Digitalization of Political Participation of Citizens of the European Union as an Tool to Overcome the Democratic Deficit
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31861/mhpi2022.45.163-175Keywords:
political participation, democratic deficit, European Union, digitalization of democracy, e-participationAbstract
The article carried out a comprehensive study of the potential, opportunities and prospects for digitalization of the political participation of citizens of the European Union as a tool to overcome the deficit of democracy. It has been established that the semantic markers of the process of digitalization of political participation are associated with the goal of overcoming the deficit of democracy in the EU and can be defined through a set of principles: human-centrism; solidarity and inclusion; freedom of choice; political participation in the democratic process at all levels; safety; constancy. It is proved that overcoming the deficit of democracy with the help of digitalization tools of political participation has clearly shown the risks and dangers of a digital divide that deepens politically significant cleavages: economically developed regions of the EU – economically depressed regions of the EU; access to a secure digital environment – lack of access to a secure digital environment. The active development of the Internet infrastructure in the EU has not significantly affected the simplification of access for older people, citizens with a lower level of education and citizens with disabilities to e-democracy digital platforms, therefore ensuring the widest possible access to e-participation platforms is a promising direction for EU policy. At the same time, EU policy efforts to increase citizen participation in policymaking should not be based solely on Internet strategies, but should increase the credibility and legitimacy of EU institutions in the economically less developed regions of a united Europe. Using the SWOT analysis method of e-participation tools in the EU, it is substantiated that the European Citizens' Initiative, the European Parliamentary Platform and the advisory petition platform “Your Voice in Europe” have a certain “parity” in the ratio of strengths and weaknesses for each of these tools. Weaknesses and threats can be leveled due to the development of their capabilities in the medium term. In particular, the potential of e-participation tools lies in enhancing the flexibility and convenience of the respective digital platforms; development and implementation of strategies for competitive mobilization and involvement of citizens; detailing the processing of proposals after their acceptance; summarizing and analyzing the data contained in the petitions; creation of a multi-level system of petitions, allowing to correlate local, national and European interests; deployment of discursive interaction between citizens and EU institutions at all stages of using e-participation tools; formalization of the connection between the processes of participation and decision-making. It has been established that the prospects for deepening the process of digitalization of political participation as a tool to overcome the deficit of democracy are determined by the formed request for all the variability of forms of political participation in the EU policy space, which is directly related to the deployment of the public space of European politics and the functional approval of the institution of European citizenship.
References
Al-Hasan, A., Khalil, O., Yim, D. (2021). Digital Information Diversity and Political Engagement: The Impact of Website Characteristics on Browsing Behavior and Voting Participation. Information Polity, Vol. 26 (1), p. 21–37.
Baek, Y. M., Wojcieszak, M., Carpini, M. X. D. (2012). Online versus face-to-face deliberation: Who? Why? What? With what effects? New Media & Society, Vol. 14(3), р. 363–383.
CAHDE (2007). Symposium on e-democracy: new opportunities for enhancing civic participation. URL: https://ininet.org/cahde2007-4-e-symposium-on-e-democracy-new-opportunities-for-e.html#Report_PROGRAMME___MONDAY_23_APRIL_2007.
Caldon, P. (2016). Digital publics: Re-defining ‘the civic’ and re-locating ‘the political’. New Media & Society, Vol.18(9), р. 2133–2138.
Chadwick, A. (2003). Bringing E-Democracy Back in. Why it Matters for Future Research on E-Governance. Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 21(4), p. 443–455.
Coelho, T., Cunha, M. A., Pozzebon, M. (2022). eParticipation Practices and Mechanisms of Influence: An Investigation of Public Policymaking. Government Information Quarterly. 39. URL: doi:10.1016/j.giq.2021.101667.
Council of Europe (2006). Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs. Directorate of Democratic Institutions Project “Good Governance in the Information Society”. Ad hoc Committee on e-democracy (CAHDE). Third meeting Strasbourg, 20-21 May 2008. Palais de l'Europe, Room 6. Dimensions and approaches for the Evaluation of E-Democracy by Georg Aichholzer and Ulrike Kozeluh. URL: https://www.academia.edu/484679/Ad_hoc_Committee_on_e_democracy_CAHDE_.
Council of Europe (2008). Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs. E-Democracy: Who Dares? Forum for the Future of Democracy 2008 Session Madrid, Spain 15–17 October 2008. URL: https://www.coe.int/t/dgap/forum-democracy/Activities/Forum%20sessions/2008/ Proceedings_FFD08_EN.pdf.
Council of Europe (2009). Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2009)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on electronic democracy (e-democracy) (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 18 February 2009 at the 1049th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies). URL: https://www.coe.int/t/dgap/goodgovernance/Activities/Key-Texts/Recommendations/Recommendation_ CM_Rec2009_1_en_PDF.pdf.
Dalakiouridou, E., Tambouris, E., Tarabanis, K. (2018). An eParticipation Acceptance Model. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, р. 1-1. URL: doi:10.1109/TETC.2018. 2861426.
Digital Democracy with a Purpose (2021). Lisbon Declaration. URL: https://assets.bondlayer.com/saktyd721tavnzm2/_assets/svimXxZTg2Aylr4v.pdf.
Eur-Lex (2011). Plan D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=LEGISSUM:a30000&from=EN.
Eur-Lex (2018). Glossary of summaries. Democratic deficit. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ EN/legal-content/glossary/democratic-deficit.html.
European Commission (2010). COM(2010) 743 final Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, the European eGovernment Action Plan 2011–2015. Harnessing ICT to Promote Smart, Sustainable & Innovative Government. SEC(2010) 1539 final. Brussels, 15.12.2010. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0743:FIN:EN:PDF.
European Commission (2017). Ministerial Declaration on eGovernment – the Tallinn Declaration. URL: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/ministerial-declaration-egovernment-tallinn-declaration.
European Commission (2020). Berlin Declaration on Digital Society and Value-based Digital Government. URL: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/berlin-declaration-digital-society-and-value-based-digital-government.
European Commission (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. On the European Democracy Action Plan. COM(2020) 790 final. Brussels, 3.12.2020. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0790&from=EN.
European Commission (2021). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. 2030 Digital Compass: the European way for the Digital Decade. COM(2021) 118 final. Brussels, 9.3.2021. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/communication-digital-compass-2030_en.pdf.
European Commission (2022). European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade. Brussels, 26.1.2022 COM(2022) 28 final. URL: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/ en/library/declaration-european-digital-rights-and-principles#Communication.
European Commission (2022). Consultations. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations_en.
European Parliament (2022). Petitions. URL: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/ en/home.
European Union (2021). Conference on the Future of Europe. URL: https://futureu.europa.eu/? locale=en.
European Union (2022). European Citizens' Initiative. Regulatory framework. URL: https://europa.eu/citizens-initiative/how-it-works/regulatory-framework_en.
EVS (2016). European Values Study 2008: Integrated Dataset (EVS 2008). GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA4800 Data file Version 4.0.0. URL: https://doi.org/10.4232/1.12458.
Grimm, D. (1995). Does Europe need a constitution? European Law Journal, Vol. 1 (3), р. 282–302.
Heyder, M., Höffken, S., Heydkamp, C. (2021). eParticipation in Neighbourhood Development: A Survey of Digital Applications and Tools. International Journal of Urban Planning and Smart Cities, Vol. 2, р. 1–18. URL: doi: 10.4018/IJUPSC.2021070101.
Lodge, J., Sarikakis K. (2013). Citizens in an Ever-closer Union? The Long Path to a Public Sphere in the EU. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, Vol. 9(2), р.165–181.
Macintosh, A. (2006). eParticipation in policy-making: the research and the challenges. Exploiting the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications, Case Studies. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Mendez, F. (2007). Е-Democratic Experimentation in Europe: The Case of e-Voting. International Conference on Direct Democracy in Latin America, 14–15 March 2007, Buenos Aires, Argentina. URL: https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/112424/1/WP2007-2%20-%20Mendez%20-%20eDemocracy%20Experiences%20in%20Europe.pdf.
Mossberger K., Tolbert C. J. (2010). Digital Democracy: How Politics Online is Changing Electoral Participation. The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior. URL: https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199235476.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199235476.
Neuhold, C. (2014). More Bureaucracy or More Democracy: the EU at an «Unrepresentative Turn»? Maastricht: Maastricht University. URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/portalfiles/ portal/615790/guid-3d75458b-01f8-48ad-a3c1-f65a7bc54dae-ASSET1.0.pdf.
Neuhold, C. (2020). Democratic Deficit in the European Union. The Oxford Encyclopedia of European Union Politics. URL: https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637. 001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1141#RelatedArticles.
OECD (2001). Citizens as Partners: OECD Handbook on Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making. OECD Publishing, Oct 31, 2001. Business & Economics, 267 p. URL: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/citizens-as-partners_9789264195578-en.
Paracharissi, Z. (2010). A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Cambridge.
Rotar, N. (2021). Functional Peculiarities of the European Civil Initiative as an Innovative form of Political Participation in the European Union. Міжнародні відносини, суспільні комунікації та регіональні студії, 2021, no 3(11). С. 235–256. https://relint.vnu.edu.ua/index.php/relint/ article/view/202.
Tiemann-Kollipost, J. (2020). Political Participation in the Digital Age. An Ethnographic Comparison Between Iceland and Germany. Februar 2020, 224 р. URL: https://www.transcript-verlag.de/chunk_detail_seite.php?doi=10.14361%2F9783839448885-003.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.