The maturing concept of e-democracy: from e-voting and online consultations to democratic value out of jumbled online chatter

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
The maturing concept of e-democracy: from e-voting and online consultations to democratic value out of jumbled online chatter
Authors: Martin Hilbert [edit item]
Citation: Journal of Information Technology & Politics 6 (2): 87-110. 2009 April.
Publication type: Journal article
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: 10.1080/19331680802715242.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s): Paper link
Added by Wikilit team: Added on initial load
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
The maturing concept of e-democracy: from e-voting and online consultations to democratic value out of jumbled online chatter is a publication by Martin Hilbert.


[edit] Abstract

Early literature on e-democracy was dominated by euphoric claims about the benefits of e-voting (digital direct democracy) or continuous online citizen consultations (digital representative democracy). High expectations have gradually been replaced with more genuine approaches that aim to break with the dichotomy of traditional notions of direct and representative democracy. The ensuing question relates to the adequate design of information and communication technology {(ICT)} applications to foster such visions. This article contributes to this search and discusses issues concerning the adequate institutional framework. Recently, so-called Web 2.0 applications, such as social networking and Wikipedia, have proven that it is possible for millions of users to collectively create meaningful content online. While these recent developments are not necessarily labeled e-democracy in the literature, this article argues that they and related applications have the potential to fulfill the promise of breaking with the longstanding democratic trade-off between group size (direct mass voting on predefined issues) and depth of argument (deliberation and discourse in a small group). Complementary information-structuring techniques are at hand to facilitate large-scale deliberations and the negotiation of interests between members of a group. This article presents three of these techniques in more depth: weighted preference voting, argument visualization, and the Semantic Web initiative. Notwithstanding these developments, the maturing concept of e-democracy still faces serious challenges. Questions remain in political and computer science disciplines that ask about adequate institutional frameworks, the omnipresent democratic challenges of equal access and free participation, and the appropriate technological design. Adapted from the source document.

[edit] Research questions

"The ensuing question relates to the adequate design of information and communication technology (ICT) applications to foster such visions. This article contributes to this search and discusses issues concerning the adequate institutional framework."

Research details

Topics: Deliberative collaboration, Policies and governance [edit item]
Domains: Computer science, Information systems, Political science [edit item]
Theory type: Analysis [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Case [edit item]
Theories: "Information-structuring techniques can help to untangle prose through methodological approaches to argumentation. The theory of argumentation is at the heart of deliberative democracy and can be defined as a social activity of reason aimed at increasing or decreasing the acceptability of a controversial standpoint by putting forward a constellation of arguments intended to justify or refute the standpoint before a rational judge (Van Eemeren, Grootendorst, & Henkemans, 1996, p. 5)" [edit item]
Research design: Conceptual [edit item]
Data source: N/A [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: N/A [edit item]
Unit of analysis: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia language: N/A [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

"Applications for e-democracy can be designed and developed using today Web 2.0 applications like online social networks and Wikipedia and using intelligent methods of information management. Yet there are other aspects of democracy and participation that should be learned from experiences of political parties."

[edit] Comments


Further notes[edit]

Facts about "The maturing concept of e-democracy: from e-voting and online consultations to democratic value out of jumbled online chatter"RDF feed
AbstractEarly literature on e-democracy was dominaEarly literature on e-democracy was dominated by euphoric claims about the benefits of e-voting (digital direct democracy) or continuous online citizen consultations (digital representative democracy). High expectations have gradually been replaced with more genuine approaches that aim to break with the dichotomy of traditional notions of direct and representative democracy. The ensuing question relates to the adequate design of information and communication technology {(ICT)} applications to foster such visions. This article contributes to this search and discusses issues concerning the adequate institutional framework. Recently, so-called Web 2.0 applications, such as social networking and Wikipedia, have proven that it is possible for millions of users to collectively create meaningful content online. While these recent developments are not necessarily labeled e-democracy in the literature, this article argues that they and related applications have the potential to fulfill the promise of breaking with the longstanding democratic trade-off between group size (direct mass voting on predefined issues) and depth of argument (deliberation and discourse in a small group). Complementary information-structuring techniques are at hand to facilitate large-scale deliberations and the negotiation of interests between members of a group. This article presents three of these techniques in more depth: weighted preference voting, argument visualization, and the Semantic Web initiative. Notwithstanding these developments, the maturing concept of e-democracy still faces serious challenges. Questions remain in political and computer science disciplines that ask about adequate institutional frameworks, the omnipresent democratic challenges of equal access and free participation, and the appropriate technological design. Adapted from the source document. design. Adapted from the source document.
Added by wikilit teamAdded on initial load +
Collected data time dimensionN/A +
ConclusionApplications for e-democracy can be designApplications for e-democracy can be designed and developed using today Web 2.0 applications like online social networks and Wikipedia and using intelligent methods of information management. Yet there are other aspects of democracy and participation that should be learned from experiences of political parties.ned from experiences of political parties.
Data sourceN/A +
Doi10.1080/19331680802715242 +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22The%2Bmaturing%2Bconcept%2Bof%2Be-democracy%3A%2Bfrom%2Be-voting%2Band%2Bonline%2Bconsultations%2Bto%2Bdemocratic%2Bvalue%2Bout%2Bof%2Bjumbled%2Bonline%2Bchatter%22 +
Has authorMartin Hilbert +
Has domainComputer science +, Information systems + and Political science +
Has topicDeliberative collaboration + and Policies and governance +
Issue2 +
MonthApril +
Pages87-110 +
Peer reviewedYes +
Publication typeJournal article +
Published inJournal of Information Technology & Politics +
Research designConceptual +
Research questionsThe ensuing question relates to the adequate design of information and communication technology (ICT) applications to foster such visions. This article contributes to this search and discusses issues concerning the adequate institutional framework.
Revid10,981 +
TheoriesInformation-structuring techniques can helInformation-structuring techniques can help to untangle prose through methodological approaches to argumentation. The theory of argumentation is at the heart of deliberative democracy and can be defined as a social activity of reason aimed at increasing or decreasing the acceptability of a controversial standpoint by putting forward a constellation of arguments intended to justify or refute the standpoint before a rational judge (Van Eemeren, Grootendorst, & Henkemans, 1996, p. 5)en, Grootendorst, & Henkemans, 1996, p. 5)
Theory typeAnalysis +
TitleThe maturing concept of e-democracy: from e-voting and online consultations to democratic value out of jumbled online chatter
Unit of analysisN/A +
Urlhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19331680802715242 +
Volume6 +
Wikipedia coverageCase +
Wikipedia data extractionN/A +
Wikipedia languageN/A +
Wikipedia page typeN/A +
Year2009 +