Interaction and communication resources in collaborative e-democratic environments: The democratic citizenship community

Abstract

Social networks change the way users relate on the Web. One type of social network is the virtual community, which has a social structure that connects citizens and the government. Integrating consultation and deliberative environments for popular participation in democratic issues and creating virtual communities to enhance member relationships makes it possible to model decision-making processes. This was behind the development, testing and analyzing of the Democratic Citizenship Community (DCC). The DCC has interaction and communication resources such as citizens' profiles, debate, voting, an information library, a social space and users' help. An experimental analysis generated discussion about and suggestions for improving the interaction and communication resources. Press and the authors. All rights reserved 74 C. Maciel et al. / The democratic citizenship communityin society, modifying people's social lives by bringing technological innovation to them to support the exchange of communication and experiences. A preliminary diagnostic evaluation [12] showed that today's virtual communities (VCs) have many social characteristics, are not directed toward democratic debate, and do not stimulate citizen participation in decision-making with their government.In light of these factors, the Government-Citizen Interactive Model [12] was proposed to address the different phases in a consultative and deliberative process.The Democratic Citizenship Community (DCC) was projected [13], developed and tested [15] based on the Government-Citizen Interactive Model. The DCC proposes a specific set of interaction and communication resources: citizens' profiles, debate, voting, an information library, a socialization space and users' help. This paper comments on the DCC in a pilot case study [14]. The experiment analysis generates discussion on and suggests improvements for the interaction and communication resources employed.

A decade of Portuguese research in e-government: evolution, current standing, and ways forward

“…It is worth noting the significant weight of documents that propose new models, systems or methods when compared with the number of studies based on empirical data. (Campos and Soares, 2014;Costa et al, 2010;Dias and Rafael, 2007;do Nascimento et al, 2005;Filho and Ribeiro, 2014;Gaaloul et al, 2014;Gomes et al, 2011Gomes et al, , 2012Gomes and Ribeiro, 2009;Irani et al, 2010;Luján-Mora and Masri, 2012;Maciel et al, 2009a;Marques et al, 2011Marques et al, , 2012Marques et al, , 2013Olmstead et al, 2007;Pedrosa et al, 2013;Rodrigues et al, 2010a;Sanz et al, 2010;Tavares and Oliveira, 2014;Tavares, 2008;Tavares and Silva, 2006;Teixeira et al, 2014;Vieira et al, 2011) Case study 13 19 (Aveiro and Pinto, 2013;Becker et al, 2011;Dias and Narciso, 2010;Maciel et al, 2009bMaciel et al, , 2010Pinto and Aveiro, 2014;Rocha and Sá, 2014;Rosa et al, 2013;Rocha, 2012, 2013;Santos et al, 2013;Tsaravas and Themistocleous, 2011) Content analysis 9 13 (Aleixo et al, 2012;Dias and Costa, 2013;Dias and Gomes, 2014;…”

“…Thus, there is good topic coverage, including several relevant e-government concerns: strategies and methodologies for -government, key factors, quality of what is offered to citizens, citizens' involvement and participation, e-government impacts, interoperability, back-office processes, and security. Santos, 2008;Rocha, 2012, 2013;Sanz et al, 2010) Quality, accessibility and usability 9 13 (Aleixo et al, 2012;Luján-Mora and Masri, 2012;Polónia et al, 2014;Ribeiro, 2011;Rodrigues et al, 2010b;Sá et al, 2014aSá et al, , 2014bSanz et al, 2010;Silva et al, 2006) Back-office processes, workflows, and knowledge/data management 7 10 (Afonso et al, 2014;Becker et al, 2011;do Nascimento et al, 2005;Rodrigues et al, 2010b;Tavares, 2008;Teixeira et al, 2014;Vieira et al, 2011) Marketing, transparency, and public participation 7 10 (Irani et al, 2010;Lapão et al, 2007;Lourenço et al, 2014;Maciel et al, 2009aMaciel et al, , 2009bMaciel et al, 2010;Tavares and Silva, 2006) Administrative and socioeconomic impacts Table 4 Frequency and percentage of topics categories addressed by the selected documents (continued)…”

“…It is interesting to notice that local e-government receives a significant research attention even though, contrary to what happens with e-government in general, local e-government is substantially underdeveloped in Portugal (Dias, 2011a;Dias and Gomes, 2014). (Becker et al, 2011;Campos and Soares, 2014;Campos and Marques, 2006;Conceição et al, 2013;Costa et al, 2010;Dias and Rafael, 2007;Domingues and Gomes, 2011;Fernandes et al, 2012;Fernandes, 2013;Filho and Ribeiro, 2014;Freire et al, 2014;Gomes et al, 2011Gomes et al, , 2012Irani et al, 2010;Janssen et al, 2014;Katre et al, 2011;Lourenço et al, 2014;Luján-Mora and Masri, 2012;Machado et al, 2005;Maciel et al, 2009aMaciel et al, , 2009bMaciel et al, , 2010Marques et al, 2011Marques et al, , 2012Marques et al, , 2013Montargil, 2009;Olmstead et al, 2007;Pascoe et al, 2006;Ribeiro, 2011;Rodousakis and dos Santos, 2008;Rodrigues et al, 2010a;Silva et al, 2006;Soares and Amaral, 2011;Tavares and Silva, 2006;Teodoro and Serrão, 2010;Tsaravas and Themistocleous, 2011;Vieira et al, 2011) Local government 22...…”

MP Transparency, Communication Links and Social Media: A Comparative Assessment of 184 Parliamentary Websites

“…Among PW tools to support multilateral C2M communication, some scholars have argued that linkages with social networking sites, 1 or 'social media' (for instance, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and YouTube), will be very important in the future not only for supporting representative democracy but also for participatory and deliberative democracy (for example, Benkler, 2007;Gustafsson, 2010;Maciel, Roque, & Garcia, 2010;Neumayer, Raffl, & Bichler, 2010;Robertson, Vatrapu, & Medina, 2010;Shirky, 2011). Even if these tools fall short of delivering true deliberative democracy, the incorporation of social 4 THE JOURNAL OF LEGISLATIVE STUDIES media on PWs can function as a type of 'advocacy reform' that allows the public 'to gather information' and 'raise and move issues from the public to the government' (Carman, 2010, p. 734).…”

Access to ICT in Poland and the Co-Creation of Urban Space in the Process of Modern Social Participation in a Smart City—A Case Study

“…E-participation enables the government to reach more citizens than traditional social participation methods, and it relies on modern technologies to enhance active social participation in the decision-making process [26]. Various e-participation tools exist, including social media (Facebook, Twitter), e-petitions, chatrooms, discussion forums, video conferencing, consultation platforms, online questionnaires, geo-questionnaires, geo-discussions, and web applications [25,[27][28][29][30]. All of these tools rely on ICT.…”