PPT Sha

ABSTRACT:

Automatedii informationii systemsii asii aii toolii forii publicii policyii areii sometimesii inappropriateii inii

viewii ofii policymakersii use.ii Theii policiesii forii participation,ii alsoii throughii theii NTIC,ii areii

insertedii inii aii broadii pathii ofii institutionalii innovation,ii whichii hasii gainedii momentumii withii

Contractii withii theii future.ii Aii visionii forii theii electronicii relationshipii betweenii governmentii andii

citizens,ii whereii explicitii referenceii isii madeii toii theii conceptii ofii activeii participation,ii intendedii asii

aii citizens'ii initiative.ii Localii consultationii experiencesii areii widespreadii onii urbanii planning,ii

territorialii planningii andii socialii servicesii issues.ii Also,ii inii thisii contextii tendsii toii prevailii overii theii

practiceii ofii anonymityii forii citizensii participants.ii Theii problemii ofii favouringii anii activeii roleii ofii

citizensii isii alreadyii atii theii heartii ofii theii Dutchii documentii Electronicii Civicii Consultationii whichii

emphasizesii theii functionii ofii publicii discussionii andii theii proceduralii characterii ofii theii

participationii ofii citizens,ii ratherii thanii theii quantitativeii detectionii ofii preferencesii disconnectedii

fromii adequateii andii extensiveii interventionsii toii encourageii publicii discussion.ii Aii furtherii

initiativeii consistsii ofii theii launchii ofii theii XPINii observatoryii onii initiativesii toii promoteii theii

citizenii participationii inii decision-makingii processesii throughii NTICs.ii (Hansardii Societyii

(2001)).

INTRODUCTION:

Theii implementationii ofii theii secondii phaseii ofii theii Nationalii Planii forii e-government,ii aii nationalii

policyii hasii justii beenii launchedii toii supportii localii initiativesii ofii e-democracy,ii co-financedii

throughii aii nationalii notice.ii Thisii policyii goesii toii insertii inii anii overallii pictureii characterizedii byii

aii weakii diffusionii ofii publicii initiativesii ofii civicii telematicsii toii promoteii theii strengtheningii ofii

citizenii participationii inii theii lifeii ofii localii institutionsii inii theii mostii dimensionii exquisitelyii

politicalii ofii theii relationshipii betweenii theii governedii andii theii rulers.ii Veryii fewii withoutii

prejudiceii exceptions,ii notii withoutii limitations,ii localii administrationsii haveii takenii otherii

prioritiesii inii theii developmentii ofii digitalii servicesii toii citizens.ii (Hansardii Societyii (2001)).ii Onii

theii oneii hand,ii itii directsii localii authoritiesii towardsii projectsii thatii buildii onii experiencesii previousii

localii participation,ii whichii enhanceii theii roleii ofii theii citizens'ii initiative,ii thatii enhanceii

opportunitiesii forii individualii participation,ii informalii groupsii andii ofii associations,ii meetingii theii

emergingii transformationsii ofii theii formsii ofii theii participation.ii ii itii emphasizesii theii needii toii

maintainii consistencyii betweenii theii experiencesii ofii onlineii participationii andii theii processesii

activeii onii theii territoryii andii inii theii officesii institutions,ii askingii publicii actorsii toii clearlyii linkii

interinstitutionalii andii participatoryii process,ii andii indicatesii theii integrationii ofii differentii skillsii

relatedii notii onlyii toii digitalii andii communicationalii skills,ii butii alsoii toii methodsii ofii mediation,ii

listeningii andii dialogue,ii andii specificii contentsii ofii decision-makingii processesii underii discussionii

-ii theii fundamentalii pathii toii faceii theii challengesii culturalii andii organizationalii posedii byii theii newii

formsii ofii participation.ii Aii furtherii qualifyingii pointii ofii theii approachii proposedii byii theii Italianii

initiativeii couldii beii providedii byii theii operationalii translation,ii inii theii selectedii projects,ii ofii theii

indicationsii relativeii toii theii promotedii participationii model,ii aimedii atii enhancingii theii

procedural,ii discursiveii dimension,ii inclusiveii ofii participationii inii theii processesii decision-

making.ii Inii effect,ii thisii isii anii approachii thatii isii consistentii withii whatii emergedii inii theii analysisii

moreii attentiveii toii theii activeii roleii ofii citizensii inii decision-makingii processes,ii establishedii aii

levelii ofii internationalii institutionsii andii followed,ii asii weii haveii seen,ii fromii theii countriesii whereii

moreii attentionii hasii beenii focusedii onii thisii specificii dimensionii ofii theii democracy.ii Inii thisii

perspective,ii forii example,ii whichii seeksii toii connectii theii citizenii participationii inii theii policyii lifeii

cycleii byii providingii forii theii involvementii ofii citizensii fromii theii stageii ofii problemii definitionii byii

toii face,ii toii getii toii theii phaseii ofii theii evaluationii ofii theii adoptedii policiesii seemsii aii discouragedii

conceptionii ofii citizenii participationii isii alsoii discouraged,ii limitedii toii theirii sporadic/impromptuii

consultationii throughii techniquesii quantitative,ii releasedii fromii adequateii circulationii routesii

relatedii informationii andii publicii discussion.ii (OECDii (2001)).

Theii premisesii ofii thisii nationalii policyii initiativeii inii favourii ofii theii participationii ofii citizensii atii aii

localii levelii thereforeii seemii interesting,ii especiallyii inii termsii ofii generalii indicationsii adopted.ii

Butii thereii areii alsoii criticalii elementsii thatii cannotii beii underestimated,ii theii resourcesii providedii

areii smallii asii withii allii interventionsii ofii theii nationalii e-governmentii plan,ii theii termsii forii openingii

theii noticeii areii theii sameii withii thoseii ofii anii administrativeii electoralii deadlineii involvingii manyii

bodiesii local,ii allii overii theii country,ii yet,ii thereii wasii noii legalii reconnaissanceii onii theii localii

participationii institutesii activeii inii theii variousii territoriesii andii atii differentii scalesii ofii

government;ii finally,ii theii informationii andii promotionii campaignii forii theii noticeii isii

predominantlyii entrustedii toii sectoral,ii focusedii informationii andii administrativeii channelsii onii

NTIC,ii bringingii theii moreii strictlyii technologicalii aspectsii backii toii theii foreii initiative.ii Underii

currentii conditionsii thisii policyii lineii thereforeii appearsii toii haveii foundii itsii spaceii insideii theii

riverbedii ifii weii wantii marginalii andii specificii ofii technologicalii innovationii policies.ii Theii

implementationii phaseii isii thereforeii presentedii withii significantii fragilityii elements.ii Itii isii toii beii

hopedii thatii thoseii networksii ofii experiencesii ofii localii politicsii that,ii extendedii andii strengthenedii

inii recentii years,ii theyii haveii madeii theii participationii ofii citizensii andii associationsii aii theirii

elementii ofii theirii workii onii theii territory,ii adoptii aii moreii matureii approachii toii theii NTIC'sii

innovationii potential,ii wellii beyondii theii levelii ofii institutionalii communication,ii gatheringii theii

bestii opportunityii anywayii representedii byii thisii governmentii initiative.ii Ifii governanceii isii

characterizedii asii aii processii ofii governanceii moreii adequateii toii theii scaleii toii theii characteristicsii

ofii theii problemsii thatii publicii institutionsii mustii faceii today,ii aii moreii directii andii strongii

participationii ofii citizens,ii onii anii individualii basis,ii ofii groupsii informalii andii asii associations,ii

thereforeii constitutesii aii substantialii elementii ofii democracy.ii (OECDii (2001)).

CONCLUSION:

Despiteii Citizensii asii Partnersii isii notii centeredii onii theii themeii ofii e-democracy,ii theii identificationii

ofii objectivesii andii theii degreeii ofii developmentii ofii theii participationii itii proposesii theyii areii oftenii

adoptedii inii governmentii documentsii thatii areii moreii attentiveii toii theii problem.ii Thereii distinctionii

betweenii threeii levelsii ofii citizenii involvementii -ii information,ii consultationii andii activeii

participationii -ii proposedii byii theii OECDii highlightsii withii clarityii theii rolesii ofii institutionsii andii

citizens,ii particularlyii inii theii lastii twoii typesii ofii identifiedii involvement:ii inii theii consultationii

processesii areii theii institutionsii thatii takeii theii initiativeii toii openii aii confrontationii withii theii

citizens;ii inii theii processesii ofii 'activeii participation'ii theii citizensii becomeii theii firstii promotersii ofii

theirii ownii proposals,ii onii whichii theyii seekii aii comparisonii withii theii institutions.ii Threeii levelsii ofii

citizenii involvement.ii Thatii are,ii Information:ii aii relationshipii inii whichii theii governmentii

producesii andii releasesii informationii soii thatii citizensii canii useii it.ii Thisii typeii ofii activityii includesii

bothii passiveii accessii ofii citizensii toii informationii atii theirii request,ii bothii allii governmentii actionsii

toii activelyii disseminateii information.ii Consultation:ii aii relationship,ii inii whichii citizensii provideii

aii governmentii feedback.ii Itii isii basedii onii theii definitionii thatii governmentsii makeii ofii issuesii onii

whichii citizensii areii askedii toii expressii theirii opinion,ii andii requestsii toii releaseii adequateii

information.ii Activeii participation:ii aii relationshipii basedii onii collaborationii withii theii

government,ii inii whereii citizensii activelyii takeii partii inii theii decision-makingii process.ii Itii isii basedii

onii recognitionii ofii theii roleii ofii citizensii inii proposingii policyii optionsii andii shapingii theii politicalii

debate,ii althoughii theii responsibilityii forii finalii choicesii orii policiesii leftoversii producedii toii

governments.ii (IPPRii (2002)).ii

REFERENCES:

 Hansardii Societyii (2001).ii Bowlingii Together.ii Onlineii Publicii Engagementii inii Policyii

Deliberation

 OECDii (2001).ii Citizensii asii Partners.ii Information,ii Consultationii andii Publicii

Participationii inii Policyii Makingii

 OECDii (2003).ii Policyii Brief:ii Engagingii Citizensii Onlineii forii Betterii Policy-making

 IPPRii (2002).ii e-Participationii inii localii government,ii London,ii Instituteii forii Publicii

Policyii Researchii