Citizen Participation Through Municipal Websites: A Global Scorecard

Aroon ManoharanKent State University, USA

Marc HolzerRutgers University-Campus at Newark, USA

Active Citizen Participation in E-Government:A Global Perspective

Active citizen participation in e-government: a global perspective / Aroon Manoharan and Marc Holzer, editors. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. Summary: “This book focuses on the issues and challenges involving adoption and implementation of online civic engagement initiatives globally and will serve as a valuable guide to governments in their efforts to enable active citizen participation”--Provided by publisher. ISBN 978-1-4666-0116-1 (hardcover) -- ISBN 978-1-4666-0117-8 (ebook) -- ISBN 978-1-4666-0118-5 (print & perpetual access) 1. Public administration--Citizen participation--Technological innovations. 2. Political participation--Technological innovations. 3. Internet in public administration. I. Manoharan, Aroon, 1979- II. Holzer, Marc. JF1525.A8A34 2012 323’.04202854678--dc23 2011046465

British Cataloguing in Publication DataA Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.

All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.

Managing Director: Lindsay JohnstonSenior Editorial Director: Heather Probst Book Production Manager: Sean WoznickiDevelopment Manager: Joel GamonDevelopment Editor: Michael KillianAcquisitions Editor: Erika GallagherTypesetter: Lisandro GonzalezCover Design: Nick Newcomer, Lisandro Gonzalez

Published in the United States of America by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global)701 E. Chocolate AvenueHershey PA 17033Tel: 717-533-8845Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] site: http://www.igi-global.com

Copyright © 2012 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher.Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

403

Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Chapter 20

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0116-1.ch020

INTRODUCTION

A growing phenomenon around the globe is how online citizen participation influences the relationship citizens’ have with their government. Democratic governments are increasingly scruti-

nized for how effectively they use the Internet to provide services to citizens. Initially, traditional citizen participation involved limited to face-to-face interactions and telephone communications, however, the evolution of technology has given citizens more opportunities for participation with improvements in communication, and accessibil-

Alicia SchattemanNorthern Illinois University, USA

Deborah Mohammed-SpignerNJ Common Cause, USA

George PoluseKent State University, USA

Citizen Participation through Municipal Websites:

A Global Scorecard

ABSTRACT

This study is based on a global survey of municipal websites conducted by the E-Governance Institute at Rutgers University New Jersey and the Global E-Policy E-Government Institute at Sungkyunkwan University, South Korea. The survey evaluated municipal websites in five distinct e-governance categories: (1) security and privacy, (2) usability, (3) content, (4) services, and (5) citizen participation. This chapter examines the area of citizen participation in detail and the analysis found that online citizen participa-tion was highly correlated with both the percentage of Internet users and the percentage of mobile users in a country. In the analysis Seoul, Korea achieved the highest score in this category. Unlike previous research the population of a country was not found to be statistically significant. Overall, this research indicates a strong relationship Internet users and education have with online citizen participation. As the percentage rate of Internet users increases across the globe, along with the rising literacy rates, more countries will progress towards adopting and implementing e-democracy strategies.

404

Citizen Participation through Municipal Websites

ity. This chapter examines different variables that might explain why countries provide online citizen participation opportunities. The analysis is based on the global study of municipal websites that was conducted by Rutgers University and Sung-kyunkwan University. This chapter focuses on two primary questions related to citizen participation:

1. What opportunities for online participation are available in the world’s most populous cities?

2. What factors best explain the development of online citizen participation on municipal websites?

The results from this study will not only con-tribute to our understanding of best practices, but also help establish municipal e-government benchmarks.

BACKGROUND

E-government enables citizens to participate more actively in the democratic process and the gover-nance of their communities (OECD 2003a). The use of information and communication technology (ICT) promises a participatory democracy (Clift, 2004). Both political support from the top officials and demand from its citizens are necessary to facilitate a shift towards e-government. Johnson and Kaye (1998) argue that within the argument that the Internet can reinvigorate democracy is the implicit “notion that Web users trust the govern-ment and want to participate” (p. 123).

The Internet can reinvigorate civic engage-ment, which is defined as “the activities by which people participate in civic, community and politi-cal life and by doing so express their commitment to community” (Smith, Kearns and Fine, 2005, p. 6). Online civic engagement is different than traditional engagement; with online capabilities many individuals can be mobilized quickly at little or no cost. Individuals can get involved directly,

bypassing such middlemen as advocacy groups and organizations. Online engagement can also empower groups and organizations; they can generate their discussion forum and create news updates without going through traditional media channels. “Methods of public engagement can be described as deliberative when they encourage citizens to scrutinize, discuss and weigh up com-peting values and policy options” (Coleman and Gotze, 2001, p. 6). The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) outlined three ways to engage the public – 1) information sharing: one-way communication in which the government produces and delivers information to its citizens; 2) consultation: two-way commu-nication in which citizens can provide feedback to the government; and 3) active participation: a partnership between the public and government in which the citizens are directly involved in the decision and policymaking process.

There are possible problems with an increase in public engagement. Coleman and Gotze (2001) suggest a possible objection, “online public en-gagement might compromise a threat to effective policy making and good governance” (p. 15). As citizens become more knowledgeable and actively express their concern over an issue, they can be-come less representative of the general populace. This can lead to minority rule over the majority, and the exclusion of others, forming small elitist groups that have a great deal of control over policy decisions via online means. If governments offer online consultation they “should not offer [it] as a gimmick; they must be committed to integrating evidence gathered into the policy process and being responsive” (Coleman & Gotze, 2001, p. 20). On-line communication networks have the potential to create a strong sense of community and social ownership, which are high in social capital (Foth, 2003). An online community can be a geographic place or group of people that come together for a specific issue, transcending a physical place. The Internet has great potential to tie together people based on their interests and concerns because

405


consultation and discussion are not limited to a physical location. Individuals can become more connected to each other, which can increase social capital and civic engagement. Korac-Kakabadse and Korac-Kakabadse (1999) explain that infor-mation communication technology provides the opportunity to improve the degree and quality of public participation in government.

Coleman and Gotze (2001) suggest that the new media (Internet) possess inherently dialogi-cal, democratic, and libertarian characteristics, which allows political communication to return to the people. This type of communication is structurally unsuited for a centralized agenda or content control. The spread of ICT use to citizens’ should lead to more participation in the political decision-making process.

A mask of democracy is detectable in the discourses surrounding new ICTs, often billed as being better able to provide information and opportunities for the public in political discus-sions (Malina, 1999). Malina warns the equality gap that exists between rich and poor in civil society will widen dramatically if ICTs are used in a way that views information as privately owned property. This would make information a precious commodity in a highly commercialized and competitive “electronic” public sphere (p. 28). Malina (1999) also recognizes that there are very few ways in which citizens can influence the process of choosing our designed technologies. Sclove (1995) stated that we should not “adapt compliantly to whatever technologies happen along,” but commit ourselves to supporting tech-nologies that are “compatible” with citizenship and democracy (p. 8-9).

Prior to the advancement of ICTs, public administrators were concerned with the rates of traditional participation of US citizens in gov-ernment and politics. The lack of participation was reflected in low rates of voter turnout and declining membership in traditional organiza-tions, such as churches and community groups (Putnam, 1995). This cynicism and apathy existed

within the broader context of a general public belief in the impotence and futility of political participation (Rowntree, 1996). ICTs however have opened up new pathways for government information and services. ICTS might be able to facilitate the proliferation of democratic values, transparency, accountability, and participation with the government and its citizens. Participation in government decision-making from informed citizens in governmental affairs empowers them to be legitimate political players. The utilization of citizen input will lead to a more openness in a government (Irvin & Stansbury, 2004).

According to Denhardt and Denhardt (2000), the concept of the New Public Service (NPS) is rooted in three basic theories. One of which is the “theory of democratic citizenship,” which advo-cates the very active and valuable role for citizens engaged in governance. From this perspective, administrators should consider the population they serve as “citizens” rather than as voters, clients, or customers (p. 5520) and share authority, reduce control, and place a high amount of trust in their collaborations with citizens. The goals for citizen participation according to Buss, Redburn and Guo (2006) “are making democracies more democratic, redefining power structures, enhancing credibility and legitimacy, managing conflict and building consensus, eliciting feedback and consultation, and promoting accountability and transparency” (p. 9). The authors argue that expanding and deepening citizen participation is the purpose of a democratic society that is founded on popular sovereignty and self-government. They offer six possible benefits in increasing the participatory power of citizens in government:

1. Citizens can provide policymakers with information they need to design and de-liver effective, efficient and quality public services.

2. Citizens participating in efficacious pro-cesses are much more likely to be satisfied with programs.

406


3. Extensive, meaningful involvement of citi-zens in all phases of service delivery helps validate the entire enterprise.

4. Actively involved citizens can marshal support for programs support for programs, services and policies.

5. Citizens not only provide input into pro-grams, but when well informed through participation, they can disseminate informa-tion widely to others who are less involved.

6. Many people are systematically excluded from opportunities to participate in programs designed for them (Buss & Tribble, 2006, p. 144).

Technology has been utilized by governments and non-profits to engage their citizens in the process of decision-making. An example of this is Americaspeaks, a non-profit whose mission is to reinvigorate American democracy by increasing citizen engagement in public decision-making. The organization’s goal is to link citizens to poli-cymakers and create additional dialogue forums for participation on policy issues. The Champions of Participation is a report that is issued from the collaboration between Americaspeaks and other similar organizations as a result of the President’s Open Government Directive. This effort includes work from 34 managers from 23 different federal agencies and experts on citizen engagement. The project identifies opportunities for participation and collaboration as well as its barriers (Champi-ons of Participation, Executive Summary, 2009). Nine strategies and recommendations were identi-fied and the three most relevant to this study are the following:

1. Establish systems that will support govern-ment-wide adoption of participation and collaboration practices. Culture change across federal agencies was identified as being important in bringing this change.

2. Ensure that participation and collaboration are adequately funded.

3. Address existing rules and regulations that impede participation and collaboration.

To Lukensmayer and Torres (2006) citizen en-gagement includes a number of democratic reform ideas: public participation, public involvement, participatory democracy, deliberative democracy, and collaborative governance The authors argue that when used in relation to the online environ-ment, a new vocabulary is evoked, which includes e-democracy, digital democracy, e-government, and electronic governance (p. 9).

METHOD

The methodological steps from the 2007 survey on global municipal websites mirrors previous research that was done in 2005 and 2003. Our methodology borrows from the Digital Gov-ernance (2005) report based on the 2005 data. The 2007 global municipality survey involves the same 98-measure from the Rutgers-SKKU Survey Index, with some changes in the cities selected. This data focuses on cities around world by considering their population size and the total number of individuals using the Internet. Cities were identified using data from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), an organization affiliated with the United Nations (UN). The top 100 most wired nations were identified using information that considers the total number of online users obtained from the ITU-UN.

The largest city, by population in each of these 100 countries was then selected for the study and used as a proxy for all cities in a particular country. The rationale for selecting the largest municipali-ties stems from the e-governance literature, which suggests a direct positive relationship between population and e-governance capacity at the lo-cal level (Moon, 2002; Moon and deLeon, 2001; Musso, Weare, & Hale, 2001; Weare, Musso & Hale, 1999). The study evaluated the official web-sites of each large city in their native language.

407


Of the 100 cities selected, 86 cities were found to have an official municipal website; these cities were evaluated from August 2007 to December 2007. From the 2005 survey 81 of the 100 cit-ies had official websites, five less than the 2007 survey. This represents a slight increase in the adoption of e-governance among municipalities around the world.

The Rutgers-SKKU E-Governance Survey Instrument is currently the most comprehensive index in practice for e-governance research. It includes 98 measures in five distinct categorical areas of e-governance research. The five compo-nents are the following: (1) Security and Privacy, (2) Usability, (3) Content, (4) Services; and (5) Citizen Participation. Table 1 provides a more detailed summary of the survey.

The 2007 survey instrument utilizes 98 mea-sures, of which 43 are dichotomous. For each of the five e-governance components our research

applies 18 to 20 measures. The non-dichotomous questions measures were coded on a four-point ordinal scale (0, 1, 2, 3; see Table 2). The di-chotomous measures for the “service” and “citizen participation” categories correspond with values on our four-point scale of “0” or “3”; dichotomous measures in “privacy” or “usability” correspond to ratings of “0” or “1” on the scale.

This chapter focuses specifically on the results from the citizen participation component. The website evaluation for this component considers several ways in which the local government in-volves its citizens. The analysis measures includes whether local governments offer current informa-tion about municipal governance online, the use of internet-based polls or surveys, online bulletin boards, or other online methods that foster two-way communication and discussion.

The dependent variable in this study is the score received for each municipal website, for

Table 1. E-governance performance measures

E-governance Category

Key Concepts Raw Score Weighted Score Keywords

Security/ Privacy

18 25 20 Privacy policies, authentication, encryption, data manage-ment, cookies

Usability 20 32 20 User-friendly design, branding, length of homepage, targeted audience links or channels, and site search capabilities

Content 20 48 20 Access to current accurate information, public documents, reports, publications, and multimedia materials

Service 20 59 20 Transactional services - purchase or register, interaction between citizens, businesses and government

Citizen Participation

20 55 20 Online civic engagement/ policy deliberation, citizen based performance measurement

Total 98 219 100

Table 2. E-governance scale

Scale Description

0 Information about a given topic does not exist on the website

1 Information about a given topic exists on the website (including links to other information and e-mail addresses)

2 Downloadable items are available on the website (forms, audio, video, and other one-way transactions, popup boxes)

3 Services, transactions, or interactions can take place completely online (credit card transactions, applications for permits, searchable databases, use of cookies, digital signatures, restricted access)

408


the online participation component. The first set of independent variables included the total number of Internet users in the country, the percentage of Internet users in the country, and the percentage of mobile phone users (data from the International Telecommunication Union). A second set of variables included factors from The World Bank’s Governance Indicators which identifies six key dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability, (2) political stability and the absence of violence/terrorism, (3) gov-ernment effectiveness, (4) regulatory quality, (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. For the purposes of this analysis, chose to include only voice and accountability and political stability and absence of violence/terrorism as additional independent variables.

The third set of variables came from the World Values Survey, a global network of social scien-tists that collects data on global normative values and beliefs. These results are broken down into national-level scores of (1) traditional/secular-rational values and (2) survival/self-expression values. The fourth set of variables was obtained from the Freedom in the World Survey, which ranks nations based on their political rights and civil liberties. The corruption perceptions index developed by Transparency International mea-sures the extent of corruption in nations around the world and was also included as an independent variable in the study. One additional variable is the democracy index from the Economist. The Economist’s democracy index ranks nations based on the extent of their democratic practices and classifies nations into four types of regimes: full democracies; flawed democracies; hybrid regimes; and authoritarian regimes. Finally the control variables for this study included the edu-cation index, population, GDP per capita in U.S. dollars, capital city, and continent.

ANALYSIS

Seoul, Korea (50 points), Bangkok, Thailand (32 points), Helsinki, Finland (31 points), Dublin, Ireland (30 points), and Sofia, Bulgaria (28 points) achieved the highest citizen participation scores out of the possible 55 points. Table 3 highlights all the other cities composite scores.

After calculating the overall scores for each of the cities studied, we examined the citizen participation score in relation to the independent variables. The correlations are indicated in Table 4.

Interestingly, the US and Canada ranked only 12th and 13th for online citizen participation rates, despite high educational achievement and a high percentage of online users. These governments seem to be behind from the rest of the globe and appear to be missing out on the positive aspects of e-democracy.

International Telecommunication Union Variables

Results from the correlation analysis suggest statistically significant findings that pertain to a certain perspective on e-democracy. Among the ITU variables, online citizen participation was highly correlated with the percentage of Internet users and the percentage of mobile users in a country, but not to the actual number of Internet users. This makes sense, since the number of Internet users acts as a proxy for population and can therefore skew the results for large and small populations. The percentage of Internet users more accurately captures the depiction of citizen population across different populations.

World Values Survey Variables

Among the variables from the World Values Survey, political stability was found to be sta-tistically significant and highly correlated with online citizen participation among countries,

409


Table 3. Total online participation scores

Rank City Country Total Score

1 Seoul Korea 50

2 Bangkok Thailand 32

3 Helsinki Finland 31

4 Dublin Ireland 30

5 Sofia Bulgaria 28

6 Sarajevo Bosnia 26

7 Singapore Singapore 26

8 Amsterdam Netherlands 24

9 Auckland New Zealand 24

10 Vienna Austria 23

11 Rome Italy 23

12 New York City USA 23

13 Toronto Canada 22

14 Tokyo Japan 20

15 Zurich Switzerland 20

16 Hong Kong Hong Kong 19

17 Sydney Australia 18

18 Moscow Russia 18

19 Riga Latvia 17

20 Madrid Spain 17

21 London UK 17

22 Berlin Germany 16

23 Bratislava Slovak Republic 16

24 Paris France 15

25 Vilnius Lithuania 15

26 Zagreb Croatia 14

27 Cape Town South Africa 14

28 Amman Jordan 13

29 Oslo Norway 13

30 Kampala Uganda 13

31 Mexico Mexico 12

32 San Jose Costa Rica 11

33 Copenhagen Denmark 11

34 Caracas Venezuela 11

35 Praque Czech Republic 10

36 Kiev Ukraine 10

37 Santiago Chile 9

38 Nicosia Cyprus 9

39 Lisbon Portugal 9

40 Belgrade Serbia 9

41 Dubai UAE 9

42 Sao Paolo Brazil 8

Rank City Country Total Score

43 Tallinn Estonia 8

44 Hochimnh Vietnam 8

45 Bogota Columbia 7

46 Budapest Hungary 7

47 Jakarta Indonesia 7

48 Almaty Kazakhstan 7

49 San Juan Puerto Rico 7

50 Buenos Aires Argentina 6

51 KL Malaysia 6

52 Dhaka Bangladesh 5

53 Shanghai China 5

54 Jerusalem Israel 5

55 Ljubljana Slovenia 5

56 Istanbul Turkey 5

57 Montevideo Uruguay 5

58 Minsk Belarus 4

59 Brussels Belgium 4

60 Athens Greece 4

61 Muscat Oman 4

62 Lima Peru 4

63 Bucharest Romania 4

64 Beirut Lebanon 3

65 Kuwait Kuwait 3

66 Luxemburg Luxemburg 3

67 Casablanca Morocco 3

68 Stockholm Sweden 3

69 La Paz Bolivia 2

70 Guayaquil Ecuador 2

71 San Salvador El Salvador 2

72 Lagos Nigeria 2

73 Karachi Pakistan 2

74 Riyadh Saudi Arabia 2

75 Guatemala Guatemala 1

76 Mumbai India 1

77 Tehran Iran 1

78 Chisinau Moldova 1

79 Quezon Philippines 1

80 Warsaw Poland 1

81 Dakar Senegal 1

82 Nairobi Kenya 0

83 Port Louis Mauritius 0

84 Tunis Tunisia 0

85 Tashkent Uzbekistan 0

410


while self-expression was not. Political stability is an important indicator of civic engagement, and therefore it is not surprising that they would be highly correlated to online civic participation on municipal websites. If citizens feel they have a voice and feel empowered to express their opinion freely then they will expect online opportunities to participate with their local government.

World Bank Variables

From the two World Bank variables voice and ac-countability, and political stability and absence of violence were found to be statistically significant. These variables are similar to the World Values Survey; where governments are stable and citi-zens feel part of the governance structure, they are more likely to seek participation with their local governments. Governments are then com-pelled to provide online opportunities for citizen participation.

Transparency International Variable

The corruption score was also statistically signifi-cant to online citizen participation score. When corruption was low in an area, citizens would be more likely to participate, and also expect online opportunities in which to engage with government.

Freedom House Variables

According to the analysis in Table 4, both the political rights and civil liberties scores were negatively correlated with online citizen partici-pation scores. The greater a country’s political rights and civil liberties the lower their citizen participation score. This finding is a bit surpris-ing given past research; the negative correlation might indicate other variables might be at work. Additional research needs to be done to determine the significance of this finding.

Table 4. Independent variables

Source of Data Variable Name Pearson Correlation Significance (2-tailed)

International Telecommunication Union # of Internet users 0.136 0.215

International Telecommunication Union % of Internet users 0.549** 0.000

International Telecommunication Union % mobile phone users 0.365** 0.001

World Values Survey Self-Expression value 0.199 0.094

World Values Survey Political stability 0.323** 0.006

World Bank: Governance Indicator DI: voice and accountability 0.375** 0.000

World Bank: Governance Indicator DI: political stability and absence of violence

0.340** 0.001

Transparency International Corruption score 0.434** 0.000

Freedom House Political Rights score -0.263* 0.017

Freedom House Civil Liberties -0.375** 0.001

UN Human Development Report Education Index 0.440** 0.000

Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index 0.414** 0.000

Control variables Population -.112 0.306

Control variables GDP $US 0.358** 0.001

*p<0.10, **p<0.05,***p<0.01

411


UN Human Development Report Variable

Similar with many e-government studies and online citizen participation studies, education is highly correlated with online citizen participation scores. Countries with higher education levels are more likely to provide opportunities for citizens to interact with government.

Economist Intelligence Unit Variable

The democracy index variable was found to be positively correlated with online participation scores. The more democratic the society the more likely citizens will seek an interactive/participa-tory relationship with the government.

Control Variables

Population of a country was not found to be sta-tistically significant, unlike previous research. However, GDP was found to be statistically significant; meaning countries with higher GDP in US dollars were more likely to receive higher online participation scores.

CONCLUSION

This research indicates two important trends that strengthen the concept of e-democracy as an increasing phenomenon. One is that there is a strong association between democracy and online citizen participation. The other trend is that there is a strong relationship between internet access and education level with online citizen participation. As the percentage rate of Internet user’s increases across the globe and literacy rates also rise, more countries will progress towards the adoption and implementation of e-democracy and e-democracy

strategies. Furthermore, this research also lends support to the argument that the more democratic a country the better job it does of reaching out to their citizens, and including them into in the policymaking process.

This study of municipal websites is extensive since it examines several global municipalities. It compares countries and offers an explanation of the variables that explain a municipality’s par-ticipatory level by creating a model that combines survey results with other relevant independent variables. The study isolates these variables to measure which ones drive a government to engage its citizens online. From the analysis part of the answer lies in accessibility. Countries with the highest scores of citizen participation also had higher percentages of Internet and mobile phone users. Since the advancement in technology has allowed Internet access to expand to small mobile devices such as tablets and cell phones, more users have the option to take their govern-ment wherever they go. Mobility changes how governments deliver programs and services, as well as how they communicate with their resi-dents. Citizens’ expectations of access rise and governments have to adjust to how they provide feedback and information in real-time. Not only do they have to consider the format in how they provide features, they have to provide services in an efficient and effective manner.

Based on the findings in this study, future re-search should be directed at closely examining the relationship between mobility and e-government. The proliferation of cellphones and smartphones around the globe has altered how people com-municate with one another and how citizens communicate with their government. Future studies should consider how mobile government (m-government) develops and how it influences e-government development and citizen participa-tion levels within municipalities.

412


REFERENCES

Alliance for Regional Stewardship. (2001). Em-powering regions: Strategies and tools for com-munity decision making. Palo Alto, California. Retrieved from www.regionalstewardship.org

Andersen, K. V., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2006). E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee model. Government Infor-mation Quarterly, 23, 236–248. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.11.008

Barber, B., Mattson, K., & Peterson, J. (1997). The state of “electronically enhanced democracy”: A survey of the Internet. New Brunswick, NJ: Walt Whitman Center for the Culture and Politics of Democracy, Rutgers University.

Buss, T., & Tribble, M. (2006). Broadening citi-zen participation processes in federal programs: HUD’s CDBG programs. In Buss, T., Redburn, F. S., & Guo, K. (Eds.), Modernizing democracy: Innovations in citizen participation (pp. 138–155). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Buss, T. F., Redburn, F. S., & Guo, K. (Eds.). (2006). Modernizing democracy: Innovations in citizen participation. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Clift, S. (2004). E-government and democracy: Representation and citizen engagement in the information age. Based on research provided to the United Nations – UNPAN/DESA for the 2003 World Public Sector Report. Retrieved from http://www.unpan.org/ dpepa_worldpareport.asp

Coleman, S., & Gotze, J. (2001). Bowling together: Online public engagement in policy deliberation. London, UK: Hansard Society. Retrieved from www.hansardsociety.org.uk

Foth, M. (2003). Connectivity does not ensure community: On social capital, networks and communities of place. IRiRA 2003 Conference Track: Community Informatics.

Holzer, M., & Kim, S. 2008. Digital governance in municipalities worldwide (2007): A longitudinal assessment of municipal websites throughout the world. Newark, NJ: National Center for Public Performance.

Johnson, T., & Kaye, B. (1998). A vehicle for en-gagement or a haven for the disaffected? Internet use, political alienation, and voter participation. In Johnson, T., Hays, C., & Hays, S. (Eds.), Engaging the public: How government and the media can reinvigorate American democracy. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Korac-Kakabadse, A., & Korac-Kakabadse, N. (1999). Information Technology’s impact on the quality of democracy: Reinventing the ‘democratic vessel. In Heeks, R. (Ed.), Reinventing government in the information age: International practice in IT-enabled public sector reform. London, UK: Routledge.

Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18, 122–136. doi:10.1016/S0740-624X(01)00066-1

Moon, M. J. (2002). The evolution of e-govern-ment among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424–433. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00196

Moon, M. J., & deLeon, P. (2001). Municipal re-invention: Municipal values and diffusion among municipalities. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, 11(3), 327–352.

Musso, J., Weare, C., & Hale, M. (2001). De-signing web technologies for local governance reform: Good management or good democ-racy. Political Communication, 17(l), 1–19. doi:10.1080/105846000198486

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2003a). Engaging citizens online for better policy-making. OECD Observer, March. Retrieved from www.oecd.org

413


Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2003b). Promise and problems of e-democracy: Challenges of online citizen engagement. Retrieved from www.oecd.org

Schelin, S. H. (2003). E-government: An over-view. Public information technology: Policy and management issues. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

Smith, J., Kearns, M., & Fine, A. (2005). Power to the edges: Trends and opportunities in online civic engagement. PACE Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement, Denver, Colorado. Retrieved from www.pacefunders.org

UN Human Development Report. (2007). Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided world. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/ hdr_20072008_en_complete.pdf

United Nations. (2005). Department of eco-nomic and social affairs (UNDESA): UN global e-government readiness report 2005: From e-government to e-inclusion, division for public administration and development management. UNPAN, 2005(14), 2005.

Weare, C., Musso, J., & Hale, M. (1999). Electronic democracy and the diffusion of municipal web pages in California. Administration & Society, 31(1), 3–27. doi:10.1177/009539999400935475

Wescott, C. (2001). E-government in the Asia-Pacific region. Asian Journal of Political Science, 9(2), 1–24. doi:10.1080/02185370108434189

West, D. (2005). Equity and accessibility in e-government: A policy perspective. Journal of E-Government, 1(2), 31–43. doi:10.1300/J399v01n02_03

ADDITIONAL READING

Barber, B. (2001). The uncertainty of digital politics: Democracy’s uneasy relationship with Information Technology. Harvard International Review, 23, 42–47.

Browning, G. (2002). Electronic democracy: Us-ing the internet to transform American politics. Medford, OR: CyberAge Books.

Center for Technology in Government. (2004). What citizens want from e-government: Current practice research. University at Albany, State University of New York.

Danziger, J. N., & Andersen, K. (2002). Impacts of Information Technology on public administra-tion: An analysis of empirical research from the ‘golden age’ of transformation. International Journal of Public Administration, 25(5), 591–627. doi:10.1081/PAD-120003292

Evans-Cowley, J. (2006). The accessibility of municipal government websites. Journal of E-Government, 2(2), 75–90. doi:10.1300/J399v02n02_05

Ho, A., & Coates, P. (2002). Citizen participa-tion: Legitimizing performance measurement as a decision tool. Government Finance Review, April, 8-10.

Ho, A. T.-K. (2002). Reinventing local govern-ments and the e-government initiative. Pub-lic Administration Review, 62(4), 434–444. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00197

Holden, S. H., Norris, D. F., & Fletcher, P. D. (2003). Electronic government at the local level. Public Performance & Management Review, 26(4), 325–344. doi:10.1177/1530957603026004002

Larsen, E., & Rainie, L. (2002). The rise of the e-citizen: How people use government agen-cies’ websites. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org

414


Mayer-Schonberger, V., & Lazer, D. (2007). Governance and Information Technology: From electronic government to information government. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Milward, H. B., & Snyder, L. O. (1996). Elec-tronic government: linking citizens to public organizations through technology. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, 6(2), 261–275.

Min, S.-J. (2007). Online vs. face-to-face delib-eration: Effects on civic engagement. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1369–1387. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00377.x

O’Looney, J. (2003). Using technology to increase citizen participation in government: The use of models and simulation. IBM Endowment for the Business of Government.

Price, V. (2009). Citizens deliberating online: Theory and some evidence. In T. Davies & Seeta Peña Gangadharan (Eds.), Online deliberation: Design, research, and practice (pp. 37-58). Chi-cago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Reddick, C. (2005). Citizen-initiated contacts with Ontario local e-government: Administrators’ responses to contacts. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 1(4), 45–62. doi:10.4018/jegr.2005100103

Reddick, C. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets to the servers? Government Information Quarterly, 22(1), 38–47. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2004.10.003

Reddick, C. (2007). The perceived impacts of e-government on U.S. cities: A survey of Florida and Texas City managers. Government Infor-mation Quarterly, 24, 576–594. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2006.09.004

Shane, P. (2008). Building democracy through online citizen deliberation: A framework for ac-tion. The Center for Interdisciplinary Law and Policy Studies, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University.

Steyaert, J. (2000). Local governments on-line and the role of the resident: Govern-ment shop versus electronic community. So-cial Science Computer Review, 18(1), 3–16. doi:10.1177/089443930001800101

Welch, E., & Hinnant, C. (2003). Internet use, transparency, and interactivity effects on trust in government. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Yang, K., & Bergrud, E. (Eds.). (2008). Civic engagement in a network society. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Civic Engagement: The ways in which people participate in their community through community and political affairs, various levels and methods of civic engagement.

E-Government: The use of information and communication technology to deliver programs and services to citizens by government.

Information and Communication Technol-ogy: Various technological tools incorporating the Internet and other modes.

Online Civic Engagement: The ways in which people participate in their community us-ing information and communication technology, various levels of online civic engagement.

Citizen Participation Through Municipal Websites: A Global Scorecard

Documents

Transcript of Citizen Participation Through Municipal Websites: A Global Scorecard