Advertisement

Towards a Systematic Exploitation of Web 2.0 and Simulation Modeling Tools in Public Policy Process

  • Yannis Charalabidis
  • George Gionis
  • Enrico Ferro
  • Euripidis Loukis
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6229)

Abstract

This paper describes a methodology for the systematic exploitation of the emerging web 2.0 social media by government organizations in the processes of public policies formulation, aiming to enhance e-participation, in combination with established simulation modeling techniques and tools. It is based on the concept of ‘Policy Gadget’ (Padget), which is a micro web application combining a policy message with underlying group knowledge in social media (in the form of content and user activities) and interacting with citizens in popular web 2.0 locations in order to get and convey their input to policy makers. Such ‘Padgets’ are created by a central platform-toolset and then deployed in many different Web 2.0 media. Citizens input from them will be used in various simulation modeling techniques and tools (such as the ‘Systems Dynamics’), which are going to simulate different policy options and estimate their outcomes and effectiveness. A use case scenario of the proposed methodology is presented, which outlines how it can be used in ‘real life’ public policy design problems.

Keywords

e-participation web 2.0 social media public policy simulation system dynamics 

References

  1. 1.
    Rittel, H.W.J., Weber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4, 155–169 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buckingham Shum, S.: The Roots to Computer Supported Collaborative Argument Visualization. In: Kirschner, P.A., Buckingham Shum, S., Carr, C.S. (eds.) Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making, pp. 3–20. Springer, London (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Girle, R., Hitchcock, D., McBurney, P., Verheij, B.: Decision Support for Practical Reasoning: A Theoretical and Computational Perspectiv. In: Reed, C., Norman, T.J. (eds.) Argumentation Machines: New Frontiers in Argument and Computation, pp. 55–83. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karacapilidis, N., Loukis, E., Dimopoulos, S.: Computer-supported G2G collaboration for public policy and decision making. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 18(5), 602–624 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nonaka, I.: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science 5(1), 14–37 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohendet, P., Steinmueller, W.E.: The Codification of Knowledge: a Conceptual and Empirical Exploration. Industrial and Corporate Change 9(2), 195–209 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pateman, C.: Participation and Democratic Theory. University Press, Cambridge (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barber, B.: Strong Democracy. University of California Press, Berkeley (1984)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Held, D.: Models of Participation. Polity Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J.: Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values 25(1), 3–29 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J.: Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values 29(4), 512–557 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD): Engaging Citizens Online for Better Policy-making. Policy Brief, Paris (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD): Promise and Problems of e-Democracy: Challenges of Online Citizen Engagement. Paris (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macintosh, A.: Characterizing E-Participation in Policy Making. In: Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Timmers, P.: Agenda for eDemocracy – an EU perspective. European Commission (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ferro, E., Molinari, F.: Making Sense of Gov 2.0 Strategies: No Citizens, No Party. In: Prosser, A., Parycek, P. (eds.) Proceedings of EDEM 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Osimo, D.: Web 2.0 in Government: Why and How? JRC Scientific and Technical Reports. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (2008), http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC45269.pdf (retrieved)
  18. 18.
    Constantinides, E.: Social Media/Web 2.0 as Marketing Parameter: An Introduction. In: Proceedings of 8th International Congress Marketing Trends (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Constantinides, E.: Connecting Small and Medium Enterprises to the New Consumer: The Web 2.0 as Marketing Tool. In: Global Perspectives on Small and Medium Enterprise. IGI Global, Hershey (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kirkwood, C.W.: System Dynamics Methods – A Quick Introduction. Arizona State University, http://www.public.asu.edu/~kirkwood/sysdyn/SDWork/work-f.pdf (retrieved)
  21. 21.
    O’ Reilly, T.E.: What is web 2.0 (2005), http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html (retrieved)
  22. 22.
    Borshchev, A., Filippov, A.: From System Dynamics and Discrete Event to Practical Agent Based Modelling: Reasons, Techniques, Tools. In: Proceeding of 22nd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Oxford, England (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Forrester, J.: Industrial Dynamics: A Major Breakthrough for Decision Makers. Harvard Business Review 36(4), 37–66 (1958)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Forrester, J.: Industrial Dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge (1961)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu, C.Y., Wang, W.T.: System Dynamics Approach to Simulation of Tax Policy for Traditional and Internet Phone Services. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Homer, J.B., Hirsch, G.B.: System Dynamics Modelling for Public Health: Background and Opportunities. American Journal of Public Health 96(3), 452–458 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Robert, Y.C., Leslie, V.C.: Demonstrating the utility of system dynamics for public policy analysis in New Zealand: the case of excise tax policy on tobacco. System Dynamics Review 22(4), 321–348 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schwaninger, M.S., Ulli-Beer, S., Kaufmann-Hayoz, R.: Policy Analysis and Design in Local Public Management - A System Dynamics Approach. In: Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, pp. 205–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zamanipour, M.: A System Dynamics Model for Analyzing the Effects of Government Policies: A Case Study of Iran’s Cell Phone Market. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Teekasap, P.: Cluster Formation and Government Policy: System Dynamics Approach. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yannis Charalabidis
    • 1
  • George Gionis
    • 2
  • Enrico Ferro
    • 3
  • Euripidis Loukis
    • 1
  1. 1.University of the AegeanKarlovassiGreece
  2. 2.National Technical University of AthensAthensGreece
  3. 3.Istituto Superiore Mario BoellaItaly

Personalised recommendations