Eparticipation In Slovenian E Government Delakorda
This document summarizes a presentation on e-participation in Slovenian e-government. It finds that Slovenia has an implementation deficit and development deficit when it comes to e-participation, as earlier strategies focused on strengthening representative democracy rather than participatory democracy. While government websites provide public information, few allow for online commenting and forums have had little success. These deficits result from a technocratic understanding of democracy that sees e-participation as a technological issue rather than empowering citizens. The presentation recommends adopting laws supporting public participation, integrating civil society knowledge, using web 2.0 technologies, and embracing electronic strong democracy.
Eparticipation In Slovenian E Government Delakorda
- 1. Information and Communication Technologies: from Modern to Information Society Univerzitetno in raziskovalno sredi邸e Novo mesto 19.-20. september 2008 e-PARTICIPATION IN SLOVENIAN e-GOVERNMENT Simon Delakorda (Institute for Electronic Participation - INePA)
- 5. Explanation Hypotheses Slovene e-government state of the art in the area of e-Participation / e-Democracy is a result of: Implementation deficit Development deficit
- 6. Methodology Slovene government ministries web sites analysis (e-democracy tools typology; Trechsel, 2003) Specific case studies analysis E-government policy documents analysis (typology of e-democracy; Hagen, 1996) Informal correspondence with government officials
- 7. Results I. - Implementation deficit Earlier e-government strategies favoured electronic democratization concept (strengthening representative democracy) E-government strategy 2006: Republic of Slovenia among 10 most developed e-democracies in the world Conceptual shift towards participatory and direct democracy (e-pools, e-consultations, e- referendum etc.) e-Democracy neglected by implementation plans
- 8. Results II. - Development deficit all government ministries provided public information e-access 8 ministries out of fifteen offered an e-mail address for sending comments on draft legislation Little success with moderated on-line forums Web 2.0 applications rarely available E-Democracy web 1.0 portal not yet finalized
- 11. Interpretation Implementation and development deficit of e- Participation are results of a technocratic understanding of political democracy and citizenship: e-Participation as technological issue e-Participation as legal issue Top down controlled e-participation in order to secure objective and rational support for political elites interest
- 12. Possible solutions Adoption of Government Law on public participation and co-decision (e-participation regulation): Political citizens are not e-government consumers Political freedom should mean that citizens have the democratic right and instruments to reject government and political elites decisions without being sanctioned Integration of knowledge and resources between public administration and civil society Technology reorientation towards web 2.0 for strengthening active citizenship communities Electronic strong democracy (Grossman, 1995)
- 13. THANK YOU! simon.delakorda@inepa.si Institute for Electronic Participation (INePA) Pov邸etova ulica 37 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Tel.:+386 41 365 529 http://www.inepa.si