Public administration

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62204/2336-498X-2023-2-7

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND DIGITAL

TRANSFORMATION: NEW HORIZONS FOR

GOVERNMENT-PUBLIC INTERACTION

Liudmyla Boiko,

postgraduate student,

State University of Trade and Economics, Ukraine,

l.v.boyko@knute.edu.ua; ORCID: 0000-0002-6272-1298

Annotation. This scientific article highlights the key role of citizen participation in building effective government-public interaction in digitalized society, discusses the multi-level nature of citizen participation from information to consultation and involvement. It explores the complexity of the “citizen participation”, emphasizes the significance of partnership between government and citizens, mentions the importance of increasing digital skills in order to take advantage of available digital tools for citizen participation.

Keywords: citizen participation, government-public interaction, digitalization, digital transformation.

Citizen participation is an essential element in building relationships between authorities at various levels and the public, as the engagement and activity of citizens serve as an indicator of the quality of the organizational and institutional mechanisms of the state in the context of government-public interaction. We suggest examining the direct definition of the concept of “citizen participation” since this term can be considered complex, multifaceted, and controversial.

In studies related to participation, different terms are used besides “citizen,” such as “public,” “community,” or “civic.” Less commonly used terms include “people” or “stakeholders”. Similarly, the term “participation” is also used interchangeably with “engagement,” “involvement,” “empowerment,” “partnership,” “co-production,” “cocreate,” and others.

The World Bank Strategic Framework has defined «citizen participation» as a twoway interaction between citizens and the government or the private sector. This occurs in various areas of engagement, including policy discussions, initiatives, events, and advisory services and analysis. This interaction creates a personal interest of citizens in decision-making processes aimed at improving development results. The term “citizens” characterizes citizens as the ultimate recipients of government, development institutions, and private sector initiatives within the country. Citizens can be individuals or form associations and groups, including civil society organizations, women’s groups or indigenous groups. Civil society organizations have the capacity to represent citizens and can cover a wide range of organizations other than the public or commercial sectors. This includes non-governmental organisations, charities, faith-based organisations, foundations, academic institutions, associations, policy and research bodies, trade unions and social movements [1].

Citizen participation is a process in which stakeholders have an impact on the creation of policies, the consideration of alternative designs, the selection of investments, and the decisions made in the management of their communities [2].

Participation of citizens in political processes is regarded as an inherent virtue and an essential component of democracy. Futhermore, «citizen participation», or «citizen engagement», is considered as a key cornerstone of good governance and one of the core national values and principles in modern society.

The viewpoint presented by Kimutai, G. K., & Aluvi, P. A. resonates with our understanding that we can define citizen participation as an opportunity for selfdetermination. It is crucial to comprehend that citizens are integral members of society and function as self-actualizing individuals. This assumption is rooted in the idea that people are proactive beings, naturally inclined to grow, overcome challenges in their surroundings, and incorporate new experiences into a coherent self-concept. However, the innate inclination toward self-determination does not operate spontaneously, nor does it exist in isolation. Instead, it relies on ongoing social interactions with other citizens, organizations and government [3].

We also consider citizen participation as an expression of local or national identity, which serves as the foundation for an active civic stance and a prerequisite for the willingness to assume responsibility for one’s community and country as a whole. It also impacts the quality of life and the pace of economic growth in regions.

A vivid example illustrating that citizens actively engage in community life based on their desire to strengthen their identity is the system of government-citizen interaction in the municipalities of Valencia, Spain. Officials in Valencia’s local government primarily utilize social media as a straightforward and accessible channel for information exchange with citizens. They view social media from the perspective of its ambivalence, as, on the one hand, it enhances the transparency of local administration and political participation, and, on the other hand, it unites the population in terms of identity.

This case study confirms that active citizens, who play a key role in their interaction with the authorities and engage in decision-making processes, are concurrently guided by a sense of local identity, which reinforces their intentions and enables the emergence of influential civic initiatives [4].

In the scientific literature there are three levels of citizen participation which distinguished in the context of government-public interaction: information, consultation and involvement. At the information level, people do not take an active part in discussing certain issues or making decisions, as this is a one-way interaction, but this level is the basis for the formation of quality interaction. At the consultation level, citizens can already be included in the discussion of policies and government proposals. The level of involvement is characterized by citizens’ initiative and active participation in the processes of development and management decision-making.

We suggest considering the levels of citizen participation in more detail based on the degrees of the well-known “Arnstein ladder”. It consists of eight stages increasingly organized starting with «nonparticipation degrees» – manipulation and therapy which give citizens the feeling that their opinion is important in society, but in reality the need for citizen participation is considered unimportant by government bodies and citizens have no influence on decisions. Next three stages informing, consultation and placation are united under the definition «tokenism». These categories express the acknowledged potential for legitimate citizen participation, the ideas and viewpoints of citizens are regarded as valuable resources that are incorporated, but within severely circumscribed boundaries. Informing involves disseminating information to citizens regarding their rights, obligations, and prospects, frequently without affording them the opportunity for civic feedback. Consultation means the explicit invitation to pass a remark, while placation signifies the apparent inclusion of citizens in processes, but without sufficient authority to exert tangible influence over decisions. The last three degrees empower citizens to really influence decisions (Partnership), become stakeholders, who can operate partly independent (Deligation) and to control a governmental issue on their own (Citizen Control) [5].

The statement that resonates with us the most is that citizen participation is best realized in the form of partnership. Specifically, partnership upholds the values of freedom, democracy, and citizen participation in state-building processes at various levels. In fact, the concept of “partnership” inherently implies a high-quality two-way interaction between government bodies and the public, which undoubtedly serves as an indicator of a high level of organization in relationship between governmental entities and citizens.

We concur with the prospective that the  voice  of  the  citizens  requires  support and  empowerment  by  the authority.  This allows  the  gradual  and  small  steps  of involvement,  which  may  one  day  allow  them  and  the community  to  gain  the influence  in  the  decision-making  process.

The highest step of citizen participation model is about co-creation. It is a process occurs by putting citizens in the role of partaking actors beside the government, emphasizing the building of a government-public interaction by enabling citizens to have an influential voice within the whole democratic process [5].

Instead of being a top-down or bottom-up process,  popular concept of co-creation involves a multi-directional approach to the process of problem solving. It is viewed as a key method in developing sustainability, markets, services, public spaces, transport, safety, and planning. Co-creation emphasizes the role of the citizens at all stages of the process and as potential initiators of co-creative processes. It is about innovation and creativity and as such it implies potential for fundamental change as regards roles, positions, and relationships between stakeholders. Basically, co-creative processes emerge and evolve from a need for dynamic changes. This need relates to the development of public services, service delivery technologies, and digitalization [6].

The global process of digitization allows more citizens to be involved in governmentpublic interaction and active participation in processes aimed at the development of communities and the country as a whole. With the development of technology, new digital tools appear that simplify communication between authorities and citizens. An example of such tools can be the aforementioned social networks, as well as special resources, web portals, platforms, chatbots and other tools, which enable citizens to actively interact with government on the different levels of citizen participation. Against the background of the development of the latest technologies, the government should focus on the integration of various systems, devices, and data into its activities and prepare for digital transformation.

According to the researchers of the company “I-Scoop”, which consults and provides services related to the management of big data to international corporations and governments of various countries, digital transformation can be defined as a fundamental transformation of business and organizational activities, processes, models and competencies that are needed in order to to ensure changes and possibilities of using digital technologies in terms of their strategic acceleration and taking into account the pace of development of the information society [7].

Digital transformation itself can be also regarded as a continuous process of embracing a substantially evolving digital environment to fulfill the digital expectations of all stakeholders [8]. The process of acceptance needs to be proactively designed, initiated and executed. This systematic way to transform digitally can be seen more as a digital maturity. Today every country should be aware of the need to define action items for transformation roadmap, prioritize between different activities and develop a strategic vision for the digital age [9].

In 2020, the United Nations provided certain recommendations to countries for the transition to digital governance and digital transformation. The recommendations consist of a change in thinking in the digital plane at the individual and systemic levels, a change in the institutional and regulatory framework in public policy, the availability of information through open government data and equal access to it. The UN notes that now, more than ever before, government leaders deal with the critical question of how best to transform the public sector to effectively deliver services and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. For many countries, the answer is to embrace innovation and digital and advanced technologies. Digital technology applications can provide users with quick and easy access to government services and programs and can be used to create participatory mechanisms that allow people to participate in decisionmaking, design and service delivery. Such technologies can support greater government openness and accountability and can be used to increase public trust [10].

We are deeply convinced that digitalization contributes to increasing the transparency of government activities the involvement of citizens in government discussions, activities and decision-making processes. Digitalized governmental environment contributes to empowering citizens and to growing trust in the authorities. In turn, transparency, trust and a positive image of the government motivate people to share their ideas with government officials, to plan farsightedly and to start new initiatives in partnership with authorities. Thanks to simple and accessible digital instruments, such as electronic petitions, electronic appeals and an open budget, citizens stop transferring responsibility for changes in their city exclusively to authorized persons, but share their own point of view and create opportunities for development and prosperity.

Digitization of all social processes caused a change in the paradigm of public management, embodied in the concept of e-governance. We consider that e-governance ceased to exist only as a successful solution in the conditions of global transformation, now it is a holistic mechanism for effective management at various levels, which functions not only on the basis of legislative consolidation and the availability of the necessary technical capabilities of the authorities, but also on innovations approaches to obtaining and processing large volumes of information, to the process of public communication and organization of work with citizens. In light of this, technology is changing the dynamics of government-public interaction and whether it’s making participation more accessible.

Nowadays, e-government and e-governance have become global phenomena: the governments of developed countries use these concepts to promote the participation of citizens in public life and expand their rights and opportunities. E-government can be defined as a way of organizing state power using the systems of local information Internet networks and segments of the global one information network, which ensures the functioning of certain services in real time and makes the daily communication of a citizen with official institutions as simple and accessible as possible. In practice, this means organization of management by the state and interaction with individuals and legal entities through the maximum use of modern information technologies in public administration bodies. This involves the possibility of any person through information and communication means apply to state authorities, local self-government bodies to obtain the necessary information, and most importantly administrative services [11].

E-government provides the public with ample opportunities to participate in the political life of society and is expressed in the interaction of the government, citizens and non-governmental public institutions based on the widespread usage of the latest technologies. Considering potential benefits arising from the implementation of electronic government applications, there are three main purposes of e-government, namely efficiency, effectiveness and improved democracy and their impact on the perception of citizens about e-government success. Focusing on improved democracy as being related to citizen participation, measurements for e-government success can be interpreted by citizens as follows: trust, well-informedness and participation in decisionmaking process [12].

We hold the belief that for the most effective usage of all the benefits of digitalization in the context of building public-government interaction, in particular citizen participation, it is necessary for all stakeholders to be informed about the available innovations and tools and to have a high level of digital skills, administrative and technological capabilities.

We offer to consider the results of the survey, which confirms that a significant number of Ukrainians do not use digital goods to implement government-public interaction, primarily because they lack one or another digital skill. According to the results of a 2021 nationwide survey, 8 out of 10 respondents believe that using the Internet has more advantages than disadvantages. At the same time, 31% are concerned that their digital skills are not good enough.

Young people aged 10 to 29 are most interested in learning digital skills. At the same time, the relevance of the request for training depends on the general level of mastery of digital technologies and the general level of education. Thus, a higher level of digital skills and unfinished higher or higher education actualizes the need to deepen already existing competencies. Half of the respondents among those who feel the need for training want to form / improve both basic and advanced skills [13].

By the way, Ukrainians can improve their digital skills on the national edutainment educational platform «Diia. Digital Education» that includes educational online series, test simulators, guides, webinars and even podcasts. The service is accessible to everyone and convenient to use, as it allows you to choose educational content by format, profession, purpose and topic.

We can conclude that modern citizens are ready for changes and the implementation of new digital approaches in social life. Most importantly, citizens are also aware of the need to acquire new skills, use online platforms, web portals, applications, social networks and other tools designed to simplify communication between citizens and the government and reduce it to a few clicks in the digital environment, avoiding long and complicated bureaucratic procedures.

Conclusions. In summary, the concept of citizen participation is truly multifaceted and widely discussed in the context of government-public interaction. We believe that citizen engagement serves as a measure of governance quality and value. There are various levels of participation, but partnership and co-creation are the most effective of them. Digital transformation enhances transparency and trust in government activities. Moreover, modern approaches to interaction reduce the barriers between the government and citizens, creating space for productive cooperation and co-creation. The readiness of citizens to embrace digital tools and improve their digital skills is undoubtedly a positive indicator of their willingness to engage with the government in the digital age. We consider that by understanding the advantages of implementing digital tools and the necessity to implement new approaches to interaction can citizens be ready not only to use existing digital resources but also to be interested in promoting their initiatives and participating in the process of making important decisions. Nowadays, the evolving landscape of public-government interaction has the potential to reshape the dynamics of governance and foster a more informed and proactive society.

References:

1. Masud, H., Kumagai, S., & Grandvoinnet, H. (2019). Mainstreaming Citizen Engagement through the World Bank Group’s Country Engagement Model.
2. Okello, M., Oenga, I. & Chege P (2008). Participatory Urban Planning Toolkit Based on The Kitale Experience: A guide to Community Based Action Planning for Effective
3. Kimutai, G. K., & Aluvi, P. A. (2018). Good governance and service delivery: A study of citizen participation in Kisumu County.
4. Català, Ll. & Penalva, C. (2020). The development of e-Government in the small municipalities of the Valencian Community (Spain): more mirror than glass. AGER: Journal of Studies on Depopulation and Rural Development(29),p.39-77.
5. Pristl, A. C. C., & Billert, M. S. (2022, June). Citizen Participation in Increasingly Digitalized Governmental Environments–A Systematic Literature Review. In European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Timisoara, Romania.
6. Leino, H., & Puumala, E. (2021). What can co-creation do for the citizens? Applying co-creation for the promotion of participation in cities. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 39(4), 781-799.
7. Digital transformation: online guide to digital business transformation URL: https://www.i-scoop.eu/digital-transformation/
8. Kane, G., Palmer, D., Phillips, A. et al. 2017. Achieving digital maturity. Research Report Summer 2017. MIT Sloan Management Review & Deloittee University Press.
9. Berghaus, S. and Back, A. 2016. Stages in Digital Business Transformation: Results of an Empirical Maturity Study. In: Tenth Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS) Proceedings.
10. United Nations E-government survey 2020. Digital Government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development.

URL:https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Docume`nts/ un/2020Survey/2020%20UN%20E

11. Pohrebniak, I. Ye. (2014). Elektronnyi uriad (e-government) i elektronne uriaduvannia (e-governance): poniatia ta pryntsypy funktsionuvannia. Pravo ta innovatsii, (3), 26-35.
12. Scott, M., W. DeLone and W. Golden (2016). “Measuring eGovernment success:

a public value approach” European Journal of Information Systems 25 (3), 187–208.

13. Cyfrova hramotnist naselennia Ukrainy: Zvit za rezultatamy zahalnonatsionalnoho opytuvannia. 2021.URL: https://osvita.diia.gov.ua/uploads/0/2625-doslidzenna_2021_ ukr.pdf