政府主导和互联网支持的公民参与中国政策制定:以上海2035总体规划为例

IF 7.8 1区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Government Information Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.giq.2023.101806
Shuangshuang Qiu , Xiang Gao , Wenze Yue , Qun Zhang
{"title":"政府主导和互联网支持的公民参与中国政策制定:以上海2035总体规划为例","authors":"Shuangshuang Qiu ,&nbsp;Xiang Gao ,&nbsp;Wenze Yue ,&nbsp;Qun Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2023.101806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Digitalization has expanded the scope of citizen participation. Nevertheless, there are no conclusive findings on online citizen participation and inclusive policymaking. This study adds in line with the discussion with a fresh perspective of institutional bias. It presents new evidence by examining the process, participants, policy agenda, and sentiments of public opinions from the government-led and Internet-empowered citizen participation regarding the 2017–2035 Shanghai Master Plan. Four findings are reported based on the in-depth case study with text and sentiment analysis. First, the government-led model provides institutionalized opportunities for citizen engagement throughout the policy process, while the Internet-empowered citizen participation is characterized by contingency and <em>ad hoc</em><span>. Second, the government-led model remains elite-dominated, while the Internet empowers a wider scope of stakeholders with an open and popularized participation platform. Third, the public opinion from the Internet-empowered model often goes beyond or even against the pre-defined official principles and goals. In contrast, the civic discussion in the government-led model influences policy by changing the sequence of policy agenda or providing focus within the official setting. Fourth, citizens, especially the experts, are more likely to give positive feedback in the government-led model than the Internet-empowered approach. These findings confirm and identify the remaining institutional bias that hinders inclusive policymaking in the Internet age. Theoretically, it reminds scholars to examine the institutional arrangements regarding citizen participation carefully. Practically, it indicates that the central government could facilitate inclusive policymaking at the local level by reducing the institutional bias of the government-led approach and utilizing text and sentiment analysis to urge the local government's response to Internet-empowered public opinion.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"40 3","pages":"Article 101806"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Government-led and Internet-empowered citizen participation in China's policymaking: A case study of the Shanghai 2035 Master Plan\",\"authors\":\"Shuangshuang Qiu ,&nbsp;Xiang Gao ,&nbsp;Wenze Yue ,&nbsp;Qun Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.giq.2023.101806\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Digitalization has expanded the scope of citizen participation. Nevertheless, there are no conclusive findings on online citizen participation and inclusive policymaking. This study adds in line with the discussion with a fresh perspective of institutional bias. It presents new evidence by examining the process, participants, policy agenda, and sentiments of public opinions from the government-led and Internet-empowered citizen participation regarding the 2017–2035 Shanghai Master Plan. Four findings are reported based on the in-depth case study with text and sentiment analysis. First, the government-led model provides institutionalized opportunities for citizen engagement throughout the policy process, while the Internet-empowered citizen participation is characterized by contingency and <em>ad hoc</em><span>. Second, the government-led model remains elite-dominated, while the Internet empowers a wider scope of stakeholders with an open and popularized participation platform. Third, the public opinion from the Internet-empowered model often goes beyond or even against the pre-defined official principles and goals. In contrast, the civic discussion in the government-led model influences policy by changing the sequence of policy agenda or providing focus within the official setting. Fourth, citizens, especially the experts, are more likely to give positive feedback in the government-led model than the Internet-empowered approach. These findings confirm and identify the remaining institutional bias that hinders inclusive policymaking in the Internet age. Theoretically, it reminds scholars to examine the institutional arrangements regarding citizen participation carefully. Practically, it indicates that the central government could facilitate inclusive policymaking at the local level by reducing the institutional bias of the government-led approach and utilizing text and sentiment analysis to urge the local government's response to Internet-empowered public opinion.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48258,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Government Information Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"40 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 101806\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Government Information Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X23000060\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Government Information Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X23000060","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

数字化扩大了公民参与的范围。然而,关于在线公民参与和包容性政策制定,还没有定论。这项研究以制度偏见的新视角与讨论相一致。它通过研究政府主导和互联网授权的公民参与2017-2035年上海总体规划的过程、参与者、政策议程和公众意见,提供了新的证据。基于文本和情感分析的深入案例研究,报告了四个发现。首先,政府主导的模式在整个政策过程中为公民参与提供了制度化的机会,而互联网赋予公民参与的特点是偶然性和临时性。其次,政府主导的模式仍然是精英主导,而互联网通过开放和普及的参与平台为更广泛的利益相关者赋权。第三,来自互联网授权模式的舆论往往超越甚至违背了预先定义的官方原则和目标。相比之下,政府主导模式下的公民讨论通过改变政策议程的顺序或在官方环境中提供焦点来影响政策。第四,公民,尤其是专家,更有可能在政府主导的模式中给予积极的反馈,而不是互联网授权的方法。这些发现证实并确定了互联网时代阻碍包容性政策制定的剩余制度偏见。从理论上讲,它提醒学者们仔细审视公民参与的制度安排。实际上,它表明,中央政府可以通过减少政府主导的方法的制度偏见,并利用文本和情绪分析来敦促地方政府对互联网授权的舆论做出回应,从而促进地方一级的包容性决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Government-led and Internet-empowered citizen participation in China's policymaking: A case study of the Shanghai 2035 Master Plan

Digitalization has expanded the scope of citizen participation. Nevertheless, there are no conclusive findings on online citizen participation and inclusive policymaking. This study adds in line with the discussion with a fresh perspective of institutional bias. It presents new evidence by examining the process, participants, policy agenda, and sentiments of public opinions from the government-led and Internet-empowered citizen participation regarding the 2017–2035 Shanghai Master Plan. Four findings are reported based on the in-depth case study with text and sentiment analysis. First, the government-led model provides institutionalized opportunities for citizen engagement throughout the policy process, while the Internet-empowered citizen participation is characterized by contingency and ad hoc. Second, the government-led model remains elite-dominated, while the Internet empowers a wider scope of stakeholders with an open and popularized participation platform. Third, the public opinion from the Internet-empowered model often goes beyond or even against the pre-defined official principles and goals. In contrast, the civic discussion in the government-led model influences policy by changing the sequence of policy agenda or providing focus within the official setting. Fourth, citizens, especially the experts, are more likely to give positive feedback in the government-led model than the Internet-empowered approach. These findings confirm and identify the remaining institutional bias that hinders inclusive policymaking in the Internet age. Theoretically, it reminds scholars to examine the institutional arrangements regarding citizen participation carefully. Practically, it indicates that the central government could facilitate inclusive policymaking at the local level by reducing the institutional bias of the government-led approach and utilizing text and sentiment analysis to urge the local government's response to Internet-empowered public opinion.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Government Information Quarterly
Government Information Quarterly INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: Government Information Quarterly (GIQ) delves into the convergence of policy, information technology, government, and the public. It explores the impact of policies on government information flows, the role of technology in innovative government services, and the dynamic between citizens and governing bodies in the digital age. GIQ serves as a premier journal, disseminating high-quality research and insights that bridge the realms of policy, information technology, government, and public engagement.
期刊最新文献
A more secure framework for open government data sharing based on federated learning Does trust in government moderate the perception towards deepfakes? Comparative perspectives from Asia on the risks of AI and misinformation for democracy Open government data and self-efficacy: The empirical evidence of micro foundation via survey experiments Transforming towards inclusion-by-design: Information system design principles shaping data-driven financial inclusiveness Bridging the gap: Towards an expanded toolkit for AI-driven decision-making in the public sector
×
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