A Critical Analysis of EU-Funded eParticipation

  • Pedro Prieto-Martín
  • Luis de Marcos
  • Jose Javier Martínez
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter reflects, from a holistic perspective, on the challenges surrounding the development of eParticipation in Europe, with special focus on EU programmes. To this end, first, we assess the field’s practical and theoretical achievements and limitations, and corroborate that the progress of eParticipation in the last decade has not been completely satisfactory in spite of the significant share of resources invested to support it. Second, we attempt to diagnose and shed light on some of the field’s systemic problems and challenges which are responsible for this lack of development. The domain’s maladies are grouped under tree main categories: (1) lack of a proper understanding and articulation with regard to the ‘participation’ field, (2) eParticipation community’s ‘founding biases’ around eGovernment and academy, and (3) inadequacy of traditional innovation support programmes to incentivize innovation in the field. In the context of the ‘Europe 2020 Strategy’, the final section provides several recommendations that should contribute to enhance the effectiveness of future European eParticipation actions.

Keywords

Civil Society Civic Engagement Funding Programme Positive Deviant Assessment Section 
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.

References

  1. Aichholzer G, Westholm H (2009) Evaluating eParticipation projects: practical examples and outline of an evaluation framework. Eur J ePrac 7:1–18Google Scholar
  2. Albrecht S, Kohlrausch N, Kubicek H (2008) eParticipation – electronic participation of citizens and the business community in eGovernment. University of Bremen, BremenGoogle Scholar
  3. Brodie E, Cowling E, Nissen N (2009) Understanding participation: a literature review. Pathways Through Participation, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruns A, Swift A (2010) g4c2c: enabling citizen engagement at arms’ length from government. EDem 3(1):57–69Google Scholar
  5. Chadwick A (2009) Web 2.0: new challenges for the study of e-Democracy in an era of informational exuberance. I/S J Law Policy Inf Soc 5(1):9–41MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Charalabidis Y, Gionis G, Ferro E (2010) Towards a systematic exploitation of Web 2.0 and simulation modeling tools in public policy process. In: Macintosh A, Tambouris E (eds) LNCS 6229, proceedings of ePart 2010. Springer, Lausanne, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  7. Chrissafis T, Rohen M (2010) European eParticipation developments: from ad hoc experiences towards mass engagement. J eDemocr 2(2):89–98Google Scholar
  8. CitizenScape (2010a) D2.1.2: monitoring and evaluation report. http://citizenscape.org/consortium-area/wp3.3-project-management-coordination-liaison-with/deliverables. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  9. CitizenScape (2010b) D3.4: final report. http://citizenscape.org/news/citizenscape-public-final-report. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  10. CitizenScape (2010c) Lessons learnt from CitizenScape Pilot trials. http://citizenscape.org/news/lessons-learnt-from-citizenscape-pilot-trials. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  11. CoE (2009) Electronic democracy (e-democracy). Recommendation CM/Rec(2009), adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Council of Europe, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  12. Coleman S (2006) Democracy in the Internet age (speech). e-Governance Academy, TallinnGoogle Scholar
  13. Coleman S, Kaposi I (2009) A study of e-participation projects in third-wave democracies. Int J Electron Govern 2(4):302–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cornwall A, Romano J, Shankland A (2008) Brazilian experiences of participation and citizen-ship: a critical look. Discussion Paper. IDS, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  15. CROSSROAD (2010) Final roadmap on ICT for governance and policy modelling. http://crossroad.epu.ntua.gr/files/2010/02/CROSSROAD_D4.3_Final_Roadmap_Report-v1.00.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  16. CROSSROAD (2011) Final policy recommendations on ICT for governance and policy modelling. http://crossroad.epu.ntua.gr/files/2010/02/CROSSROAD_D4.4_Policy_Recommendations-v2.00.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  17. De Cindio F, Peraboni CF (2009) e-Participation at the urban level. In: Macintosh A, Tambouris E (eds) LNCS 5694, proceedings of ePart 2009. Springer, Linz, pp 112–124Google Scholar
  18. eGovMoNet (2010) D3.3: eGovernment monitor network, impact measurement methodology. eGovMoNet ConsortiumGoogle Scholar
  19. European Union (2011) Online database of EU research projects. http://cordis.europa.eu/. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  20. European Commission (2009) Ministerial declaration on eGovernment. Malmö. http://www.egov2009.se/wp-content/uploads/Ministerial-Declaration-on-eGovernment.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  21. European Commission (2010) Interim evaluation of the seventh framework programme. Report of the expert group. European Commission, Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations/pdf/archive/other_reports_studies_and_documents/fp7_interim_evaluation_expert_group_report.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  22. European Commission (2011a) Green paper. From challenges to opportunities: towards a common strategic framework for EU research and innovation funding. Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/research/csfri/pdf/com_2011_0048_csf_green_paper_en.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  23. European Commission (2011b) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/11/59&type=HTML. Innovation – key issues for the European Council. European Commission, Brussels. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  24. European eParticipation (2009a) D1.1: major factors shaping the development of eParticipation. European eParticipation Study. http://islab.uom.gr/eP/. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  25. European eParticipation (2009b) D1.3: main benefits of eParticipation developments in the EU. European eParticipation Study. http://islab.uom.gr/eP/. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  26. European eParticipation (2009c) D5.1: eParticipation recommendations – focusing on the European level. European eParticipation Study. http://islab.uom.gr/eP/. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  27. European eParticipation (2009d) D7.5: final report. European eParticipation Study. http://islab.uom.gr/eP/. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  28. European eParticipation (2009e) Summary report. Study and supply of services on the development of eParticipation in the EU. European Commission, Brussels. http://islab.uom.gr/eP/. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  29. FEED (2009) D1.1: end-user characteristics and system actors. http://www.feed-project.eu/files/FEED_D1_1_End-user%20Characteristics%20and%20System%20Actors.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  30. Ferro E, Molinari F (2010) Framing Web 2.0 in the process of public sector innovation: going down the participation ladder. Eur J ePrac 9:20–34Google Scholar
  31. Freschi AC, Medaglia R, Nørbjerg J (2009) eParticipation in the institutional domain: a review of research. DEMO-Net, BergamoGoogle Scholar
  32. Gaventa J, Barret G (2010) So what difference does it make? Mapping the outcomes of citizen engagement. Citizenship, participation and accountability. IDS, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  33. Handler J, Shadbolt N, Hall W, Berners-Lee T, Weitzner D (2008) Web science: an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the web. Commun ACM 51(7):60–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Howe C (2009) Building the virtual town hall: civic architecture for cyberspace. Public-i, HoveGoogle Scholar
  35. Ideal-EU (2009) D6.9: final dissemination report. Ideal-EU ConsortiumGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnston P (2010) Transforming government’s policy-making processes. Why encouraging more and easier citizen input into policy-making is not enough. JeDEM 2(2):162–169MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. Lippa B (2008) eParticipation evaluation and impact. DEMO-Net, BremenGoogle Scholar
  38. Macintosh A, Coleman S (2006) Multidisciplinary roadmap and report on eParticipation research. DEMO-Net, BergamoGoogle Scholar
  39. Macintosh A, Coleman S, Schneeberger A (2009) eParticipation: the research gaps. In: Macintosh A, Tambouris E (eds) LNCS 5694, proceedings of ePart 2009. Springer, Linz, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  40. Maier E, Reimer U (2010) Process support for increasing participation in eParticipation. J eDemocr 2(1):46–55Google Scholar
  41. Medaglia R (2007) The challenged identity of a field: the state of the art of eParticipation research. Inf Polity 12:169–181Google Scholar
  42. Millard J, Meyerhoff Nielsen M (2010) European status of e-participation and what is needed to optimise future Benefits? Paper presented at the EDem 2010, KremsGoogle Scholar
  43. Molinari F (2010) On sustainable participation. In: Macintosh A, Tambouris E, Glassey O (eds) LNCS 6229, proceedings of ePart 2010. Springer, Lausanne, pp 126–139Google Scholar
  44. MOMENTUM (2010) D2.7: eParticipation projects consolidated results V.3. http://www.ep-momentum.eu/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=T8o4VgJp7oU%3D&tabid=57&mid=492. Accessed 5 Oct 2011
  45. NCDD (2009) Core principles for public engagement. National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation, Boiling SpringsGoogle Scholar
  46. Osimo D (2009) A short history of government 2.0: from cool projects to policy impact. In: Gøtze J, Pedersen CB (eds) State of the eUnion. Government 2.0 and onwards. 21gov.net, Copenhagen, pp 97–107Google Scholar
  47. Panopoulou E, Tambouris E, Tarabanis K (2009) eParticipation initiatives: How is Europe progressing? Eur J ePract 7Google Scholar
  48. Panopoulou E, Tambouris E, Tarabanis K (2010) eParticipation initiatives in Europe: learning from practitioners. In: Macintosh A, Tambouris E, Glassey O (eds) LNCS 6229, proceedings of ePart 2010. Springer, Lausanne, pp 54–65Google Scholar
  49. Parés M, Pomeroy M, Díaz L (2007) Observing the local participatory democracies. IOPD, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  50. Pascale R, Sternin J, Sternin M (2010) The power of positive deviance. Harvard Press, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  51. Peart MN, Ramos Díaz J (2007) Comparative project on local e-democracy initiatives in Europe and North America. e-Democracy Centre, ZürichGoogle Scholar
  52. Pierson P (2000) Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. Am Polit Sci Rev 94(2):251–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pratchett L (2006) Understanding e-democracy in Europe. Ad-hoc committee on e-democracy (CAHDE), Council of Europe, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  54. Prieto-Martín P (2006a) Putting e-participation research on the service of civil society. In: Rose J (ed) European research workshop: mapping eParticipation, MCIS 2006. DEMO-Net, VeniceGoogle Scholar
  55. Prieto-Martín P (2006b) Virtual environments for citizen participation: principal bases for design. In: Remenyi D (ed) ECEG 2006. Academic Conferences Limited, MarburgGoogle Scholar
  56. Prieto-Martín P (2010) Las alas de Leo. La participación ciudadana del siglo XX. Asociación Ciudades Kyosei, PanajachelGoogle Scholar
  57. Pruitt B, Thomas P (2007) Democratic dialogue – a handbook for practitioners. IDEA, OAS & UNDP, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  58. Punie Y, Lusoli W, Misuraca G, Broster D (eds) (2009) The impact of social computing on the EU information society and economy. IPTS, SevileGoogle Scholar
  59. Rambøll Management (2008) Evaluation of the e-Participation preparatory action. ECGoogle Scholar
  60. Sæbø Ø, Rose J, Flak LS (2008) The shape of eParticipation: characterizing an emerging research area. Gov Inf Q 25:400–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sanford C, Rose J (2007) Characterizing eParticipation. Int J Inf Manag 27(6):406–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Scherer S, Schneider C, Wimmer M, Shaddock J (2008) Studying eParticipation in government innovation programmes: lessons from a survey. In: 21st Bled eConference – eCollaboration, BledGoogle Scholar
  63. Sydow J, Schreyögg G, Koch J (2009) Organizational path dependence: opening the black box. Acad Manag Rev 34(4):689–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Verdegem P, Stragier J, Verleye G (2010) Measuring for knowledge: a data-driven research approach for eGovernment. Electron J e-Gov 8(2):227–236Google Scholar
  65. Westholm H, Wimmer M (2007) Interdisciplinary framework to address the socio-technical and political challenges of eParticipation. DEMO-Net, BremenGoogle Scholar
  66. Zouridis S, Thaens M (2003) E-government: towards a public administration approach. Asian J Publ Admin 25(2):159–183Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pedro Prieto-Martín
    • 1
  • Luis de Marcos
    • 1
  • Jose Javier Martínez
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversidad de AlcaláAlcalá de HenaresSpain

Personalised recommendations