Variation in E-Participation Schemes and Strategies: Comparative Case Study of Oslo, Madrid, and Melbourne

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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电子参与计划和策略的差异:奥斯陆、马德里和墨尔本的比较案例研究
为什么有些城市比其他城市更渴望采用电子参与计划?为什么采用电子参与计划的城市之间的电子参与实践各不相同?目前对地方政府电子参与的比较研究通常采用大规模样本来确定电子参与采用的决定因素。尽管这些样本通常确定了政治意愿、现代化雄心和政治危机等重要变量,但它们往往缺乏对导致不同形式电子参与的因果模式的细致解释。因此,在这篇正在进行的研究论文中,我们比较了三个城市的电子参与策略和平台:奥斯陆、墨尔本和马德里。所有城市都是各自国家的主要城市中心,拥有富裕、受过高等教育和数字化互联的人口。然而,他们确实有非常不同的电子参与方式。我们的初步调查结果基于政府文件。我们对这些文本的分析侧重于这些演员如何通过与现场观众的交流来寻求赋予意义或改变实践。通过访谈,我们既试图详细阐述文件中提出的观点,也试图追溯这些行动者在发展城市电子参与性实践中所发挥的作用。这种过程追踪的目的是了解导致在城市中采用特定形式的电子参与的因果过程和复杂决策。目标是补充现有的关于电子参与采用决定因素的大样本文献。此外,我们希望对城市中采用的各种形式的电子参与之间的差异有更深入的了解,这在大型研究中使用的粗略类型学中经常被忽略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Engaging Governments in Open Data Policies through Gaming How to Master the "E": Tools for Competence Identification, Provision and Preservation in a Digitalized Public Sector Public Wi-Fi metadata in data-driven urban governance The Impact of Digital Governance on the Business Environment: the Case of Estonian Tax and Customs Board Participation and Citizen Empowerment platform for e-governance: Communal Integration System (SINCO)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1