 |
Mobile participation24. June 2008 – 20:27 by Zebralog / Hans Hagedorn |
Mobile Participation (mParticipation) seems to be the next step in ePartizipation. With the rising of the iPhone and other smart phones and combined with other features like GPS and Location Based Services the expectations for new applications for are high. Consequently mobile applications amplify eParticipation in an spatial and temporal dimension. Not only at home, but also e.g. traveling in the metro, participants are enabled to read, write and follow the discussions.
But in contrary to the expectations the realization is underachieved. Maybe this is caused by the difference between possible applications and the actual use of cell phones. Research studies dealing with the use of cell phones, draw this conclusion. Even if around 40 % of cell phones users have smart phones, only around 20% use the mobile internet. Questioned what features of the personal cell phone are used, the majority names phonecalls and SMS (around 85% - 93%; depending to the survey). All other services are far behind. E.g. only 20 % send photos or videos via their mobile phone, but around 85% use SMS.
Even if SMS only offer limited possibilities (because of the restriction to 160 signs) in comparison to mobile internet devices, there are arguments for integration in participation processes. They are an easy to use feature, they are cheap, they can be integrated to web (and vice versa). Looking at demoscopic data, they even offer more advantages. The diffusion is higher - 93 % in comparison to around 60% of the internet. Additionaly the use of the internet is affected by income and education, which is less significant at the use of mobile phones. Following this data, the integrations of SMS offer the chance to integrate less educated and poorer people.
The challenge is to develop formats, by combining both media. Shown at the campaign Mindestlohn, collections of signatures can be one of the possible application. Another option is the integration in location based projects, like city development projects. While missing internet access in situ, information could be given via audio-podcasts (which can be listened via the phone) and passer-bys could send a first statement (“Send A for the first alternative, and B for alternative B”). The reply-SMS could contain further information.
The future of mParticipation will be the mobile internet, but for current projects, the low-tech applications SMS and Audio offer the bigger participation potential.
Stefan Höffken (Zebralog Berlin)
Tags: inenglish
4 Responses to “Mobile participation”
By Asociacion Ciudades Kyosei on Jun 24, 2008
Certainly, the mParticipation seems to be “the next step in eParticipation”. And it makes a lot of sense to investigate and test the possibilities that mobile devices offer for political participation, specially for those geographic and social environments where the penetration of computer usage is still quite low and where the mobile phones are becoming ubiquitous (i.e.: most of the un-rich, third world).
But I’m afraid that most of the current “mParticipation hype” is once again driven by a “technological mindset”, which is probably forgetting about the real questions around “participation”, and what is necessary to make it work.
If mParticipation is the “next step”, which ones are the previous steps?
Probably, the first step is to get a decent and working democratic environment. Then, the second step is to create and reinforce “Participation”, developing the institutional and procedural frameworks needed to obtain meaningful offline participation: something that can make a difference in our governance processes.
The third step is then “eParticipation”, which means: using the enormous potential of TICs to promote participation, to make it affordable for the common citizen and to increase its impact.
mParticipation is thus, at best, the fourth step of a long walk.
And, while it could be argued that our current democratic arrangements are moderately developed and functional… our feeling is that we still have a lot to learn about “Participation”. It’s not really working. Its impact during the 20th century was very very limited, because of a lot of challenges and barriers involved, which we haven’t still been able to solve (or even understand!).
And be aware: if your country wants to have a good ranking in the next eGovernment index… the “m” is a “MUST HAVE”. 
To make things worst, most of the experimentation we’ve recently carried out on the “eParticipation” field is not considering “Participation” and its troubles seriously. Sociological and political issues are not really being measured and pondered, because the emphasis has been laid upon the technical side. No wonder that most of our trials didn’t so far have much success or real impact.
And now… comes mParticipation!!
Please don’t misunderstand me: mParticipation is certainly important, and it can prove to be really useful in some environments. You’ve given some interesting examples on how it could be used.
But I feel a good deal of healthy skepticism is needed. Only if we consider all the four steps mentioned (and keep walking them onward and backward, once and again), will “mParticipation” be a real “next step”. In other case, it will probably be just another jump… into non-sense.
Pedro Prieto-Martin (Asociación Ciudades Kyosei)
By Stefan Höffken on Jun 25, 2008
This “healthy sketicism” is definitly needed and the analysis is right. mParticipation is not a value for it´s own and must be combined with the three steps in front.
But as mentioned in my post, mParticipation with SMS offers the chance to include new target groups (e.g. poorer, less educated and older people). Therefore it´s not driven by a “technical mindset”, it´s the search for new possibilities for participation processes. Then it will be just a small step foreward, but hopefully helps to handle one of the “sufficient problems” “that real life participation faces”.
By Chris Haller on Jun 25, 2008
Great post, Stefan! I feel the important question is, what do we call mParticipation and where is the difference to what we consider eParticipation?
In my eyes, using smartphones to participate in online dialogues or consultation processes shouldn’t be considered mParticipation. Technologies change and a couple of years from now I doubt there’s going to be any differentiation whether citizens use desktop PCs, laptops, xBoxes, mobile devices or whatever online-enabled device comes next to participate in eParticipation projects.
Where I agree with you is the added value mobile devices can bring to the table - the core of mParticipation. The point is they are ubiquitous, basically everyone on the street carries them. This is the true value which we need to explore further - how do we best use mobile devices as points-of-entry to the main engagement offering: short questions, first statements, spatial annotations, etc. that are context-sensitive and make the connection between project and everyday life of our target audiences. And the response with further information and automatic opt-ins into a contact database are bridges that can help to turn interested passerbys into engaged participants. The design of those kinds of cross-media participation processes is still in its infancy. I barely know good examples in the field (any pointers?), but looking at the shifts going on in the marketing world, there’s a lot of potential.
Finally, I believe we shouldn’t discuss mParticipation as a next step, but as an addition to the toolset with a lot of potential that still needs to prove its true benefits.
(summary of my post at https://blog.eparticipation.com)