research-article

Citizen empowerment and participation in e-democracy: Indian context

Authors:

Sreejith Alathur,

P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan,

M. P. GuptaAuthors Info & Claims

ICEGOV '11: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance

Pages 11 - 19

https://doi.org/10.1145/2072069.2072072

Published: 26 September 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Present paper examines whether citizens' empowered status influences their online democratic participation. The paper put forward two stages of citizen empowerment in the virtual space. In the first stage, citizens are enabled for e-democracy participation and in the second stage citizens are part of the decision making process. On the basis of review of literature, a research model was delineated and tested with quantitative data collected through a survey. Regression results indicate that empowerment elements do influence the participation in e-democracy. The study also reveals that participation in partisan networks influences by cohesive empowerment. Citizen participation through electronic voting machines is influenced by the network actor's empowerment status. And citizens' technical empowerment is found to influence participation through mobile phones.

References

[1]

Banducci, S. A., Donovan, T., and Karp, J. A. 2004. Minority representation, empowerment, and participation. The Journal of Politics 66, 2, 534--556.

[2]

Beck, A. T. 1983. Cognitive therapy of depression: New perspectives. In P. J. Clayton, & J. E. Barnett (eds.), Treatment of depression: Old Controversies and New Approaches, 265--290. New York: Raven Press.

[3]

Beetham, D. 2002. The State of Democracy: Democracy Assessments in Eight Nations. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Kluwer Law International. ISBN: 90-411-1931-0.

[4]

Bellamy, C. D., and Mowbray, C. T. 1999. Supported education as an empowerment intervention for people with mental illness. Journal of Community Psychology 26, 5, 401--413.

[5]

Bowler, S. and Donovan, T. 2002. Institutions and attitudes about citizen influence on government. British Journal of Political Science 32, 2, 371--390.

[6]

Cabri, G., Ferrari, L., and Leonardi, L. 2005. A role-based mobile-agent approach to support e-democracy. Applied Soft Computing 6, 85--99.

Digital Library

[7]

Caldeira, G. A., Patterson, S. C., and Markko, G. A. 1985. The mobilization of voters in congressional elections. The Journal of Politics 47, 2, 490--509.

[8]

Cruickshank, P., Edelmann, N., and Smith, C. 2010. Signing an e-petition as a transition from lurking to participation. In Chappellet, J., Glassey, O., Janssen, M., Macintosh, A., Scholl, J., Tambouris, E., and Wimmer, M. (eds.): Electronic Government and Electronic Participation 275--282.

[9]

Csetenyi, A. 2000. Electronic government: Perspectives from e-Commerce. Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, IEEE, 294--298.

Digital Library

[10]

Cullen, R. and Sommer, L. 2011. Participatory democracy and the value of online community networks: An exploration of online and offline communities engaged in civil society and political activity. Government Information Quarterly 28, 148--154.

[11]

D'udekem-Gevers, M. and Poullet, Y. 2001. Internet content regulation. concerns from a European user empowerment perspective about internet content regulation: An analysis of some recent statements, Part I. Computer Law & Security Report 17, 6.

[12]

Dahl, R. A. and Tufte, E. R. 1973. Size and Democracy. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

[13]

Ergazakis, K., Metaxiotis, E., and Tsitsanis, T. 2011. A state-of-the-art review of applied forms and areas, tools and technologies for e-participation. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 7, 1 (January-March 2011), 1--19.

Digital Library

[14]

Forester, J. F. 1989. Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley, University of California Press.

[15]

Gowda, R. and Hemangini. G. H. 2010. Tracking and explaining e-participation in India. Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A., and Glassey O. (eds.): ePart2010, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6229, 66--81.

[16]

Griffiths, M. 2004. e-Citizens: blogging as democratic practice. Electronic Journal of e-Government 2, 3,155--166.

[17]

Gupta, M. P. 2010. Tracking the evolution of e-governance in India. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 6,1, (January-March 2010), 46--58.

Digital Library

[18]

Gurin, P., Hatchett, S., and Jackson, J. S. 1989. Hope and Independence: Blacks' Response to Electoral and Party Politics. New York: Russell Sage.

[19]

Howard, P. N. 2010.The lasting impact of digital media on civil society. eJournalUSA 15, 1, 10--12. www.america.gov/publications/ejournalusa.html.

[20]

Hurwitz, A. 1999. Who needs politics? Who needs people? The ironies of democracy in cyberspace. Contemporary Sociology 28, 6, 655--661.

[21]

Jayal, N. G. 2001. Democracy in India. New York: Oxford University Press.

[22]

Lambrecht, L. 2009. On the Need for and Importance of Empowerment to Strengthen Democracy. Perspectives on Empowerment, Social Cohesion and Democracy: An International Anthology. Part 1, 11--25.

[23]

Lin, M. J., Hung, S. W., and Chen, C. J. 2009. Fostering the determinants of knowledge sharing in professional virtual communities. Computers in Human Behavior 25, 929--939.

Digital Library

[24]

Lord, J. and Hutchison, P. 1993. The process of empowerment: Implications for theory and practice. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health 12, 1, 5--22.

[25]

Lupu, P. and Stokes, S. 2010. Democracy, interrupted: regime change and partisanship in twentieth-century Argentina. Electoral Studies 29, 92, 91--104.

[26]

Macintosh, A., Coleman, S., and Lalljee, M. 2005. e-Methods for public engagement. Bristol, UK: Bristol City Council.

[27]

Macintosh, A., Gordon, T. F., and Renton, A. 2009. Providing argument support for e-participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 6, 43--59.

[28]

McClelland, D. C. 1975. Power: The inner experience. New York: Irvington Press.

[29]

Mercado-Kierkegaard, S. 2006. Blogging -- emerging legal liabilities. Blogs, lies and the doocing: The next hotbed of litigation?. Computer law & Security Report 22, 127--136.

[30]

Morell, M. 1999. Citizens' evaluations of participatory democratic procedures: Normative theory meets empirical science. Political Research Quarterly 52, 293--322.

[31]

Moscovitch, A. and Drover, G. 1981. Inequality: Essays on the political economy of social welfare. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

[32]

Munck, G. L. and Verkuilen, J. 2002. Measuring democracy: evaluating alternate indices. Comparative Political Studies 35, 1, 5--57.

[33]

Norris, D. F. 2010. E-government...not e-governance...not-e-democracy: Not now! Not ever? In Tomsz Janowski and Jim Davies (eds.): Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance 25--28, October, 2010, Beijing, China.

Digital Library

[34]

OECD. 2001. Engaging citizens in policy-making: Information, consultation and public participation. PUMA Policy Brief No. 10.

[35]

Pateman, C. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge University Press.

[36]

Przeworski, A. 2004. Democracy and economic development. 2004. In Edward D. Mansfield and Richard Sisson (eds.), The Evolution of Political Knowledge. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

[37]

Ramakantan, N. 2009. Democratic decentralization and empowerment of local government associations in Kerala. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance 2, 128--136.

[38]

Reddick, C. G. 2011. Citizen interaction and e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 5, 2, 167--184.

[39]

Savini, F. 2010. The endowment of community participation: Institutional settings in two urban regeneration projects. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 1--20.

[40]

Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., Kumar, U., and Dwivedi, Y. K. 2011. e-Government Adoption Model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Government Information Quarterly 28, 17--35.

[41]

Smith, D. A. and Tolbert, C. 2001. The initiative to party: Partisanship and ballot initiatives in California. Party Politics 7, 781--99.

[42]

Smith, E., Macintosh, A., and Whyte, A. 2006. Organised use of e-democracy tools for young people. In Wimmer, M., Scholl, H., Gronlund, A., and Anderson, K. (eds.): Electronic Government: Communications of the Fifth International EGOV Conference, 2006, 260--267. Berlin, Germany.

[43]

Sorensen, E. and Torfing, J. 2009. Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration 87,2, 234--258.

[44]

Stallman, R. 1995. Are computer property rights absolute? In: Johnson, D. G. and Nissenbaum, H. (eds.) Computers, Ethics & Social Values Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 115--119.

[45]

Subramanian, R. 2005/2006. Nationhood, technology and the roots of computer-assisted governance in India, 1880--1980, International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society 1, 1, 50--61.

[46]

Tate, K. 1991. Black political participation in the 1984 and 1988 presidential elections. American Political Science Review 85, 4, 1159--76.

[47]

Tero, P and Øystein, S. 2006. Models of e-democracy. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 17, 37, 818--84.

[48]

Thomas, J. J., and Parayil, G. 2010. Bridging the social and digital divides in Andhra Pradesh and Kerala: A capabilities approach. Development and Change 39, 3, 409--435.

[49]

United Nations E-Government Survey. 2010. Leveraging e-governance at the time of financial and economic crisis, www2.unpan.org/egovkb/global_reports/10report.htm.

[50]

Vanhanen, T. 2000. A New dataset for measuring democracy, 1810--1998. Journal of Peace Research 37, 2, 251--265.

[51]

Vecchione, M. and Caprara, G. V. 2009. Personality determinants of political participation: The contribution of traits and self-efficacy beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences 46, 487--492.

[52]

Whyte, A. and Macintosh, A. 2002. Analysis and evaluation of e-consultations. e-Service Journal 2, 1, 9--34.

[53]

Witschge, T. 2002. Online deliberation: Possibilities of the internet for deliberative democracy. Paper presented at the Euricom Colloquium: Electronic Networks and Democratic Engagement, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

[54]

Zelic, B. and Stahl, B. C. 2005. Does ontology influence technological projects? The case of Irish electronic voting. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3782, 657--667.

Digital Library

Cited By

Lee-Geiller S(2020)Conditions influencing e-ParticipationProceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance10.1145/3428502.3428615(754-761)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428502.3428615
Apleni ASmuts H(2020)An e-Government Implementation Framework: A Developing Country Case StudyResponsible Design, Implementation and Use of Information and Communication Technology10.1007/978-3-030-45002-1_2(15-27)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45002-1_2
Sánchez-Tortolero RMárquez-González JVérnaez-Hernández G(2019)Participation and Citizen Empowerment platform for e-governanceProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance10.1145/3326365.3326393(212-219)Online publication date: 3-Apr-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3326365.3326393
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Citizen empowerment and participation in e-democracy: Indian context
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Computing / technology policy

Recommendations

From participation to e-participation: the German case
ICEGOV '08: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Theory and practice of electronic governance

This paper informs about the public policies on e-Participation in Germany. At the moment e-Participation happens in political niche arenas and does not have real impact or importance on political decision-making. Activists and researchers promote the ...
Individual Empowerment through Digital Governance: Proposing an Assessment Framework for India
ICEGOV '17: Proceedings of the Special Collection on eGovernment Innovations in India

Adoption of information and communication technologies (ICT) in governance contexts is considered empowering for governments and citizens. Digital Governance aims at transforming internal processes, structures and working practices leading to greater ...
Significance of socio-cultural, political and historical factors for the introduction of e-participation in Switzerland
ICEGOV '14: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance

The arrival of new technologies in the public sector and the connected re-definition of ways public administrations interact with citizens is currently a burning topic. Despite numerous research projects exploring the introduction of electronic ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

ICEGOV '11: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance

September 2011

400 pages

ISBN:9781450307468

DOI:10.1145/2072069

Editors:
Elsa Estevez
UNU-IIST, Macao SAR
,
Marijn Janssen
Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
,
General Chairs:
Jim Davies
University of Oxford, UK
,
Theresa Pardo
CUniversity at Albany, SUNY
,
Ivar Tallo
e-Governance Academy, Estonia
,
Program Chair:
Nele Leosk
e-Governance Academy, Estonia

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 September 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICEGOV '11

ICEGOV '11: 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance

September 26 - 29, 2011

Tallinn, Estonia

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 350 of 865 submissions, 40%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

9
Total Citations
View Citations
513
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)24
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Lee-Geiller S(2020)Conditions influencing e-ParticipationProceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance10.1145/3428502.3428615(754-761)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428502.3428615
Apleni ASmuts H(2020)An e-Government Implementation Framework: A Developing Country Case StudyResponsible Design, Implementation and Use of Information and Communication Technology10.1007/978-3-030-45002-1_2(15-27)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45002-1_2
Sánchez-Tortolero RMárquez-González JVérnaez-Hernández G(2019)Participation and Citizen Empowerment platform for e-governanceProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance10.1145/3326365.3326393(212-219)Online publication date: 3-Apr-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3326365.3326393
Vidiasova L(2016)The Applicability of International Techniques for E-Participation Assessment in the Russian ContextDigital Transformation and Global Society10.1007/978-3-319-49700-6_15(145-154)Online publication date: 24-Nov-2016
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49700-6_15
Vidiasova LMikhaylova E(2016)The Comparison of Governmental and Non-governmental E-Participation Tools Functioning at a City-Level in RussiaDigital Transformation and Global Society10.1007/978-3-319-49700-6_14(135-144)Online publication date: 24-Nov-2016
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49700-6_14
(2015)Citizens’ Discussions on e-Government Topics: The Perspective for Social Media AnalysisCreativity in Intelligent Technologies and Data Science10.1007/978-3-319-23766-4_43(542-555)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23766-4_43
Bershadskaya LChugunov AGolubtsova EEstevez EJanssen MBarbosa L(2014)Measurement techniques for e-participation assessmentProceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance10.1145/2691195.2691198(395-398)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2691195.2691198
Bershadskaya LChugunov ATrutnev D(2013)e-participation developmentProceedings of the 7th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance10.1145/2591888.2591900(73-76)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2591888.2591900
Sandoval-Almazan RGil-Garcia J(2013)Cyberactivism through Social MediaProceedings of the 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences10.1109/HICSS.2013.161(1704-1713)Online publication date: 7-Jan-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2013.161

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents