How Can Automated Text Analysis Enhance Local Digital Democracy?
Keywords:
Digital democracy, Local governance, Automated text analysisAbstract
Digital democracy can be defined as the use of digital technologies to enhance citizen participation and engagement in political processes. This article aims to explore digital democracy especially at the local level to shed a light on its evolution, impact and potential. The discussion begins by defining digital democracy and tracing its development through two distinct waves. The first wave introduced digital tools for political discussions, while the second wave revolutionized digital democracy with advanced functionalities, increased binding nature, and mass participation. As the digital technologies have been integrated into society, digital democracy has played a pivotal role in transforming civic engagement and collective action. It has empowered individuals to shape their participation, fostering more responsive and inclusive decision-making processes. At the local level, digital democracy initiatives have emerged as powerful tools for citizen engagement and transparent governance. The examples from around the world include Better Reykjavik, Decide Madrid, Civic Engagement Commission in New York City and Madame la Maire, J'ai une Idée! in Paris. They provide clear evidence for the potential of digital platforms to empower citizens, improve local services and encourage a sense of being a part of a community. The article concludes by discussing the challenges and opportunities of digital democracy, its impact on traditional political structures, and the potential for further research and development.
References
Andersen, K. N., Lee, J., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2020). Digital sclerosis? Wind of change for government and the employees. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 1(1), 1-14.
Becker, T. L. (2001). The comprehensive electronic town meeting and its role in 21st-century democracy. Futures, 33(3-4), 347-350.
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brennen, J. S., & Kreiss, D. (2016). Digitalization. The international encyclopedia of communication theory and philosophy, 1-11.
Certomà, C., Corsini, F., & Frey, M. (2020). Hyperconnected, receptive and do-it-yourself city. An investigation into the European “imaginary” of crowdsourcing for urban governance. Technology in Society, 61, 101229.
Chadwick, A. (2008). Web 2.0: New challenges for the study of e-democracy in an era of informational exuberance. Isjlp, 5, 9.
Dahlberg, L. (2011). Re-constructing digital democracy: An outline of four 'positions.' New media & society, 13(6), 855-872.
Dahlberg, L. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political communication, 22(2), 147-162.
Foster, D. (2013). Community and identity in the electronic village. In Internet culture. Routledge, 23-37.
Freeman, J., & Quirke, S. (2013). Understanding e-democracy government-led initiatives for democratic reform. JeDEM-eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 5(2), 141-154.
Fuchs, C. (2014). Social media and the public sphere. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 12(1), 57–101.
Fuchs, C. (2021). The Digital Commons and the Digital Public Sphere: How to Advance Digital Democracy Today. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 16(1), 9-26.
Gerbaudo, P. (2019). The Digital Party: Political Organisation and Online Democracy. London: Pluto.
Göker, G. (2007). İnternet’in Türkiye Kadın Hareketi Üzerindeki Etkisi: Kadın Kurultayı E-Grubu Örneği. Yeni Medya Çalışmaları, 205-247.
Grosswiler, P. (1998). Historical hopes, media fears, and the electronic town meeting concept: where technology meets democracy or demagogy?. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 22(2), 133-151.
Guallart, V. (2014). The Self-Sufficient City: Internet has changed our lives but it hasn't changed our cities, yet. Actar D, Inc.
Guillamón, M. D., Ríos, A. M., Gesuele, B., & Metallo, C. (2016). Factors influencing social media use in local governments: The case of Italy and Spain. Government Information Quarterly, 33(3), 460-471.
Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hague, B. N., & Loader, B. (Eds.). (1999). Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age. Psychology Press.
Hoggett, P. (1996). New modes of control in the public service. Public administration, 74(1), 9-32.
Karpf, D. (2012). The MoveOn effect: The unexpected transformation of American political advocacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Korkut, Y. (2022). Siyasal Katılım ve Dijitalleşme. Dijital Demokrasi, 55-69.
Lackaff, D. (2016). 13 Case Study: Better Reykjavik—Open Municipal Policymaking. Civic media: Technology, Design, Practice, 229.
Lim, S. B., & Yigitcanlar, T. (2022). Participatory governance of Smart cities: Insights from e-participation of Putrajaya and Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. Smart Cities, 5(1), 71-89.
Lutz, C., Hoffmann, C. P., & Meckel, M. (2014). Beyond just politics: A systematic literature review of online participation. First Monday.
McKeown, K. (1991). Social Norms and Implications of Santa Monica's PEN (Public Electronic Network).
Noveck, B. S., & Cerf, V. G. (2020). Digital Democracy: Past, Present, Future An Interview with Vinton G. Cerf Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist, Google. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 1(1), 1-10.
Pina, V., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Garcia-Rayado, J. (2022). Decide Madrid: A Spanish best practice on e-participation. In Engaging Citizens in Policy Making: e-Participation Practices in Europe (p. 152).
Rouet, G., & Côme, T. (Eds.). (2023). Participatory and Digital Democracy at the Local Level: European Discourses and Practices. Springer Nature.
Shulman, S. (2006). Whither deliberation? Mass e-mail campaigns and U.S. regulatory rulemaking. Journal of E-Government, 3(3), 44-45.
Tayanç, N. K., & Serdar, Ç. İ. L. (2022). Demokrasi Arayışında İletişim Teknolojileri Ve Yönetim Modelleri. Dijital Demokrasi, 7-30.
Timonen, A. (2013). Digital democracy in the EU. European View, 12(1), 103-112.
Tseng, Y.-S. (2022). Rethinking gamified democracy as frictional: a comparative examination of the Decide Madrid and vTaiwan platforms. Social & Cultural Geography, 1-18.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics.
