francesco molinari 7 dec 2010

8/8/2019 Francesco Molinari 7 Dec 2010

1/13

Sustainability of eParticipation

Francesco Molinari, [email protected]

Proudly member of

ePractice workshop: eParticipation

Brussels, 7th December 2010


2/13

Contents

Domain definition and challenges

The eParticipation Preparatory Action Overview of results and likely impact Lessons learnt from the IDEAL-EU project

A two-pronged strategy Scaling Up and Institutional Change

Sustainability as a multidimensional concept A possible way forward

eGov Action Plan design and implementation principles An OMC-like approach Some operational recommendations

Brussels, 7th Dec 20102 Francesco Molinari


3/13

Domain definition and challenges

Brussels, 7th Dec 2010Francesco Molinari3

eDemocracy eVoting eLegislation eParticipation

ICT based methods & tools for Inclusive/reliable voting systems Efficient/quality law/rule making More numerous and actively

engaged citizens in support to

public decision (policy) making

Yet:

eParticipation in practice can still be characterized as experimental or pilot. Sustainable

eParticipation is rarely achieved

Aichholzer et al. (2008)

We need to move to an environment and culture where there is clear commitment and willingness

of political and administrative representatives to engage with eParticipation

Coleman et al. (2007)


4/13

The eParticipation Preparatory Action

Achievements 2007-2010 Moreover


In a nutshell 30 pilot sites 18 EU Member States 100,000 citizens engaged 50 public sector entities 70 MEPs

Investment 20 Mio. (approx.) 200 per citizen engaged

Social impact 3,300 citizens per pilot 2,000 per public sector entity 1,400 per MEP

Economic impact An embryo market created/trialled for

some leading technologies

Research impact A nascent socio-technical discipline

Policy impact Indeterminate!

Source: EC


5/13

A matter of local relevance


Source: eParticipation Study


6/13

where EU funding made a big difference!


Source: eParticipation Study


7/13

A two-pronged strategy

Scaling up Institutional change


Aim: to enforce andstimulate the potential of

the nascent market for

eParticipation solutions in

Europe

Instrument: Migrate fromone-off small pilot projects

to city level, regional and

nationwide services

Aim: to embedeParticipation like a

permanent add-on in the

current setup of public

decision-making processes

Instrument: Explore andassess the conditions that

make eParticipation

sustainable


8/13

Lessons learnt from the past


Focus on public processes The natural loci where policy change takes place

Focus on institutions Laws and regulations, but also traditions, cultural and social norms

contribute to shape (e)Participation

Focus on take-up There is a mismatch between availability and usage of (process)

technology in EU public administration

Follow-up example: analysing the business modelof two successful eParticipation solutions

in the spatial planning and strategic

environmental assessment policy scenarios


9/13

A multi-dimensional concept


Source: Molinari (2010)


10/13

What next?


Coordinate ongoing and future EuropeaneGovernment projects so they align with theforthcoming action plan in order to facilitate sharing andavoiding unnecessary duplication of work.

Solutions to assure the sustainability of pilots andactions under these projects and programmes shouldbe explored.

The coordination of activities should take into account thespecificities of different Member States.

Source: Ministerial Declaration on eGovernment, Malmoe 2009


11/13

A possible way forward


The empowerment OF citizens (and businesses) in the EUInformation Society is a priority goal of the forthcomingeGovernment Action Plan, in line with the Malmoe MinisterialDeclaration This should include appropriate measures to ensure also the related

empowerment AS citizens in the Information Society goal (that iskey to the Digital Agenda as well, and in some EU countries is

becoming part of an expanded constitutional shield) We expect indications on how to best reconcile coordination,

sustainability and national specificities. In the eParticipationdomain: Scaling up from pilots to services is not an easy goal per se,

particularly in the short-to-medium run

In parallel, EU Member States should be called towards roadmapping(sustainable) ways of institutional change An OMC-like, co-petitive approach might support that


12/13

Some operational recommendations


Take stock of the eParticipation Preparatory Action results byjointly focusingon technological (scaling-up) and institutional (change) aspects in theframework of the eGov Action Plans design and implementation process

Structure ePractice.eu as a repository of best practice and a source ofintelligent benchmarking of European experiences also compared tointernational evidence available (e.g. vitalizing-democracy.org)

Launch a feasibility study for an Observatory of European eDemocracy Evaluating the reuse potential of the major ICT solutions and tools developed and trialled

so far Building up a similar infrastructure to http://www.eastin.info/home.aspx?ln=en&pg=keynote Streamlining evidence-based reform guidelines at City, Regional and National level Exploring coherence and scope for integration of eParticipation within national (e.g. youth

or immigration) policies

Grounding future assessment of the Member States performance by a set of instruments(official statistics, activity indicators, implementation records) on a systematic basis

Promote/Endorse a pan-European eDemocracy Forum Evolving from events such as todays one and using state-of-the-art ICT solutions for

permanent and/or ad hocconsultation on selected issues

Gathering academic experts, solution providers, practitioner networks (e.g. PEP-NET) andstakeholder communities (e.g. associations of EU Regions)


13/13

References used


http://www.egov2009.se/wp-content/uploads/Ministerial-Declaration-on-eGovernment.pdf

Aichholzer, G., Allhutter, D., Freschi, A.C., Lippa, B., Macintosh, A., Moss, G., andWestholm, H. (2008): eParticipation Evaluation and Impact. DEMO-NetProject Deliverable No. 13.3

Coleman, S., Macintosh, A., and Schneeberger, A. (2007): eParticipationResearch Direction based on Barriers, Challenges and Needs. DEMO-Net

Project Deliverable No. 12.3 Molinari, F. (2010): On Sustainable eParticipation. Proceedings of the IFIP

ePart2010 Conference, Lausanne (Switzerland).

http://www.ep-momentum.eu Monitoring the eParticipation Preparatory Action projects and results

http://www.jedem.org Special issue (2-2010) on Sustainability of eParticipation

http://islab.uom.gr/eP/ European eParticipation Study (2008)

francesco molinari 7 dec 2010

Documents