However, documented practice shows mixed results from eParticipation initiatives, and concerns about sustainability-related matters (the likelihood that an expensive trial program will become “embedded” as a stable practice in the institutional setup of the concerned public sector organization) have started to emerge.
This is why Rolf Luehrs and I are launching the initiative of this collective book to be published in 2012 by IGI Global (formerly Idea Group Inc.). The book should provide relevant theoretical frameworks and the latest empirical research findings in the area of eParticipation. It is aimed to promote awareness and further debate on the scope and limitations of citizen engagement supported by ICT in modern democracies. It will also offer operational guidelines and lessons learned from past experiences to the benefit of government executives wanting to engage on eParticipation trials.
Specifically, the book is designed to deliver:
• a collection of European and international best practice of sustainable eParticipation
• a set of evaluation exercises to be used as guidelines for political understanding and future action
• an overview of existing methods, tools and ICT solutions available as a result of prior experiments
• an initial assessment of the “market potential” of the above.
Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before July 30, 2011, a 2-3 page chapter proposal clearly explaining the scope and contents of their proposed chapter. Authors of accepted proposals will be notified by August 15, 2011 about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted by October 30, 2011. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project.
For more information regarding this call, please contact https://supart.org
]]>To be honest, the argument is not new. Already in the 2006 general election, a survey of electoral flows showed that the citizens embedded in homogeneous partisan networks were comparatively more influenced than those who discussed politics within heterogeneous networks that do not uniformly support a single political position. In both cases, the effects of interpersonal networks on voting behavior turned out to be stronger than those of TV news programs and generalist talk shows.
However, the big difference this time – particularly in the case of the referendum, since the administrative ballots were involving only part of the Italian population, though also including important cities like Milan, Turin, Bologna and Naples – is that almost all nationwide TV channels did not provide any coverage of the election day till the very last week of campaign. Critics attributed this lack of transparency to the fact that 5 out of 7 channels (three private and two public) are controlled by the media tycoon and elected PM Silvio Berlusconi, and that the referendum was putting into question the building blocks of his government’s policy stance: from privatization of a public service like tap water supply to the rebuilding of nuclear power plants in Italy, not to forget the controversial law that had suspended de facto the numerous ongoing trial hearings of the Prime Minister till the end of his mandate.
Knowing that the majority of voters would have repelled these acts – the argument continues – the Government’s unspoken strategy was aimed to prevent the 50,001% quorum (percentage of population going to the polls) that is required to make a referendum’s results effective, according to the Italian Constitution, differently from any normal election. Parts of that strategy were reportedly: the decision taken by the Ministry of Interior to postpone the referendum day till the beginning of school holidays in Italy, the slow start-up of the usual TV video clips instructing citizens how to vote as well as of the electoral talk shows in the national TV channels (a delay that was formally blamed by the National Telecommunication Authority), and other hilarious happenings like TV news speakers making mistakes on the actual election date, or fake weather forecasts announcing the sunshine and inviting people to go off on leisure trips… The same appeal, by the way, which was indirectly made to the electorate by key members of the incumbent majority.
Thus, while the impact of television on voting was being sterilized somehow, Italy registered an explosion of political discussions and particularly word of mouth spreading on social networks, with hundreds of Facebook groups created ad hoc and Twitter messages sent around to promote participation of friends and relatives in the referendum day (the assumption being that once reached the quorum, there would be no doubt on the results; in fact, the “aye’s” to abrogation ultimately won 95-5). Statistics available from Google Insights clearly show how the public’s interest on making web searches on the word “referendum” was steadily growing in the two weeks before. Here again, some humorous peaks were reached: for instance, Madonna’s latest hit being forced to change from “Vogue” to “Vote!“, or the TV information service for the hearing impaired becoming a pretext for mockery of Government censorship on how to vote.
Most of these video clips have relied on YouTube and other similar repositories to support viral distribution to peers and reach the top headlines of printed – as well as Internet – press. Yet, it remains fairly undemonstrated that a decisive push to voters orientation has been a direct consequence of this exposure. For instance, according to an instant poll realized by IPR Marketing on the aftermath of referendum day, 81% of former Berlusconi’s party voters and 64% of “Terzo Polo” (the main center opposition party) did actually stay at home on the referendum day, compared with 10% of left party supporters and a surprising 49% of the Northern League followers (the biggest ally in the Prime Minister’s coalition).
To conclude, while the political effects of social networks seem to have been enhanced by a partisan, purposeful reaction to a Government’s instrumental exploitation of traditional media and particularly TV, real impact seems to have more likely occurred within the center-left opinion area – by the way, the 2006 general election also saw the victory of a leftist majority, and part of the Northern League’s electorate is said to be made of former center-left voters – while the persistent power of television on electoral behavior is not decisively disconfirmed. Further research is needed to assess whether this election round marked a real breakthrough in the Italian politics or is simply another step of the long march towards wider engagement of “ordinary” people in the electronic participation arena.
]]>The study, called EXPGOV, has by now collected a huge amount of evidence on the most likely areas of impact of ICT on governance, based on a survey of about 60 out of 446 EU cities with 100,000 inhabitants or more from all 27 Member States (plus Croatia and Switzerland), and later on the preparation and analysis of four detailed case studies (Barcelona, Berlin, Manchester, and Tallin), the results of which were presented for the first time during the meeting.
In my opinion, the big merit of this effort is to have raised the issue of assessing ICT impact on middle- and large- sized city governance on a systematic basis in Europe – probably for the first time ever, as strange as this may appear. In that respect, it is a preliminary answer given to the key questions: “Where do we stand? Where should we go?” and also the photograph of work in progress, showing a fair deal of convergence between old and new Member States, south and north of Europe, relatively larger and smaller communities, both in terms of problems tackled with and solutions offered to approach them. Particularly the survey questionnaire (which was anonymously filled out by several kinds of stakeholder, including city managers or their delegates) provided evidence of a number of “flagship projects” that must have been making the difference in a number of European city contexts.
Another merit of this research possibly lies in the preparation of a simple, almost intuitive, “maturity model“, highlighting three value drivers of ICT enabled governance (performance, openness and inclusion), without indulging to the temptation of reading them in evolutionary terms. This model seems easily transferable as improvement guideline for city governments and also useful in terms of predictive power, although the latter capacity should be qualified and confirmed by additional research.
Bottom line, the study confirms the existence of linkages between ICT and governance, at least in the relatively more populated cities of Europe. However, a huge number of questions remain unanswered. For instance, while we can speak of generic impact and identify the value drivers of ICT for governance, quantifying the phenomenon remains hard – if possible at all. Another question is that the study says nothing about the less populated / peripheral cities of Europe. Does size matter in any respect or not?
There probably is sufficient awareness about the relevance of the governance issue in the respondents’ minds, which is good particularly when they are civil servants or elected officials. But what about vision alignment inside the organisation (along the command and control hierarchy) as well as outside it (among the citizens and external stakeholders)? Does the maturity model survive to this generalisation, or does it need extension? Social validation of the value drivers with and by the users could be the next step to make.
Finally, most European cities seem to live with some degree of anxiety the “contradictions of development” (which call for more and better attention to social inclusion). Is this the real next new frontier of ICT enabled (or enabling?) governance?
In conclusion, being so pervasive as a technology, ICT may ultimately disappear from, and/or become embedded into, the daily practice of governance. Yet before arriving to that, our understanding of their potential and value for the sustainable management of EU communities and institutions surely deserves further reflection. Hopefully there will be a second round for this study, and the IPTS and Eurocities will keep this open approach that can only be beneficial to the formation of a growing and stronger level of awareness among researchers and practitioners alike. ]]>
Le “Giornate di Montaione” è una conferenza promossa e sostenuta finanziariamente dalla Regione Toscana – bella sfida in questi tempi di ristrettezze di bilancio – come un appuntamento annuale, che quest’anno si terrà il19 e 20 Novembre (vedere agenda).
La lezione inaugurale del Prof. Stefano Zamagni, dell’Università di Bologna, ci intratterrà sulle relazioni fra crescita, democrazia e partecipazione. Come d’abitudine, saranno presentati e discussi un certo numero di casi di studio da dentro e fuori Italia, selezionati dal Comitato Scientifico guidato dal Prof. Luigi Bobbio dell’Università di Torino. Una Giuria di Cittadini composta di 24 persone estratte a sorte attribuirà il premio al miglior processo partecipativo realizzato in Toscana, la prima Regione italiana (non più l’unica!!) e forse in tutta Europa ad essersi dotata di una specifica legge sulla partecipazione, quasi tre anni fa.
Un premio speciale sarà assegnato al miglior paper scritto sull’argomento da un giovane ricercatore, quest’anno il Dr. Stephen Estlub dell’Università del West of Scotland, autore di “Linking micro deliberative democracy and decision-making: trade-offs between theory and practice in a partisan citizen forum”.
Per registrarsi si può inviare una e-mail ad ufficio.partecipazione AT regione.toscana.it allegando questa scheda.
Per altre informazioni cliccare qui.
]]>The “Montaione Days” conference is promoted and financially supported by the Regional Government of Tuscany as a yearly appointment – quite challenging in these harsh times of budget cutoffs – this time on 19 and 20 November (see agenda).
Keynote speaker will be Prof. Stefano Zamagni, from the University of Bologna, who will explain how growth, democracy and participation, can actually be linked together. As usual, a number of case studies from inside and outside Italy will be presented and publicly discussed, as they were selected by the Scientific Committee led by Prof. Luigi Bobbio from the University of Turin. A Citizen Jury composed of 24 randomly selected people will award the best participatory process from across Tuscany, the first Region in Italy (not anymore the only one!!) and possibly in the whole Europe to have voted a specific law on participation, almost three years ago.
A special prize will be awarded to the best thematic paper written by a young researcher, this year Dr. Stephen Estlub from the University of the West of Scotland, who wrote “Linking micro deliberative democracy and decision-making: trade-offs between theory and practice in a partisan citizen forum”.
To pre-register send an e-mail to ufficio.partecipazione AT regione.toscana.it using this form.
To get more information (sorry, in Italian) click here.
]]>Per rafforzare l’impatto, oltre che la visibilità internazionale, di questi esperimenti, una conferenza di tre giorni (in programma tutti gli anni nel mese di Novembre) ha luogo nel meraviglioso paesaggio di Montaione – una piccola città posta proprio al confine tra le province di Firenze e Siena, che negli anni scorsi ha ospitato uno dei più significativi dibattiti pubblici sul tema della definizione di una strategia locale di sviluppo turistico e conservazione ambientale per l’area circostante l’antico borgo medievale di Castelfalfi.
Nel quadro delle ‘Giornate di Montaione’, la Regione lancia adesso i “Premi Montaione“, per offrire riconoscimento alle migliori esperienze di partecipazione (progetti di ricerca e/o implementazioni pratiche) a livello mondiale. Il comitato scientifico cui sono affidate le valutazioni è composto dai professori: Umberto Allegretti, Loic Blondiaux, Luigi Bobbio, Quim Brugué, Rodolfo Lewanski, Massimo Morisi, Yves Sintomer e Stefano Zamagni. Tutti i vincitori saranno invitati alla prossima edizione della conferenza.
Scadenza del bando: 31 Luglio 2010
Comunicazione dei risultati alle parti interessate: 30 Settembre 2010
Categorie:
1. Miglior processo partecipativo a livello mondiale
Il premio è attribuito a processi di partecipazione che sono già stati implementati, in Italia o al’estero. I candidati dovranno fornire informazioni sul proprio progetto in un documento di non più di due pagine, comprendente i sei punti elencati nella relativa sezione del bando. Il comitato scientifico inviterà un numero ristretto di progetti a presentare informazioni più dettagliate in una fase successiva.
2. Miglior paper di ricerca
Il premio è assegnato a giovani ricercatori (meno di 36 anni), Italiani o stranieri, per un paper – pubblicato o non– di 20-40 pagine, riguardante uno studio empirico su processi partecipativi. I paper possono essere scritti in Italiano, Francese, Spagnolo, Portoghese o Inglese. Il comitato scientifico provvederà alla loro valutazione. Il vincitore riceverà un premio di 2.000 Euro, in aggiunta all’invito a Montaione.
3. Miglior processo partecipativo in Toscana
Il premio per il miglior processo partecipativo sviluppato in Toscana sarà attribuito da una Giuria di Cittadini composta di residenti in Toscana estratti a sorte.
]]>The Regional Government of Tuscany was the first in Italy, and probably in Europe, to pass a law (No. 69 of 2007) expressely aimed to foster citizens participation in public choices and to encourage the diffusion of new methodologies and technologies in the field. This law has found fertile ground in Tuscany’s civic consciousness and social fabric. In its first years of implementation, it has already promoted a good number of significant participatory experiments all over the territory.
To strenghten the impact of these experiments, as well as their internationally visibility, a three-day conference (scheduled in November every year) takes place in the beautiful landscape of Montaione – a small town located right on the border between the provinces of Florence and Siena, which hosted one of the most significant public debates held so far, concerning the definition of a local community’s strategy for environmental preservation and touristic development of a surrounding area to the ancient Mediaeval village of Castelfalfi.
In the framework of the ‘Montaione Days’, the Regional Government has now launched the “Montaione Prize“, to bestow recognition to the best known examples (research and/or implementation projects) of citizens participation worldwide. The scientific committee in charge of the evaluation is made up of the professors: Umberto Allegretti, Loic Blondiaux, Luigi Bobbio, Quim Brugué, Rodolfo Lewanski, Massimo Morisi, Yves Sintomer and Stefano Zamagni. All winners will be invited to the next edition of the conference.
Deadline for submissions: 31 July 2010
Announcement of the results to the parties concerned: 30 September 2010
Prize categories:
1. Best participatory process worldwide
This prize is awarded to participatory processes that have already been actually implemented, either in Italy or abroad. Candidates shall supply a file of no more than two pages on the project, and which shall include the six points listed in the relevant section of the call. The scientific committee will invite a restricted number of projects to present more detailed documentation in a subsequent phase.
2. Best research paper
This prize is awarded to young Italian or foreign researchers (under 36 years old) for a paper – published or unpublished – 20-40 pages long, focusing on an empirical study of participatory processes. The papers may be written in Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese or English. They will be evaluated by the scientific committee. The winner will get a prize of € 2,000, in addition to the invitation to Montaione.
3. Best participatory process in Tuscany
This prize for the best participatory process carried out in Tuscany will be awarded by a Citizens’ Jury randomly drawn among the Tuscany residents.
Apologies for this misuse of a public site for internal information distribution, but we thought it was good to make the process transparent to our non partner readers as well.
As you may know, the EU-funded project is coming to an end soon, but there is the intention to continue the PEP-NET experience by creating a more solid form of partnership, like an international non profit association, holding no financial risk for its members.
To appreciate what and how should be done in that direction, a survey has been launched among the PEP-NET (full and associate) members, by means of a personal invitation emailed to everyone on Friday 14th at 14:59 CET. In case you have lost or forgot about it, you will get a personal reminder pretty soon.
There is time for your response till Friday, 21st May at 12:00 CET.
What was not in the invitation, because it is today’s decision only, is that the survey results will be discussed and turned into action items for the foundation of the new PEP-NET association during a dedicated meeting of a “Temporary Steering Committee”, scheduled on Friday 25th & Saturday 26th of June in Berlin. There will also be a dedicated video conference session, open to all interested PEP-NET “fans”, on Friday, 25th of June at 16:00-17:00 CET, and that I cordially invite you to attend!
A note about logistics: People who want to take part in the video conference session have to register in advance. Daniel Roleff from politik-digital will set up the technology according to the number of participants. For registration, send an e-mail to Daniel (droleff AT politik-digital.de) and state your instant messaging ID (Skype, Vsee, GoogleTalk or Jabber). Please register soon, latest by Friday, 18th of June. There will be no further notice.
Thanks for your participation!
On behalf of the Temporary Steering Committee,
Francesco Molinari
info AT pep-net.eu
The conference will introduce some key European experiences of Local Government transformation that are aiming to a high quality and cost effective public administration. A variety of strategies, initiatives, and projects focused on providing valued services designed on the needs of constituents and leveraging the value of ICT.
Conference topics will be:
On June 7th / afternoon
- Strategies and Projects from Germany
On June 8th & 9th / morning – “The European Days”
- Electronic Document Management (June 8th / morning)
- Marketing and Acceptance of e-Government Services (June 8th / afternoon)
- New Ways of Organizing the Production of Public Services: Public Administration as a Collaborative Network (June 9th / early morning)
- A “Smart City” to Serve the Community, the Environment and the Economic Development (June 9th / final morning session)
Registration is open at www.majorcities.eu in the section dedicated to the Berlin Conference, where you can also find the full program and information on accommodation.
Enjoy!
]]>
and a Twitter based discussion entitled Why vote?. Sound evidence was shown regarding the creation of several Local Forums at the various partners’ locations in order to bring together ideas, make innovative experiments with multimedia tools and build new expertise to be shared internationally. An online community of practice is now being setup to further make the promotion of participatory democracy to young people more sustainable at local/regional level. Proposed instruments to facilitate the community: chat, instant messaging, whiteboard and discussion tables; voting and survey tools; document sharing facilities such as googledocs and a wiki to write together and produce text with shared visions. My comment: I spotted a lot of ingenious creativity and serious engagement in these people. Though this be madness, yet there is method in it. Worth a second look soon.
]]>