Digital Tools and Platforms for Enhancing Community Participation: A Review of Global Practices
Keywords:
Digital platforms, community participation, digital inclusion, e-governance, civic engagement, digital divide, qualitative researchAbstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review global practices in the use of digital tools and platforms to enhance community participation. It specifically aims to evaluate the effectiveness of these technologies in promoting inclusive and equitable engagement, while identifying key practices, challenges, and lessons from global experiences.
Methods: The study employs a qualitative research approach, systematically reviewing literature sourced from academic journals, reports, and case studies.
Results: The findings indicate that digital platforms—such as social media, e-governance tools, and participatory budgeting systems—have effectively enhanced citizen engagement, especially in developed regions. However, challenges such as the digital divide, low digital literacy, and limited infrastructure continue to impede participation, particularly in marginalized and underserved communities.
Conclusion: The paper concludes by recommending the expansion of digital infrastructure, the promotion of digital literacy programs, the design of inclusive platforms, and the strengthening of community-based participation. Additionally, it calls for future research on emerging digital trends and the influence of digital inequality in underserved regions.
References
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
Bimber, B., Cunill, M. C., Copeland, L., & Gibson, R. (2015). Digital Media and Political Participation: The Moderating Role of Political Interest Across Acts and Over Time. Social Science Computer Review, 33(1), 21-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314526559
Boulianne, S. (2020). Twenty years of digital media effects on civic and political participation. New Media & Society, 22(5), 864-884. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0093650218808186
Cabannes, Y., & Lipietz, B. (2018). Revisiting the democratic promise of participatory budgeting in light of competing political, good governance and technocratic logics. Environment and Urbanization, 30(1), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247817746279
Carpentier, N. (2016). Beyond the Ladder of Participation: An Analytical Toolkit for the Critical Analysis of Participatory Media Processes. Javnost - The Public, 23(1), 70–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2016.1149760
Chandra, P., & Nanda, R. (2021). E-Governance and its Role in Strengthening Democracy: A Study of MyGov.in. Journal of Public Affairs, 21(4), e2569. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pa.2569
Cornwall, A. & Edwards, J. (2016) Introduction: Negotiating Empowerment, Volume 47 Number 1A https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.123
Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘Participation’: Models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269-283. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsn010
Cornwall, A. (2016). Participatory spaces and the democratization of development. Development in Practice, 17(4-5), 706-712. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520701469669
Correa, T. and Pavez, I. (2016). Digital Inclusion in Rural Areas: A Qualitative Exploration of Challenges Faced by People from Isolated Communities, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 247–263, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12154
Dahlgren, P. (2013). The political web: Media, participation and alternative democracy. Springer.
Dahlgren, P. (2018). Media, participation, and alternative democracy. New Media & Society, 20(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817738253
DO4 Africa (2020). Digital literacy in Africa https://www.do4africa.org/en/digital-literacy-in-africa/
Freelon, D., McIlwain, C. D., & Clark, M. (2016). Beyond the hashtags: #Ferguson, #Blacklivesmatter, and the online struggle for offline justice. New Media & Society, 22(3), 475-495. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2747066
Fung, A. (2015). Putting the public back into governance: The challenges of citizen participation and its future. Public Administration Review, 75(4), 513-522. Putting the Public Back into Governance: The Challenges of Citizen Participation and Its Future - Fung - 2015 - Public Administration Review - Wiley Online Library
Gaventa, J. (2006). Triumph, deficit, or contestation? Deepening the ‘Deepening Democracy’ debate. IDS Working Paper in conjunction with LogoLink and the Citizenship DRC. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Gherghina, S., Soare, S., & Jacquet, V. (2020). Deliberative democracy and political parties: functions and consequences. European Political Science, 19(2), 200-211.
Habermas, J. (1991). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262581080/the-structural-transformation-of-the-public-sphere/
Heeks, R. (2022). Digital inequality beyond the digital divide: conceptualizing adverse digital incorporation in the global South. Information Technology for Development, 28(4), 688–704. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2022.2068492
Hickey, S. (2004). Participation: from tyranny to transformation: exploring new approaches to participation in development. Zed books.
Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Democracy's Fourth Wave? Digital Media and the Arab Spring. Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/book/12228
Idzi, F.M., Gomes, R.C. (2022). Digital governance: government strategies that impact public services. GPPG 2, 427–452 https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00055-w
International Telecommunication Union. (2021). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2021. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2021.pdf
JanvanDijk. (2020). The digital divide. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 208 pp. £17.99 (paperback) (ISBN 9781509534456)
Keryova, E. (2020). YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture: 2nd ed., Jean Burgess and Joshua Green, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2018, 191 pages, £12.99 (paperback), £40.78 (hardcover), ISBN-13: 978-0-7456-6019-6. Information, Communication & Society, 23(9), 1386–1387. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1726989
Linders, D. (2019). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 445-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.04.003
Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2018). The second wave of digital-era governance: A quasi-paradigm for government on the web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2128), 20170358. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2017.0358
Medaglia, R. (2018). E-participation research: Moving characterization forward (2006–2016). Government Information Quarterly, 35(3), 437-447. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0740624X17304070?via%3Dihub
Mohan, G., & Stokke, K. (2000). Participatory development and empowerment: The dangers of localism. Third World Quarterly, 21(2), 247-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590050004346
Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2007). Digital citizenship: The Internet, society, and participation. MIT Press. https://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/3275/Digital-CitizenshipThe-Internet-Society-and
Pateman, C. (2012). Participatory Democracy Revisited. Perspectives on Politics, 10(1), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592711004877
Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., … Stern, M. J. (2015). Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532
Sampaio, R. C., Maia, R. C. M., & Marques, F. P. J. (2021). E-participation and deliberation on digital participatory budgeting: Case studies from Latin America. Journal of Public Deliberation, 17(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.973
Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341-362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804042519
Sintomer, Y., Herzberg, C., & Röcke, A. (2008). Participatory budgeting in Europe: Potentials and challenges. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), 164-178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00777.x
Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300228175
United Nations. (2020). E-Government Survey 2020: Digital government in the decade of action for sustainable development. United Nations Publications. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2020
van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354-375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082
Wampler, B. (2020). Participatory budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, cooperation, and accountability. Penn State University Press. https://books.google.rw/books/about/Participatory_Budgeting_in_Brazil.html?id=Y6-14Zpr0lkC&redir_esc=y
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. (2018). World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/
