ADDRESSING E-PARTICIPATION FROM NGO S PERSPECTIVE

Transcription

1 A Joint High-Level International Seminar and Expert Group meeting by UNDESA E-Participation: Empowering People through ICTs Geneva, Switzerland, July 2013, International Telecommunications Union ADDRESSING E-PARTICIPATION FROM NGO S PERSPECTIVE Simon Delakorda, M.Sc. / Institute for Electronic Participation

2 TABLE OF CONTENT Democratic risks of digital society Technocratic e-government Fake e-participation Patterns from practice Consequences NGOs as e-participation intermediaries

3 DEMOCRATIC RISKS OF DIGITAL SOCIETY digital inequality internet control commodification of internet technocratic e-government fake e-participation

4 TECHNOCRATIC E-GOVERNMENT Citizens have limited or no influence on e-government development (Misuraca 2007) E-government focusing on information access and top down delivered administrative services (Mayer-Schonberger & Lazer 2007) Citizens considers as e-government consumers (Delakorda 2008)

5 FAKE E-PARTICIPATION lacking clear statement how e-participation will influence policies pre-established procedures and topics failing to achieve a critical mass of participation lack of rigorous evaluation and cost-benefit analysis (Source: Prieto-Martín et al 2012)

6 PATTERNS FROM PRACTICE I propose to the government web portal (introduced by Government Communication Office in 2009) Adopted from Estonian application TID+ (5.000,00 for set up and 9.000,00 per year for maintenance and upgrades) Nov Nov. 2010: registered users proposals comments votes proposals (27,7%) send to gov. agencies - 11 accepted (4,7%).

7 CLIMAX OF E-PARTICIPATION IN SLOVENIA Source: United Nations E-Government Survey 2010: Leveraging E-government at a Time of Financial and Economic Crisis.

8 FAKE E-PARTICIPATION PATTERNS large majority of citizens on-line proposals rejected bureaucratic style of feedback from gov. agencies no follow up reports from facilitators on portal results / impact deliberation issues (generating conflicts instead of solving it) overall users dissatisfaction because of growing expectations

9 REACTIONS FROM USERS I am getting a feeling that everything proposed here is rejected by government ministries. Unfortunately this portal is a farse for democracy enabling government to praise themselves before EU about active citizenship. This portal is just a sand for your eyes, an illusion enabling us to think that we are able to exercise influence. Responsible officials rejecting proposal think they are untouchable and are not interested into improving government performance.

10 AS A RESULT...

11 OVERALL CONSEQUENCES Disappointment issue (low level of government performance) Trust issue (bad public image of democratic institutions) Disengagement issue (rise of Pirate politics) Alternative channels of participation (AVAAZ) Informal / conflict driven e-participation (ACTA, Wikileaks)

12 NGOs AS E-PARTICIPATION INTERMEDIARIES information dissemination and education advocating and campaigning on policy issues building on-line communities mobilisation of activists promoting engagement and participation networking, assisting and cooperating with other organisations endeavour for more open and democratic government to je test Source: Aravosis (1998), Brundin (2008, 45) 12

13 NGOs E-PARTICIPATION PORTAL DURING SLOVENIA EU COUNCIL PRESIDENCY 2008 Government tender for co-financing NGO's projects during EU Council Presidency (20.000,00 for 2 years) Information and communication on-line portal Predsedovanje selected featuring facilitated e-debates, e-opinion polls and information / documents provision Institutionalisation of the portal operation by the Official agreement signed in public between NGOs and government visits ( unique visitors per month) - 12 on-line debates and 8 on-line polls (8 reports from NGOs with policy proposals and 2 official replies from Government) on-line forum contributions & 163 votes in e-polls 500+ news covering the Presidency in SI and ENG The first of this kind attempt to establish an on-line civil dialogue / partnership at the national level during EU presidency

14

15 ON-LINE CITIZENS FORUM EUROPEAN DEBATES On-line discussions and consultations between Slovene Members of the European Parliament and public Facilitated by Institute for Electronic Participation in partnership with European parliament information office in Slovenia

16 Societal conflicts management Innovative approach Good governance Transparency of participation Legitimacy Accountable decisions

17 Stakeholders inputs facilitation Argumentative responsiveness Meaningful results delivery Administration of relevant information

18 Results more than published contributions unique visitors 9 consultation reports from facilitators 17 official feedback from MEPs epractice Editors Choice recognition 2007 Informal learning NEFIKS recognition 2011

19 CONCLUSIONS open and critical discussion about patterns of fake eparticipation is need (methodology / evaluation) transparency, accountability and impact of e-participation are crucial (strong e-participation) non-governmental organizations as actors, partners and champions e-participation (outsourcing) e-participation is not so much about technology by itself (political and social context matters)

20 THANK YOU! / facebook.com/zavod.inepa twitter.com/institut_inepa si.linkedin.com/in/simondelakorda