Panos & chris overview of e petitioning in english local authorities

Where are we? An overview of ePetitioning tools in English local authorities SALAR Study Visit – 16/03/2011 Panos Panagiotopoulos & Christopher Moody

Coming up …
Motivation
Study methodology and results
Further reflections and observations
Slide

Motivation
EPetitioning the most popular form of online participation in the UK, according to the Oxford Internet Survey.
Institutional “confusion” and political uncertainty.
No systematic evaluation of the ePetitioning duty impact for LAs.
The first opportunity to assess a nation-wide eParticipation policy at such scale.
Slide

What we did - methodology
Designed a framework of 20 features that describe the implementation of LA ePetitioning websites.
Validated the framework with the help of four experts (including Fraser) + pilot run with 33 LAs.
Added 6 additional variables representing other common eParticipation activities on LA websites.
Applied this framework on the 353 English LAs websites using a web content analysis methodology. (6 coders were involved)
Statistically analysed 348 usable results including background institutional factors such as size, population, and political orientation (on going).
Slide

What we found - overview
Indication of minimum levels of compliance, promotion and innovation, yet 279 out of 353 ePetitioning websites span all over England now .
Little actual use of ePetitions – some systems really well hidden under council websites.
Adopters and non-adopters do not perform systematically better in other eParticipation activities, although the more effort on ePetitions the better they score in other eParticipation activities.
Slide

If implemented, how well hidden? Slide

Providers market share
In-house or no information: 19.1% (53)
Moderngov: 29.5% (82)
MySociety: 12.9% (36)
Public-i: 12.6% (35)
Web-Lab: 7.6% (21)
Limehouse: 2.2% (6)
Other (e.g. Firmstep): 16.2% (45)
Slide

Support characteristics
Forum or space to discuss petitions: 2.5% (7)
Agree/Disagree feature: 2.5% (7)
System in use before December 2010: 10.1% (28)
Links to useful information (e.g. Council material): 10.1% (28)
Notification services for new petitions (e.g. RSS feed, mailing lists): 33.7% (94)
Contact details within ePetitions: 40.1% (112)
Evidence of encouraged feedback: 4.7% (13)
Slide

How many petitions?
No petitions open at all: 69.2% (193)
1-5 open petitions: 27.3% (76)
More than 5 - up to 15 open petitions: 3.7% (10)
Not a single petition completed yet: 84.2% (235)
Calculating average numbers of signatures not useful at this stage.
Slide

(e)Petitioning process
Evidence of paper petitions archived online: 19.8% (55)
Accepting ePetitions from other online sources: 3.2% (9)
Different threshold for online and paper petitions: 4.3% (12)
Explicit privacy statement: 30.1% (84)
Instructions and assistance measured on a 0-3 scale:
Scored 0 or 1: 62.6% (174)
Scored 2 or 3: 37.4% (104)
Thresholds for ordinary petitions:
No threshold: 64.4% (179)
1-50 signatures: 28.8% (80)
More than 50 up to 500: 6.8% (19)
Slide

Other eParticipation activities
Webcasting council meetings: 16.6% (57)
Official use of social media: 67.4% (232)
Online forums or other community engagement websites: 9.3% (32)
Online participation in council consultations: 42.7% (147)
Online budget feedback: 16.6% (57)
Online surveys: 51.6% (178)
Slide

Observations and limitations
Is there actually a quality response process? What do thresholds really imply?
No information on whether the initiative was promoted or not locally.
No information over traditional paper process.
What do citizens actually expect or are willing to support?
Although framework mostly objective, data collection mistakes might have occurred.
Slide

Summary and further discussion
279 LA petitioning websites, but have yet to become embedded in local institutions.
Emerging question: so, what is the impact of ePetitioning?
What should we do? Also with government and Parliament petitions and ePetitions.
Enacting eParticipation: bureaucratically controlled or engagement from the grassroots? EPetitioning popular because combines both, but as an advocacy form of participation requires a fair and politically neutral process.
Slide

CISR PhD workshop - 15/02/2011 Slide Thank you very much… Panagiotis . Panagiotopoulos @ brunel . ac . uk or [email_address] We gratefully acknowledge Fraser Henderson for funding this study and further offering his ideas. Many thanks also to Dr T. Elliman, as well as our coders: Harry Bath-Barranco, Arthur Faulkner, Hubert Andrzejczyk and George Xydopoulos.

http://davepress.net	49
http://particitech.com	17

Panos & chris overview of e petitioning in english local authorities

by frazzy123 on Mar 24, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 66

Statistics

Panos & chris overview of e petitioning in english local authorities — Presentation Transcript