Social and political participation using digital services: An empty ritual or a genuine participation?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu12.2024.105Abstract
This article focuses on how modern digital services can involve citizens in socio-political processes. Based on a survey of residents of the Tyumen region, an assessment was made of the participation of citizens in socio-political processes, the demand for digital services by the population for the manifestation of socio-political activity, as well as the ability of these services to provide citizens with genuine political participation. The study found that only 40 % of respondents use modern services and technologies to display their socio-political activity. In the great majority of cases, the use of digital services or platforms is apolitical (solving one’s own life problems, getting information, informing the authorities). The needs of citizens related to participation in social and political processes through digital services are fully satisfied, but these services do not provide citizens with genuine participation and don’t give the opportunity to influence ongoing social and political processes. Only a few services today enable citizens to reach a high level of sociopolitical participation. Most digital services provide only symbolic political participation, but their presence improves the system of public administration and interaction between the authorities and the population. We tend to see, even in the non-political nature of digital service usage, latent political participation that can become real. The use of digital services is important for society, as they significantly expand
both the audience and the repertoire of citizens’ participation in socio-political processes; have a learning effect; contribute to increasing the openness and accountability of authorities to citizens. By properly analyzing the weaknesses of digital services and the demands of citizens for their improvement, one can make significant improvements.
Keywords:
social and political participation, digital services, level of social and political participation, engagement of citizens in political processes, вовлеченность граждан в политические процессы
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Литература
Verba S., Nie N. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Norris P. Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610073
Theocharis Ya., Van Deth J.W. The continuous expansion of citizen participation: A new taxonomy // European Political Science Review. 2018. Vol. 10, no. 1. P. 139–163. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773916000230
Van Deth Ja. W. A conceptual map of political participation // Acta Politica. 2014. Vol. 49, no. 3. P. 349–367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/ap.2014.6
Theocharis Ya., De Moor J., Van Deth J.W. Digitally networked participation and lifestyle politics as new modes of political participation // Policy & Internet. 2021. Vol. 13, no. 1. P. 30–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.231
Amnå E., Ekman J. Standby citizens: Understanding non-participation in contemporary democracies // Barrett M., Zani B. (eds). Political and Civic Engagement: Multidisciplinary perspectives. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2015. P. 96–108.
Ekman J., Amnå E. Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology // Human Affairs. 2012. Vol. 22. P. 283–300. https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-012-0024-1
Schudson M. What if civic life didn’t die? // American Prospect. 1996. Vol. 25. P. 17–20.
Schudson M. Good citizens and bad history: Today’s political ideals in historical perspective // The Communication Review. 2000. Vol. 4, no. 1. P. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420009359458
Gibson R., Cantijoch M. Conceptualizing and measuring participation in the age of the Internet: Is online political engagement really different to offline? // The Journal of Politics. 2015. Vol. 75, no. 3. P. 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613000431
Парма Р.В. Общественный активизм российских граждан в офлайн- и онлайнпространствах// Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2021. № 6. С. 145–170. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2021.6.2042
Le Blanc D., Settecasi N. E-Participation: A quick overview of recent qualitative trends // United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. URL: https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2020/wp163_2020.pdf (дата обращения: 01.12.2021).
Смирнов А.В. Цифровое общество: теоретическая модель и российская действительность // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2021. № 1. С. 129–153. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2021.1.1790
Panopoulou E., Tambouris E., Tarabanis K. Success factors in designing eParticipation initiatives // Information and Organization. 2014. Vol. 24, no. 4. P. 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2014.08.001
Royo S., Pina V., Garcia-Rayado J. Decide Madrid: A critical analysis of an award-winning e-Participation initiative // Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12, no. 4. P. 1674. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041674
Morozov E. The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. New York: Public Affairs, 2012.
George J.J., Leidner D.E. From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism // Information and Organization. 2019. Vol. 29, no. 3. P. 100249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.04.001
Володенков С.В., Федорченко С.Н. Цифровые инфраструктуры гражданско-политического активизма: актуальные вызовы, риски и ограничения // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2021. № 6. С. 97–118. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2021.6.2014
Arnstein Sh. R. A ladder of citizen participation // Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 1969. Vol. 35, no. 4. P. 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Gaber J. Building “A Ladder of Citizen Participation”: Sherry Arnstein, citizen participation, and model cities // Journal of the American Planning Association. 2019. Vol. 85, no. 3. P. 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1612267
Tambouris E., Liotas N., Tarabanis K. A framework for assessing E-participation projects and tools // 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’07). Waikoloa, 2007. P. 90. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2007.13
Кабанов Ю.А., Панфилов Г.О., Чугунов А.В. Мониторинг электронного участия в регионах России: результаты исследований 2020–2021 гг. // Государство и граждане в электронной среде. Вып. 5: труды XXIV Междунар. объедин. науч. конф. «Интернет и современное общество», IMS-2021. Санкт-Петербург, 24–26 июня 2021 г.: сб. науч. ст. СПб.: Университет ИТМО, 2021. С. 65–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.17586/2541-979X-2020-4-61-72
Беляева Г.Ф. Политическая активность женщин в России // Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления. 2008. № 1. С. 143–164.
Открытость в условиях пандемии COVID-19: дайджест Департамента международного и регионального сотрудничества СП РФ. М.: Счетная палата РФ, 2020. URL: https://Covid-19-openness.pdf (дата обращения: 01.12.2021)
References
Verba S., Nie N. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Norris P. Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610073
Theocharis Ya., Van Deth J.W. The continuous expansion of citizen participation: A new taxonomy // European Political Science Review. 2018. Vol. 10, no. 1. P. 139–163. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773916000230
Van Deth Ja. W. A conceptual map of political participation // Acta Politica. 2014. Vol. 49, no. 3. P. 349–367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/ap.2014.6
Theocharis Ya., De Moor J., Van Deth J.W. Digitally networked participation and lifestyle politics as new modes of political participation // Policy & Internet. 2021. Vol. 13, no. 1. P. 30–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.231
Amnå E., Ekman J. Standby citizens: Understanding non-participation in contemporary democracies // Barrett M., Zani B. (eds). Political and Civic Engagement: Multidisciplinary perspectives. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2015. P. 96–108.
Ekman J., Amnå E. Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology // Human Affairs. 2012. Vol. 22. P. 283–300. https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-012-0024-1
Schudson M. What if civic life didn’t die? // American Prospect. 1996. Vol. 25. P. 17–20.
Schudson M. Good citizens and bad history: Today’s political ideals in historical perspective // The Communication Review. 2000. Vol. 4, no. 1. P. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420009359458
Gibson R., Cantijoch M. Conceptualizing and measuring participation in the age of the Internet: Is online political engagement really different to offline? // The Journal of Politics. 2015. Vol. 75, no. 3. P. 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613000431
Парма Р.В. Общественный активизм российских граждан в офлайн- и онлайнпространствах// Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2021. № 6. С. 145–170. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2021.6.2042
Le Blanc D., Settecasi N. E-Participation: A quick overview of recent qualitative trends // United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. URL: https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2020/wp163_2020.pdf (дата обращения: 01.12.2021).
Смирнов А.В. Цифровое общество: теоретическая модель и российская действительность // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2021. № 1. С. 129–153. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2021.1.1790
Panopoulou E., Tambouris E., Tarabanis K. Success factors in designing eParticipation initiatives // Information and Organization. 2014. Vol. 24, no. 4. P. 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2014.08.001
Royo S., Pina V., Garcia-Rayado J. Decide Madrid: A critical analysis of an award-winning e-Participation initiative // Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12, no. 4. P. 1674. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041674
Morozov E. The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. New York: Public Affairs, 2012.
George J.J., Leidner D.E. From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism // Information and Organization. 2019. Vol. 29, no. 3. P. 100249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.04.001
Володенков С.В., Федорченко С.Н. Цифровые инфраструктуры гражданско-политического активизма: актуальные вызовы, риски и ограничения // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2021. № 6. С. 97–118. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2021.6.2014
Arnstein Sh. R. A ladder of citizen participation // Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 1969. Vol. 35, no. 4. P. 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Gaber J. Building “A Ladder of Citizen Participation”: Sherry Arnstein, citizen participation, and model cities // Journal of the American Planning Association. 2019. Vol. 85, no. 3. P. 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1612267
Tambouris E., Liotas N., Tarabanis K. A framework for assessing E-participation projects and tools // 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’07). Waikoloa, 2007. P. 90. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2007.13
Кабанов Ю.А., Панфилов Г.О., Чугунов А.В. Мониторинг электронного участия в регионах России: результаты исследований 2020–2021 гг. // Государство и граждане в электронной среде. Вып. 5: труды XXIV Междунар. объедин. науч. конф. «Интернет и современное общество», IMS-2021. Санкт-Петербург, 24–26 июня 2021 г.: сб. науч. ст. СПб.: Университет ИТМО, 2021. С. 65–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.17586/2541-979X-2020-4-61-72
Беляева Г.Ф. Политическая активность женщин в России // Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления. 2008. № 1. С. 143–164.
Открытость в условиях пандемии COVID-19: дайджест Департамента международного и регионального сотрудничества СП РФ. М.: Счетная палата РФ, 2020. URL: https://Covid-19-openness.pdf (дата обращения: 01.12.2021)
Downloads
Published
2024-08-10
How to Cite
Karagulyan, E. A., & Batyreva, M. V. (2024). Social and political participation using digital services: An empty ritual or a genuine participation?. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Sociology, 17(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu12.2024.105
Issue
Section
Society and Technologies
License
Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Sociology" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
