sessions

Social Media, Public Administration and Citizen Engagement #cedem16

Thursday, 19. May 2016

CeDEM16
CeDEM – the international Conference for e-Democracy and Open Government – brings together e-democracy, e-participation and open government specialists working in academia, politics, government and business to critically analyse the innovations, issues, ideas and challenges in the networked societies of the digital age. The CeDEM16 will be held from May 18th to May 20th 2016 at the Danube University Krems.

» More about the CeDEM16
» All CeDEM16 Sessions

Social Media, Public Administration and Citizen Engagement

Chair: Fiorella De Cindio

An Examination of Online Electoral Campaigning in Tanzania (Deodatus P. Shayo, Norbert Kersting)

The presentation builds on a PhD project in Tanzania about the online electoral campaigning in the presidental election. Participation can be seen as invited or invented space (which would be a bit of a different connotation between top-down and bottom-up classifications).  Different tools and activities can be classified into directdemocratic, demonstratie, representative, and deliberative (or blended) participation. The global south has advanced some of the social innovations.

In Tanzania, internet users are 11.3 million (2014), while mobile subscription is 34 million out of a 50 million population. In the 2015 Tanzanian election, three out of eight candidates used Facebook.

Candidates who did not have Facebook pages for campaigning received lower votes than those who did not use it, however, this might also relate to bigger parties or other factors.  Also, Facebook is not (yet?) the most important media in Tanzania. In an election in Uganda, they closed the internet on the day of the elections out of fear of negative commenting.

(Related literature: Kersting 2013: Online participation. From invented to invited space. In: IJEG 2013. Basically the paper includes the term “demonstrative participation” into other classifications.)

Social Media in Local Administration: An Empirical Study of Twitter Use in Flood Management (Panom Gunawong and Nantapong Butakhieo)

Flooding is an yearly event in Bangkok. Social media has been studied in the context of disaster management (f.i. Lindsay 2011: The benefits of social media in disaster management: an organizational perspective). Effective flood management needs co-creators sharing information and coordinated collective action. With view to Twitter, the quality of tweet messages in crucial. Trust and value in tweet content can create engagement among users and in the community. To adopt Twitter for flood management a suitable framework for the content is required. The account examined (@BKK_Best) showed more activity in some months. The reply rate was zero, and had less engagement with followers. They adopted Twitter mainly as a one-to-many tool. Future research will focus on a mixed-method approach (interviews) and the integration of Twitter with other social media.

Normalization Versus Equalization Effects of the Internet for Political Parties: Singapore’s General Election 2015 as a Case Study (Tan Tarn How, Tng Ying Hui, Andrew Yeo)

The less press and personal freedom people have, the more attractive the Internet becomes as a safe site for anti-government political expression. Since 2011 a lot of parties started using social media. Normalization theory means that the online world operated the same way as the offline word. In the study, the 5 largest poitical parties and their FB and party websites were examined (2011-2015). The biggest party apparently called social media the “World Wild West” of media (in 2013). Some parties declined re quantitity of postings, some increased. Analyzing activity and usage of FB features, the PAP party was the most active with most followers and most content. Concluding, social media requires monetary investment. The PAP party knew how to use Facebook and the website to its advantage, and digital consultants helped in doing so. The use of social media did not translate into votes. Even though more social media users had made up their minds on whom to vote for later than non-social media users, most had cast a mental note before Nomination day. Social media does have some effect, but whether it translates into votes, it is not yet certain.

Social Media Activism in Post-Euromaidan Ukrainian Politics and Civil Society (Alexander Ronzhyn)

Why is the Ukraine a valuable case? Due to ongoing conflict, a big population size and people actively using social media. The paper analyed 38 FB public pages and 17 FB groups, using Veghs typology of online activism that distinguishes awareness/advocacy, organization/mobilization and action/reaction. Analysis also comprised political affiliation of groups: most were neutral to the government. Some example about the rise of social media for activism in the Ukraine were: The Minister of Emergency Situations Z. Shkiryak resigned after social media oppression. Another case of influence of social media on politics is the LGBT anti-discrimination bill in November 2015. Furthermore, the rise of Facebook political bots shows the importance of social media.

 

Open Data, Transparency and Open Innovation #cedem16

CeDEM16
CeDEM – the international Conference for e-Democracy and Open Government – brings together e-democracy, e-participation and open government specialists working in academia, politics, government and business to critically analyse the innovations, issues, ideas and challenges in the networked societies of the digital age. The CeDEM16 will be held from May 18th to May 20th 2016 at the Danube University Krems.

» More about the CeDEM16
» All CeDEM16 Sessions

Open Data, Transparency and Open Innovation

Using Open Research Data for Public Policy Making: Opportunities of Virtual Research Environments (Anneke Zuiderwijk, Keith Jeffery, Daniele Bailo and Yi Yin)

IMG_6448
Scientists are looking for ways to publish their data and meet people that are searching for data to use for their applications. Usually these do not come together at the same place. Therefore, the need arises regarding Research Infrastructures and Virtual Research Environments (VRE).

These introduced environments offer:

  • Data, Tools, Resource/infrastructure, Collaboration and co-operation between researchers
  • Collaboration and co-operation between researchers on intra/inter institutional levels
  • Preservation of data and the associated outputs

The overall idea is to combine data from different domains in order to foster multidisciplinary research.

Yet there still exist challenges and open issues regarding the realisation of this concept:

  • Open issues
    • Data context is essential (esp. as certain disciplines have spec. methods, approaches
    • Heterogeneity in terms of semantics (concepts and terms treated differently in different disciplines)
    • User experience in terms of data acquisition
    • Fast updates to reflect current status quo/state-of-the-art
    • Data quality affects all methods and results based on the outcomes
    • Data privacy including researchers and individuals is important
    • Software issues in terms of compatibility
  • What are the requirements for a VRE combination of existing infrastructures
  • Fusion of OGD with ORD
  • General Empowerment of multidisciplinary research

Derived from a case study from the field of earth sciences, the following 13 requirements are crucial regarding the instantiation of a VRE:

  • Data storage
  • Data accessing
  • Data computational services
  • Data curation
  • Data cataloguing
  • Linkage between VREs
  • User identification
  • Researcher or community collaboration support
  • User communities training and support services
  • Service interface
  • Simplicity and ease of use
  • Accounting service
  • Sustainable business model for long-term operation of a VRE

Regarding future developments, promotion, and adoption of VREs, it will be necessary to not only intensify the

Presentation slides

Towards a Linked Data Publishing Methodology (Eduard Klein, Adrian Gschwend and Alessia C. Neuroni)

klein.png
Businesses and organisations struggle with the existence of legacy data (events, pois, glam data) in their repositories, as these affect the applicability of tools and techniques in terms of compatibility throughout the entire data life-cycle. Linked data approaches can help not only regarding the interconnection of data, but also regarding general integration aspects and the overall enrichment strategy.

Overall the two most important aspects are:

  • Higher usability
  • Creation of sustainability

Klein et al. have therefore developed a methodology, which is dedicated to sketching the necessary steps in conjunction with the associated affordances to ease the planning and implementation of linked data approaches. The main goals of this methodology are:

  • Re-use of linked data publishing process
  • Completeness (of planning) necessary project skills
  • Documentation of essential tasks to help answering:
    • How long will it take to develop use cases with this platform
    • Necessary technical skills
  • Better estimation for future projects

The seven steps of the suggested Linked Data Publishing Methodology (LIDAPUME) are:

  • Stakeholder analysis
  • Requirements analysis
  • Use case development
  • Data identification
  • Data modeling
  • Transformation configuration
  • Data processing

It will take several iterations of discussion regarding the above-mentioned steps to achieve a final result for a particular application. At the moment, the developed methodology is tested in several projects regarding applicability. The feedback from the project participants can then be used to not only refine the methodology, but also – over time – to derive templates for particular application/data cases, which in turn will speed up the entire process and will provide better means of sustainability.

Presentation slides

Measuring the Promise of Open Data: Development of the Impact Monitoring Framework (Matthias Stürmer and Marcus M. Dapp)

markus
Currently, the movement of Open (Gov) Data is getting more and more momentum, which is reflected in the increasing numbers of open data portals. However, the overall status of Open Data has yet to be assessed, together with the actual impact that is created by publishing Open Data. At the moment, there exist no real systematic approaches to assess the before-mentioned impact, nor are there suitable tools available. There are already organisations working towards potential solutions regarding these issues such as the ODI, but this is more towards experts “personal” views. Coming from the other side of perspective, barcamps and hackathons are bringing together people and data, yet it is -again- hard to assess the exact impact of open data during these events. Also when taking a closer look at the Open Data and Open Source community, time and resources spend by the people involved are not or hardly available, as a lot of interaction happens on an anonymous basis. The overall question remains: were the people and the spend resources actually worth it?

The framework presented by Matthias Stürmer and Marcus M. Dapp builds upon the concept of Social Return on Investment (SROI), related towards the theory of change, which was adapted to represent a Theory of Change for Open Gov Data. 

The main steps of this framework include:

  • Input: all resources such as money, people equipment and facilities; native proprietary data;
  • Output: direct and tanglible deliverables
  • Outcome (Value chain): all direct and indirect consequences of reuse of open data
  • Impact: results that occur due to the release of open data

These steps are then combined with 14 high-value data categories from the G8 open data charter:

  1. Companies
  2. Crime and Justice
  3. Earth observation
  4. Education
  5. Energy and Environment
  6. Finances and contracts
  7. Geospatial
  8. Global development
  9. Government accountability and democracy
  10. Health
  11. Science and Research
  12. Statistics
  13. Social mobility and welfare
  14. Transport and Infrastructure

The resulting methodology can be used, e.g., for a retrospective analysis of open data activities. The derived knowledge and experience can then be used to develop a release plan for open data, predicting benefits and impacts from related actions. Furthermore, the presented framework can serve as a monitoring instance, which can show the impact caused over time. While the framework in its current state is not yet complete, the first conceptual steps are complete and the project can now proceed to the second phase, where it will be tested on real use-cases (finished projects) as well as on future endeavours in the realm of open data.

Presentation Slides

 

Connected Smart City #cedem16

CeDEM16
CeDEM – the international Conference for e-Democracy and Open Government – brings together e-democracy, e-participation and open government specialists working in academia, politics, government and business to critically analyse the innovations, issues, ideas and challenges in the networked societies of the digital age. The CeDEM16 will be held from May 18th to May 20th 2016 at the Danube University Krems.

» More about the CeDEM16
» All CeDEM16 Sessions

Connected Smart City

  • Smart Government – The Potential of Intelligent Networking in Government and Public Administration (Jörn Von Lucke)

Smart world is the intelligently networked world. Using smart object and combine them to smart ecosystems is also known as the internet of things. This is also known as industry 4.0 and the government has to react on it. What will government 4.0 or smart government look like? Smart is often not used in the context of ICT, but this context becomes increasingly relevant, as we refer to intelligent networking. The new government also needs smart civil servants, and their role must be defined. Now is the time to envision the next step in ICT penetration. …

 

E-Democracy and E-Participation #cedem16

This track offered insights into different forms of eDemocracy and eParticipation at the CeDEM16 Conference.

CeDEM16
CeDEM – the international Conference for e-Democracy and Open Government – brings together e-democracy, e-participation and open government specialists working in academia, politics, government and business to critically analyse the innovations, issues, ideas and challenges in the networked societies of the digital age. The CeDEM16 will be held from May 18th to May 20th 2016 at the Danube University Krems.

» More about the CeDEM16
» All CeDEM16 Sessions

[Slideshare]

E-Democracy and E-Participation

  • A Review of Introducing Game Elements to eParticipation (Sarah-Kristin Thiel)
  • Civicracy – Establishing a Competent and Responsible Council of Representatives Based on Liquid Democracy (Reinhard Hainisch, Alois Paulin)
  • Styles of Online Participation in the Monza Participatory Budgeting (Stefano Stortone, Fiorella De Cindio)
  • Scaling Up Democracies with E-Collecting? (Uwe Serdült, Fernando Mendez, Maya Harris and Hyeon Su Seo)

A Review of Introducing Game Elements to eParticipation (Sarah-Kristin Thiel)

cedem_game
What is the status and the challange of of eParticipation? It seems the engagement rate has not been increased and the challanges are to activate and engage the people to long-term participation. Gamification can encourage and increase the usage of different systems. Different groups can be attracted through gamification, like young or less interested people. But do we want to gamifiy democracy? The critique is, that it is not a bridge builder for everybody. The clue is to have different strategies e.g. challanges, incentives and point systems to increase eParticipation. Even if game aspects are not “reaching” everybody they can serve as additional motivatians.
Presentation slides

Civicracy – Establishing a Competent and Responsible Council of Representatives Based on Liquid Democracy (Reinhard Hainisch, Alois Paulin)

cedem_civicracy
What is the motivation for eParticipation and how can we bring together citizens and politicians? Civicracy follows the core principles of liquid democracy and enables collaborative decision-making. Civicracy constrains the liquidity of vote delegation through a algorithm of representation and it focusses on the liquid-democratic constitution of a council of representatives.

Styles of Online Participation in the Monza Participatory Budgeting (Stefano Stortone, Fiorella De Cindio)

cedem_monza
It can be shown, that participation is changing. A case of an initiative in the city of Monza according to Participatory Budgeting was presented, by using an analytic framework. The results showed that there is still a big number of people who are participating offline and that there are gender differences due to participation activities.
Presentation slides

Scaling Up Democracies with E-Collecting? (Uwe Serdült, Fernando Mendez, Maya Harris and Hyeon Su Seo)

cedem_ecollect
There are different participatory instruments in Switzerland which allow citizens to put new issues on the policy agenda. The focus of the research was to classify them into three basic categories: 1) petition 2) agenda initiative and 3) citizens’ initiative. E-collecting mechanism can depend on the specifity of used instruments (policy impact of an instrument), as well as the insitutionalisation of the instrument (new, old). Cases from e.g. Finland, Latvia, Switzerland, show different systems for e-collecting.
Presentation slides

Workshop: Identity Management (ÖSD) #cedem16

We know your password! Do you?

In an afternoon workshop at CEDEM16 on identity management by the ÖSD (Austrian State Printing House), an overview on biometric authentication – not only as technologies valid for electronic participation.

These technologies usually develop exponentially. In the first phase of “deceptive disappointment”, nobody really believes in the technology, only after a tipping point is reached. From there, development usually is fast, reaching either a. disruptive stress or b. the level of opportunity (a development that can be compared to the one of the digital camera).

This is a questionnaire for participants, which you are also welcome to fill out: http://bit.ly/1XlVvxC

Below a summary of the workshop.

What’s wrong with passwords?

There are three factors relevant in authentication: a. I know something (f.i. password) b. I have something (hardware token or mobile) c. I am something (f.i. biometrics). If more of these factors are needed, we call it multi-factor authentication (known already from Google). (more…)