New research on public deliberation and information technology

ABSTRACT

This is a proposal for a panel to examine new research programs into the uses of information technology (IT) tools in combination with public deliberation for improving public input into government at all levels. A better public input process is needed to address intractable national policy issues and local "wicked" planning problems. Both proponents of IT and of deliberation contend that their approaches can promote changes in public input that would be beneficial for addressing such difficult issues. These changes include educating and motivating the public, improving the synthesis and coordination of public views on an issue, and conferring greater legitimacy to policy decisions. Several new research efforts are broaching the possibility that IT and deliberation approaches can be especially helpful in combination. This panel will explore the research questions, methodologies, research experiences, and findings of these valuable efforts. The panel seeks to cross-fertilize the diverse approaches in this area, raise audience awareness of and interest in this domain of research, and disseminate knowledge of pitfalls in this area of research.

REFERENCES

• 1: Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 2006
• 2: Button, M. and Ryfe, D. M. What Can We Learn from the Practice of Deliberative Democracy? In J. Gastil and P. Levine, eds., The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 2005, 20--34.
• 3: Dahlberg, L. The Internet and Democratic Discourse: Exploring The Prospects of Online Deliberative Forums Extending the Public Sphere. Information, Communication and Society 4, 4 (2001), 615--633.
• 4: Fishkin, J. S. Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1991.
• 5: Gastil, J. Political Communication and Deliberation. Sage Publications, Inc, 2008.
• 6: Habermas, J. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume Two: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Beacon Press, Boston, 1984.
• 7: Kriplean, T., Borning, A., Beschastnikh, I., McDonald, D. W., and Zachry, M. Designing Mediating Spaces Between Citizens and Government. Workshop on Social Mediating Technologies: Developing the Research Agenda (at CHI '09), (2009).
• 8: Muhlberger, P. Human Agency and the Revitalization of the Public Sphere. Political Communication 22, 2 (2005), 163--178.
• 9: O'Connor, R. E., Bord, R. J., Yarnal, B., and Wiefek, N. Who Wants to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions? Social Science Quarterly 83, 1 (2002), 1--17.
• 10: Rheingold, H. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, MA, 1993.
• 11: Sears, D. O. and Citrin, J. Tax Revolt: Something for Nothing in California. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1982.
• 12: Webb, N., Hepple, M., and Wilks, Y. Error Analysis of Dialogue Act Classification. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Text, Speech and Dialogue, (2005).

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.4 COMPUTERS AND SOCIETY
      K.4.0 General

General Terms:
Design, Experimentation, Human Factors, Measurement, Standardization

Keywords:
Wikipedia, collaboration, collective intelligence, deliberation, government, natural language processing, public input, rulemaking, video