Problem-Structuring Methods for e-Democracy

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation book series (AGDN, volume 5)

Abstract

The pressures towards e-government have brought the possibility to use decision-analytic methods and models to support the participation of social actors in democratic deliberations about public issues. Despite their increased use, however, less attention has been devoted to the process of structuring issues prior to building them in such participatory contexts. In this chapter, we examine the role of problem-structuring methods to support e-democracy, from defining the issues of concerns to scoping the required level of participation of stakeholders. Furthermore, we identify the challenges that have to be addressed and overcome if facilitated structuring approaches such as problem-structuring methods are to be implemented and used to support e-democratic systems.

Keywords

Problem-structuring methods (PSMs) Facilitation Democratic deliberations e-democracy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ackoff, R. 1974. Redesigning the Future: A Systems Approach to Societal Problems. New York, NY, Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Ackoff, R. 1979. The future of operational research is past. Journal of Operational Research Society, 30(2), 93–104.Google Scholar
  3. Adkins, M. et al. 2004. A language technology toolset for development of a large group augmented facilitation system. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii.Google Scholar
  4. Adkins, M. and R. Schwarz. 2002. Embedded facilitation requirements using the skilled facilitator approach: within and across time and space. Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. Hawaii.Google Scholar
  5. Alabdulkarim, A. A. and L. A. Macaulay. 2007. Facilitation patterns and citizen engagement. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 7(2), 122–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger, P. L. and T. Luckmann. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York, NY, Doubleday.Google Scholar
  7. Briggs, R. O. et al. 2003. Collaboration engineering with ThinkLets to pursue sustained success with group support systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 31–64.Google Scholar
  8. Browning, G. 2002. Electronic Democracy: Using the Internet to Transform American Politics. Medford, NJ, Information Today.Google Scholar
  9. Bryant, J. 2002. Confrontation in health service management: insights from drama theory. European Journal of Operational Research, 142, 610–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bryant, J. 2007. Drama theory: dispelling the myths. Journal Operational Research Society, 58(5), 602–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bryson, J. M. 2004. What to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bryson, J. M., F. Ackermann, C. Eden and C. Finn. 2004. Visible Thinking: Unlocking Causal Mapping for Practical Business Results. Chichester, Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Checkland, P. and J. Scholes. 1990. Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Chichester, Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Conover, P. J. and D. D. Searing. 2005. Studying ‘everyday political talk’ in the deliberative system. Acta Politica, 40(3), 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dando, M. R. and P. G. Bennett. 1981. A Kuhnian crisis in management science? Journal of Operational Research Society, 32(2), 91–103.Google Scholar
  16. Davies, T. and B. S. Noveck. 2007. Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice. Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Eden, C. 1988. Cognitive mapping: a review. European Journal of Operational Research, 36(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eden, C. 1990. The unfolding nature of group decision support: two dimensions of skill. In C. Eden and J. Radford (Eds.), Tackling Strategic Problems: The Role of Group Decision Support. London, Sage. pp. 48–52.Google Scholar
  19. Eden, C. and F. Ackermann. 1998. Strategy Making: The Journey of Strategic Management. London, Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Eden, C., S. Jones and D. Sims. 1983. Messing About in Problems: An Informal Structured Approach to Their Identification and Management. Oxford, Pergamon.Google Scholar
  21. Franco, L. A. 2006. Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 813–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Franco, L. A. and G. Montibeller. 2010. Facilitated modelling in operational research (invited review). European Journal of Operational Research, 205(3), 489–500.Google Scholar
  23. Franco, L. A., D. Shaw and M. Westcombe. 2006. Special issue: problem structuring methods. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 757–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. French, S., J. Maule and N. Papamichail. 2009. Decision Behaviour, Analysis and Support. Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. French, S., D. Ríos Insua and F. Ruggeri. 2007. e-participation and decision analysis. Decision Analysis, 4(4), 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Friend, J. and A. Hickling. 2005. Planning Under Pressure: The Strategic Choice Approach, 3rd edn. Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
  27. Helquist, J. H., J. Kruse and M. Adkins. 2008. Participant-driven collaborative convergence. Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI.Google Scholar
  28. Hemmati, M. 2002. Multi-Stakeholder Processes for Governance and Stability: Beyond Deadlock and Conflict. London, Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Kao, A. and S. Poteet, Eds. 2007. Natural Language Processing and Text Mining. London, Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Landry, M. 1995. A note on the concept of ‘problem’. Organization Studies, 16(2), 315–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lyles, M. A. and I. I. Mitroff. 1980. Organizational problem formulation: an empirical study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mingers, J. and J. Rosenhead. 2004. Problem structuring methods in action. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 530–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mitroff, I. L. and J. R. Ernshoff. 1974. On systemic problem solving and the error of the third kind. Behavioral Science, 19, 383–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Namen, A. A., C. Bornstein and J. Rosenhead. 2009. Robustness analysis for sustainable community development. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(5), 587–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nutt, P. C. 1992. Formulation tactics and the success of organizational decision making. Decision Sciences, 23(3), 519–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rittel, H. and M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Science, 4, 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rosenhead, J. 1992. Into the swamp: the analysis of social issues. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 43(4), 293–305.Google Scholar
  38. Rosenhead, J. 1996. What’s the problem? An introduction to problem structuring methods. Interfaces, 29(6), 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenhead, J., and J. Mingers, Eds. 2001. Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited: Problem Structuring Methods for Complexity, Uncertainty and Conflict. Chichester, Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. Schutz, A. 1967. The Phenomenology of the Social World (G. Walsh and F. Lehnert, Trans.). Evanston, IL, Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Shaw, M. 1981. Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Group Behaviours. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  42. Smith, G. F. 1994. Classifying managerial problems: an empirical study of definitional content. Journal of Management Studies, 32, 679–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thomas, H. and D. Samson. 1986. Subjective aspects of the art of decision analysis: exploring the role of decision analysis in decision structuring, decision support and policy dialogue. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 37(3), 249–265.Google Scholar
  44. Weick, K. E. 1995. Sense Making in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.Google Scholar
  45. White, L. 2002. Size matters: large group methods and the process of operational research. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(2), 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wong, H. and J. Rosenhead. 2000. A rigorous definition of robustness analysis. Journal of Operational Research Society, 51(2), 176–182.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leicester Business SchoolLeicesterUK
  2. 2.Warwick Business SchoolWest MidlandsUK

Personalised recommendations