Online tools for public engagement: case studies from Reykjavik

TL;DR

This paper analyzes how Reykjavik's public bodies use online tools like social media to enhance public participation, emphasizing the importance of scale, efficiency, and resource allocation for effective digital engagement.

Contribution

It introduces a systematic framework for evaluating e-participation platforms and provides empirical insights from Reykjavik's case studies on online public engagement.

Findings

Online tools are most effective for urgent or small-scale issues.

Resource allocation should match the effort needed for meaningful engagement.

Combining online tools with real-time meetings enhances participation.

Abstract

With the ubiquity of Internet technologies and growing demands for transparency and open data policies, the role of social networking and online deliberation tools for public engagement in decision-making has increased substantially in the last decades. In this paper, we present the analysis of how social media are used by different public bodies to enhance public participation in deliberative democracy. We collected and reviewed published information on the subject and carried out a field base assessment, involving structured interviews with different government representatives and urban policymakers. In order to compare collected data, we used a framework for systematic analysis and comparison of e-participation platforms called the participatory cube. The results we got were the following. Participatory decision-making on matters of public concern justly consumes time and resources, therefore online tools should be applied with consideration of scale and efficiency, i.e. on burning issues for a majority of citizens or small-scale local platforms, and in combination with meetings in real time and space. The budget and workforce allocated to managing online engagement tools should be proportionate to other political and administrative efforts to bring to execution proposed ideas and act on collected feedback in order to satisfy the needs expressed by the communities and not undermine their beliefs about their power to influence decisions.