The “Tokenization” of the eParticipation in Public Governance: An Opportunity to Hack Democracy

  • Francisco Luis Benítez MartínezEmail author
  • María Visitación Hurtado TorresEmail author
  • Esteban Romero FríasEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1010)


Currently Distributed Ledger Technologies-DLTs, and especially the Blockchain technology, are an excellent opportunity for public institutions to transform the channels of citizen participation and reinvigorate democratic processes. These technologies permit the simplification of processes and make it possible to safely and securely manage the data stored in its records. This guarantees the transmission and public transparency of information, and thus leads to the development of a new citizen governance model by using technology such as a BaaS (Blockchain as a Service) platform. G-Cloud solutions would facilitate a faster deployment in the cities and provide scalability to foster the creation of Smart Citizens within the philosophy of Open Government. The development of an eParticipation model that can configure a tokenizable system of the actions and processes that citizens currently exercise in democratic environments is an opportunity to guarantee greater participation and thus manage more effective local democratic spaces. Therefore, a Blockchain solution in eDemocracy platforms is an exciting new opportunity to claim a new pattern of management amongst the agents that participate in the public sphere.


Governance Blockchain eParticipation 


  1. 1.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system (2008). Accessed 7 Feb 2019
  2. 2.
    Hedera hashgraph plattform. Accessed 7 Feb 2019
  3. 3.
    IOTA foundation tangle protocol. Accessed 7 Feb 2019
  4. 4.
    Alexopoulos, C., Charalabidis, Y., Androutsopoulou, A.: Benefits and obstacles of blockchain applications in E-Government. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 3377–3386 (2019)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huang, J., Karduck, A.: A methodology for digital government transformation. J. Econ., Bus. Manag. 5(6), 246–254 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morabito, V.: Blockchain governance. In: Business Innovation Through Blockchain: The B3 Perspective, pp. 41–59. Springer (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glaser, F., et al.: Blockchain as a platform. In: Treiblmaier, H., Beck, R. (eds.) Business Transformation through Blockchain, vol. I, Pp. 121–143. Palgrave MacMillan (2019)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Springall, D., et al.: Security analysis of the estonian Internet voting system. Accessed 25 Mar 2019
  9. 9.
    Rauchs, M., et al.: Distributed ledger technology systems: a conceptual framework. Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    IIIT Hyderabad: Cloud computing for e-Governance, White Paper (2010). Accessed 8 Feb 2019
  11. 11.
    Bitnation Governance 2.0 Platform. Accessed 9 Feb 2019
  12. 12.
    Follow My Vote Platform. Accessed 9 Feb 2019
  13. 13.
    BoardRoom Platform. Accessed 9 Feb 2019
  14. 14.
    CONSUL Project. Accessed 9 Feb 2019
  15. 15.
    TIVI Online Voting System. Accessed 9 Feb 2019
  16. 16.
    Fernández, M.: Descifrar las smart cities: Qué queremos decir cuando hablamos de smart cities, pp. 183–185, Caligrama Editorial, Madrid (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Romero-Frías, E., Arroyo-Machado, W.: Policy labs in Europe: political innovation, structure and content analysis on Twitter. In: El profesional de la información, 27(6), 1181–1192 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    LabIn Granada: Social Innovation Lab. Accessed 10 Feb 2019
  19. 19.
    Garriga-Portolá, M., López Ventura, J.: The role of open government in smart cities. In: Open Government Public Administration and Information Technology 4. Springer, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhao, Z., Chan, T.H.H.: How to vote privately using bitcoin. In: International Conference on Information and Communications Security, pp. 82–96. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hopwood, D., et al.: Zcash protocol specification. Technical Report 2016-1.10, Zerocoin Electric Coin Company (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McCorry, P., Shahandashti, S.F., Hao, F.: A smart contract for boardroom voting with maximum voter privacy. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2017, 110 (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu, B., et al.: Platform-independent secure blockchain-based voting system. In: Chen, L., Manulis, M., Schneider, S. (eds.) Information Security, ISC. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11060, pp. 369–386. Springer, Cham (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Annae, R., Freeland, R., Theodoropoulos, G.: E-voting requirements and implementation. In: 2007 The 9th IEEE CEC/EEE 2007, pp. 382–392. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wang, K.H., et al.: A review of contemporary e-voting: requirements, technology, systems. In: Data Science and Pattern Recognition, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 31–47 (2017)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ayed, A.B.: A conceptual secure blockchain-based electronic voting system. Int. J. Netw. Secur. Appl. 9(3) 1–9 (2017)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hardwick, F.S., Gioulis, A., Akram, R.N.: E-voting with blockchain: an e-voting protocol with decentralisation and voter privacy. ISG-SCC, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK (2018)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Naranjo-Zolotov, M., et al.: Examining social capital and individual motivators to explain the adoption of online participation. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 92, 302–311 (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations