A Study of the Availability and Demand of Digital Services for the Manifestation of Social and Political Activity by Citizens
https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2023-10-4-162-185
- Р Р‡.МессенРТвЂВВВВВВВВжер
- РћРТвЂВВВВВВВВнокласснРСвЂВВВВВВВВРєРСвЂВВВВВВВВ
- LiveJournal
- Telegram
- ВКонтакте
- РЎРєРѕРїРСвЂВВВВВВВВровать ссылку
Full Text:
Abstract
In recent decades, scientists have been discussing ways of involving the population in social and political processes. Terms such as “civic participation,” “civic control,” “participation in the government of the power-poor,” etc. are widely used in scholarly discourse on this subject. The research related to social and political activities is conducted within various thematic areas based on “political participation theory” and “participatory democracy theory,” as well as on “theories of economic and digital inequalities.” According to the vast majority of scientists, increasing digitalization is known to expand the forms of participation and transform the public administration at all levels concerning joint governance and a citizen-centric approach, taking into consideration the opinion and active participation of citizens in the production and execution of policy decisions. This article presents the results of a study that investigated whether modern digital services allow citizens to participate in and influence the social and political processes taking place at various levels of government. In addition, the study demonstrates how modern digital technologies promote the maximum participation of the most socially vulnerable categories of the population, as well as how such factors as the level of digital competence, the level of income of the population, and the level of digitalization of territories limit this participation. In order to assess the modern digital forms and the use of these forms in a citizen’s interaction with the authorities, a survey of 1,200 residents of villages and towns located in the south Tyumen Region was conducted. The ways in which the residents living in the towns and villages of the Tyumen Region were able to express their civic positions were determined and the proportion of citizens using digital technologies was noted. The study also assessed the availability and demand for digital technologies by citizens to express their social and political activities, as well as the primary factors that limit their social and political participation. Moreover, this research showed that age, education, and digital competence and awareness were the main factors influencing a citizen’s propensity to use modern digital technologies for social and political activity. The hypothesis that the demand for digital services by citizens living in remote districts should be higher than that of urban residents was not confirmed. On the contrary, for a wide range of services, the assessments of demand and accessibility are higher among the residents of cities than among the residents of rural municipal districts, with the highest assessments coming from the residents of the regional capital. This fact is associated with a higher level of digital competence among citizens, a higher level of digitalization of the regional capital, as well as a higher level of income, which allows them to more actively master and use all these services. Additionally, this article is addressed to researchers interested in various aspects of social and political participation, as well as to politicians who make decisions regarding the development and implementation of new forms of digital interaction between citizens and the authorities that enable citizens to demonstrate their civic position.
Keywords
About the Authors
E. KaragulyanRussian Federation
Egine Karagulyan - Associate Professor
6 Volodarskogo St., Tyumen, 625003
M. Batyreva
Russian Federation
Maria Batyreva - Associate Professor
6 Volodarskogo St., Tyumen, 625003
References
1. Afouxenidis A. Social Media and Political Participation: An Investigation of Small-Scale Activism in Greece, 4(1) Advances in Applied Sociology 1 (2014). https://doi.org/10.4236/aasoci.2014.41001
2. Arnstein S.R. A Ladder of Citizen Participation, 35(4) Journal of the American Planning Association 216 (1969). https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
3. Boyd O.P. Differences in eDemocracy Parties’ eParticipation Systems, 13(3,4) Information Polity 167 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-2008-0161
4. Campante F. et al. Politics 2.0: The Multifaceted Effect of Broadband Internet on Political Participation, 16(4) Journal of the European Economic Association 1094 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvx044
5. Cardullo P. & Kitchin R. Being a ‘Citizen’ in the Smart City: Up and Down the Scaffold of Smart Citizen Participation in Dublin, Ireland, 84(1) GeoJournal 1 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-018-9845-8
6. Cardullo P. Citizens in the ‘Smart City’: Participation, Co-production, Governance (2020). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429438806
7. Chayinska M. et al. A Longitudinal Study of the Bidirectional Causal Relationships Between Online Political Participation and Offline Collective Action, 121 Computers in Human Behavior (Article 106810) (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106810
8. Cornwall A. Unpacking ‘Participation’ Models, Meanings and Practices, 43(3) Community Development Journal 269 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsn010
9. Ekman J. & Amnå E. Political Participation and Civic Engagement: Towards a New Typology, 22(3) Human Affairs 283 (2012). https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-012-0024-1
10. Fox S. Is It Time to Update the Definition of Political Participation?, 67(2) Parliamentary Affairs 495 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gss094
11. Gil-García J.R. et al. Conceptualizing Smartness in Government: An Integrative and Multidimensional View, 33(3) Government Information Quarterly 524 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.03.002
12. Gil-García J.R. et al. What Makes a City Smart? Identifying Core Components and Proposing an Integrative and Comprehensive Conceptualization, 20(1) Information Polity 61 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-150354
13. Grasso M.T. Generations, Political Participation and Social Change in Western Europe (2021). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315684031
14. Hu G. et al. A Hierarchical Model of e-Government Service Capability: An Empirical Analysis, 29(4) Government Information Quarterly 564 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.04.007
15. Kaase M. & Marsh A. Political Action: A Theoretical Perspective, in Barnes S. et al., Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies 27 (1979).
16. Milbrath L.W. & Goel M.L. Political Participation: How and Why People Get Involved in Politics (1977).
17. Mitsch F. et al. Faith No More? The Divergence of Political Trust Between Urban and Rural Europe, 89 Political Geography (Article 102426) (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102426
18. Noh Y.H. & Kyeongwon Y. Internet, Inequality and Growth, 30(6) Journal of Policy Modeling 1005 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.06.016
19. Norris P. Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism (2002). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610073
20. Oser J. et al. Is Online Participation Distinct from Offline Participation? A Latent Class Analysis of Participation Types and Their Stratification, 66(1) Political Research Quarterly 91 (2013).
21. Parry G. et al. Political Participation and Democracy in Britain (1992). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511558726
22. Pattie C. et al. Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation and Democracy (2004). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511490811
23. Pereira G.V. et al. Smart Governance in the Context of Smart Cities: A Literature Review, 23(2) Information Polity 143 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-170067
24. Rodionova E. et al. Using Information Technology to Design Comfortable Furniture Based on Research of Seniors’ Needs, 9(11) International Journal of Open Information Technologies 75 (2021).
25. Rosener J.B. Citizen Participation: Can We Measure its Effectiveness?, 38(5) Public Administration Review 457 (1978). https://doi.org/10.2307/975505
26. Rosener J.B. User-Oriented Evaluation: A New Way to View Citizen Participation, 17(4) Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 583 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1177/002188638101700412
27. Sæbø Ø. et al. The Shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an Emerging Research Area, 25(3) Government Information Quarterly 400 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.04.007
28. Saman A. & Khurram S. Survey Dataset on Citizens’ Perspective Regarding Government’s Use of Social Media for Provision of Quality Information and Citizens Online Political Participation in Pakistan, 32 Data in Brief (Article 106311) (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.106311
29. Simonofski A. et al. Citizen Participation in Smart Cities: Evaluation Framework Proposal, Paper presented at the 19th IEEE Conference on Business Informatics, Thessaloniki, Greece (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2017.21
30. Stratu-Strelet D. et al. Critical Factors in the Institutionalization of E-Participation in e-Government in Europe: Technology or Leadership?, 164 Technological Forecasting and Social Change (Article 120489) (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120489
31. Theocharis Y. & Van Deth J.W. The Continuous Expansion of Citizen Participation: A New Taxonomy, 10(1) European Political Science Review 139 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773916000230
32. Van Deth J.W. A Conceptual Map of Political Participation, 49(3) Acta Politica 349 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2014
33. Verba S. & Nie N.H. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (1972).
34. Verba S. et al. Race, Ethnicity and Political Resources: Participation in the United States, 23 British Journal of Political Science 453 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400006694
35. Vesnic-Alujevic L. Political Participation and Web 2.0 in Europe: A Case Study of Facebook, 38(3) Public Relations Review 466 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.01.010
36. Vidiasov E. et al. Institutional Factors for Building Trust in Information Technologies: Case-Study of Saint Petersburg, in Alexandrov D.A. et al. (eds.), Digital Transformation and Global Society, DTGS 2021, Communications in Computer and Information Science 152 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93715-7_11
37. Vigoda E. From Responsiveness to Collaboration: Governance, Citizens, and the Next Generation of Public Administration, 62(5) Public Administration Review 527 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00235
Review
For citations:
Karagulyan E., Batyreva M. A Study of the Availability and Demand of Digital Services for the Manifestation of Social and Political Activity by Citizens. BRICS Law Journal. 2023;10(4):162-185. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2023-10-4-162-185
ISSN 2412-2343 (Online)