RSA Winter Conference Multi-channel governance - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

RSA Winter Conference

Multi-channel governance and Electronic Democracy

Leslie Budd and Ivan HorrocksEGOV4U Research Team Open University, UKPaper presented at the Regional Studies Association Winter ConferenceContested Regions: Territorial Politics and Policy London, 25th November 2011

Introduction and Issues

From eGovernance to Multi-channel Governance?

Habermas

’

Communicative Action

and Bourdieu’s Capitals; The limits of Multi-Level Governance in re-structuring the Public Domain; The trajectory of Post-socialism to Post-Democracy to reclaiming legitimate governance of socio-economic spaces; The Better Reykjavik EGOV4U Case and its wider implication for e-Democracy; Conclusions and conjectures?

RSA Winter Conference

RSA Winter ConferenceeGovernance

to Multi-Channel Governance?The elastic concept of governance as:

“attributing public status to institutions which have been incorporated into governing arrangements over a number of policy domains.”

to the equally ‘stretchy’

eGovernance

as:

“the public sector’s use of information and communications technologies with the aim of improving information and service delivery, encouraging citizen participation in the decision-making process and making government more accountable, transparent and effective.” (UNESCO, 2005). BUT, discourses on “Reinventing government” New Public Management (NPM) New Public Governance (NPG). Network Governance (NG) and Digital-Era Governance (DEG) pursue a functionalist and technicist approach to the promise of ICT as enabler of restructuring the public domain which focuses on the transactional basis of operating efficiencies (transactional economies).In the case of Multi-Channel Governance the transformational basis of integrating and re-inserting socially excluded groups into civil society using a number of ICT service delivery channels (transformational economies) which is the main driver of EGOV4U

eGOVERNANCE

STRUCTURES & PROCESSES

GENERATING SOCIAL INCLUSION

CREATING PUBLIC VALUE ADDED

Dublin

SECC

Milton Keynes

SECC

Reykjavik

SECC

Rijeka

HABITUS

1

SECC

EGOV4U

FIELD OF TRANSACTIONS

EGOV4U TRANSACTIONAL ECONOMIES

IMPACT

EVALUATION FRAMEWORK (IEF)

Malta SECC

Dublin SECC2

EGOV4U TRANSFORMATIONAL ECONOMIES

Milton Keynes

SECC

2

Rijeka

SECC2

Reykjavik

SECC2

eGovernment

Services

Malta SECC

Malta SECC2

Integrating Habermas with Bourdieu

RSA Winter Conference Communicative action, is the concept in which actors in society seek to reach common understanding and to coordinate actions by reasoned argument, consensus, and cooperation rather than strategic action strictly in pursuit of their own goals.BUT, lack a theory of power in can be filled by integrating

Bourdieu’s

forms of capitals in the context of the governance of ‘

Habitus

’ in multi-channel settings

Capitals:Human: collective knowledge and skills (technology specific and technology independent);Social: (bonding, bridging, linking);Organisational: processes; managerial and governance structures of community;Environmental: digital and non-digital amenities that facilitate co-production of outcomes and impacts;Infrastructural: ICT and related infrastructure, including ‘back-office’ systems;Financial: individual and collective financial resources;Reputational: Trust and recommendation (underpinned by transparency, security, privacy); democratic endorsement.

Community Capitals

RSA Winter Conference

HABITUS

Organisational capital

Social capital

Infrastructural

capital

Financial

capital

Human

capital

Reputational

capital

Environmental

capital

Taken together,

Community Capitals

constitute a ‘

Habitus

’ that bounds the attainment of sustainability and cohesiveness for a community. Effective policy interventions are those that ‘enlarge’ the

Habitus

.

Habitus

is defined as a socio-cultural space in which individuals acquire patterns of thought, behaviour, and taste as the components of social practice (or social action) by which they negotiate the social structures of modern societies. Thus

Habitus

can exist in real and virtual spaces

The limits of Multi-level Governance

RSA Winter Conference Multi-level governance characterizes the changing relationships between actors situated at different territorial levels and from public, private and voluntary sectors…. Most specifically, multi-level governance crosses the traditionally separate domains of domestic and international politics to highlight the increasingly blurred distinction between these domains in the context of

European integration. (Bache, 2005, 5). Two types can be distinguished:

Akin to federalism, this consists of limited and non-overlapping jurisdictions within a restricted number of territorial levels. The focus is on specific governmental purposes rather than a set of policies or issues;

2. Is a

more complex and fluid type that consists of a larger number of overlapping and flexible jurisdictions. The focus is much more on specific policy sectors and issues …... Like most governance structures there is a tendency to instability as the policy environment alters, but it is designed to seek optimal decision-making (Hooge and Marks, 2004).According Clarke this approach limits the multi-ness of governance to vertically and hierarchically structured territorial and administrative scales. Thus the possibilities of Type 2 is constrained by the transactional nature of post-bureaucratic treatments of the public domain (eg NPM and DEG)Thus the possibilities of the transformational nature of eGovernance to open up opportunities for eParticipation and eDemocracy are limited to transactional gains in governmental efficiencies

Post-socialism into Post-Democracy?

RSA Winter Conference Post-socialism as the study of the transition of formerly Communist societies is a rather inchoate conception that tends to aggregate complex and manifold interactions. The technocratic appeal of market transformations in these and associated societies is based upon the apparently rational

and technocratic logic of this form of socio-economic

organisation

.

Yet this logic leads directly to P

ost-Democracy : That is, representing a critical and problematic interpretation which assigns to the new media and ICTs a role not of re-launching and revitalising direct and collective participation in democratic life, but on the contrary as a further factor of fragmentation and social inequality (the "digital divide"), within a growing transformation of social subjects into information consumers instead of into more informed citizens. (Crouch 2003). Opens up the possibility for exploring representative and accountable forms of eDemocracy through the agency of Multi-Channel Governance which is explored in the case of Reykjavik

Iceland and Reykjavik - Statistics

The population of Iceland (2010): 317,593Population of Reykjavik: 118,427 = 38% of the population of Iceland

‘Greater’ Reykjavik (shaded triangle on the map above): 200,852 = 63% of the population of IcelandAverage population growth 0.9% per annum. A little over 8% of the population of Reykjavik are foreign citizensInternet access extremely high (100% 16-24, over 70% and growing for the above 65 age groupRSA Winter Conference

From boom to bust

Strong economic expansion 2003 – 2007 (mainly aluminum and banking)Banks - summer 2008 branches in 10 countries, “assets” 100% of GDP 2000, 800% of GDP 2007Capital inflow ensured a strong króna

Asset prices reached record heightsBuilding activity was brisk and housing prices doubled in real terms 2007 - average income $70,000 – 5th highest in the worldUnemployment was around 1% in 2007 (1.3% in September 2008)2008 - OctoberBanking and currency crisis – the size of the commercial banks made it impossible for the Central Bank of Iceland to exercise its role as a lender of last resort

Three largest banks collapse -

Icelandic Financial Supervisory Authority takes control. Each of the banks divided into two entities: ‘old’ (international) and ‘new’ (domestic) bank.

Currency restrictions and capital movement curbed –

krona

depreciates by 46% against EuroAverage gross national income fell by 50% in six monthsUnemployment rises to 9% by April 2009. It remains above 8%RSA Winter Conference

Responsibility for economic crash – all voters 2009

(Scale 0-10, 0 = no responsibility, 10 = very great responsibility) RSA Winter Conference

Consequences and responses – government

Reduced revenue from income tax as a result of increased unemploymentCollapse in the building industry drastically reduced the expected revenue from the sale of building plotsIncreased demand for social services because of increased unemployment

Collapse of the currency Inflation increased costs by 10-30% The cost of paying down loans in foreign currencies almost doubledResponses – Reykjavik MunicipalitySecure basic services for citizens with unchanged user-feesNo layoffs/redundancy for the City’s permanent employees – but wages were lowered for city officials, politicians and specialists. Lower wages were protected.A halt was put on hiring new employees – with a review board to oversee all new appointments

International relations were cut and all overseas travel required approval from City Hall

RSA Winter Conference

Consequences and responses: political 1

Interest in politics 1983-2009RSA Winter Conference

Consequence and responses: political 2

Historic elections in 2009 and 2010National - 2009Conservatives (Independence Party) not largest party at the polls for the first timeSocial Democrats and left-socialists able to form a two-party majority coalition for the first time

Coalition formation: party block(s) for the first time since the 1960sLocal - 2010The economic crash - harms the Independence Party, Progressive Party, Social DemocratsGovernment participation - harms the Social Democrats and Left GreensStrength of this effect differs between communesRSA Winter Conference

Consequences and responses – political 3

Local elections 2010: Vote for the four established parties in 4 largest communes:2006: 92.0%2010: 66.8%Winners: Best party (Reykjavík)Second best party (Kópavogur)

L-list (Akureyri)‘...the Best Party is a liberal and honest party influenced by Scandinavian ideas, working steadily for social reform and the solution of common tasks on an equal rights basis. We neither smoke nor drink alcohol. We want to create a community etter than other parties!”And the second best party: “Let this election be about consensus, justice and fairness. Let’s give the useless, corrupt and boring parties a leave of absence for four years. ... The Second Best Party offers an alternative in Kópavogur. It stands open to all, irrespective of political opinions, place of residence, colour, gender, sexuality, religion or which English football club you support.” RSA Winter Conference

Reykjavík 2010 (%): vote intention by gender and Percentage of the parties’ 2006 voters voting for Best Party

(Gallup, before election 2010) RSA Winter Conference

Reykjavik political structure

The City Council consists of 15 representatives, elected every fourth year.Last elections were on the 29th of May 2010 and voter turnout was 73.4%

Current members represent the following parties: Best Party, Independence Party., Progressive Party, Social Democrats, Red/GreensThe City Council is the highest authority in the city and holds regular meetings twice a monthCouncil meetings are open to the public and are broadcast on the city’s website and on the radio.The City Executive Board has, together with the Mayor, executive and fiscal authority in the City of Reykjavík The board has 7 members elected from among members of the City Council for 1 year terms

RSA Winter Conference

Better Reykjavik: early development http://www.betrireykjavik.is/

Prior to the 2008 crash Iceland was committed to EU membership and strong movement to adopt the EuroPost 2008 support for joining the EU fell and membership of the Eurozone became impossible

The emergence of a general movement in Iceland to reclaim democracy for citizens (i.e. from economic actors), reinvent/reinvigorate representative democracy from the bottom up (e.g. an elected Constitutional Council to review the constitution)An early version of Better Reykjavik (i.e. a web portal) used by the Best Party in their 2010 election campaignSubsequently used during negotiations to form a coalition to govern Reykjavik by the Best Party and Social Democrats to collect ideas and suggestions from citizens about what the parties policy priorities should be. Promise given that Better Reykjavik would be used as an online consultative forum: aim – to promote consensus based decision making leading to an increase in trust in politicians and thus reinvigorate representative democracy

RSA Winter Conference

Better Reykjavik: current operation

The five most supported suggestions each month are put on the agenda of the relevant political committee. The most supported suggestion in a specific policy area (11 plus ‘other’ e.g. tourism. education, transport, environment) Launched 19th October 2011; 10,000 unique users; 200 ideas by 31st

October - 16 reviewed by committees with decisions posted on the Better Reykjavik web site. Examples: Integration of the whole capital area into one municipalityhttp://betrireykjavik.is/priorities/25-sameining-hofudborgarsvaedisins-i-eitt-sveitarfelagPresented at the City Council (17 November, 2011) Resume Laugarvegur street as pedestrian shopping street with tourists in mindhttp://betrireykjavik.is/priorities/7-endurvekja-laugarveg-sem-verslunargotu-med-ferdamenn-i-hugaPresented at the Culture and Tourism committee (14 November 2011

Set up facilities for young graffiti artists.

http://betrireykjavik.is/priorities/3-setja-upp-adstodu-fyrir-unga-vegglistamenn

Presented at the Culture and Tourism committee (14 November 2011)

RSA Winter Conference

Conclusions and Conjectures

After the banking crash of 2008 Icelandic political developments – party political, constitutional and technological (i.e. multi-channel) - represent early examples of citizens’ attempts to create more democratic spaces and take control of their community capitals by seeking to:Reclaim democratic governance from corporate influence and controlRelocate policy and decision making back to national and local governments

Reengage citizens in grass roots politics and policy making Reinvent a belief in politics Renew trust in politicians Since the emergence of the Icelandic examples similar global/local developments that seek to pursue similar aims - and thus develop new democratic/governance channels - include:The Pirate Party (15 seats Berlin State and one Swedish MEP since 2009) - The global #Occupy movementUK Uncut and similar groups (e.g. United States, Australia, etc)

RSA Winter Conference

Conjectures

Does Better Reykjavik and similar multi channel approaches to governance open up the possibility of more democratic space as citizens take control of their community capitals and thus (re)define their habitus (?)Or are they simply the most recent examples of the emergence of ‘two-tier democracy’: ‘big’ democracy – concerned with policy and decision-making at national and international level (witness Italy, Greece, Spain – democracy ‘suspended’ by ‘the market’ – governance by technocrat/technocracy)

‘small’ democracy – where ordinary citizens try to make a difference in terms of the quality of their everyday life.RSA Winter Conference