如何解释电子参与的程度?奥斯陆、墨尔本和马德里采用数字参与平台的比较

IF 1.3 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Information Polity Pub Date : 2022-11-25 DOI:10.3233/ip-220035
S. Legard, I. McShane, J. Ruano
{"title":"如何解释电子参与的程度?奥斯陆、墨尔本和马德里采用数字参与平台的比较","authors":"S. Legard, I. McShane, J. Ruano","doi":"10.3233/ip-220035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"E-participation research has mainly been concerned with the spread of e-participation technologies, but less with why some government organizations choose to use digital tools to consult citizens (e-consultation) whereas others go further and include them in the decision-making processes (e-decision making). This article is an in-depth, comparative case-study of the adoption of e-participation platforms in Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid, and develops an alternative explanatory framework using theories of institutional entrepreneurship and change. It shows that conventional adoption theory – focusing on resource slack, socio-economic development, competition and top-down mandates – is not able to account for the differences between these cases, and argues that the degree of e-participation should be understood as an outcome of the type and agenda of change agents, the level of institutional discretion, the strength of institutional defenders, and the resources of the change agents.","PeriodicalId":46265,"journal":{"name":"Information Polity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What explains the degree of e-participation? A comparison of the adoption of digital participation platforms in Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid\",\"authors\":\"S. Legard, I. McShane, J. Ruano\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/ip-220035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"E-participation research has mainly been concerned with the spread of e-participation technologies, but less with why some government organizations choose to use digital tools to consult citizens (e-consultation) whereas others go further and include them in the decision-making processes (e-decision making). This article is an in-depth, comparative case-study of the adoption of e-participation platforms in Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid, and develops an alternative explanatory framework using theories of institutional entrepreneurship and change. It shows that conventional adoption theory – focusing on resource slack, socio-economic development, competition and top-down mandates – is not able to account for the differences between these cases, and argues that the degree of e-participation should be understood as an outcome of the type and agenda of change agents, the level of institutional discretion, the strength of institutional defenders, and the resources of the change agents.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Polity\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Polity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-220035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Polity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-220035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

电子参与研究主要关注电子参与技术的传播,但较少关注为什么一些政府组织选择使用数字工具咨询公民(电子咨询),而另一些政府组织则更进一步,将公民纳入决策过程(电子决策)。本文对奥斯陆、墨尔本和马德里采用电子参与平台进行了深入的比较案例研究,并利用制度创业和变革理论开发了另一种解释框架。它表明,传统的采用理论——关注资源松弛、社会经济发展、竞争和自上而下的授权——无法解释这些案例之间的差异,并认为,电子参与的程度应被理解为变革推动者的类型和议程、制度自由裁量权的水平、制度捍卫者的力量和变革推动者的资源的结果。
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
What explains the degree of e-participation? A comparison of the adoption of digital participation platforms in Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid
E-participation research has mainly been concerned with the spread of e-participation technologies, but less with why some government organizations choose to use digital tools to consult citizens (e-consultation) whereas others go further and include them in the decision-making processes (e-decision making). This article is an in-depth, comparative case-study of the adoption of e-participation platforms in Oslo, Melbourne and Madrid, and develops an alternative explanatory framework using theories of institutional entrepreneurship and change. It shows that conventional adoption theory – focusing on resource slack, socio-economic development, competition and top-down mandates – is not able to account for the differences between these cases, and argues that the degree of e-participation should be understood as an outcome of the type and agenda of change agents, the level of institutional discretion, the strength of institutional defenders, and the resources of the change agents.
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
Information Polity
Information Polity INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
The Power of Language and Discourse in eGovernment Does agile improve value creation in government? Stephens, Melodena, Awamleh, Raed, and Salem, Fadi (Eds.) (2022) Agile Government: Emerging Perspectives in Public Management, World Scientific Publishing Company Introduction to the special issue ‘Towards a Multi-Level Understanding of Agile in Government: Macro, Meso and Micro Perspectives’ When line meets agile in public service organizations: Exploring the role of felt accountability amongst line managers
×
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