Ra/i'rave Exploring the Value Proposition of eDemocracy: Insights from eBusiness John G. Mooney, Eimear Farrell Abstract In parallel with the rise, tali and now resurgence of eBusiness in business contexts, significant interest and experimentation into the role of Internet technologies in non-profit contexts. While there has been much discussion about the concept of eGovernment, a much quieter public movement, eDemocracy. is slowly building momentum and interest. This paper articulates the value proposition of eDemocracy initiatives by drawing upon insights derived from developments in eBusiness Izvleček Vzporedno z vzponom, padcem in sedanjim oživljanjem elektronskega poslovanja v poslovnem okolju opažamo tudi veliko zanimanje in eksperimentiranje o vlog! spletnih tehnologij v neprofitnih okoljih. O e- upravi je bilo že veliko razprav, medtem ko manj opazno družbeno gibanje, e-demokracija, le počasi postaja aktualno in pridobiva pozornost, članek predlaga model za vrednotenje iniciativ e-demokracije na osnovi izkušenj razvoja elektronskega poslovanja podjetij. mmm "VVV aren t the beginning of the information age reOOlution, which is changing societies all aver the world. It clumps the way people coimiiuiiicate and access information. It is also changing government itself: the organization of government, its chief relationships with its citizens and the international co-operation between governments." Stringer, 20011 "It is impossible to he simultaneously blasted by a revolution in technology...and a world-wide revolution in communications without also facing...a potentially explosive political revolution." (Tofflcr 19S0, p.392). Democracy: an Evolving Concept New forms of citizen participation are becoming especially important in conjunction with the new citizen orientation of public administration. In recent years an additional conception of how to improve government-citizen relations has emerged, broadly described as "citizen empowerment," which aims to support citizens by providing them with the facilities to access government and policy information individually and to contact responsible officials {Vigoda, 2000). Better contact and information in turn will promote better accountability of public officiais to citizens, and produce fertile ground for reinvigorated civil society. This type of novel administration is often related to innovations in information technology, which would allow citizens to access public information and interact with officials and leaders via the Internet (Kahin and Nelson, 1997). At the same time, new thinking about governance has also emerged, stressing collaborative relationships and network-like arrangements between various organizations and constituencies that enable more effective problem solving and greater participation in public affairs than in the past (Stoker et al 2000:93). In his John Gaus Lecture to members of the American Political Science Association in the autumn of 19992, Dr. George Frederickson noted that public ad ministration is increasingly defined by efforts to create coherent patterns of governance across political chasms: The theories and concepts of the clash of interests, of electoral and interest group competition, of games ami of winners ami losers have dominated ami continue to dominate much of American Political Science Public Administration, on the other and, is steadily moving away 1 ,PuWngGovemn>ent QnBne, Bringing Citizens Online," Speech byUKGovernment M'misterGraham Stringer, MP, http://www.cablrKt-Qfficc.gQV.uk/ ¡hdex/niin org.htm and http'J/www.e envoy.gov.uh/ to the Global Forum conference in Naples, Italy on March 15, 2001. 2 Available audio arid video file an he Public Ad mi nisi ration of American Political Scicnco Association wcbsilc. http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~pub-admit)/, ncccsscd 1 *J July 2001. iipornl'nd NFORM ATHiA 2001 - Sieviika A letnik IX John G. Mooney and El/near Far re! I: Exploring the Value Proposition of eDemocracy: Insights from eBusiness from then' theories and concepts toward theories of co-op-erathm, the commons, networking, governance mul institution-building and maintenance. Public Administration, both in practice and theory is repositioning itself to deal with the disarticulation of the State, In short, Pidb lie Administration is the Political Science of making the fragmented and disarticulated political state work. This new kind of "negotiated social governance" can be considered "a new style of governance and as a source of new experiments in democratic practice" (Hirst 2000:19). In this perspective the governance approach can be seen as a possibility lo restore legitimacy in the political system by the creation of new channels of participation and partnerships between the public sector, and the private and voluntary sector, contributing lo new democratic forms of public/ private interaction. In Europe, a "new" debate has thus emerged, addressing the problems of constitutional clarity, institutional design and transparency". In 2000 and 2001, high-profile speeches by national politicians and EU officials have sought to open the debate on Europe and its 'democratic dilemma'1. Romano Prodi, President of the European Commission, in "Shaping the New F;.u rope" called for "a new, more democratic form of partnership between the different levels of governance in Europe," He claimed that "People want a much more participatory, "hands on" democracy. They will not support the European project unless they are fully involved in setting goals, making poli cy and evaluating progress"5. The European Commission White Paper on European Governance proposes far reaching changes to the way the Union works. Five political principles -openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness and coherence underpin the recommendations of the paper." The mandate of the working group on broadening and enriching the debate on European Matters (Group la) focused on the need to increase levels ot participation in public dialogue, discussion and debate and also to improve the quality of exchanges of information, thought and opinion. The Emergence of eTechnologies and eDemocracy The strategic potential of ICTs in the public sector can be found in aspects of speed and quality (Bellamy and 1 ay lor 1998). ICls can be used to increase public access to service agencies, which in turn can stimulate the openness of government. For example, Tapscott (1996:163) suggested that ICTs: Not only., ¡reduce the costs of government hut also radical h/ transform the way government programs are delivered and the vert/ nature of governance. Internehuorked fsicf government can overcome the barriers of time and distance to perform the business of government and give people public information ami services when and where the}/ want them. Governments can use electronic systems to deliver better-quality products to the public more quickly, cost effectively and conveniently. In addition, the information and communications capabilities of the information age arc lending increased credibility to alternative democratic scenarios, of which the concept of 'strong' democracy is probably the most prominent (Barber 1994). I he significance of electronic means for political participation is often seen to lie in the circumvention of the need for representation. Much of the literature is therefore focused on decision-making aspects, rather than the earlier deliberative stages of democracy. In Hi is paper however, we focus on the potential of new technology to support existing democratic structures. We suggest that information technology has the potential to re-pluralize democratic policy, through its capacity to provide low cost information, deliberation, transparency and evaluation -. There is an emergent view, that the process of electronic democracy can be exploited to supply'strategic guidance' to elected politicians. In such ways, ICTs enable innovations designed to recast the relationships between citizens, politicians and government (Van de Donk et a!. 1995). Information can be 'delivered' and will empower those previously unable to access it. This is a 'push' model of information dissemination; the state will place information in accessible lorums and the onus 3 See Economist, October 2000. "A Constitution for Europe?, leader. Also Diarmuid Rossa Phelan. Antje Wiener ('Debating the CD's Constitution Tost Nice: Rights Policy and the Democratic Dilemma-, paper prepared for the European Scholar Seminar programme. Dublin European Institute, University College Dublin, 3 April 2001} has drawn attention to the Union's move from implicit lo explicit values in the Copenhagen criteria for enlargement and the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the recent EU sanctions against Austria fSee Statement from the Portuguese Presidency ol the European Union on behalf of XIV member stales. IittP://www.portugal.ue-2000.pt/uk/news/execute/news.asp7id = 425, 31 January 2000 on this latter issue). 4 Notably that of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair in his Warsaw speech: ~ihe citiiens of Europe must feel trier they own Europe, not that Europe owns them' (Blair, 2000). 5 Romano Prodi. Presidentof the European Commission, "2000-2005: Shaping the New Europe". SPtECH/00/41, Strasbourg. 15 Fehniary 2000. 6 See press release 'The Commission Proposes Immediate action on European Governance". ON: IP/01/1096. 25 July 2001. available at http:// eiiropa.eu.int/rapid/sirat/cgi/guesten,l not sufficient for the immediate development of a participatory democracy. This led the group to offer a final set of policy recommendations: To strengthen democratic development within the | Information Society] the EU should implement a democracy project. The objectives would be to reveal how ICTs can: « step up the interaction between politicians and citizens and increase the latter's participation in political debate and decision-making; * clarify how issues relating to human rights, xenophobia, social values, etc. should be approached in the Information Society, ■ improve our understanding and the transparency of the democratic process in both National and EU institutions (European Commission 1997:51-52). Building on this recommendation, the European Commission recently called for "eEurope: An Information Society for AH" (European Commission, 1999). This initiative stresses the need to go 'beyond simply publishing legislation and white papers on the web' and to establish a discussion and feedback forum' (European Commission 1999:16). EU Commissioner I n kanen argues that "the information revolution can provide governments and administrations all over the world...with better tools to empower citizens and to serve them better."10 In Europe, future prospects are sketched tor (he further evolution of "Internet democracy" with the aid of the concepts "developmental democracy" and " pro tective democracy" as distinguished by Held (1996) and Macpherson (1973). One is aimed at increasing product efficiency without fostering any illusions about the inherent interest of the customer of public goods in political issues. Ihe other is aimed at increasing "civic" participation by inviting the public to submit their wishes and complaints directly to public institutions and agencies. Both visions can support an increasingly web-supported common definition ot S European Commission Green Paper on Living and Working in Vie Information Society, COM (96) 389 final, paragraph 101. 9 European Commission (1998aI. Public Sector Information: A Key Resource for Europe: Green Paper on Public Sector Information in the Information Society. COM (981 585, 10 Erkki UIKANEN Member of the European Commission responsible for Enterprise and the Information Society 'eGovemment Providing better public service and wider participation (or citizens" IDEA (International Institute (or Democracy and Electoral Assistance) Democracy Forum 2001: Democracy and the Information Revolution Stockholm. 29 June 2001. Available at http:tteuropa.eu.int/rapicl/stan/cgi/ guesten.ksb?p action.gettxt-gt&doc ---SPEECH/01/319d0dRAPID<>=EN, accessed 10 July 2001. tí;*ntií)j hh n fo r m at ik a 2001 slevilka lemiklX John G. Mooney and El/near Far re! I: Exploring the Value Proposition of eDemocracy: Insights from eBusiness basic governance; the first to make institutional delivery of services more efficient and the second to improve the ease of informed citizen input. Implementation choices made along the lines of openness will determine the future of openness as an indicator of the vigor of a democracy. Internet-enabled eDemocracy: Power to the People What characterizes new Internet technologies from "traditional ICT" is their potential for interactivity, rich communication, and extensive reach. With the success of e-Commerce the transfer of concepts and systems to the publie sector has been advocated. As a concept and an emerging practice, eGovernment seeks to realize processes and structures for harnessing the potentialities of information and communication technologies at various levels of government and the public. The political significance of these developments derives from technology being conceived less as a medium for disseminating information and more as media for interactive communication. Not only arc the avenues of political communication multiplying in a process that is becoming more diverse, fragmented, and complex, but also, at a deeper level, power relations among key message providers and receivers are being rearranged and conventional meanings of 'democracy' and 'citizenship' are being questioned and rethought (Brants et al, 1998). Id's are said to contribute to the transparency of power, to favor interactive decision-making and the empowerment of citizens. The new communications are claimed to sustain a 'dialogic' politics (Fox and Miller 1995). In particular, claims were made that on-line voting and other new kinds of political communication had the potential to 'revolutionize' democracy (Sac km an and Nie 1970). Informatization was expected to facilitate atl kinds of (direct as well as participatory) digital democracy (e.g. Van de Donk et al. 1995). The early history of electronic democracy is littered with experiments to employ cable TV to involve voters actively in election hustings or discussions with elected representatives (Ab ram son el til., 19K8). Following Arthur Anderson (2000), we concur with the distinction between e-government, e-administra-tion and c-democracy. E-Governmenl is the most inclusive term. The Gartner Group defines ^Government as: "The continuous optimization of Government service delivery, citizen participation and governance by transforming internal and external relationships through technology/ the Internet and new media." E-Administration refers to government's use of ICTs to assure smooth running of public services for its clients and tor its own internal functioning (Arthur Andersen, 2000: 5). E-Democracy, the other subset of e-Government, relates to the establishment of systems designed to allow state and citizens to participate in deliberation and decision-making with the aid of new ICTs. It concerns the relation between government and citizen on the one hand, and government to government on the other (Arthur Andersen, 2000:5). A further insight into the realm of eDemocracy is provided by the scope of the "Democracy Online Project" http://demo-cracyonline.org at George Washington University. The project aims to further the role of Online technologies in enhancing freedom of expression, universal access to democratic information and the democratic process, government accountability, social tolerance, and public deliberation. in order to identify the potential processes and outcome opportunities of eDemocracy, we examine the eBusiness value proposition. The eDemocracy Value Proposition Combining theoretical and exemplar analysis, Moon-ey(2001) proposes a conceptual model of the "eBusiness Value Proposition" for business enterprises. Drawing from this model, we propose the following elements of the "eDemocracy Value Proposition," that articulate the value-enhancing opportunities of internet technologies for democracy. Communication and Interaction-based opportunities Compared with their ICT predecessors, Internet technologies enable significantly more interactive and richer communication between democracy stakeholders. Traditional paper-based documents and reports published and distributed by "Government Publication Offices" can be replaced with rich multimedia content that is accessible anytime any place. In addition, the interactive capability of Internet technologies can be used by citizens to engage in widely inclusive dialog among citizens, or between citizens and government. Such enhanced dialog capability enables government to be "more attentive" to its citizens, and to implement relationship enhancing service policies as "Our door is always open," "Be sure to tell us if you have a problem or issue,"" I he latest development on this issue is.." The European Commission is beginning to exploit the potential of Internet technologies to improve 2001 • itewlkal - letnik IX «/jkii uii; ifil N FOR M ATI K& John G. Mooney and Fini ear Farrell: Exploring I he Value Proposition of e Democracy; Insifihts Irom eBusiness communication and democratic dialogue. There are currently experiments with online debates, Internet video, and electronic magazines like European Dialogue" . According to the Working Group again: Thé EURO PA website is set to evolve into an interactive platform for information, feedback and debate, link in g parallel networks across the Union. There are several examples in the UK of successful consultation websites, e.g. COD - Citizen On-line Democracy (CODJ, Uspeak: Parliament listens, UKOnline CitizenSpnce1- and the Scotland E-petitioiier. 1,1 The Finnish city of' Tampere has a city website going on since 1997, which debates on the life of the city and issues which relate to the city in a broader context. Another good example of technologically mediated democracy can be found in the Netherlands- Expertise Bureau for Innovative Policy-Making.14 The Dutch central portal (wvvw.overheld.nl) offers discussions with information about referenda and interactive policymaking15. Sweden's Votia Empowerment www.votia.com aims to create "living dialogues" between citizens and government, and to enable the latter to "build long lasting relations with citizens." Community-based opportunities The use of Internet technologies to develop online communities has created significant value in eBusiness contexts. Elements of value include the use of Online communities for content generation (for example, the contribution of book reviews by ama-zon.corn's online community). In the eDemocracy context, online communities provide powerful alternatives to focus and special interest groups, and traditional lobbying channels. Technologies being used for activism'6 and community media networks. As e-governance becomes more f irmly entrenched and initiatives proceed beyond delivery mechanisms for existing services, new instruments of participation in policy making may be expected to emerge. Online communities provide a highly effective and efficient means for citizen participation, thus enhancing their sense ol engagement with the democratic process. Furthermore, online communities are important mechanisms for trust enhancement, and the creation of "comfort zones" with Internet channel!». Fora such as those facilitated by ICT provide an attractive way to unite European actors. One example is the Belgian Presidency's Expedition Europe website (http://www.expeditioneurope.be). I his, in contrast to the Futurum site [http://www.europa.eii.int/fufurum) is targeted at 17 to 25 year olds living in the European Union. These fora have the likely effect of not only reducing the democratic deficit through more defined information routes, but also have the potential to encourage greater involvement. As with fora in the nonvirtual world however, debate must be structured and contributions valued. On the other hand, projects like USpeak (http:// www.uspeak.oriMikj have been quite successful in garnering input and discussing issues ol social benefits from their website: "Uspeak is a direct link between you and Parliament - your opportunity to tell MPs your experiences and your views on lax credits, work incentives, chiidcare and benefits," Another example of community-based e-Democra-cy is www.MoveOn.org, a community of "citizens making a difference." This initiative was created as a campaign to "immediately censure President Clinton and Move On to pressing issues facing the country." l he site attracted USS13m in pledges for the last US Presidential election, and raised over US$2m for 29 democratic candidates from 43,232 individuals across 28 races that wanted "people reflecting our values to represent us." The site encourages the community to "speak out through its national initiatives forum." In the United Kingdom, www.VouGov.com is il lustrative of a "facilitated" virtual community initiative in which broad community engagement in the democratic process is facilitated online by a team of professional commentators, journalists, and experts. YouCiOv.com services include a "People's Parliament, " el'e tit ions, and Gov Doctor 11 The Fulorurn site provides an example of (Jie role thai neiv media will play in the creation of a European public sphere. Indeed this area received much attention in the new White Paper on Governance and the recommendations ol Working Group 1 (a) on the promotion of public debate on Eu ropean questions. 12 UK Prime Minister Tony Blair offers chats on the web at the No. 10, Downing Street site, 13 www.e-petitioner.org.Lik/. Seeaiso lhe International Centre lor Telotfemocracy at Napier, Edinburgh, www.tetedemocracy.org. I*! The Govern/nent is devoting increasing attention to shaping the process that takes place prior to new policy measures. The trend towards a more 'horizontal' society and the rise of new forms of IC T have prompted the creation of an Expertise Bureau that can gather the acquired know-how and experience arid apply it elsewhere in government organisations. The Bureau was launched on IA June 2001. The website (www.xpin.nl/) is a virtual marketplace where clients (ministries, regional and local authorities! and suppliers (process supervisors, website/tool constructors etc.) can he brought together on an interactive Oasis, lhe wehsiieaiso has a database ol best practices that are taking place around the world. 15 The Dutch Minister has also installed a webcam In his office 16 The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAII was stopped by private citizens and interest groups organizing transnational!/ through the Interne! similarly, net activism was a key feature of the Seattle. Washington, Davos, Quebec City (April 20011 and Genoa (2001) protests. irpnmbr id NFORMÂTIKA 2001 stevilkad letniklX John G. Mooney and El/near Far re! I: Exploring the Value Proposition of eDemocracy: Insights from eBusiness Convenience-based opportunities In general, the convenience-based dimension of eDe-mocracy aims to create value by removing the inconveniences of the democratic process for citizens. Three elements are evident. First, time-based convenience aims to overcome traditional time restrictions on democratic process and services {e.g. traditional "9 to 5 closed for lunch" opening hours of government departments. Second, location-based convenience aims to use the capabilities of Internet technologies to overcome geographic barriers to citizen participation in democratic processes, for example providing virtual access to government services and democratic processes to those located in remote regions. Third, process-based convenience aims to use the capabilities of Internet technologies to reduce the complexity and/or inconvenience ("hassle") of certain democratic processes. For example, www.election.com provides secure on-line voting services, which offer significant convenience to senior citizens and others for whom physical attendance at a "voting station" is inconvenient or impossible. Cost and Efficiency-based opportunities Democracy has been described as "the inefficiency required to make the best public choices."1' While this may indeed be the case, it is desirable that democracy be as efficient as possible. This is increasingly the case in a "real world" in which the dominant scarcity is time, and in an online world in which the dominant scarcity is attention. Internet technologies provide opportunities for reducing the costs and increasing efficiencies of democratic processes. Examples include the reduced costs of information dissemination, citizen communication, constituent care, online donations, online voting. Efficiency improvements include reduced administrative errors, online versus paper-based processes, and faster response times (for example, real-time tallying of online voting). Customization and Personalization-based opportunities Within the eBusiness domain, much emphasis has been placed upon the customer value created by customization and personalization. Customization refers to the tailoring of product or services offerings to the specific needs of the customer. Personalization refers to the growing trend of engaging in personalized exchanges with online users, resulting in a "personalized relationship" that grows from becoming acquainted, to remembering the details of previous exchanges, to anticipating future needs. In the context of eDemocracy, each citizen could be presented with personalized online services and interactions that are reflective of the history of interactions between the citizen and the state, given the enhanced online "memory" of the state. In addition, citizens may be presented with customized offerings based upon the citizen's preferences, legal status, and societal role. http://www.hotearth.net allows people to contact their government representatives. In addition, however, visitors can calculate their contribution to global warming by specifying their car and annual mileage. Based upon this information, the site provides customized and personalized advice on what the visitor can do to reduce global warming. information-based opportunities New Internet technologies permit improvements in diffusion of information and encourage the practice ol <) more direct, efficient and transparent administration."1 Informing stakeholders of key facts and events, and from the enhanced learning and citizen empowerment that subsequently emerges enhances democracy. In addition, improved information flows contribute to greater transparency and openness. This aspect will be discussed below under transparency and accountability. The launch of the EURO PA server and its recent redesign can be considered as one of the most significant EU developments in this regard.'I he California Voter Foundation www.calvoter.org is a "nonprofit non-partisan organization dedicated to applying "new technologies" to provide the public with access to the information needed to participate in public life in a meaningful way." One of Cal Voter's primary objectives is to improving voter and civic education, by providing politician backgrounds, contact information, maps of electoral districts, and information on how citizens can get involved in the democratic process. 17 http.itormi.e. democracy.MgOQ Madame Loyola de Palacio, La governance et la democratic en Europe, SPEECH/00/439. at a conference on *New Forms of Governance in Europe", Lille, 9 November 2000. 19 The Wl-VlV server FUftOPA Iivw*.europa.eu..lnti was /aunched by the Commission in February 1995 and subsequently redesigned In 2001 its success has generated an Important internal Institutional process, o! reflection and discussion about the roles of the Internet and electronic information and their impact on information dissemination generally, it is among the world's mes! frequently visited sites with around five million hits per month, EUR-LEX (Information source on European Community law WWw.eu ropa eti.lntjeur-lex/en/index.html), RAPID (database of daily European Union news briefings), EUDOR (document delivery service), SCAD (bibliographical database! and SCADplus (listings ofEU po//cies and meetings,) should also be noted 2001 àtevilhti 4 letnik IX i tponibt «il NFOR M ATI KA John G. Mooney and Fini ear Farrell: Exploring I he Value Proposition of e Democracy; Insifihts Irom eBusiness Another information-based opportunity is that of online advocacy. Many political and community interest groups have used email and web sites to distribute information about their issues and priorities. The Citizens for Local Democracy in Toronto http:// www.c41d.org/ used the Internet to further their opposition to a province-directed amalgamation of six cities into a larger Toronto. In Minnesota, the Residents Opposed to Airport Racket http://www.no-norse.org/q u i e t net/roar/ used the Internet to publicize their nighttime pajarna protest at the international airport, Those prepared to contract for e-advocacy services will find a willing partner with www.e-advocates.com, the "first, full-service Internet advocacy consulting firm ... to harness the power of the Internet to achieve legislative and political objective." Interaction-based opportunities Tor a healthy democracy, dissemination of information is not enough. As explained in the Working Group paper: "Member Slnlcs nitd the Commission should extend the use of the Internet to ensure consultation and feedback on major political initiatives. The aim would he to go beyond simply publishing legislation and white papers on the web mut establish a discussion and feedback forum possibly with independent moderators. "'" One area of c-Commission activity is the improvement of democratic participation through online interaction. perhaps culminating in various forms of online public commons. EU Commissioner Lilkanen believes that "To be a modern regulator, we need new-ways of consulting stakeholders, for example, through increased use of the Internet"21. As part of the eCommission initiative the Commission has presented "Interactive Policy-Making to improve governance by using the Internet for collecting and analyzing reactions in the marketplace for use in the HU's policymaking process". (IP/01/519)22 The development of an Internet-based mechanism for Interactive policy relying on spontaneous reactions in the marketplace and on open consultations of stakeholders meets the e-Cnnnnission objectives set out in the Reform White Paper23 and is seeking coherence with the Commission's commitment to draw up guidelines on best practice in consultations (Action 4 Reform White Paper). It also represents an important project in the context of the Governance objective. Moreover it plays u part in the Internal Market Strategy and will help to identify people 's needs during the enlargement process, (Extract of the Progress report on Interactive Policy Making, Communication of Mr. Bolkestetn, Mr. Kinnock anil Mr, Liikanen). Transparency and Accountability-based opportunities Improved information and communication are important levers in bringing about improved control and accountability of the democratic process, primarily through the improved transparency brought about by better information and communication. Transparency has been one of the key areas of reform within the Union in the 1990s (Lord, 1998, p.S7). In the wake of the European Commission's mass resignations for fraud, a Reform White Paper has identified the development of an "e-Commission" as one of the fundamental pillars to increase the transparency of the various European institutions. The issue of transparency has a number of aspects. It involves public knowledge about procedures, access to proceedings and documents and greater public participation. Enhanced use of ICTs by public authorities can ensure that citizens access information quickly and easily. In the last few years much has been done to improve the transparency of policy and decision-making (including public session of the Council) and legislation has been passed to grant access to official documents. 1 ( lear-lv visible results of this reform to date have been: a Dialogue on Europe25 228 20 Point 10. Government online. 21 Cited in "Internet to /lost EU policy debates". Information dossier. Transparency section. t.uractiu, wivw.etjrcrtV.com. 22 Interactive Policy Making: Commission seeks to use Inlornet in EU's policy-making process. DN: IP/01/519. 4 April, 2001, Further information prt the j'nitiafft® can he found at! httD://www.eurooa.eu.int/comn)/intemBl marUet/en/update/citizen/indef.htm 23 Reform White Paper - Action Flan, Chapter It, point VI: "Towards the E Commission" Action 8 fOJ In line with me targets of e-Fur ope Initiative, the Commission should extend the use ot the Internet to ensure consultation and feedback on major political Initiatives. The aim would be to go beyond simply publishing policy documents on internet, and to establish appropriate feedback mechanisms. Resources will have to be made available to this end. Directorate General Internal Market to lead pilot exercise, supported by OPOCF. Oirectorate-Generai Information Society. Secretariat general and Press and Communication Service - Review by end 2000. 24 The issue of openness and access to public sector information was attended to by the G7 in a 1995 meeting. Most directly, this was addressed by lite "Government Online" project. I he objective of this project was to exchange experience and best practice on the use ot online information technology by administrations. It is noted In the programme objectives that the potential of the Internet could be harnessed to realize the objective of the Amsterdam Treaty to ensure full transparency lor citizens on the activities and decisions of the EU institutions, (Casev, 2001, p.68j.(Government Online I. tipombttrfNFORMATIKA 2001 - Stevilka 4 - letnik IX John G. Mooney and Fini ear Farrell: Exploring I he Value Proposition of e Democracy; Insifihts Irom eBusiness ■ Online register of President Prodi's external mail36 ■ Unique porta} to European Governments27 !n the United States, www.caIvoter.org promotes internet disclosure of campaign finance data, an initiative called "digital sunlight" that was subsequently enacted as California legislation through the "Online Disclosure Act." In addition, Cal Voter provides an "Initiative Watch" that tracks the progress of various political initiatives, and the contribution of various political representatives to the progress or otherwise of these initiatives. It also works with the media to improve political coverage by providing non-partisan political information. Discussion and Conclusions The above discussion illustrates the prime dimensions of the eDemocracy value proposition. It is evident that the enhanced information and communications capabilities of Internet technologies have already been applied in a number of simple yet powerful ways to enhance democratic processes and outcomes. Some e-irtitiatives sought to better inform citizens, enhance transparency and improve accountability. Others sought to engender grass roots empowerment, local mobilization, and virtual community-based lobbying. We have seen remarkable achievements in online fund raising, and exciting experiments in online voting. There are also some tentative moves to transfer the eBusiness concept of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) to Voter Relationship Management (VRM) in the eDemocracy domain. Together, these initiatives promise powerful new mechanisms for democratic participation. For many, these new mechanisms will be more accessible, more convenient, more efficient, and less intimidating. In particular, eDemocracy may be an important aspect of engaging "Generation X" in the democratic process. For others, they will be significantly less appealing than traditional democratic mechanisms. Real and perceived threats to privacy, anonymity, veritiability, and security will mitigate against widespread adoption of these mechanisms for some time. For many, the dynamic underlying the "Digital Divide" creates the strong possibility of online exclusion, rather than enhanced participation in eDemocracy initiatives. For all these reasons, significant caution must the exercised before assuming that Internet technologies offer a panacea for the perennial problems of democracy. The 2611 [ 'p .Yftww. ei; ropa. eu. in l/c oni n i /commi^sioners/prodi/mn Her;. hi n i 27 http:/Amw.syrnpa. eti. ir;t/abc^'ovqfnniqnts/index_en.html tools and mechanisms of e-Democracy should be viewed as augmenting rather than automating, complementary to rather than competing with the tools and mechanisms of "traditional" democracy. One of the challenges will be to identify the optimal combination of traditional and virtual democratic processes. Certainly, as citizen experience and comfort with eBusiness increases, and as dimensions of the eBusiness value proposition become the norm, these new norms of empowerment, engagement, transparency, and responsiveness will create expectations in other domains. As with eBusiness, an evolutionary process will characterize the emergence of eDemocracy, in which early principles, actions, and outcomes will have significant effects on subsequent development. In the short term, and as long as geography continues to exert a strong influence on political boundaries, most of the early successes in eDemocracy will likely emerge from local, community-based, activist-driven initiatives. Bibliography Abramson, J. B., F. Christopher Arterton and Gary R. Orren, The electronic commonwealth: the impact of new media technologies on democratic politics, (New York: Basic Books) 1988. Arthur Andersen. "eGouvernement: Réflexions sur l'utilisation des nouvelles technologies de l'information et de la communication par les collectivités publiques", Arthur Anderson Business Consulting Report, 2000. available at: http://www.arthurandersen.com/ resource2.nsf/vAttachlU/AA C H ego v_ FS wi tze r I a n d/ $File/eGouvernement%20octobre%202000.pdf. accessed 13 August 2001. Barber, L, "From the heart of Europe," Europe, Iss. 338; pg. 14-17. Bellamy C., And Taylor J.A., Governing In The Information Age. (Buckingham. UK: Open University Press) 1998. Brants, K.T J. Hermes, and L. van Zoonen (Eds), The media in question: popular cultures and public interests, (London: Sage), 1998. ChadwickA,, and C, May, "Interaction between states and citizens in the age of the Internet: 'e-government' in the United States, Britain, and the European Union," Presented at the 29th Joint Sessions of the European Consortium for Political Research Workshops, Grenoble, France, 6 11 April 2001 available online athttp:// www.essex.ac.uk/ccpr/jointsessions/grenoble/papers/ ws3/chadwick may.pdf 2001 - Étevilka 4 ■ letnik IX i^™i.™HNFORMATIKA QOQ John G. Mooney antf Ornear Farrell: Lxploririg ttic Value Proposition of eDemocracy: insights from eBusiness Chryssochoou, D. N., Democracy in the European Union, (New York : Tauris Academic Studies, 1998. Citu 2000b: Central ft Unit: Information Age Government - Benchmarking Electronic Service Delivery, Report , Central It Unit, London 2000. Online: http://www.citU.gOV.Uk/ benchmarking/intl-rep.pdf Dahl R.t Democracy And Its Critic s. New Haven And London: Yale University Press, 1989. Democracies Online Newswire http://www.e-democracy.org/do/ European Commission 1997, "Building the European Information Society for us all. Final policy report of the high level expert group," April 1997 available online at http://europa.eu.int/ ISP0/docs/topics/docs/hlgefinalen97.rli European Commission 1999, eEurope: An Information Society for All, available online at http://europa.eu.int/information_society/ eeurope/news library/pdf files/english.pdf Ezgov.com hup://www.ezgov.conVportal/index,jsp Fischer, J., Speech by the President of the Council of the European Union In the European Parliament, in Strasbourg, on 12 January 1999 (available at http:// www.germany-info.org/EU/eu-st_01 12 99.htm Fox, C, J. and H.T. Miller, Postmodern public administration: toward discourse, (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications), 1995. Hague, B. and Loader B. Eds. (1999). Digital Democracy: Discourse And Decision-Making In The Information Age.. (London: Routledge), 1999. Held D.( Models of Democracy, (Cambridge: Polity Press), 1996. Hirst P and S. Khilant. Reinventing Democracy, (Cambridge, MA.: Blackwell Publishers), 1996, Hirst, P., "Democracy and governance" in Pierre J. (ed). Debating Governance. Authority, Steering and Democracy. (Oxford: Oxford University Press}, 2000, pp. 13-36. Hubert A. And Caremier B. (2000) Democracy And The Information Society In Europe. Luxembourg: European Communities. Kahin B. and C. Nesson (Eds), Borders in cyberspace: information policy and the global information infrastructure, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1997. Loader Brian. Ed. (1997) The Governance Of Cyberspace: Politics, Technology And Global Restructuring. London: Routledge. Lord, C., Democracy in the European Union (Sheffield, England : Sheffield Academic Press, 1998. Macpherson, C. B., Democratic theory: essays in retrieval, (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 1973. Margolts, M.. D. Resnick, D., and J. Wolfe, "Party Competition on the Internet in the United States and Britain," Press/Politics, 4 (1999), 4, pp. 22-47. Mooney, John, "The eBusiness Vaiue Proposition: Imperative for "Traditional" Firms," Working Paper 2001. PoliUcsonline http://www.politicsonline.com/ Sackman, H., and N. Nie, The Information Utility and Social Change , (New York: AFIPS Press), 1970. Stoker, G., W. L. Miller, and M. Dickson, Models of local governance : public, opinion and political theory in Britain, New York : Pa I grave, 2000, Tapscott, D., The digital economy: promise and peril in the age of networked intelligence, (New York : McGraw-Hill) 1996. Toffler, A., The Third Wave, New York: Morrow, 1980. Van de Donk, W.B.H.J, I.Th.M. Snellen, and RW. Tops (Eds), Orwell in Athens : a perspective on informatization and democracy, (Oxford : IOS Press), 1995. Vigoda, E., "Are you being served? The responsiveness of public administration to citizens' demands: An empirical examination in Israel," Public Administration, 78 (2000), 1: 165-191. Wilhelm Anthony (2000) Democracy In The Digital Age, London: Routledge. * John Mooney is currently a Visiting Associate Professor of Information Systems at the Graduate School of Management, and a Visiting Scholar at the Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine, USA He is a Senior Lecturer in Management Information Systems and eBusiness at the S mur fit and Quinn Schools of Business, University College Dublin, Ireland. Professor Mooney's research interests include eBusiness strategy and processes, the management of Information Technology resources, and IT Outsourcing. The original concept of this paper was first presented at the 14th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference panel session on "eDemocracy: A Panacea or Pandora's Box. "June26, 2001. ♦ timear F arret! is a graduate of Trinity College Dublin and is currently reading for an MA in European Studies from the Dublin turo pean Institute (UCD). Her research interests include the impact of information and communication technologies on democracy and on public administration. Her Masters' thesis examines e-government as an emerging force in european governance, including design, delivery and decision-making capabilities. Much of the background material for this article is drawn from this thesis. ♦ 22Q upomt»mlNFORMATIKA 2001 slevilka4 - Ifiinik IX