E-Participation Challenges: the Divergence of Research and Practice in the Case of Copenhagen
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Master Thesis E-Participation Challenges: The Divergence of Research and Practice in the Case of Copenhagen Florian Fabarius (125298) Ferdinand Krumhoff (124434) supervised by Karl-Heinz Pogner M.Sc. Business Administration & E-business submitted May 15, 2020 Characters: 266.987 Standard pages: 119 Abstract As part of Sustainability Development Goal 11, the UN has set itself the goal to enhance citizen participation in urban development. However, according to existing literature, sev- eral challenges must be addressed for successful e-participation implementation. Denmark and its capital Copenhagen, ranking first in the category of e-participation in the UN's E- Government Survey, represent a particularly interesting case for e-participation research. The present study aims to extend research by investigating existing challenges of e-participation implementation for a supposedly progressive city in this context. Through stakeholder inter- views with private companies, research institutions, citizens and governmental actors, this study provides a nuanced perspective on the implementation of e-participation. The results reveal that a multitude of challenges still exists, which can be allocated to the spheres of Technology (T), Organisation (O) and Citizen (C) as well as their interdependencies. The developed TOC framework shows that e-participation progress in Copenhagen is overes- timated. Further, gaps between the government and the citizens but also vertically and horizontally among government levels and areas of responsibility exist. Consequently, a co- herent strategy across different government levels is needed, and government structures are required to be more integrated and aligned. When establishing these, a focus should always be placed on the heterogeneous needs of the citizen. The overall study provides practitioners with guidance for the successful implementation of e-participation. Acknowledgements First of all, we would like to thank all the interviewees who took the time to share their knowledge with us. We would also like to thank our supervisor Karl-Heinz Pogner, who supported us during the thesis process and this unconventional time by providing constructive advice, challenging our ideas and steering us in the right direction. We would like to thank our families for their continuous encouragement and unconditional support. Finally, we appreciate the constructive comments of Hanna Theis and Victoria Krumhoff as well as the knowledge shared on the composition of stakeholders by Oda Svenungsen, which have enriched our work. a Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Problem Formulation & Motivation . 1 1.2 Research Question . 2 1.3 Delimitation . 3 1.4 Structure . 3 2 Knowledge Base 4 2.1 Citizen-Government Relationships in the Digital Age . 4 2.1.1 Terminology . 5 2.1.2 Historical Development . 11 2.1.3 Purpose & Motivation . 13 2.1.4 Challenges & Critique . 18 2.2 Smart Cities . 21 2.2.1 Pull & Push Factors . 21 2.2.2 Smart Cities Defined . 23 2.2.3 Smart City Dimensions . 25 2.2.4 Liveability in Cities . 29 2.3 Governmental Strategies & Projects . 31 2.3.1 UN Sustainability Goal 11 . 31 2.3.2 The Open Government Partnership . 32 2.3.3 Denmark's Digital Strategy 2016-2020 . 34 2.4 Denmark's System of Governance . 35 2.4.1 National Government . 35 2.4.2 Copenhagen Government . 36 3 Theoretical Framework 38 3.1 Technology . 39 3.2 Organisation . 39 3.3 Environment . 40 4 Methodology 41 4.1 Research Philosophy . 41 4.2 Approach to Theory Development . 44 4.3 Methodological Choice . 45 4.4 Research Strategy . 47 4.5 Time Horizon . 49 4.6 Data Collection & Analysis . 49 4.6.1 Approach to Data Collection . 50 4.6.2 Procedure of Data Analysis . 57 4.7 Limitations of Methodology . 60 5 Findings 62 5.1 E-participation Needs to be Inclusive . 63 5.2 Government Needs to Reconnect . 67 5.3 Inherent Issues in Organisations . 71 b 5.4 Ineffective Current Efforts . 75 5.5 Clear Responsibilities within Integrated Structures . 82 5.6 Complex & Dynamic Technologies . 87 5.7 E-Participation is an Investment . 93 6 Discussion 97 6.1 Spheres of Challenges . 97 6.1.1 Technology . 97 6.1.2 Organisation . 99 6.1.3 Citizen . 103 6.2 Relationships . 105 6.2.1 Citizen - Organisation . 106 6.2.2 Organisation - Technology . 107 6.2.3 Technology - Citizen . 108 6.3 Revised Framework . 109 6.4 Implications for Research & Practice . 112 6.5 Limitations and Future Research . 115 7 Conclusion 117 Appendices 130 A Research Onion by M. Saunders et al. (2016) 130 B Interview Protocols 131 C Four Case Study Designs by Yin (2014) 135 D Codes to Basic Themes 136 E Basic Themes to Global Themes 138 F Interview Transcripts 140 F.1 Lokaludvalgs Christianshavn and Indre By . 140 F.2 Lokaludvalg Kongens Enghave . 152 F.3 Lokaludvalg Østerbro . 160 F.4 Lokaludvalg - Vesterbro . 168 F.5 Business - 1 . 178 F.6 Business - 2 . 193 F.7 Government . 208 F.8 Research Institution - 1 . 220 F.9 Research Institution - 2 . 236 c List of Tables 1 Overview of Levels of E-participation . 10 2 Smart City Definitions . 23 3 Interview Guideline for Lokaludvalgs . 55 4 Interview Guideline for Other Three Stakeholders . 56 5 Stakeholder Pseudonyms . 63 List of Figures 1 Smart City Framework adapted from Allam & Newman (2018) . 25 2 TOE Framework reprinted from Tornatzky et al. (1990) . 38 3 Quadruple Helix adapted from Carayannis & Campbell (2010) . 53 4 Thematic Network - E-participation Needs to be Inclusive . 64 5 Thematic Network - The Government Needs to Actively Reconnect to Citizens . 68 6 Thematic Network - Inherent Issues in Organisations Halt Implementation . 72 7 Thematic Network - Ineffective Current Efforts . 76 8 Thematic Network - Clear Responsibilities within Integrated Structures . 83 9 Thematic Network - The Technological Environment is Highly Dynamic and Com- plex . 88 10 Thematic Network - E-participation is an Investment . 94 11 TOC Framework adapted from Tornatzky et al. (1990) . 110 d Acronyms EGDI e-Government Development Index. EPI E-Participation Index. G2B government-to-business. G2C government-to-citizen. G2E government-to-employee. G2G government-to-government. ICT Information and communications technologies. OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. SDGs Sustainable Development Goals. UN United Nations. UNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. e 1 Introduction 1.1 Problem Formulation & Motivation The recent rapid development of digital technologies is reshaping the dynamics of cities and has a major impact on the lives of all citizens. When looking at the sociological aspect of technology and the role of the citizen in existing research, it becomes apparent that the focus mostly lies on improving the efficiency of the cities' mechanisms (Neirotti et al., 2014). Thereby, technology is often portrayed as a panacea and predominantly represents the centre of research instead of first identifying the needs of the citizen and subsequently defining the best suitable technology (Granier & Kudo, 2016; Monzon, 2015; Dwivedi et al., 2012). With target 11.3 of the Sustainability Development Goals, the United Nations (UN) has created a blueprint for cities and communities to increase citizen involvement as it aims to \enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning" (UN, 2015). Digitally enhanced citizen engagement, also known as e-participation, is identified as a means to achieve inclusive and sustainable growth (OECD, 2004). In the UN's 2018 E-Government Survey, Denmark has been ranked first together with South Korea and Finland in the category of e-participation which evaluates the extent to which e-participation initiatives have proceeded within countries worldwide (UNDESA, 2018). As Denmark's capital, this makes Copenhagen a particularly relevant subject to investigate the status quo of e-participation in practice. Research has demonstrated that e-participation inhibits promising opportunities towards adapt- ing the political landscape to better serve citizens needs by enhancing citizen participation through digital means (Granier & Kudo, 2016). However, although the term e-participation has been around since the dawn of the internet in the 1990s, e-participation is still not compre- hensively applied in urban areas (Heeks & Bailur, 2007; Sundberg, 2019). Hence, the overall aim of this study is to identify barriers and challenges to e-participation implementation for a supposedly progressive city in this context. To achieve a differentiated view on the problem, four stakeholder groups relevant to e-participation in practice have been identified: (1) the government, represented by the municipality, (2) re- 1 searchers of the subject, (3) private companies offering e-participation solutions and ultimately (4) the citizens themselves which are represented by local committees of different districts of Copenhagen. Their views are collected through interviews and later summarised and reflected upon. 1.2 Research Question In light of the issues arising from the problem formulation, we derive the following research question: What are the challenges to implementing e-participation in urban areas? To help answer the general research question, it is broken down into three separate subquestions. These will be answered in subsequent parts of the thesis building on one another: 1. What are the challenges to implementing e-participation as perceived by re- searchers, governments and intergovernmental organisations? 2. What is the status of e-participation in practice in the case of Copenhagen, Denmark? 3. How do the challenges towards practical application of e-participation in the case of Copenhagen differ from the general perception of its status? The first subquestion aims to determine the status quo of e-participation and will be answered within the Knowledge Base upon which this research is built (see Chapter 2). The goal is to identify the current understanding of e-participation and its related challenges in order to compare them with the subsequent case. The second subquestion will be answered through the findings.