Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
  • Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Electronic Government

EGOV 2013: Electronic Government pp 87–98Cite as

  1. Home
  2. Electronic Government
  3. Conference paper
Participatory Data Gathering for Public Sector Reuse: Lessons Learned from Traditional Initiatives

Participatory Data Gathering for Public Sector Reuse: Lessons Learned from Traditional Initiatives

  • Nathalie Stembert19,
  • Peter Conradie19,
  • Ingrid Mulder19,20 &
  • …
  • Sunil Choenni19,21 
  • Conference paper
  • 2490 Accesses

  • 1 Citations

  • 4 Altmetric

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNISA,volume 8074)

Abstract

Local governments are increasingly looking for new ways to involve citizens in policy and decision-making, for example by combining public sector data sources with data gathered by citizens. Several examples exist of data gathering where personal mobile devices act as data collectors. While these efforts illustrate the technical capability of data sourcing, they neglect the value of local knowledge where people use their senses to capture and interpret data. Traditional data gathering initiatives, however, exploit this local knowledge to inform policy makers, e.g., neighborhood policing. To understand data gathering processes of these traditional data gathering initiatives, three cases are examined. We analyze these cases, focusing on the various elements they contain, concluding how digital data gathering can be informed by these traditional variants, concerning what the benefits of using digital means can be for data gathering and how traditional initiatives ensure data re-use by the public sector.

Keywords

  • Data Gathering
  • Participatory Citizenship
  • Local knowledge
  • Open Data

Download conference paper PDF

References

  1. Reddel, T., Woolcock, G.: From consultation to participatory governance? A critical review of citizen engagement strategies in Queensland. Australian Journal of Public Administration 63, 75–87 (2004)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Amichai-Hamburger, Y.: Potential and promise of online volunteering. Computers in Human Behavior 24, 544–562 (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Johannessen, M.R., Flak, L.S., Sæbø, Ø.: Choosing the Right Medium for Municipal eParticipation Based on Stakeholder Expectations. In: Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A., Sæbø, Ø. (eds.) ePart 2012. LNCS, vol. 7444, pp. 25–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Maier-Rabler, U., Huber, S.: “Open”: the changing relation between citizens, public administration, and political authority. JeDEM 3, 182–191 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Maisonneuve, N., Stevens, M., Ochab, B.: Participatory noise pollution monitoring using mobile phones. Information Polity 15, 51–71 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Eriksson, J., Girod, L., Hull, B., Newton, R., Madden, S., Balakrishnan, H.: The Pothole Patrol: Using a Mobile Sensor Network for Road Surface Monitoring. In: MobiSys 2008 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Savage, N.: Cycling through data. Communications of the ACM 53, 16 (2010)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Levine, C., Fisher, G.: Citizenship and service delivery: The promise of coproduction. Public Administration Review 44, 178–189 (1984)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Gouveia, C., Fonseca, A., Câmara, A., Ferreira, F.: Promoting the use of environmental data collected by concerned citizens through information and communication technologies. Journal of Environmental Management 71, 135–154 (2004)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Coleman, S., Gøtze, J.: Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Corburn, J.: Community knowledge in environmental health science: co-producing policy expertise. Environmental Science & Policy 10, 150–161 (2007)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Corburn, J.: Bringing Local Knowledge into Environmental Decision Making: Improving Urban Planning for Communities at Risk. Journal of Planning Education and Research 22, 420–433 (2003)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  13. Nicholson, E., Ryan, J., Hodgkins, D.: Community data-where does the value lie? Assessing confidence limits of community collected water quality data. Water Sci. Technol. 45, 193–200 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bromenshenk, J.J., Preston, E.M.: Public participation in environmental monitoring: A means of attaining network capability. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 6, 35–47 (1986)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Stokes, P., Havas, M., Brydges, T.: Public participation and volunteer help in monitoring programs: An assessment. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 15, 225–229 (1990)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Au, J., Bagchi, P., Chen, B., Martinez, R., Dudley, S.A., Sorger, G.J.: Methodology for public monitoring of total coliforms, Escherichia coli and toxicity in waterways by Canadian high school students. Journal of Environmental Management 58, 213–230 (2000)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Girardin, F., Blat, J., Calabrese, F., Fiorre, F.D.: Digital Footprinting: Uncovering Tourists with User-Generated Content. IEEE Pervasive Computing 7, 36–43 (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Fischer, F.: Citizens, experts, and the environment: The politics of local knowledge. Duke University Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Corburn, J.: Bringing Local Knowledge into Environmental Decision Making Improving Urban Planning for communities at risk, 420–433 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. King, S.F.S., Brown, P.: Fix my street or else: using the internet to voice local public service concerns. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, Macau, pp. 72–80 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Yearley, S.: Experts in Public: Publics’ Relationships to Scientific Authority. In: Making Sense of Science: Understanding the Social Study of Science, pp. 113–128. SAGE Publications Ltd., London (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Susskind, L., Elliott, M.: Learning from Western Europe. In: Paternalism, Conflict, and Coproduction: Learning from Citizen Action and Citizen Participation in Western Europe, p. 3. Plenum Press (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ehrmann, J., Stinson, B.: Joint Fact-finding and the Use of Technical Experts. In: The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement, pp. 375–400. Sage Publications (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yin, R.: Case Study Research Design and Methods. SAGE, London (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Baxter, P., Jack, S.: Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report 13, 544–559 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Visser, F.S., Van Der Lugt, R., Stappers, P.J.: Participatory design needs participatory communication: New tools for sharing user insights in the product innovation process. In: Proceedings of 9th European Conference on Creativity and Innovation, Lódz, Poland, pp. 1–17 (September 2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Creating 010, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands

    Nathalie Stembert, Peter Conradie, Ingrid Mulder & Sunil Choenni

  2. ID-StudioLab, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

    Ingrid Mulder

  3. Research and Documentation Centre, Ministry of Justice, The Netherlands

    Sunil Choenni

Authors
  1. Nathalie Stembert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Conradie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ingrid Mulder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sunil Choenni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for IS Research, University of Koblenz-Landau, Universitätsstrasse 1, 56070, Koblenz, Germany

    Maria A. Wimmer

  2. Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, Delft, The Netherlands

    Marijn Janssen

  3. University of Washington, Mary Gates Hall, 98195-2840, Seattle, WA, USA

    Hans J. Scholl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Cite this paper

Stembert, N., Conradie, P., Mulder, I., Choenni, S. (2013). Participatory Data Gathering for Public Sector Reuse: Lessons Learned from Traditional Initiatives. In: Wimmer, M.A., Janssen, M., Scholl, H.J. (eds) Electronic Government. EGOV 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8074. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40358-3_8

Download citation

  • .RIS
  • .ENW
  • .BIB
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40358-3_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40357-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40358-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Over 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips

Switch Edition
  • Academic Edition
  • Corporate Edition
  • Home
  • Impressum
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • California Privacy Statement
  • How we use cookies
  • Manage cookies/Do not sell my data
  • Accessibility
  • FAQ
  • Contact us
  • Affiliate program

Not logged in - 44.201.94.236

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.