E-Learning in Education and Training

DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR RESEARCH WORKING PAPER EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE Scientific and Technological Options Assessment Series __________STOA 116 EN __________ DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR RESEARCH WORKING PAPER EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE Raphael KIES, Fernando MENDEZ, Philippe C. SCHMITTER, European University Institute, Florence, Italy and Alexander H. TRECHSEL, University of Geneva, Switzerland Scientific and Technological Options Assessment Series __________STOA 116 EN__________ 10-2003 This study was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Citizen's Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs within the STOA Workplan 2001. This paper is published in English only. Author : Raphael KIES, Fernando MENDEZ, Philippe C. SCHMITTER, European University Institute Florence Italy and Alexander H. TRECHSEL, University of Geneva Switzerland Responsible Official : Lars Bosche Division for Industry, Research, Energy, Environment and STOA Tel: (352) 4300 22569 Fax: (352) 4300 27718 E-mail: [email protected] Manuscript completed in October 2003. Further information on DG4 publications can be accessed through : www.europarl.eu.int/studies Luxembourg, European Parliament, 2002 ISBN:....................... The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. © European Communities, 2002 Printed in Luxembourg EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is about the one of the latest changes in the ‘technology of democracy’ and how it may impact on some of our core institutions of democratic representation: parliaments and parties. As in the past, whenever something new was injected into the processes of election and representation pundits have emerged to argue that the nature of democracy would be transformed. This is no less true for one of the latest potential changes in the ‘technology of democracy’, namely the introduction into the democratic realm of information and communication technologies (ICT). This report evaluates whether the introduction and diffusion of ICT is having a significant impact upon the practice of democracy in the member and candidate states of the European Union. Two research strategies have been employed: The first is a comparative website analysis of parliamentary and political parties’ websites. The second is a series of case studies and country reports which focus on e-democracy initiatives across the 26 polities we survey. The results of our core empirical analysis indicate that there is considerable variation among both parliaments and parties as far as the development of their websites is concerned. Existing member states tend to have more developed websites and, overall, the quality of parliamentary websites tends to be slightly superior to that of party websites. Most surprisingly, familiarity and use of ICT – as well as higher levels of wealth - do not inexorably lead to better website development. Differences in party systems – its fragmentation, ideological orientation, levels of turnout, distribution of major and minor parties- also do not seem to have a significant impact on website development for parliaments or parties. The variations we have observed suggest that it is political actors’ strategies rather than ICT development or other institutional variables that are driving parliaments and parties’ website development. To supplement the quantitative analysis various case studies and country reports have been produced offering further insights regarding both the variety of techniques that are the subject of experimentation by political actors and the particular aspects of democracy they wish to promote. E-access is by far the most dominant e-technique being pursed while e-consultation and e-forums are noticeably lagging. This latter finding is somewhat disappointing for e- democracy advocates although on the e-voting front some notable progress has been achieved. In sum, the process we describe is dynamic and as yet incomplete. Furthermore its connection with democracy is, at this early stage, still ambivalent. It is our view that given the uncertainties surrounding its diffusion and potential impact, policy intervention whether by national or European authorities could risk failing to produce intended results. We do believe, however, that it is important to learn by monitoring these developments in the political usage of ICTs both for the emergence of potential distortions as well as best practices. - i - EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE - ii - EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................................I I. INTRODUCTION: DEMOCRACY AND E-DEMOCRACY....................................................................... 1 II. GOALS, DEFINITIONS, RESEARCH STRATEGIES AND HYPOTHESES ......................................... 3 III. COMPARATIVE WEBSITE ANALYSIS................................................................................................... 5 A) PARLIAMENTS IN EUROPE ON THE WEB ......................................................................................................... 5 B) POLITICAL PARTIES IN EUROPE ON THE WEB ............................................................................................... 15 C) CORRELATING VARIABLES AND EXPLAINING VARIATION IN E-DEMOCRATIC POTENTIAL .......................... 22 IV. QUALITATIVE ASPECTS......................................................................................................................... 31 V. INSTEAD OF CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................... 41 VI. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 45 ANNEX I - CASE STUDIES.............................................................................................................................. 47 ANNEX II - METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................ 93 ANNEX III - DESCRIPTION OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES ............................................................. 103 ANNEX IV - LEGISLATURES' SCORES ON THE E-LI AND ITS DIMENSIONS................................ 107 ANNEX V - POLITICAL PARTIES' SCORES ON THE E-PI AND ITS DIMENSIONS........................ 109 ANNEX VI - FULL LIST OF AUTHORS...................................................................................................... 115 - iii - EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEMOCRACY IN EUROPE I. INTRODUCTION: DEMOCRACY AND E-DEMOCRACY Democracy has proven to be an extraordinarily resilient form of government. It has changed its scale from ethnically homogeneous city-states to multi-national mega-states; it has expanded in scope from providing defense and little else to providing welfare and much else; it has re-defined its participants from a small number of male, native-born, relatively elderly, non-slave citizens to a large number of male&female, native&naturalized, young&old citizens – and managed to abolish slavery along the way. And yet during this long (if erratic) trajectory, democracy has always been rooted in a limited number of consistent principles: equality of citizens, participation in common affairs, popular consent, freedom of expression, right of assembly and accountability of rulers. Anyone concerned about the problems of democracy in today’s world can profitably turn to the Funeral Oration of Pericles for reflections on the importance of citizen equality, the writings of Aristoles, Polybius and Montesquieu for the virtues of mixed government, Machiavelli’s Discorsi for the advantages (and risks) of mass participation, John Locke for the centrality of rights and property, Jean- Jacques Rousseau for the social contract and popular sovereignty, the Federalist Papers for wisdom on multiple layers of government (federalism) and multiple sources of cleavage (pluralism), Thomas Paine for the notion of the common man, John Stuart Mill for the importance of representative government, Mary Wollstonecraft for the rights of women, Immanuel Kant for thoughts on why democracies do not go to war with each other, Alexis de Tocqueville for the role of associations and freedom of the press – not to mention such other past contributors as Benjamin Constant, F.A. Hayek, Abraham Lincoln, Roberto Michels, Gaetano Mosca, Joseph Schumpeter and Max Weber. What has been much less consistent over its long history is the “technology of democracy”. The specific mechanisms that have translated its eternal principles into everyday practices of voting, representing, deciding, implementing, and complying by citizens and their rulers have changed greatly and, seemingly, irrevocably. At its founding, citizens walked to a central place, assembled there for a lengthy period to listen to the rhetoric

Load more