Measuring Progress in E-Participation in Russia: The Results of a Multi-method Case Study

  • Lyudmila Vidiasova
  • Yaroslava Tensina
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 745)


The paper describes a scientific research on e-participation development in Russia. The portal “Russian Public Initiative” has become the research object. This e-participation portal considers to be an official e-petition portal in Russia and was launched in 2013. However, the results of its work are not obvious.

In the research, we appealed to the international practice and the national context (revealed after an expert poll) and conducted an analysis of an e-petition portal by using a combination of factors and criteria. The data describing the institutional factors, the results of previously conducted expert poll on e-participation barriers, and applied automated tool to assess the portal operation for the period 2013–2017 was used in the survey.

The results show the efficiency through analysis of quantitative data on petitions’ publication, votes for and against the petitions, as well as a qualitative assessment of regulations and decision-making on the petitions that collected the necessary number of votes.


E-petition portal Success factors Social efficiency Case-study 



This work was conducted with support of the Grant of the President of the Russian Federation to young scientists №MK-5953.2016.6 “The research of e-participation tools development factors in Russian Federation”.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Medaglia, R.: eParticipation research: moving characterization forward (2006–2011). Gov. Inf. Quart. 29, 346–360 (2012). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2012.02.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jho, W., Song, K.: Institutional and technological determinants of civil e-Participation: solo or duet? Gov. Inf. Quart. 32, 488–495 (2015). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2015.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zheng, Y., Schachter, H.L., Holzer, M.: The impact of government from e-participation: a study of New Jersey municipalities. Gov. Inf. Quart. 31, 653–659 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2014.06.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ter’an, L., Drobnjak, A.: An evaluation framework for eParticipation: the VAAs case study. Int. Sch. Sci. Res. Innov. 7(1), 77–85 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Macintosh, A., Whyte, A.: Towards an evaluation framework for e-Participation. Transform. Gov.: People Process Policy 2(1), 16–30 (2008). doi: 10.1108/17506160810862928 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schroetera, R., Scheel, O., Renn, O., Schweizer, P.: Testing the value of public participation in Germany: theory, operationalization and a case study on the evaluation of participation. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 13, 116–125 (2016). doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karkin, N., Janssen, M.: Evaluating websites from a public value perspective: a review of Turkish local government websites. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 34, 351–363 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.11.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., Weerakkody, V.: Evaluating the use impact of Web 2.0 technologies in local government. Gov. Inf. Quart. 32, 473–487 (2015). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akrivopoulou, C.A.: Human Rights and the Impact of ICT in the Public Sphere: Participation, Democracy, and Political Autonomy. Information Science Reference, USA (2014). doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-6248-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alreemy, Z., Chang, V., Walters, R., Wills, G.: Critical success factors (CSFs) for information technology governance (ITG). Gov. Inf. Quart. 36(6), 907–916 (2016). doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.05.017 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Karlsson, F., Holgersson, J., Soderstrom, E., Hedstrom, K.: Exploring web participation approaches in public e-services development. Gov. Inf. Quart. 29, 158–168 (2012). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2011.07.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Astrom, J., Karlsson, M., Linde, J., Pirannjad, A.: Understanding the rise of e-participation in non-democracies: domestic and international factors. Gov. Inf. Quart. 29, 142–150 (2012). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2011.09.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Satish, K., Teo, T.S.H., Lim, V.K.G.: Contextual factors, e-participation, and e-government development: testing a multiple-mediation model. In: Proceedings of PACIS 2012, p. 113 (2012).
  15. 15.
    Lancee, B., Van der Werthorst, H.G.: Income inequality and participation: a comparison of 24 European countries. Soc. Sci. Res. 41(5), 1166–1178 (2012). doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Scherer, S., Wimmer, M.: Trust in e-participation: literature review and emerging needs. In: Proceedings of ICEGOV 2014, pp. 61–70 (2014). doi: 10.1145/2691195.2691237
  17. 17.
    Charalabidis, Y., Tsitsanis, T., Koussouris, S., Matzakou, I.: Momentum Deliverable 2.7: E-Participation Projects Consolidated Results (2013).
  18. 18.
    Vidiasova, L., Mikhaylova, E.: E-participation tools: barriers for development in Russia. Inf. Resour. Russ. 6, 31–33 (2016). in RussianGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Federal law №59: On the order debated the requests of citizens of the Russian Federation. From 21.04.2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Presidential decree of the Russian Federation № 601: On the main directions of governance improvement. From 07.05.2012 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    State Program “Information Society” (2011-2010). The Russian government regulation №313 from 13.04.2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    The decree of the President of the Russian Federation №183 of 4.03.2013: On consideration of public initiatives directed by citizens of the Russian Federation using the Internet portal “Russian Public Initiative” (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ITMO UniversitySaint PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations