Advertisement

Direct Democracy Catalysed by Resident-to-Resident Online Deliberation

  • Rean van der Merwe
  • Anthony Meehan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6847)

Abstract

In the context of local civic governance, much of the interest in e-Participation concerns the extent to which online media might overcome the limitations of geography and scale, and so allow local interests to be better represented in institutionally driven participatory processes at national or regional level. In contrast, this study investigates the online deliberations of a local, geographically bounded community in a series of mailing lists that had originated from their own initiative and self-organisation. The interactions we observe challenges assumptions of democratic deliberation as mainly policy debate between citizens and government, or of lobbying administrative government. It also proposes a broader conception of the role of online deliberation in local governance, where instrumental decision-making and developing consensus is frequently over privileged in research.

Keywords

e-Democracy e-Participation e-Governance Neighbourhood democracy Online Deliberation 

References

  1. 1.
    Castells, M.: Communication, Power and Counter-power in the Network Society. International Journal of Communication 1, 238–266 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Engeström, Y.: From communities of practice to mycorrhizae. In: Hughes, J., Jewson, N., Unwin, L. (eds.) Communities of Practice: Critical Perspectives. Routledge, London (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wellman, B., Quan-Haase, A., Boase, J., Chen, W., Hampton, K., DÌaz, I., Miyata, K.: The Social Affordances of the Internet for Networked Individualism. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 8 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kling, R., McKim, G., King, A.: A Bit More to It: Scholarly Communication Forums as Socio-Technical Interaction Networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 54, 47–67 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bertucci, G.: United Nations e-Government Survey 2008: From e-Government to Connected Governance, United Nations, New York (2008) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vedel, T.: The Idea of Electronic Democracy: Origins, Visions and Questions. Parliamenry Affairs 59, 226–235 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leighninger, M.: The promise and challenge of Neighbourhood Democracy. Deliberative Democracy Consortium, 24 (2008) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dahlberg, L.: Net-public sphere research: Beyond the “first phase”. Javnost 11, 27–44 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gutmann, A., Thompson, D.F.: Why deliberative democracy? Princeton University Press, Princeton (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wunsch, J.S.: Decentralization, Local Governance and The Democratic Transition in Southern Africa: A Comparative Analysis. African Studies Quarterly 2 (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J.D., Rowe, K.: Technology for communities. Communities 2, 1–15 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Preece, J., Abras, C., Maloney-Krichmar, D.: Designing and evaluating online communities: research speaks to emerging practice. International Journal of Web Based Communities 1, 2–18 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barber, B.R.: Strong democracy: participatory politics for a new age. University of California Press, Berkeley (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stake, R.E.: The art of Case Study Research. Sage, London (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carroll, J.M., Swatman, P.A.: Structured-case: a methodological framework for building theory in information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 9, 235–242 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hauser, G.A.: Vernacular Dialogue and the Rhetoricality of Public Opinion. Communication Monographs 65, 83 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cohen, J., Sabel, C.: Directly Deliberative Polyarchy. European Law Journal 3, 313–340 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bimber, B.A.: Information and American democracy: technology in the evolution of political. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mingers, J.: Combining IS research methods: towards a pluralist methodology. Information Systems Research 12, 240–259 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van Der Merwe, R., Meehan, A.: Direct deliberative local governance using online media? consensual problem solving or a recalcitrant pluralism?: From e-Participation to Online Deliberation. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Online Deliberation, OD 2010, June 30-July 2, p. 13. University of Leeds, Leeds (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rugg, G., McGeorge, P.: The sorting techniques: a tutorial paper on card sorts, picture sorts and item sorts. Expert Systems 14, 80–93 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kelly, G.A.: A brief introduction to personal construct theory. In: Perspectives in Personal Construct Theory, pp. 1–29. Academic Press, London (1970)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anderson, B.R.: Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism, Verso (1991) Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fayard, A.-L., DeSanctis, G.: Enacting language games: the development of a sense of, “we-ness” in online forums. Information Systems Journal 20, 383–416 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Willcocks, L.P.: Foucault, Power/Knowledge and Information Systems: reconstructing the present. In: Mingers, J., Willcocks, L.P. (eds.) Social Theory and Philosophy for Information Systems, pp. 238–296. Wiley, Chichester (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Klein, H.K., Huynh, Q.H.: The critical social theory of Jürgen Habermas and its implications for IS research. In: Mingers, J., Willcocks, L.P. (eds.) Social Theory and Philosophy for Information Systems, pp. 157–237. Wiley, Chichester (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Isin, E., Wood, P.: Technological Citizenship. Citizenship and Identity, pp. 105–113. Sage, London (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Anderson, M.R.: Community Psychology, Political Efficacy, and Trust. Political Psychology 31 (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Davies, T.: The Blossoming Field of Online Deliberation. In: Davies, T.R., Peña Gangadharan, S. (eds.) Online Deliberation Design Research and Practice, pp. 1–20. CSLI Publications (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Price, V.: Citizens Deliberating Online: Theory and Some Evidence. In: Davies, T., Gangadharan, S.P. (eds.) Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice, pp. 37–58. CSLI Publications (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sunstein, C.R.: The Law of Group Polarisation. John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 91, p. 38. University of Chicago Law School (1999) Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lev-on, A., Manin, B.: Happy Accidents: Deliberation and Online Exposure to Opposing Views. In: Davies, T.R., Peña Gangadharan, S. (eds.) Online Deliberation Design Research and Practice, pp. 105–122. CSLI Publications (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cordella, A.: Transaction costs and information systems: does IT add up? Journal of Information Technology, 195–202 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rean van der Merwe
    • 1
  • Anthony Meehan
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing DepartmentThe Open UniversityUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations