S. Legard, G. Giannoumis, Sissel Hovik, C. Paupini
{"title":"Variation in E-Participation Schemes and Strategies: Comparative Case Study of Oslo, Madrid, and Melbourne","authors":"S. Legard, G. Giannoumis, Sissel Hovik, C. Paupini","doi":"10.1145/3326365.3326384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why are some cities more eager to adopt e-participation schemes than others, and why do e-participation practices vary among cities who adopts them? Current comparative research on e-participation in local government normally uses large-scale samples to identify determinants of e-participation adoption. Although these samples typically identify significant variables such as political will, modernization ambitions and political crisis, they often lack fine-grained explanations of the causal patterns leading to different forms of e-participation. In this on-going research paper, we therefore compare e-participation strategies and platforms in three cities: Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid. All cities are major urban centers within their countries and have affluent, highly educated and digitally connected populations. They do, however, have very different approaches to e-participation. We base our preliminary findings on government documents. Our analysis of these texts focuses on how these actors seek to attribute meaning or change practices through their communication with audiences in the field. Through the interviews, we both seek to elaborate on views presented in the documents, but also to trace the role these actors have played in developing the cities' e-participatory practices. The aim of this process tracing is to understand the causal processes and complex decision-making leading to the adoption of the particular form of e-participation in the cities. The goal is to complement the existing large sample literature on determinants of e-participation adoption. In addition, we want to develop a richer understanding of the differences between the various forms of e-participation adopted in the cities, which is often lost in the coarse typologies used in large n studies.","PeriodicalId":178287,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3326365.3326384","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
Why are some cities more eager to adopt e-participation schemes than others, and why do e-participation practices vary among cities who adopts them? Current comparative research on e-participation in local government normally uses large-scale samples to identify determinants of e-participation adoption. Although these samples typically identify significant variables such as political will, modernization ambitions and political crisis, they often lack fine-grained explanations of the causal patterns leading to different forms of e-participation. In this on-going research paper, we therefore compare e-participation strategies and platforms in three cities: Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid. All cities are major urban centers within their countries and have affluent, highly educated and digitally connected populations. They do, however, have very different approaches to e-participation. We base our preliminary findings on government documents. Our analysis of these texts focuses on how these actors seek to attribute meaning or change practices through their communication with audiences in the field. Through the interviews, we both seek to elaborate on views presented in the documents, but also to trace the role these actors have played in developing the cities' e-participatory practices. The aim of this process tracing is to understand the causal processes and complex decision-making leading to the adoption of the particular form of e-participation in the cities. The goal is to complement the existing large sample literature on determinants of e-participation adoption. In addition, we want to develop a richer understanding of the differences between the various forms of e-participation adopted in the cities, which is often lost in the coarse typologies used in large n studies.