Strategic framework for e-democracy development and sustainability

Abstract

Purpose Information and communication technology has been identified as a viable tool to proffer solution to the societal problem of disconnect between democratic actors. The issue of sustainability and citizens’ acceptance of online public participation, however, remains a major issue of concern requiring adequate attention. This study therefore aims to develop a strategic framework for e-democracy implementation and sustainability. Design/methodology/approach Systematic qualitative review using Grounded Theory Method was adopted to develop the e-democracy strategic framework. Findings The strategic framework is generic and has the potential to serve as a spring board for e-democracy implementation. It abstracts existing strategies and best practice that can be adopted to add value to e-democracy implementation. Using this framework, developing nations can take advantage of their present level of technological development to give voice to the voiceless and improve their democratic system. Practical implications E-democracy implementation should be backed up with policy framework which explicitly states the vision, objectives, policies guiding e-democracy implementation and the oversight bodies responsible for monitoring and evaluation. The implementation plan should clearly identify the implementation approach, levels of engagement, roles of various stakeholders and tools and technology to be involved. Government willingness to harness citizens input and commit resource to e-participation is of paramount importance. Originality/value The framework developed is useful for the e-democracy research community and government in executing successful e-democracy implementation and evaluating its impact on democratic outcomes.

Iran and COVID-19: A Bottom-up, Faith-Driven, Citizen-Supported Response

“…This study employed a qualitative 'grounded theory' (GT) methodology (Corbin & Strauss, 2015 ) to examine the ‘context, causes, strategies, features … and the axial concept’ (Bryman, 2012 ) that underpin Iran's bottom-up response. GT is a frequently utilized method for generating theoretical frameworks since it enables the investigation of social phenomena and the development of notions and constructs based on data (Bryman, 2012 ; Oni et al, 2016 ). GT is a creative process in which the researcher 'invents' and imposes ideas on the data.…”

Politicization of e-voting rejection: reflections from Kazakhstan

“…However, the most important challenges are related to quite reasonable speculations in society on how the debates about these technical nuances of the vote verification affect perceptions and thus, political behavior of citizens, namely, on how the local electorate could now freely expresses its genuine political will due to the fact that a voter could have certain concerns that his or her political opinion or choice can easily be documented, especially taking into account that it could be done instantly in an electronic manner as described in the case. Such apprehensions could especially be prevalent in a transitional society where TG 14,2 there is still certain inertia in public mindset of local citizenry toward new more democratic ways to ensure transparency of government or in an environment of the ongoing conflict of interests between different political factions in the political system (Oni et al, 2016;Kassen, 2017;Shat and Abbott, 2017;Risnanto et al, 2019). For many decades, the free expression of political opinion had been either next to non-existent or latent due to oppression in soviet republics, including in Kazakhstan.…”

A bibliometric analysis of E-Democracy on government research

“…The development of electronic democracy (E-democracy) has been accepted globally as a democratic revolution regarding citizen participation in democratic activities. Edemocracy can be said to be the use of electronic means to promote and increase citizen involvement and participation in government activities, programs, and decisionmaking (Norris & Reddick 2013;Oni et al 2016;Päivärinta dan Saebø, 2006). These communication channels with the potential to support citizen participation are available in developed countries and most developing and least developed countries.…”