Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

e-Participation: A Discursive Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
e-Democracy

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

Abstract

This chapter analyses some of the distinguishing characteristics of public participation processes, justifying the case for a discursive deliberative approach. It identifies tools’ requirements to effectively foster deliberation, presenting a comprehensive evolution of discursive support tools up to the Web 2.0 generation. Integration with tools from several research areas, including decision-analytic approaches is also discussed. Finally, this chapter ends with some considerations about the potential and limitations of the discursive approach and the challenges ahead.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aikens, G. S. 1998. A personal history of Minnesota electronic democracy, 1994. Journal of Government Information, 25, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B. R. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. December 1981. Teledemocracy. Bringing power back to the people. The Futurist, 15, 6–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brants, K. 2005. Guest editor’s introduction: the internet and the public sphere. Political Communication, 22, 143–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, S., A. Evans, R. Kingston and I. Turton. 2001. Public participation, GIS, and cyberdemocracy: evaluating on-line spatial decision support systems. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28, 907–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., L. Treleaven and D. Moodie. 2000. CMC and the question of democratisation: a university field study. Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cindio, F. D. and D. Schuler. 2007. Deliberation and community networks: a strong link waiting to be forged. Paper presented at the Communities and Action: Prato CIRN Conference 2007, Prato.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, S. and J. Gøtze. 2001. Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation. London, Hansard Society and BT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg, L. 2001. The internet and democratic discourse: exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere. Information, Communication and Society, 4, 615–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, P. 2005. The internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, D. 1997. Citizen participation in the planning process: an essentially contested concept? Journal of Planning Literature, 11, 412–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeTombe, D. J. 2002. Complex societal problems in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research, 140, 232–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, D. W. and H. Farrell. 2008. Introduction: blogs, politics and power: a special issue of Public Choice. Public Choice, 134, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. 2001. Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29, 651–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, W. N. 1994. Public Policy Analysis: An introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliman, T., A. Macintosh and Z. Irani. 2007. A model building tool to support group deliberation (eDelib). International Journal of Cases on Electronic Commerce, 3, 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. 1997. The market and the forum: three varieties of political theory. In J. Bohman and W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press. pp. 3–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, A. J., R. Kingston and S. Carver. 2004. Democratic input into the nuclear waste, disposal problem: the influence of geographical data on decision making examined through a Web-based GIS. Journal of Geographical Systems, 6, 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, H. and D. W. Drezner. 2008. The power and politics of blogs. Public Choice, 134, 15–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fearon, J. D. 1998. Deliberation as discussion. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press. pp. 44–68.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • French, S., D. Ríos-Insua and F. Ruggeri. 2007. e-Participation and decision analysis. Decision Analysis, 4, 211–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. 2006. Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66, 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geurts, J. L. A. and C. Joldersma. 2001. Methodology for participatory policy analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 128, 300–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T. F. and G. Richter. 2002. Discourse support systems for deliberative democracy. In R. Traunmuller and K. Lenk (Eds.), E-government: State-of-the-Art and Perspectives (EGOV). Aix-en-Provence, Springer. pp. 248–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R., B. Fischhoff and T. McDaniels. 2005. Acceptable input: using decision analysis to guide public policy deliberations. Decision Analysis, 2, 4–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grönlund, Å. and T. A. Horan. 2005. Introducing e-Gov: history, definitions, and issues. Communications of the AIS, 15, 713–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 1974. The public sphere: an encyclopedia article. New German Critique, 3, 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 1996. Three normative models of Democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press. pp. 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P. 2003. Decisionarium – aiding decisions, negotiating and collecting opinions on the Web. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 12, 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Held, D. 1995. Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas. Cambridge, MA, Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D. 1997. Models of Democracy. Cambridge, MA, Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtzman, S. 1989. Intelligent Decision Systems. Reading, MA, Addison-Welsey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, J. 2005. Emergent democracy. In J. Lebkowsky and M. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Extreme Democracy. Lulu.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankowski, N. and M. van Selm. 2000. The promise and practice of public debate in cyberspace. In K. L. Hacker and J. van Dijk (Eds.), Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory and Practice. London, SAGE Publications. pp. 149–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavanaugh, A., P. Isenhour, M. Cooper, J. M. Carroll, M. B. Rosson and J. Schmitz. 2005a. Information technology in support of public deliberation. In P. V. D. Bessalaar and J. Preece (Eds.), Communities and Technologies II. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavanaugh, A., P. Isenhour, J. Godara, M. Cooper, A. Midha and W. Randolph. 2005b. Detecting and facilitating deliberation at the local level. Paper presented at the 2nd Conference on Online Deliberation: Design, Research and Practice/DIAC 2005, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R. 1988. Planning, public hearings, and the politis of discourse. In J. Forrester (Ed.), Critical Theory and Public Life. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press. pp. 177–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunz, W. and H. W. J. Rittel. 1970. Issues as Elements of Information Systems (Report No. T R 0131). Stuttgart, Institut fur Grundlagen der Planung, Universitat Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, L. S. and E. Turban. 2008. Groups formation and operations in the Web 2.0 environment and social networks. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17, 387–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, R. P. 2008. A bliki model to support political discourse formation. Paper presented at the 2008 International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym ‘2008), Porto, Portugal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, R. P. and J. P. Costa. 2006. Discursive e-Democracy Support. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, R. P. and J. P. Costa. 2007. Incorporating citizens’ views in local policy decision making processes. Decision Support Systems, 43, 1499–1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A. 2003. Using information and communication technologies to enhance citizen engagement in the policy process. In Promises and Problems of e-Democracy: Challenges of Citizen Online Engagement. Paris, OECD. pp. 19–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A., A. Mckay-Hubbard and D. Shell. 2005. Using weblogs to support local democracy. In E-Government: Towards Electronic Democracy. Berlin/Heidelberg, Springer. pp. 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A. and A. Renton. 2004. Argument visualisation to support democratic decision-making. Proceedings of the eChallenges e.2004 Conference, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A. and A. Whyte.. 2008. Towards an evaluation framework for eParticipation. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 2, 16–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makice, K. 2006. PoliticWiki: Exploring communal politics. Paper presented at the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym ‘2006), Odense, Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Jiménez, J. M., M. T. Escobar, A. Toncovich and A. Turón. 2008. Arguments that support decisions in e-cognocracy: a quantitative approach based on priorities intensity. In M. D. Lytras, J. M. Carroll, E. Damiani, R. D. Tennyson, D. Avison, G. Vossen and P. O. D. Pablos (Eds.), The Open Knowlege Society: A Computer Science and Information Systems Manifesto. Berlin Heidelberg, Springer. pp. 649–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. and W. Polasek. 2003. e-Democracy and knowledge. A multicriteria framework for the new democratic era. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 12, 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, J. 2001. Representing people, representing nature, representing the world. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 19, 483–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paolillo, J. C. and D. Heald. 2002. Democratic participation in the discursive management of Usenet. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paralic, J., T. Sabol and M. Mach. 2003. First trials in webocracy. In R. Traunmuller (Ed.), EGOV 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Springer. pp. 69–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pateman, C. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, Z.-R. 2001. Internet GIS for public participation. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28, 889–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raynes-Goldie, K. and D. Fono. 2005. Wiki use by political parties: a case study. Paper presented at the Second Conference on Online Deliberation: Design, Research and Practice/DIAC 2005, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., T. Webler and P. Wiedemann. 1994. A need for discourse on citizen participation: objectives and structure of the book. In O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann (Eds.), Fair and Competent Citizen Participation: Evaluating New Models for Environmental Discourse. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renton, A. and A. Macintosh. 2007. Computer supported argument maps as a policy memory. The Information Society, 23, 125–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinner, C. 2001. Argumentation maps: GIS-based discussion support for on-line planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28, 847–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinner, C., C. Keßler and S. Andrulis. 2008. The use of Web 2.0 concepts to support deliberation in spatial decision-making. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32, 386–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ríos-Insua, D., G. E. Kersten, J. M. Ríos and C. Grima. 2007. Towards decision support for participatory democracy. Information Systems and E-Business Management, 6, 161–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W. and M. M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Science, 4, 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, N. 2004. Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. The American Review of Public Administration, 34, 315–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhead, J., Ed. 1989. Rational Analysis for a Problematic World. Chichester, Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sæbø, Ø., J. Rose and L. S. Flak. 2008. The shape of eParticipation: characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25, 400–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, C. and J. Rose. 2007. Characterizing eParticipation. International Journal of Information Management, 27, 406–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheufele, D. A. 1999. Deliberation or dispute? An exploratory study examining dimensions of public opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 11, 25–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D. and P. Day.. 2004. Shaping the network society: opportunities and challenges. In D. Schuler and P. Day (Eds.), Shaping the Network Society: The New Role of Civil Society in Cyberspace. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. pp. 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snider, J. H. 2003. Should the public meeting enter the information age? National Civic Review, 92, 20–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, S. 1998. Pathologies of deliberation. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press. pp. 123–139.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stromer-Galley, J. 2002. New voices in the political sphere: a comparative analysis of interpersonal and online political talk. Javnost/The Public, 9, 23–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S.. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsaliki, L. 2002. Online forums and the enlargement of the public sphere: research from a European project. Javnost/The Public, 9, 95–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turoff, M., S. R. Hiltz, M. Bieber, J. Fjermestad and A. Rana. 1999. Collaborative discourse structures in Computer Mediated Group Communications. Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turoff, M., S. R. Hiltz, H.-K. Cho, Z. Li and Y. Wang. 2002. Social Decision Support Systems (SDSS). Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tweed, C. 1998. Supporting argumentation practices in urban planning and design. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 22, 351–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viégas, F. B., M. Wattenberg and K. Dave. 2004. Studying cooperation and conflict between authors with history flow visualizations. Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2004), Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webler, T. 1994. “Right” discourse in citizen participation: an evaluation yardstick. In O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann (Eds.), Fair and Competent Citizen Participation: Evaluating New Models for Environmental Discourse. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 35–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witschge, T. 2002. Online DELIBERATION: possibilities of the internet for deliberative democracy. Paper presented at the Euricom Colloquium Electronic Networks & Democratic Engagement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodly, D. 2008. New competencies in democratic communication? Blogs, agenda setting and political participation. Public Choice, 134, 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, R. O., E. Katz and J. Kim. 2000. Bridging the spheres: political and personal conversation in public and private spaces. The Journal of Communication, 50, 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics, INESC, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

    Rui Pedro Lourenço & João Paulo Costa

Authors
  1. Rui Pedro Lourenço
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. João Paulo Costa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui Pedro Lourenço .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Depto. Informatica, Estadistica, Universitdad Rey Juan Carlos, Tulipan s/n, Mostoles, 28933, Spain

    David Rios Insua

  2. Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Booth Street W., Manchester, M15 6PB, United Kingdom

    Simon French

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lourenço, R.P., Costa, J.P. (2010). e-Participation: A Discursive Approach. In: Rios Insua, D., French, S. (eds) e-Democracy . Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9045-4_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation