• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
 

PhD Defense - Pedro Prieto-Martín - Dpt. Computer Science (UAH)

on

  • 1,428 views

Presentation used by Pedro Prieto-Martín, the founding president of the association, for the defense of his Doctoral Thesis ("Creating the 'symbiotic city': A proposal for the interdisciplinary ...

Presentation used by Pedro Prieto-Martín, the founding president of the association, for the defense of his Doctoral Thesis ("Creating the 'symbiotic city': A proposal for the interdisciplinary co-design and co-creation of Civic Software Systems"), 29th of October 2012 in the University of Alcalá.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,428
Views on SlideShare
473
Embed Views
955

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

5 Embeds 955

http://rumboalorien.kyopol.net 722
http://roadtolorien.kyopol.net 216
http://blog.kyopol.net 10
http://feeds.feedburner.com 6
http://rumboalorien.kyopol.net&_=1352459818109 HTTP 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    PhD Defense - Pedro Prieto-Martín - Dpt. Computer Science (UAH) PhD Defense - Pedro Prieto-Martín - Dpt. Computer Science (UAH) Presentation Transcript

    • Creating the ‘Symbiotic city’ A proposal for the interdisciplinary co-design and co-creation of Civic Software Systems PhD Candidate: Director & Co-Director: Pedro Prieto Martín Luis de Marcos Ortega Computer Science Dept, UAH Ass. Lect., Computer Science Dept., UAH José Javier Martínez Herraiz Senior Lect. Computer Science Dept., UAHCommittee: Tomás R. Villasante (Chair) Emer. Prof., Dept. of Sociology II, Universidad Complutense de Madrid Carmen Pagés Arévalo (Secretary) Assoc. Lect., Computer Science Dept., Universidad de Alcalá Fernando Flores Assoc. Lect., Dept. of Art and Cultural Sciences, Lunds Universitet (SE) Ángel Badillo Matos Senior Lect., Dept. of Sociology and Communication, Universidad de Salamanca Miguel Angel Patricio Guisado Senior Lect., Computer Science and Engineering Dept., Universidad Carlos III
    • Outline1. Introduction2. Review & Synthesis of literatures3. Methodology & Research Itinerary4. Findings & Discussion5. Conclusions Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 1
    • IntroductionContext (Electronic) Participation or “(e)Participation”: “Everything that enables, broadens or deepens people’s capacity to influence the decisions and get involved in the actions that affect their lives ” (including the use of ICT)” (Prieto-Martin 2012) “Citizen participation is citizen power” “Participation without redistribution of power is an empty process […] [that] allows the power-holders to claim that all sides were considered, but makes it possible for only some of those sides to benefit. It maintains the status quo.” Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 2
    • Introduction Democratic Context Institutions of Citizens(e)Participation Technology Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 3
    • IntroductionProblem Statement (Wide) The application of ICT in the political process has been oriented to digitize and enhance existing processes and practices rather than to transform the relations of power and influence behind such practices. Professional politicians have "resisted actively to limit the potential revolutionary and disruptive capacity of ICTs.” (Zittel 2005, Schmitter 2011)Problem Statement (Concrete) a. Civic Networking Platforms are socio-technical software systems that explicitly aim to affect complex social realities and to influence the intricate workings of political and administrative machineries. b. Its design, construction and operation thus involve a series of exceptional challenges and difficulties which, in turn, demand specific and innovative approaches. Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 4
    • IntroductionObjective & Research Questions Trans-disciplinarily analyze the field of municipal Civic Engagement, with the aim to devise a methodology for the collaborative design and construction of Civic Software Systems which are adapted to the interests, needs and skills of social and political actors involved in local governance. What for? Theories Developed Why? EU? countriesWhat? Who? Practice + How? Where? Context Impoverished LA? When? countries Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 5
    • Outline1. Introduction2. Review & Synthesis of literatures3. Methodology & Research Itinerary4. Findings & Discussion5. Conclusions Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 6
    • Review of literaturesDisciplines Participation Informatics involved Development Studies Web PoliticalIssues: (e)Participation Science Community Science Informatics … • Silos & Public CSCW Interdisciplinary Policy … failures Social Movements • Focus: Participatory Design • Power: HCI … Software Development Models ? Software Engineering Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 7
    • Review of literatures AcademiaDisciplines involvedIssues: Practitioners • Silos & Interdisciplinary failures • Focus: • Power: • Trans-disciplinary Context failures Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 8
    • Review of literatures TübingenResearcher Profile Sololá (GT) Alcalá / Madrid Barcelona Education: 93-98 Universidad Complutense MSc. Computer Science 96-00: Universidad de Alcalá Bach. Business Admin. (Hons) Fortaleza (BR) 00-02: Univ. Autónoma de Madrid ~ 1st Degree Bach. Philosophy 02-04: Univ. Oberta de Catalunya Master Sociology of Information Society Work experience: 00-06: Hewlett-Packard (DE) Technical Lead – Develop. team 02-03: Universität Tübingen (DE) 05: Universidade Estadual do Ceará (BR) 06-12: Asoc. Ciudades Kyosei 07: Deutscher Entwicklungdienst (DE) 05: Prefeitura Fortaleza (BR) 11: Uniwersytet Jagielloński (PL) 09-10: Mun. Sololá (GT) 08-10: NGO Lagun Artean Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 9
    • Review of literatures1. Participation a. Models, concepts, theories ? Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH (Karsten 2011, Brodie et al. 2009, Cornwall 2008) 10
    • Review of literatures1. Participation a. Models, concepts, theories  Huge variety, with distinct value levels… (Karsten 2011, Cornwall 2008, Brodie et al. 2009) Tetralemma  …mostly speculative, descriptive, non-falsifiable Flowgram b. Methods and Tools  A lot of variety and confusion too, hardly manageable… (Rowe & Frewer 2005, participedia.net)  …including valuable insights Sociogram (eg: Ganuza et al. 2010, CIMAS 2009) c. Cases, Good practices and Evaluation  Haystacks of cases with few needles inside (oidp.net, participatedb.com)  Recently, more critical, systematic and empirical analysis (eg: Alarcón Pérez et al. 2011, Fonte et al. 2011, Falck & Paño Yáñez 2011, Sintomer & Ganuza 2011, Smith & Ryan 2011, Gaventa & Barret 2010, Lee 2011; Cornwall et al. 2008; Wilson & Leach 2011; Brodie et al. 2011) Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 11
    • Review of literatures2. Software Design and Engineering a. Development models, techniques, tools: (Boehm 1986, Dennis et al. 2005)  Objectives  Prototypes  Validation  Iterative process Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 12
    • Review of literatures2. Software Design and Engineeringb. Empirical methods for software engineering research: (Myers & Avison 2002; Easterbrook et al. 2007; Cruz Neto 2008) • Controlled experiments • Survey research • Case studies • Ethnographies (e)Participation • Action research • Grounded Theory c. People-Centered Design: (Sanders et al. 2010) Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 13
    • Review of literatures3. Informatics a. Community Informatics: (Wenger et al. 2009, De Cindio et al. 2007, 2012, Brandtzæg et al. 2010, People 2012) • From User-centric to Community- centric design • Communities as lead users • Digital habitats • Tools for communities • Methods for Software development Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 14
    • Review of literatures3. Informatics b. eDemocracy & (e)Participation – The lost decade (Sæbø et al. 2008, Kubicek 2010, Medaglia 2012)Leading scholars acknowledge that most of the basic issues of the field are still not solved: inter-disciplinarity is not working, research designs tend to be flawed, socio-technical issues haven’t beensuccessfully addressed, institutional and political resistance toward participation has not been targeted,etc. (Macintosh, Coleman et al. 2012)“The research field of eParticipation suffers from lack of comprehensive theoretical contributions,insufficient depth, and inconsistency in definitions of central concepts […] “Central problems witheParticipation research concern immaturity of the field, topical gaps, and biased assumptions […] Thecoupling of Technology – Stakeholders –(Participatory) Environments is weak” (Susha & Grönlund 2012)Research has been rather detached from its object of study as well as disconnected from the perceptionsof research participants, and has disregarded the evaluation of the outcomes and impacts of onlineengagement (Coleman & Moss 2012)No real breakthrough or even any significant research milestone can be reported for the field, asthe same questions that were open ten years ago remain unanswered nowadays. (Prieto Martín etal. 2012) In a moment of self-questioning, new perspectives are emerging (Karlsson 2012; Astrom & Grönlund 2011, Chadwick 2011; Bannister & Connolly 2012, Liston et al. 2012, Simon 2011, Price 2011; van der Merwe & Meehan 2011, 2012) Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 15
    • Outline1. Introduction2. Review & Synthesis of literatures3. Methodology & Research Itinerary4. Findings & Discussion5. Conclusions Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 16
    • Methodology & Research ItineraryStarting Point“The design of Digital Democracy Systems must start with an exhaustive and critic analysis of previous experiences and proposals, and incorporate multi-disciplinary methodologies (tecnological, socio-political and law) both for determining the requisites and determining factors and for the evaluation of the system” (Carracedo Gallardo et al. 2003) Determining requistes for eDemocracy Systems (Carracedo Gallardo 2004) Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 17
    • Methodology & Research ItineraryTransdisciplinary co-design of civic software [Feedback cycles]Previous Preliminary αlphas cycleKnowledge Objective Articulated objectives, collaborators visions and intuitionsTheoretic internal cycleAnalysis cycle Sociopolitical Participatory - Refined research Design objectives Collaborative - Research Evaluation Socio-technical questions research Minimum viable product Technical research αlpha Construction Pilot Projects βeta Doctoral Thesis Permanent βeta Sustaining, scaling & improvement Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 18
    • Methodology & Research ItineraryExplorative research methods for systems’ design Grounded Theory • Case studies (e)Participation • Ethnographies • Action research • Grounded Theory (Strauss y Corbin 1998; Urquhart 2010, 2012) (Davison et al 2004) Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 19
    • Research ItineraryTimeline BR 1 2 3 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1 Civic Participation and ICTs at the municipal level: Consensus 1 System case in Catalonia [es] Virtual Environments for citizen participation: 2 principal bases for design 3 Putting eParticipation research at the service of Civil Society 3 1 2 3Participation X BR(e)Participation X X XSystem Design XCritical Appr. X Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 20
    • Research ItineraryTimeline BR GT 1 2 3 4 5 6 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 4 5 6 4 The withered democracy [es] 5 Citizen Participation of the 20 th Century Citizen [es] 6 The odyssey of Participatory Budgeting in Brazil [es] GT 1 2 3 4 5 6Participation X X X X(e)Participation X X XSystem Design XCritical Appr. X X X X Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 21
    • Research ItineraryTimeline BR GT ES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 7 7 The e-(R)evolution will not be funded 8 8 Citizen Participation of the 21 st Century 9 Collaborative construction of Civic Software Systems [es] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 X ESParticipation X X X X(e)Participation X X X X X XSystem Design X XCritical Appr. X X X X X X X Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 22
    • Outline1. Introduction2. Review & Synthesis of literatures3. Methodology & Research Itinerary4. Findings & Discussion5. Conclusions Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 23
    • Findings & Discussion 1. On Traditional Participation a. Critical attitude toward the research subject… Ciudadanía Ciudadanía Ciudadanos CiudadanosPoder empresarial Poder empresarial Corporaciones Corporaciones Soc. civil organizada Soc. civil organizada Actores políticos Actores políticos Políticos Políticos Medios de Medios decomunicación masiva comunicación masiva Partidos políticos Partidos políticos Administración Administración Poderes estatales pública Poderes estatales pública Ejecutivo Fuerzas de Ejecutivo Fuerzas de seguridad seguridad Judicatura Judicatura Legislativo LegislativoActores internacionales Actores internacionales Grupos disidentes Grupos disidentes EU, OMC, BM, FMI EU, OMC, BM, FMI Crimen organizado Crimen organizadoOtros estados Otros estados Grupos de resistencia armada Grupos de resistencia armada Mercados financieros Mercados financieros Ideal of influence in Reality of influence in liberal democracies liberal democracies Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 24
    • Findings & Discussion1. On Traditional Participation a. …situated within the “big context”… Institutional view of a social system Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 25
    • Findings & Discussion1. On Traditional Participation a. …that dares to speak clear and honestlyVicious Cycle of Participation Intrinsic ProblemsIncompatibilities  Complex - Political  Expensive Participation = - Legal  Non-representative - Cultural  Non-inclusive  Less informed 1/5 · Deliberation + - Socioeconomic  Conflict prone - Organizational  Non-deliberative 1/4 · Manipulation +  Difficult to scale  ... Rest · Politics as usual (ie: a continuous struggle for power and (un)accountability) Extrinsic Problems  Arbitrary Motivation =  Manipulability f (effort, usefulness)  Risk of capture  Irrelevant subjects EU eParticipation =  Non-effective  Not self-sustainable  Inefficient  Civic exhaustion  ...  Administrative Monopoly of participation Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 26
    • Findings & Discussion1. On Traditional Participation b. Clarified basic notions about participation… Administrative Participation associative Organic Participation Autonomous E.g.: representative democracy, community council, neighborhood assembly, health Participation council, citizen panels, etc. E.g.: demonstrations, strikes, informal decisive advisory oversight negotiations, lobbying, pressure on representatives and institutions, civil Special disobedience, proposals to political Participatory Processes institutions, etc. personal E.g.: development plans, participatory budget, agenda 21, etc. collaborative belligerent Procedural Participation E.g.: electoral participation, petitions, referendum, public hearings, citizen initiative, etc. occasional regular Municipal Citizen Participation forms Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 27
    • Findings & Discussion1. On Traditional Participation b. …which are articulated with existing knowledge… Administrative Participation Forms (Brugué et al 2003) Participatory Processes: phases and criteria Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH (Font & Blanco 2006, Parés et al 2007) 28
    • Findings & Discussion1. On Traditional Participation b. …and sometimes also challenge it!! Participatory Budgeting Fortaleza (BR) 2005 Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 29
    • Findings & Discussion2. On (e)Participation a. Analysis that helps to understand the limitations of previous research (Macintosh y Whyte 2002) A framework to evaluate outcomes of e-Consultations from three criteria: political, technical and social. ! (Macintosh et al. 2005) Criteria and sources for e-democracy evaluation (Macintosh y Whyte 2008) Layered eParticipation evaluation perspectives (Lippa et al. 2008) The layered model of eParticipation ? Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 30
    • Findings & Discussion2. On (e)Participation b. Reflections that shed light on what gets changed by ICT Vicious Cycle of Participation “Long Tail” models CognitiveRelationship between Participation & (e)Participation Surplus Peer-to-peer recognition Reduction in power and knowledge assimetries Reduction cost of collective action Motivation = f (effort, usefulness) Change in expectations Value generation in different kinds of networks Virtuous Circle of Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH (e)Participation 31
    • Findings & Discussion2. On (e)Participation c. Models that help to understand current and imminent developments… Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 32
    • Findings & Discussion 2. On (e)Participation c. …and to start charting 21st Century citizen participation Matrix of Citizen Implication KEY:Ladder of Citizen (2010) Participation (1969) Intensity of Collaboration Institutiona- Delegated Control lization Level Citizen Control Collaborative Delegated power Deliberativity Delegated power Participation Collaboration Partnership pre- Transparency Participation Placation Advisement Consultation Consultative Participation Consultation Information Information Therapy Non- Manipulation Organic Institutionalization Participation Manipulation Functional Institutionalization Institutionalized Legitimate coercion Continuous Periodic Less Institutionalized Conflict Episodic Illegal Duress Sporadic Non Institutionalized 33
    • Findings & Discussion3. On eParticipation – System’s Designa. A model for the transdisciplinary co-design of civic software… 34
    • Findings & Discussion3. On eParticipation – System’s Designa. … which identifies dimension to be taken into account… Spy-Glass Model Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 35
    • Findings & Discussion3. On eParticipation – System’s Design a. … provides guidance on how to proceed…Spy-Glass Model Applied Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 36
    • Findings & Discussion3. On eParticipation – System’s Designa. …and who to work with Core Team to do ‘what’ Pioneers Group Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Expansion Pilot Projects Phase I Phase II Phase III Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 37
    • Outline1. Introduction2. Review & Synthesis of literatures3. Methodology & Research Itinerary4. Findings & Discussion5. Conclusions & Future Work Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 38
    • Conclusions & Future WorkTake-aways• ICT for Governance field needs to be analysed with a trans-disciplinary, holistic and critical perspective.• Projects’ designs and their evaluation strategies need to be closely linked with their context of application. • To successfully develop the field research needs to be at the service of societal needs, listening to the real needs from civic organizations and democratic institutions, instead of imposing them the researchers’ agenda.• Civic Networking Systems (CNS) need to be created using Agile, participatory, iterative and user-centric development models. • We have sketched a methodology that enables a bottom-up multi-stakeholder collaboration and offers a pragmatic guidance for researchers, social actors and governmental institutions to co-design and co-construct sustainable Civic Networking Systems. Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 39
    • Conclusions & Future WorkLimitations• The research had a strong exploratory character. • Wide trans-disciplinary area / limited depth. • Its reliability and applicability are to be cautiously appraised.• The ‘ICT for Governance’ field constitues a paradigm of a “moving research target” within Web Science. • Some conclusions could get obsolete quickly, as a result of technological and/or social developments.• The methodological approach, which has mixed tools and disciplines, is especially prone to researcher bias. • We tried to triangulate and apply a strong self-criticism, but this just slightly mitigates the risk of self-deceiving. Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 40
    • Conclusions & Future WorkFuture Work PREAMBLE MINI-RESEARCH CO-CREATION [Feedback cycles]Previous Preliminary αlphas cycleKnowledge Objective Articulated objectives, collaborators visions and intuitionsTheoretic internal cycleAnalysis cycle Sociopolitical Participatory - Refined research Design objectives Collaborative - Research Evaluation Socio-technical questions research Minimum viable product Technical research αlpha Construction Pilot Projects ---> Doctoral Thesis βeta Permanent βeta Sustaining, scaling & improvement 41
    • Conclusions & Future WorkFuture Work Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 42
    • Thanks for your attentionThanks to my PhD advisors, Dr. Luis de Marcos Ortega and Dr. José Javier Martínez, fortheir help, advice and support along the way. Thanks also to Jose David Carracedo Verdeand Salvador Martí i Puig for their guidance in the early stages of the doctoral research.Thanks also to the institutions and people from the Ceará State University (Brazil) and theJagiellonian University (Poland), which have kindly offered their facilities and supportduring my stays abroad. I specially appreciate the help provided by Professors FranciscoHoracio da Silva Frota and Alberto Teixeira from the Mestrado Acadêmico em PolíticasPúblicas e Sociedade of the UECE, and by Professor Marek Skomorowski from theInstitute of Computer Science of the Jagiellonian University.Many, many thanks to all friends who reviewed and/or commented, through all theseyears, on any of the different texts and papers that make up this dissertation. And thanksalso to Don Marcelino, who struggled so hard to teach me, with so many of his students,the crucial difference between indigenous police and autogenous welding.Finally I want to express my eternal gratitude to all participants in the field researchdeveloped at Fortaleza (Brazil) and Sololá (Guatemala) –especially to my buddiesfrom Lagun Artean, Sotz’il Jay and the Coordenadoria do Orçamento Participativo–.It was their determination, humanity and courage what motivated me to perseverein the most difficult moments.Pedro Prieto-Martín, PhD Defense, UAH 43
    • References – Participation and Civic Engagement (2)Alarcón Pérez, P., Font Fàbregas, J., & Sesma Carlos, M. D. (2011). Local Participation Mechanisms: Southern Europe Regions in Comparative Perspective. Presentado en European Consortium for Political Research, Reykjavik.Allegretti, G., García Leiva, P., & Paño Yáñez, P. (2011). Viajando por los presupuestos participativos: buenas prácticas, obstáculos y aprendizajes. Diputación de Málaga. Recuperado a partir de http://www.redcimas.org/archivos/biblioteca/prepar/viajando_por_los_presupuestosparticipativos.pdfArnstein, S. R. (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. American Institute of Planners Journal, 35(4), 216–224.Blanco, I., & Ballester, M. (2011). ¿Participar para transformar? La experiencia de los Presupuestos Participativos en la provincia de Barcelona. Gestión y Análisis de Políticas Públicas, 5, 117–144.Brodie, E., Cowling, E., & Nissen, N. (2009). Understanding participation: a literature review. NCVO & Involve.Brodie, E., Hughes, T., Jochum, V., Miller, S., Ockenden, N., & Warburton, D. (2011). Pathways through participation: What creates and sustains active citizenship? NCVO & Involve.Brugué, Q., Font, J., et al. (2003) "Participación y democracia: asociaciones y poder local", en Movimientos sociales: cambios social y participación, Madrid: UNED.CIMAS. (2009). Metodologías participativas. Manual. Madrid: Observatorio Internacional de Ciudadanía y Medio Ambiente Sostenible (CIMAS).Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘Participation’: models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269– 283.Cornwall, A., Romano, J., et al. (2008). Brazilian Experiences of Participation and Citizenship: A Critical Look, Discussion Paper. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.Falck, A., & Paño Yáñez, P. (Eds.). (2011). Democracia Participativa y Presupuestos Participativos: Acercamiento y Profundización sobre el debate actual. Málaga: CEDMA.Font, J., Corrochano, D. H., Fontcuberta, P., Galais, C., Ganuza, E., & Navarro, C. (2011). Democracia local en Andalucía. Experiencias participativas en los municipios andaluces. Sevilla: Centro de Estudios Andaluces.Font, J., Blanco, I. (2006) “Polis, la ciudad participativa. Participar en los municipios: ¿quién, cómo y por qué?”, Barcelona: Centre per a la ParticipacióGanuza, E., Olivari, L., Paño, P., Buitrago, L., & Lorenzana, C. (2010). La democracia en acción. Una visión desde las metodologías participativas. Antígona.Gaventa, J., & Barret, G. (2010). So What Difference Does it Make? Mapping the Outcomes of Citizen Engagement. Institute of Development Studies.Karsten, A. (2011). Participation Models. A chase through the maze. Berlin: Nonformality - Demokratie&Dialog. 44
    • References – Participation and Civic Engagement (2)Lee, C. W. (2011). Five assumptions academics make about Public Deliberation, and why they deserve rethinking. Journal of Public Deliberation, 7(1).Parés, M., Pomeroy, M., et al. (2007) “Guía práctica de evaluación de procesos participativos”, Barcelona: Observatorio Internacional de la Democracia Participativa.Prieto Martín, P. (2010). Las alas de Leo. La participación ciudadana del siglo XX, Bubok. ISBN: 978-84-614-9140-7.Prieto-Martín, P. (2012). Creating the ‘Symbiotic City’: A proposal for the interdisciplinary co-design and co-creation of Civic Software Systems, Doctoral Thesis, Computer Science Department, University of Alcalá (ES).Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2005). A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30(2), 251-290.Schmitter, P. C. (2011). Information and communication technology: yet another revolution in «real-existing democracy»? Buenos Aires: Universidad de San Andrés.Sintomer, Y., & Ganuza, E. (2011). Democracia participativa y modernización de los servicios públicos: Investigación sobre las experiencias de presupuesto participativo en Europa. TNI.Smith, G., & Ryan, M. (2011). Towards a Comparative Analysis of Democratic Innovations: Lessons from an fs-QCA of Participatory Budgeting. Presentado en European Consortium for Political Research, Reykjavik.Wilson, R., & Leach, M. (2011). Civic Limits: How much more involved can people get? ResPublica.Zittel, T. (2005). What can the Vep model do for democracy? ... in answer to Alexander Trechsel. En Council of Europe (Ed.), Reflections on the future of democracy in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. 45
    • References – (e)Participation and Informatics (1)Astrom, J., & Grönlund, Å. (2011). Online consultations in local government: What works, when and how. En S. Coleman & P. M. Shane (Eds.), Connecting democracy: Online consultation and the flow of political communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2012). Surfeit of Technological Exuberance? The questionable impact of technology on e- Participation. Presentado en Transforming Government Workshop 2012, London.Brandtzæg, P. B., Følstad, A., Obrist, M., Geerts, D., & Berg, R. (2010). Innovation in Online Communities–Towards Community-Centric Design, 40, 50-57.Carracedo Gallardo, J. (2004). Seguridad en redes telemáticas. México: McGraw-Hill.Carracedo Gallardo, J., Gómez Oliva, A., & Carracedo Verde, J. D. (2003). Sistema VOTESCRIPT: Una propuesta innovadora desarrollada para resolver los problemas clásicos de la votación electrónica. Congreso Iberoamericano de Seguridad Informática (CIBSI’03). México D.F.Chadwick, A. (2011). Explaining the Failure of an Online Citizen Engagement Initiative: The Role of Internal Institutional Variables. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 8(1), 21–40.Charalabidis, Y., Koussouris, S. (2012), Empowering Open and Collaborative Governance: Technologies and Methods for On- line Citizen Engagement in Public Policy Making, Heidelberg: Springer.Coleman, S., & Moss, G. (2012). Under Construction: The Field of Online Deliberation Research. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(1), 1–15.De Cindio, F. (2012). Guidelines for Designing Deliberative Digital Habitats: Learning from e-Participation for Open Data Initiatives. Journal of Community Informatics, 8(2).De Cindio, F., Ripamonti, L. A., & Peraboni, C. (2007). Community Networks as lead users in online public services design. The Journal of Community Informatics, 3(1).Karlsson, M. (2012). Participatory initiatives and political representation: The case of local councillors in Sweden. Local Government Studie, 38(1).Kubicek, H. (2010). The Potential of E-Participation in Urban Planning: A European Perspective. En C. N. Silva (Ed.), Handbook of Research on E-Planning (pp. 168–194). IGI Global.Liston, V., Harris, C., Lee, D., Davies, B., & O’Toole, M. (2012). Enabling discourse representation and meta-consensus in online deliberation using Internet technologies. Presentado en Conference of the Political Studies Association, London.Lippa, B., Aichholzer, G., Allhutter, D., Freschi, A. C., Macintosh, A., Moss, G., & Westholm, H. (2008). D13.3 DEMO-Net Booklet: eParticipation Evaluation and Impact. DEMO-Net.Macintosh, A., & Whyte, A. (2002). Analysis and Evaluation of E-Consultations. e-Service Journal, 2(1):9-34. 46
    • References – (e)Participation and Informatics (2)Macintosh, A., Whyte, A., & Renton, A. (2005). eDemocracy from the Top Down: An Evaluation of e-Democracy Activities Initiated by Councils and Government. Local eDemocracy National Project.Macintosh, A., & Whyte, A. (2008). Towards an evaluation framework for eParticipation. Transforming Government: People, Process & Policy, 2(1), 16-30.Macintosh, A., Coleman, S., & Schneeberger, A. (2009). eParticipation: The Research Gaps. En A. Macintosh & E. Tambouris (Eds.), LNCS 5694. Proceedings of ePart 2009 (pp. 1-11). Linz: Springer.Medaglia, R. (2012). eParticipation research: Moving characterization forward (2006–2011). Government Information Quarterly, 29(3).PEOPLE. (2012). Concept and Pilots Description for the Call of Cooperation. PEOPLE Consortium.Price, V. (2011). Playing Politics: The Experience of E-Participation. En S. Coleman & P. M. Shane (Eds.), Connecting Democracy: Online Consultation and the Flow of Political Communication. MIT Press.Prieto-Martín, P., de Marcos, L., & Martínez, J. J. (2012). The e-(R)evolution will not be funded. An interdisciplinary and critical analysis of European eParticipation developments and troubles. European Journal of ePractice, 15, 62–89.Sæbø, Ø., Rose, J., & Flak, L. S. (2008). The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25, 400–428.Simon, J. (2011). E-Democracy and Values in Information Systems Design. En P. Mindus, A. Greppi, & M. Cuono (Eds.), Legitimacy 2.0: E-democracy and Public Opinion in the Digital Age. Frankfurt am Main: Goethe University.Susha, I., Grönlund, Å. (2012) eParticipation research: Systematizing the field. Government Information Quarterly, 29(3).van der Merwe, R., & Meehan, A. (2011). Direct Democracy Catalysed by Resident-to-Resident Online Deliberation. En E. Tambouris, A. Macintosh, & H. Bruijn (Eds.), LNCS 6847. Proceedings of ePart 2011 (pp. 169-179). Springer.van der Merwe, R., & Meehan, A. (2012). Direct Deliberative Governance Online: Consensual Problem Solving or Accommodated Pluralism? Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(1), 46–63.Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital Habitats: stewarding technology for communities. Portland: CPsquare. 47
    • References – Software Design and EngineeringBoehm, B. (1986). A spiral model of software development and enhancement, Software Engineering Notes, 11(4):14-24.Cruz Neto, G. (2008). Estudos qualitativos para elicitação de requisitos: uma abordagem que integra análise sócio-cultural e modelagem organizacional (PhD Dissertation). Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brasil, Recife.Dennis, A., Wixom, B. H., & Tegarden, D. (2005). Systems Analysis and Design with UML. John Wiley & Sons.Easterbrook, S., Singer, J., Storey, M.-A., & Damian, D. (2007). Selecting Empirical Methods for Software Engineering Research. Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering (pp. 285–311). Springer.Myers, M. W., & Avison, D. E. (Eds.). (2002). Qualitative Research in Information Systems: A Reader (1.a ed.). Sage Publications Ltd.Nuseibeh, B., & Easterbrook, S. (2000). Requirements engineering: a roadmap. Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering, ICSE ’00 (pp. 35–46). New York: ACM.Sanders, E., Brandt, E., & Binder, T. (2010). A framework for organizing the tools and techniques of participatory design. Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, PDC ’10 (pp. 195–198). New York, NY, USA: ACM.References – OtherDavison, R. M., Martinsons, M. G., and Kock, N. (2004) Principles of Canonical Action Research. Information Systems Journal 14(1), 65-86.Strauss, A. C., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage.Urquhart, C. (2012). Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research. A Practical Guide. Sage Publications.Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H., & Myers, M. D. (2010). Putting the ‘theory’ back into grounded theory: guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Information Systems Journal, 20(4), 357–381. 48