A Comparative Analysis of Tools and Technologies for Policy Making

Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 10)


Latest advancements in information and communication technologies offer great opportunities for modernising policy making, i.e. increasing its efficiency, bringing it closer to all relevant actors, and enhancing its transparency and acceptance levels. In this context, this chapter aims to present, analyse, and discuss emerging information and communication technologies (ICT) tools and technologies presenting the potential to enhance policy making. The methodological approach includes the searching and identification of relevant tools and technologies, their systematic analysis and categorisation, and finally a discussion of potential usage and recommendations for enhancing policy making.


Geographic Information System Social Network Analysis Visualisation Tool Sentiment Lexicon Policy Cycle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work is partially funded by the European Commission within the 7th Framework Programme in the context of the eGovPoliNet project ( under grand agreement No. 288136.


  1. Abt CC (1987) Serious games. University Press of America, Lanham (Cited in: Michael, D. and Chen, C. (2006). Serious games: games that educate, train and inform. Boston, MA: Thompson Course Technology, PTR)Google Scholar
  2. Auffret M (2001) Content management makes sense—Part 1, delivering increased business value through semantic content management. J Knowl Manage Pract.
  3. Bandini S, Manzoni S, Vizzari G (2009) Agent-based modeling and simulation: an informatics perspective. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 12(4):4Google Scholar
  4. Behavioural Insights Teem (BIT) (2012) Applying behavioural insights to reduce fraud, error and debt. Cabinet Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Benn N, Macintosh A (2011) Argument visualization for eParticipation: towards a research agenda and prototype tool. In: Tambouris E, Macintosh A, de Bruijn H (eds) Electronic participation. Springer, Berlin, pp 60–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berners-Lee T, Fischetti M, Dertouzos M (1999) Weaving the web: the original design and ultimate destiny of the world wide web by its inventor. Harper, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertot JC, Gorham U, Jaeger PT, Sarin LC, Choi H (2014) Big data, open government and e-government: issues, policies and recommendations. Inform Polity 19(1):5–16.Google Scholar
  8. Caird-Daley A, Harris D, Bessell K, Lowe M (2007) Training decision making using serious games. Technical report. Human Factors Integration Defence Technology Centre. UK, HFIDTC/2/WP4.6.2/1Google Scholar
  9. Chang KT (2010) Introduction to geographic information systems. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Cyganiak R, Hausenblas M, McCuirc E (2011) Ocial statistics and the practice of data fidelity. In: Wood D (ed) Linking government data. Springer, Berlin, pp 135–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fogg BJ (2002) Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. Ubiquity, December: Article 5Google Scholar
  12. Gramberger MR (2001) Citizens as partners. OECD handbook on information, consultation and public participation in policy-making. OECD, Paris, p 64Google Scholar
  13. Hausenblas Μ (2009) Exploiting linked data to build web applications. IEEE Internet Comput 13(4):68–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heath T, Bizer C (2011) Linked data: evolving the web into a global data space. Synthesis lectures on the semantic web: theory and technology, vol 1:1. Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, pp 1–136Google Scholar
  15. Jann W, Wegrich K (2006) Theories of the policy cycle. In: Fischer F, Miller GJ, Sidney MS (eds) Handbook of public policy analysis: theory, politics, and methods. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  16. Kalampokis E, Hausenblas M, Tarabanis K (2011) Combining social and government open data for participatory decision-making. In: Tambouris E, Macintosh A, de Brujin H (eds) Electronic participation. Springer, Berlin, pp 36–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kraak MJ, Brown A (eds) (2001). Web cartography: developments and prospects. Taylor & Francis, New York, p 213Google Scholar
  18. Macal CM, North MJ (2005) Tutorial on agent-based modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings of the 37th conference on Winter simulation, pp 2–15. Winter Simulation ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  19. MacEachren AM, Kraak MJ (2001) Research challenges in geovisualization. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 28(1):3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maragoudakis M, Loukis E, Charalabidis Y (2011) A review of opinion mining methods for analyzing citizens’ contributions in public policy debate. In: Maragoudakis M, Loukis E, Charalabidis Y (eds) Electronic participation. Springer, Berlin, pp 298–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mitchell T (2005) Web mapping illustrated. O’Reilly, SebastopolGoogle Scholar
  22. Northern Ireland Government (2013) A practical guide to policy making in Northern Ireland. Accessed 22 Dec 2014
  23. Nyce C (2007) Predictive analytics white paper. American Institute for Chartered Property Casualty Underwriters. Insurance Institute of America, pp 9–10Google Scholar
  24. Ohl R (2008) Computer supported argument visualization: Modelling in consultative democracy around wicked problems. In: Okada A, Buckingham Shum S, Sherborne T (eds) Knowledge cartography: software tools and mapping techniques. Advanced information and knowledge processing series. Springer, London, pp 267–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Onggo BS (2010) Running agent-based models on a discrete-event simulator. In: Proceedings of the 24th European Simulation and Modelling Conference, pp 51–55Google Scholar
  26. Osimo D, Mureddu F (2012) Research challenge on visualization. W3C workshop on “Using Open Data: policy modeling, citizen empowerment, data journalism”Google Scholar
  27. Panopoulou E, Dalakiouridou E, Tambouris E, Tarabanis K (2012) Citizens’ evaluation of an online argument visualisation platform for eParticipation. In: Tambouris E, Macintosh A, Saebo O (eds) ePart 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7444. Springer, Berlin, pp 49–60Google Scholar
  28. Phang CW, Kankanhalli A (2008) A framework of ICT exploitation for e-participation initiatives. Commun ACM 51(12):128–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Raybourn EM, Deagle ME, Mendini K, Heneghan J (2005) Adaptive thinking & leadership simulation game training for special forces officers. In: The interservice/industry training, simulation & education conference (I/ITSEC), vol 2005, no 1). National Training Systems AssociationGoogle Scholar
  30. Rowena D (2010) Applying a systems-centered (SCT) approach and social network analysis (SNA) to citizen-centric behaviour change.
  31. Stylios G, Christodoulakis D, Besharat J, Vonitsanou M, Kotrotsos I, Koumpouri A, Stamou S (2010) Public opinion mining for governmental decisions. Electron J e-Gov 8(2):203–214Google Scholar
  32. Tambouris E, Dalakiouridou E, Panopoulou E, Tarabanis K (2011) Evaluation of an argument visualisation platform by experts and policy makers. In: Tambouris E, Macintosh A, de Bruijn H (eds) ePart 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6847. Springer, Berlin, pp 73–84Google Scholar
  33. Tang S, Yuan J, Mao X, Li X, Chen W, Dai G (2011) Relationship classification in large scale online social networks and its impact on information propagation. In proceeding of 30th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), pp 2291–2299, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  34. UK Government (1999) Modernising government. Accessed 22 Dec 2014
  35. United Nations Department of Economic (2010) United Nations e-government survey 2010: leveraging e-government at a time of financial and economic crisis, vol 10. United Nations Publications, HerndonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Technologies InstituteCentre for Research & Technology—HellasThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.University of MacedoniaThessalonikiGreece
  3. 3.INSIGHT Centre for Data Analytics, NUIGGalwayIreland
  4. 4.Thoughtgraph LtdSomersetUK

Personalised recommendations