1 / 24

Young People, New Technologies and Political Engagement University of Surrey, UK, 24-25 July 2007

Young People and eParticipation in Slovenia: the case of Citizen's Forum Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda (Center of eDemocracy / Institute of Ecology). Young People, New Technologies and Political Engagement University of Surrey, UK, 24-25 July 2007. Content. eDemocracy situation in Slovenia

tate-ball
Download Presentation

Young People, New Technologies and Political Engagement University of Surrey, UK, 24-25 July 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Young People and eParticipation in Slovenia:the case of Citizen's ForumSimon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda(Center of eDemocracy / Institute of Ecology) Young People, New Technologies and Political EngagementUniversity of Surrey, UK, 24-25 July 2007 Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda

  2. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda Content • eDemocracy situation in Slovenia • Young people and eParticipation • The case of Citizen's Forum • Lessons • Future developments

  3. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 1. eDemocracy situation in Slovenia - reports • UN eParticipation index (2005): 46th among 191 nations and 15th among EU-27. • The Economist report (eDemocracy criteria 2004): 7th in CEE Europe • Municipalities on-line participation (2005): Ljubljana 74th among 78 cities • No case studies from SI in OECD reports • eDemocracy neglected by earliest eGovernment plans

  4. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda Latest developments • positive impact of the EU membership • eGovernment strategy goal (2006) – SI among 10 most developed eDemocracy countries • Information society strategy (2007) – eDemocracy included • governmental eParticipation web site applications • eVoting part of political agenda

  5. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda Implementation challenges remain huge... • eDemocracy limited to an e-mail, e-poll and public information e-access • failure of governmental on-line forums in public deliberation • e-formats based e-consultation process is not interactive • lack of political imagination to design web 2.0 eDemocracy • strong representative democracy is in favour

  6. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 2. Young people and eParticipation - facts • Eurobarometer (2007): 27.1% between 15-30 of age have been already politically involved by presenting their view in an on-line discussion/forum (EU 27 – 23.6%; UK - 21.2%) • Internet research in Slovenia - RIS (2005):- visited political institution web site: 20% (16-19 age) and 28% (20-25 age)- searched for official document (law or political programme): 26% (16-19 age) and 52% (20-25 age)- participated in on-line poll on political issues: 30% (16-19 age) and 30% (20-25 age)- sent an e-mail to the politician or institution: 5% (16-19 age) and 0% (20-25 age)- signed an e-petition / letter of support: 6% (16-19 age) and 19% (20-25 age)- participated in on-line debate on political issues: 8% (16-19 age) and 7% (20-25 age)

  7. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 2. Young people and eParticipation - prospects • Political action taken to ensure that one's voice is heard by policy-makers (Eurobarometer 2007):- Slovenia: participate in debates (44%), join a political party (18%), sign petition (15%)- UK: participate in debates (25%), sign petition (18 %), join trade union (15%)- EU-27: participate in debates (29%), join a political party (16%), take part in demostration (13%) • Interest in politics and current affairs (Eurobarometer 2007): - Slovenia: country (79%), city/region (68%), EU (68%)- UK: country (86%), city/region (71%), EU (60%)- EU:country (82%), city/region (73), EU (66%) • Voted in an election or referendum in last 3 years (if eligible):- Slovenia (71%), UK (50%), EU (62%)

  8. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 3. The case of Citizen's Forum • Political context:- French and Dutch “no” on EU constition treaty national referendums- European parliament resolution on the Period of reflection - establishing Citizen's fora – public debates on the Future of the EU both on-line and off-line • Project team:- Centre of eDemocracy / Institute of Ecology (implementation), Faculty of Social Sciences / University of Ljubljana and Information Office of the European Parliament for Slovenia (financier)

  9. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • Communication concept:- participatory and deliberative democracy (J. Fishkin)- democratic expression of oppinions- e-debates and e-counsultations on European issues and policies- involvement in decision-making proces throught slovene members of the European parliament- moderation- protocols- registration - reporting to mass media

  10. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 1. Slovenian member of the European Parliament 2. Ministry of the Slovenian government (if participating) 3. Information office for the European Parliament for Slovenia 4. Centre for e-democracy at the Institute of Ecology

  11. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda

  12. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda

  13. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • The case of issue-based e-debate on the future European social model with Slovene students- Aim: to gather ideas, opinions and suggestions on the future European social model from the university students- Initiator: Slovenian Member of the European Parliament, Mr. Mihael Brejc- Place & time: Ljubljana during 17th and 19th of October 2006 at the Students Arena exhibition

  14. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • Implementation:- MEP prepared eight questions on social model supported by relevant documents (economic and social reforms in Slovenia, scholarship, kindergartens fees, retirement reform etc.)- participation upon forum registration by entering the name and surname and valid e-mail address - the web debate was opened 24 hours a day and moderated- public and media promotion initiated and promotion materials with questions and web link were distributed through university - public lecture on e-democracy and European parliament took place during the exhibition- three interim reports and a final report were prepared and sent to the MEP and Parliamentary committee for the EU affairs at the National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia

  15. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • Key figures- 500 on-line visitors (3000+)- 100 messages (111 participants)- 4 reports from moderating team

  16. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda

  17. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda

  18. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • Evaluation (e-consultation evaluation framework defined by A. Macintosh and A. Whyte, 2006):the communication view:- high level of intensitivity, - messages in line with the topic and starting questions, - expressing personal opinions, preferences and suggestions - no argumentation or additional information provided- opposite opinions – no attempts to reach consensusthe political view:- the Future European Social model debate on the agenda of the EP (identification of the policy suggestions) - MEP Mihael Brejc was a parliamentary reporter - MEP announced that final report of debate will be included in his report to the EP - MEP was not able to attend three day on-line debate, although he provided a public response on the final report

  19. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda

  20. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 4. Lessons learned • Many students did not want to participate on-line: “my opinion will not be included”“I am not interested”“issue is to complicated”“I have no time”“I do not want to get exposed”“I do not like on-line forums”

  21. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • What could be improved:- low level of an on-line deliberation- better public promotion- more direct involvement of the MEP- more time- a better understanding of which students messages were included in MEP report and why (content analysis forthcoming)

  22. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda • Lessons learned:- top-down approach has democratic limitations (elitism)- trust building- facing complex situations when implementing eDemocracy in multilevel governance- politicians can to exploit democratic process- proper evaluation framework needed (including content analysis, policy analysis and in-depth interviews)

  23. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda 5. Future developments • strengthening the interest of Slovene MEP in Citizens forum when shaping European policies • strengthening media and public promotion of successful eDemocracy cases and its effect on political democracy • combining on-line and off-line debates • Web 2.0 applications • convergence with different eDemocracy tools • supplementing existent evaluation methodology • reflecting and understanding how in particular cases Citizen's forums shifted the balance of power within democracy process

  24. Simon Delakorda & Matej Delakorda THANK YOU!simon.delakorda@guest.arnes.si matej.delakorda@guest.arnes.si

More Related