Democracy online: technologies for democratic deliberation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Adam Meylan-Stevenson, Ben Hawes, and Matt Ryan: “This paper explores the use of online tools to improve democratic participation and deliberation. These tools offer new opportunities for inclusive communication and networking, specifically targeting the participation of diverse groups in decision-making processes. It summarises recent research and published reports by users of these tools and categorises the tools according to functions and objectives. It also draws on testimony and experiences recorded in interviews with some users of these tools in public sector and civil society organisations internationally.


The objective is to introduce online deliberation tools to a wider audience, including benefits, limitations and potential disadvantages, in the immediate context of research on democratic deliberation. We identify limitations of tools and of the context and markets in which online deliberation tools are currently being developed. The paper suggests that fostering a collaborative approach among technology developers and democratic practitioners, might improve opportunities for funding and continual optimisation that have been used successfully in other online application sectors…(More)”.

Searching for Safer, Healthier Digital Spaces

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Search for Common Ground (Search): “… has specialized in approaches that leverage media such as radio and television to reach target audiences. In recent years, the organization has been more intentional about digital and online spaces, delving deeper into the realm of digital peacebuilding. Search has since implemented a number of digital peacebuilding projects.

Search wanted to understand if and how its initiatives were able to catalyze constructive agency among social media users, away from a space of apathy, self-doubt, or fear to incite inclusion, belonging, empathy, mutual understanding, and trust. This report examines these hypotheses using primary data from former and current participants in Search’s digital peacebuilding initiatives…(More)”

Open government, civic tech and digital platforms in Latin America: A governance study of Montevideo’s urban app ‘Por Mi Barrio’

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Carolina Aguerre and Carla Bonina: “Digital technologies have a recognised potential to build more efficient, credible, and innovative public institutions in Latin America. Despite progress, digital transformation in Latin American governments remains limited. In this work, we explore a peculiar yet largely understudied opportunity in the region: pursuing digital government transformation as a collaborative process between the government and civil society organisations. To do so, we draw from information systems research on digital government and platforms for development, complemented with governance theory from political science and conduct an interpretive in-depth case study of an urban reporting platform in Montevideo called ‘Por Mi Barrio’. The study reveals three mutually reinforced orders of governance in the trajectory of the project and explain how the collaboration unfolded over time: (i) a technical decision to use open platform architectures; (ii) the negotiation of formal and informal rules to make the project thrive and (iii) a shared, long-term ideology around the value of open technologies and technical sovereignty grounded in years of political history. Using a contextual explanation approach, our study helps to improve our understanding on the governance of collaborative digital government platforms in Latin America, with specific contributions to practice…(More)”.

A systematic analysis of digital tools for citizen participation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Bokyong Shin et al: “Despite the increasing use of digital tools for citizen participation, their ecosystem and functionality remain underexplored. What digital tools exist, and how do they help citizens engage in policymaking? This article addresses this gap by examining the supply side of digital tools for citizen participation. We compiled a comprehensive dataset of 116 digital tools from three public repositories. Using the collective intelligence genome framework, adapted for the e-participation context, we systematically examined the dynamics and trends of these tools through cluster analyses. Our findings highlight the potential of digital participatory tools to facilitate the flow of information from citizens to governments using advanced technologies. However, a prominent deficiency was identified in disseminating accountability information to citizens regarding how policy decisions are made, realised, and assessed. These findings offer valuable insights and notable gaps in the digital tool ecosystem…(More)”.

Taking [A]part: The Politics and Aesthetics of Participation in Experience-Centered Design

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by John McCarthy and Peter Wright: “…consider a series of boundary-pushing research projects in human-computer interaction (HCI) in which the design of digital technology is used to inquire into participative experience. McCarthy and Wright view all of these projects—which range from the public and performative to the private and interpersonal—through the critical lens of participation. Taking participation, in all its variety, as the generative and critical concept allows them to examine the projects as a part of a coherent, responsive movement, allied with other emerging movements in DIY culture and participatory art. Their investigation leads them to rethink such traditional HCI categories as designer and user, maker and developer, researcher and participant, characterizing these relationships instead as mutually responsive and dialogical.

McCarthy and Wright explore four genres of participation—understanding the other, building relationships, belonging in community, and participating in publics—and they examine participatory projects that exemplify each genre. These include the Humanaquarium, a participatory musical performance; the Personhood project, in which a researcher and a couple explored the experience of living with dementia; the Prayer Companion project, which developed a technology to inform the prayer life of cloistered nuns; and the development of social media to support participatory publics in settings that range from reality game show fans to on-line deliberative democracies…(More)”

Illuminating Lived Experience

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Lab Note from the Sydney Policy Lab: “The lived experiences of people involved in care – from informal and formal care workers to the people they support – is foundational to the Australia Cares project. To learn from the ways people with lived experience are included in co-design and research methods, the Sydney Policy Lab initiated reflective research that has resulted in a Lab Note on Illuminating Lived Experience (pdf, 1MB).

Through a series of interviews, dialogues and collaborative writing processes, co-authors explored tensions between different approaches and core concepts underpinning lived experience methods and shared examples of those methods in practice.

Illuminating Lived Experience poses questions that may help guide researchers and policymakers seeking to engage people with lived experience and three core principles we believe are required for such engagements.

The Lab Note aims to encourage researchers to be creative in the ways co-design and lived experience are approached while being true to the critical roots of participatory methodologies. Rather than prescribing methods, the principles and practices developed are offered as a guide – a starting point for play…(More)”

The Essential Principle for Appropriate Data Policy of Citizen Science Projects

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Chapter by Takeshi Osawa: “Citizen science is one of new paradigms of science. This concept features various project forms, participants, and motivations and implies the need for attention to ethical issues for every participant, which frequently includes nonacademics. In this chapter, I address ethical issues associated with citizen science projects that focus on the data treatment rule and demonstrate a concept on appropriate data policy for these projects. First, I demonstrate that citizen science projects tend to include different types of collaboration, which may lead to certain conflicts among participants in terms of data sharing. Second, I propose an idea that could integrate different types of collaboration according to the theory transcend. Third, I take a case of a citizen science project through which transcend occurred and elucidate the difference between ordinal research and citizen science projects, specifically in terms of the goals of these projects and the goals and motivations of participants, which may change. Finally, I proposed one conceptual idea on how the principal investigator (PI) of a citizen science project can establish data policy after assessing the rights of participants. The basic idea is the division and organization of the data policy in a hierarchy for the project and for the participants. Data policy is one of the important items for establishing the appropriate methods for citizen science as new style of science. As such, practice and framing related to data policy must be carefully monitored and reflected on…(More)”.

Enrolling Citizens: A Primer on Archetypes of Democratic Engagement with AI

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Wanheng Hu and Ranjit Singh: “In response to rapid advances in artificial intelligence, lawmakers, regulators, academics, and technologists alike are sifting through technical jargon and marketing hype as they take on the challenge of safeguarding citizens from the technology’s potential harms while maximizing their access to its benefits. A common feature of these efforts is including citizens throughout the stages of AI development and governance. Yet doing so is impossible without a clear vision of what citizens ideally should do. This primer takes up this imperative and asks: What approaches can ensure that citizens have meaningful involvement in the development of AI, and how do these approaches envision the role of a “good citizen”?

The primer highlights three major approaches to involving citizens in AI — AI literacy, AI governance, and participatory AI — each of them premised on the importance of enrolling citizens but envisioning different roles for citizens to play. While recognizing that it is largely impossible to come up with a universal standard for building AI in the public interest, and that all approaches will remain local and situated, this primer invites a critical reflection on the underlying assumptions about technology, democracy, and citizenship that ground how we think about the ethics and role of public(s) in large-scale sociotechnical change. ..(More)”.

Embracing the Social in Social Science

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Jay Lloyd: “In a world where science is inextricably intermixed with society, the social sciences are essential to building trust in the scientific enterprise.

To begin thinking about why all the sciences should embrace the social in social science, I would like to start with cupcakes.

In my research, context is a recurring theme, so let me give you some context for cupcakes as metaphor. A few months ago, when I was asked to respond to an article in this magazine, I wrote: “In the production of science, social scientists can often feel like sprinkles on a cupcake: not essential. Social science is not the egg, the flour, or the sugar. Sprinkles are neither in the batter, nor do they see the oven. Sprinkles are a late addition. No matter the stylistic or aesthetic impact, they never alter the substance of the ‘cake’ in the cupcake.”

In writing these sentences, I was, and still am, hopeful that all kinds of future scientific research will make social science a key component of the scientific “batter” and bake social scientific knowledge, skill, and expertise into twenty-first-century scientific “cupcakes.”

But there are tensions and power differentials in the ways interdisciplinary science can be done. Most importantly, the formation of questions itself is a site of power. The questions we as a society ask science to address both reflect and create the values and power dynamics of social systems, whether the scientific disciplines recognize this influence or not. And some of those knowledge systems do not embrace the importance of insights from the social sciences because many institutions of science work hard to insulate the practice of science from the contingencies of society.

Moving forward, how do we, as researchers, develop questions that not only welcome intellectual variety within the sciences but also embrace the diversity represented in societies? As science continues to more powerfully blend, overlap, and intermix with society, embracing what social science can bring to the entire scientific enterprise is necessary. In order to accomplish these important goals, social concerns must be a key ingredient of the whole cupcake—not an afterthought, or decoration, but among the first thoughts…(More)”

Multi-disciplinary Perspectives on Citizen Science—Synthesizing Five Paradigms of Citizen Involvement

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Susanne Beck, Dilek Fraisl, Marion Poetz and Henry Sauermann: “Research on Open Innovation in Science (OIS) investigates how open and collaborative practices influence the scientific and societal impact of research. Since 2019, the OIS Research Conference has brought together scholars and practitioners from diverse backgrounds to discuss OIS research and case examples. In this meeting report, we describe four session formats that have allowed our multi-disciplinary community to have productive discussions around opportunities and challenges related to citizen involvement in research. However, these sessions also highlight the need for a better understanding of the underlying rationales of citizen involvement in an increasingly diverse project landscape. Building on the discussions at the 2023 and prior editions of the conference, we outline a conceptual framework of five crowd paradigms and present an associated tool that can aid in understanding how citizen involvement in particular projects can help advance science. We illustrate this tool using cases presented at the 2023 conference, and discuss how it can facilitate discussions at future conferences as well as guide future research and practice in citizen science…(More)”.