Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Web 2.0 and Citizen Participation : The Taiwan Experience Evaluation on National Policy Think Tank Online and Vision 2020 Ching-Heng Pan, Ph.D. Research Fellow, Taiwan e-Governance Research Center

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Research Objectives  How does Web 2.0 make sense to the government ?  Develop an evaluation framework  Discover factors affecting online participation in the policy process

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center WHAT IS WEB 2.0 ANYWAY? 3

The Web and e-Government ~2000 Web1.0 Government1.0 (e-government) 2005~2010 Web2.0 Government ~2020 Web3.0 Government 3.0 (u-Government) Government-centeredCitizen-centeredIndividual-centered Single portalOne-stop shopping, integrated service Individually customized service portal One-way serviceInteractive service; Partnership Customized intelligent service Confined to time & location mobile serviceseamless service PastPresentFuture

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Services, not packaged software Architecture of Participation Cost-effective scalability Remixable data source and data transformations Software above the level of a single device Harnessing collective intelligence Web2.0 Core Competencies 5 Source ： O’Reilly (2005)

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Values 1.User as producer 2.Collective intelligence 3.Perpetual beta 4.Extreme ease of use Applications 1.blog, 2.Wiki, 3.Podcast, 4.RSS, 5.Tagging, 6. Social Network, 7. Search engine, 8. MPO games Technologies 1. Ajax 2. XML 3. Open API 4. Microformats 5. Flash/Flex 3 Dimensions of Web2.0 Source: Osimo (2008)

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Web2.0 Practices Human Relation System Open SystemInternal ProcessRational System 7 Decentralized, disseminated Centralized, integrated Outside of organization Inside organization Dynamic, growth, resourcing, external supports Goal setting, planning, productivity, efficiency Stabilization, control, information management, communication Coherence, morality, human resources

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Level of e-Participation Arnstein (1969) OECD Citizen-government link UNE-participation Manipulation Information Gov provide information to citizens; one-way relationship E-information Therapy Informing Consultation Consultation Available channels for public input and feedback; two-way relationship E-consultation Placation Partnership Delegated power Active participation Take part in agenda setting and policy process; government has the final say; partnership relationship E-decision making Citizen control 8 L H

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 9 Conceptual Framework e- Info disclosure e- Public consultation e- Decision making process User as producer Collective intelligence Perpetual beta Extreme ease of use Web2.0 Values E-participation

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 10 ConstructIndicator Values User as producer 1.User generated content (UGC) Collective intelligence 1.Folksonomy 2.Community networking Perpetual beta 1.Functional Service Extreme ease of use 1.Information content 2.Interface design 3.Ease of use 4.Efficiency 5.Security/Privacy 6.Responsiveness Evaluate Web2.0 & e-Participation

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 11 ConstructIndicator e-Participation e-Information A.Accessibility B.Comprehensibility C.Attainability e-Consultation A. Conducted as planned B. Consultation objectives C. Target audience D. Information appropriateness E. Keep contribution informed F. Providing feedback e-Decision making A. Impact on the policy content Evaluate Web2.0 & e-Participation (con’d)

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center National Policy Think Tank Online (NAPTTO) Stated objectives: –Policy information dissemination Inform the public about formulating policies –Policy Forum Use the platform to communicate with the public, collect policy information, and increase compliance –Policy Research Provide research reports or resources for making the policy 12

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 13 Public Discussion House Policy Pitcher’s Plate People Wiseman

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 14

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Vision 2020 “What do you expect to see in year 2020?” Sponsored by the government; maintained by the contractor Several celebrities’ blogs at one website. Channels with different themes (e.g., human rights, environmental protection, politics, health…) hosted by celebrities (e.g., journalist, DJ, professors, grassroots, writers, etc.) Open forum 15

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 16

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 17

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Main Research Questions Recap Does NAPTTO and/or Vision2020 website show Web 2.0 characteristics? Does NAPTTO and/or Vision2020 website facilitate citizen participation? And How? 18

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center CONTENT ANALYSIS… 19

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 20 1.Registered membership required to comment and respond 2.Users leaving comments can observe the counts of viewers and responses NAPTTO 1.Business model: Several Blog Channels. 2.Registration not required to join forum. Multimedia better utilized. 3.“PK” Arena allows votes and comments. 4.Discussion Board allows more detailed comments and dialogue. Vision 2020 NAPTTO vs. Vision 2020: User as producer

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 21 Two thematic parts ： 1.Policy Pitcher’s Plate – policy information: Issues designed by REDC and contracted research teams. 2.People Wiseman – policy consultation: all registered members may comment NAPTTO 1.Seemly issue-oriented design. Controlled by contractors. Issue not generated by the public or tagging. 2.Attempts to collaborate with social networking websites to expand publicity. Vision 2020 NAPTTO vs. Vision 2020: Collective Intelligence

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center 22 1.Registration required to participate – a barrier. 2.Easily understood Flash such as growing tree representing the popularity of the issue NAPTTO 1.Easy to participate (vote, comment, respond); no registration required. 2.Good download /flip page speed, about 2-4 seconds. 3.Registration is optional. To register, only user name, password, and are required. Other personal information optional. Privacy better protected. Vision 2020 NAPTTO vs. Vision 2020: Extreme ease of use

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Survey study design Online Surveys: Users on NAPTTO and Vision Pair-up comparisons 。 23 A: NAPTTO users C: Both websites usersB: Vision 2020 users Online survey to NAPTTO users Online survey to Vision 2020 users

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Preliminary Findings Different interface designs soliciting different user behaviors: –NAPTTO: users expect more government responses (Designed with stronger sense of government website) –Vision 2020: users expect more policy discussions; to know what others think. (designed with stronger sense of social network website) 24

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Preliminary Findings –Vision 2020: higher percentage of users “acquainted” with one another –NAPTTO users less satisfied with responsiveness to questions/comments. Does Web 2.0 really fit in the government? –Tradeoff: government identity vs. “social” networking; –top-down vs. bottom-up; 25

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Unfinished business… Application of Web 2.0: where you stand depends on where you sit –Elected officials –Appointed officials –Legislators –Bureaucrats, technocrats 26

Taiwan e-Governance Research Center Thank you!! 27