BudgetMap

Kim, Nam Wook; Jung, Jonghyuk; Ko, Eun-Young; Han, Shuang; Lee, Chang Won; Kim, Juho; Kim, Jihee

doi:10.1145/2818048.2820004

Cited by 22 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The goals of PB vary widely and in the US context they can explicitly include equity (Lerner and Pape 2020). Engagement with PB has been found to increase political participation of traditionally underrepresented demographics in New York (Johnson, Carlson, and Reynolds 2021) and engagement in budget feedback exercises can enhance understanding of budgetary issues (Kim et al 2016). As PB increasingly moves online, various tools including the Stanford Participatory Budgeting platform 1 (Goel et al 2019), Consul 2 (Arana-Catania et al 2021;Pina et al 2022), AppCivist-PB 3 (Holston, Issarny, and Parra 2016) and Decidim (Serramia et al 2019) become available.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rank, Pack, or Approve: Voting Methods in Participatory Budgeting

Gelauff,

Goel

2024

ICWSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participatory budgeting is a popular method to engage residents in budgeting decisions by local governments. The AnonPB Platform is an online platform that has been used to engage residents in more than 150 budgeting processes. We present a data set with anonymized budget opinions from these processes with K-approval, K-ranking or knapsack primary ballots. For a subset of the voters, it includes paired votes with a different elicitation method in the same process. This presents a unique data set, as the voters, projects and setting are all related to real-world decisions that the voters have an actual interest in. With data from primary ballots we find that while ballot complexity (number of projects to choose from, number of projects to select and ballot length) is correlated with a higher median time spent by voters, it is not correlated with a higher abandonment rate. We use vote pairs with different voting methods to analyze the effect of voting methods on the cost of selected projects, more comprehensively than was previously possible. In most elections, voters selected significantly more expensive projects using K-approval than using knapsack, although we also find a small number of examples with a significant effect in the opposite direction. This effect happens at the aggregate level as well as for individual voters, and is influenced both by the implicit constraints of the voting method and the explicit constraints of the voting interface. Finally, we validate the use of K-ranking elicitation to offer a paper alternative for knapsack voting.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rank, Pack, or Approve: Voting Methods in Participatory Budgeting

Gelauff,

Goel

2024

ICWSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Civic Tech has been rising in Asia during the last few years. For example, Factful [16] is a platform that allows taxpayers to participate in the discussion of South Korea's government budget. The platform allows users to read about budget planning and proposes news article and other sources.…”

Section: Civic Tech In Asiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This allows participants to understand the government choices, and be more critical while checking for facts. Similarly, Bud-getMap [17] is an issue-driven visualization platform that allows taxpayers to explore and tag the links between budget and social issues and was deployed in Seoul. Finally, vTaiwan [14] is an open consultation process that brings citizens and government together in online and offline spaces, to deliberate and reach rough consensus on national issues, and to craft national digital legislation.…”

Section: Civic Tech In Asiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Moderation and Opinion Heterogeneity on Attitude towards the Online Deliberation Experience

Perrault

Zhang

2019

Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online deliberation offers a way for citizens to collectively discuss an issue and provide input for policy makers. The overall experience of online deliberation can be affected by multiple factors. We decided to investigate the effects of moderation and opinion heterogeneity on the perceived deliberation experience, by running the first online deliberation experiment in Singapore. Our study took place in three months with three phases. In phase 1, our 2,006 participants answered a survey, that we used to create groups of different opinion heterogeneity. During the second phase, 510 participants discussed about the population issue on the online platform we developed. We gathered data on their online deliberation experience during phase 3. We found out that higher levels of moderation negatively impact the experience of deliberation on perceived procedural fairness, validity claim and policy legitimacy; and that high opinion heterogeneity is important in order to get a fair assessment of the deliberation experience. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing; Collaborative and social computing systems and tools; Web-based interaction.

show abstract

“…Despite the above trends, digital technologies supporting inclusive participation toward civic engagement remains a major challenge -even at a local scale. Understanding the motivations for public engagement has been and is still the focus of various studies, especially in the HCI domain (e.g., [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]). However, studies concentrate on very specific use cases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Middleware for Civic Engagement

Angarita

Georgantas

Issarny

2019

2019 IEEE 39th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Civic engagement refers to any collective action towards the identification and solving of public issues. Current civic technologies are traditional Web-or mobile-based platforms that make difficult, or just impossible, the participation of citizens via different communication technologies. Moreover, connected objects sensing physical-world data can nourish participatory processes by providing physical evidence to citizens; however, leveraging these data is not direct and still a time-consuming process for civic technologies developers. This paper introduces the concept of social middleware for civic engagement. Social middleware allows citizens to engage in participatory processessupported by civic technologies-via their favorite communication tools, and to interact not only with other citizens but also with relevant connected objects and software platforms. The mission of social middleware goes beyond the connection of all these heterogeneous entities. It aims at easing the implementation of distributed applications oriented toward civic engagement by featuring dedicated built-in services.

show abstract

BudgetMap

Cited by 22 publications

References 23 publications

Rank, Pack, or Approve: Voting Methods in Participatory Budgeting

Rank, Pack, or Approve: Voting Methods in Participatory Budgeting

Effects of Moderation and Opinion Heterogeneity on Attitude towards the Online Deliberation Experience

Social Middleware for Civic Engagement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About