framework, the authors in this chapter are firstly presenting an overview of existing methodologies for the evaluation and assessment of ePetition approaches. Then, they propose a unified and complete methodology for the in-depth evaluation of an ePetition approach. The last part of the chapter is devoted to the presentation of the main results from the real-life application of this evaluation methodology, in the context of an FP7-funded project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=PROJ_ICT_TEMP&ACTION=D&DOC=18&CAT=PROJ&QUERY=01326b2c3cc7:e73d:25a9bdca&RCN=52651. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  2. 2.

    http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=PROJ_ICT_TEMP&ACTION=D&CAT=PROJ&RCN=57463. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  3. 3.

    http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=proj.document&PJ_RCN=4850479. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  4. 4.

    http://www.demo-net.org/what-is-it-about/projects/projects/european-cities-platform-for-on-line-transaction-services-euro-citi. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  5. 5.

    http://www.qualeg.eupm.net/my_spip/index.php. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  6. 6.

    http://www.webocrat.sk/webocrat/index.jsp?id=2. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  7. 7.

    http://www.demo-net.org/. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.

  8. 8.

    http://www.ep-momentum.eu/. Accessed 10 Sep 2011.

  9. 9.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_analytics. Accessed 10 Sep 2011.

  10. 10.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usability_testing. Accessed 10 Sep 2011.

  11. 11.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_planned_behavior. Accessed 10 Sep 2011.

  12. 12.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SERVQUAL. Accessed 10 Sep 2011.

  13. 13.

    http://www.ep-empower.eu/. Accessed 5 Sep 2011.

References

  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50:179–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi RP, Davis FD, Warshaw PR (1992) Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Hum Relat 45(7):660–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baringhorst S (2009) Political campaigning in changing media cultures—typological and historical approaches. In: Baringhorst S, Kneip V, Niesyto J (eds) Political campaigning on the web. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ/London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman J, Mulligan DK (2003) Digital grass roots. Issue advocacy in the age of the internet. In: Anderson DM, Cornfield M (eds) The civic web, online politics and democratic value. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, pp 77–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttle F (1996) SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda. Eur J Mark 30(1):8–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll WK, Hackett RA (2006) Democratic media activism through the lens of social movement theory. Media Cult Soc 28:83–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg L, Siapera S (eds) (2006) Radical democracy and the internet: interogating theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag Sci 35:982–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downey J, Fenton N (2003) New media, counter publicity and the public sphere. New Media Soc 5:185–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly AH, Chaiken S (1993) The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Fort Worth, TX

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein M (1967) Attitude and the prediction of behavior. In: Fishbein M (ed) Readings in attitude theory and measurement. Wiley, New York, pp 477–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Graber DA (2002) The internet and politics. Emerging perspectives. In: Price ME, Nissenbau HF (eds) Academy and the internet. Digital formations, vol 12. Peter Lang, New York, NY, pp 90–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale JL, Householder BJ, Greene KL (2003) The theory of reasoned action. In: Dillard JP, Pfau M (eds) The persuasion handbook: developments in theory and practice. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 259–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtz-Bacha C (2004) Political communication research abroad: Europe. In: Kaid LL (ed) Handbook of political communication research. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 463–477

    Google Scholar 

  • ICELE (2008) Effective petitioning – the Internet way, 3rd edn. International Centre of Excellence for Local e-Democracy, Bristol, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Lusoli W, Jankowski NW (eds) (2005) The World Wide Web and the 2004 European parliament election. Special Issue, Information policy, vol 10

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh A, Whyte A (2008) Towards an evaluation framework for eParticipation. Transforming Government People Process Policy 2(1):16–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosca L, Santucci D (2009) Petitioning online. The role of e-petitions in web campaining. In: Baringhorst S, Kneip V, Niesyto J (eds) Political campaigning on the web. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ/London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldenburg B, Glanz K (2008) Diffusion of innovations. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer B (eds) Health behaviour and health education: theory, research and practice, 4th edn. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA, pp 313–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of innovations, 4th edn. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Seaton J (2005) The Scotish parliament and e-democracy. Aslib Proc New Inform Perspect 57(4):333–337

    Google Scholar 

  • Tait E (2008) Mapping and evaluating eparticipation in Scottish local authorities. Political Studies Association Conference, Swansea

    Google Scholar 

  • Tambouris E, Liotas N, Tarabanis K (2007) Framework for assessing eparticipation projects and tools. In: Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii international conference on system sciences

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27:425–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte A, Macintosh A (2003) Analysis and evaluation of e-consultations. e Serv J 2(1). e-democracy in practice, Indiana University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte A, Renton A, Macintosh A (2005) e-Petitioning in Kingston and Bristol, evaluation of e-petitioning in the local e-democracy national project. International Teledemocracy Centre, Napier University, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

eMPOWER ‘Empowering citizens to influence the decision making and policy formulation on environmental issues’ was an eParticipation trial project co-funded by the European Commission under the EU eParticipation Preparatory Action. The authors would like to thank the whole eMPOWER consortium for their work and collaboration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kostas Ergazakis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ergazakis, K., Askounis, D., Kokkinakos, P., Tsitsanis, A. (2012). An Integrated Methodology for the Evaluation of ePetitions. In: Charalabidis, Y., Koussouris, S. (eds) Empowering Open and Collaborative Governance. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27219-6_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27219-6_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-27218-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-27219-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics