Digital mechanisms for public participation in crisis management of post-war recovery based on digital technologies
Abstract
This paper examines the methodological foundations for studying digital mechanisms of public participation in crisis management during Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction. The author conceptualizes these mechanisms as complex socio-technical systems that integrate institutional, technological, and social dimensions. Employing a systems approach, the research illuminates the interaction between e-participation components within the turbulent post-war environment. The institutional lens enables analysis of formal and informal ‘rules of the game’ that structure the space of online democracy. The participatory focus emphasizes citizens’ role as co-creators of recovery and reconstruction policy. The network perspective highlights the horizontal, collaborative nature of digital communication amongst stakeholders. Particular attention is devoted to the potential of decentralized information platforms (blockchain, DAO) in synergy with big data and artificial intelligence. International case studies illustrate the distinctive features of e-engagement in post-war settings. Based on this analysis, the paper proposes a conceptual model for a digital ecosystem of public participation tailored to post-war Ukraine’s realities (Rebuild Ukraine e-Participation Ecosystem, RUEP). The research outlines implementation prospects and challenges for the coming years. The methodology integrates general scientific approaches, specialized methods for analyzing digital participation, and cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural perspectives. This paper should interest e-democracy researchers, public administration practitioners, and civic activists.
Downloads
References
Hibadullin, O.V., & Dunayev, I.V. (2023). Towards sustainable industrial recovery and development of Ukraine: research of regional systems during the war period. Public building: electronic collection, 2 (34). DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1992-2337-2023-2-09 URL: https://periodicals.karazin.ua/db/article/view/23397 [in Ukrainian].
Karamyshev, D., & Dziundziuk, V. (2023). Digital services as tools for implementing the concept of «public participation 2.0» in post-war reconstruction in Ukraine. Pressing problems of public administration, 2(63), 84–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1684-8489-2023-2-06 [in Ukrainian].
Kud, A.A. (2021). Decentralized information platforms as a tool for modernizing public administration. Bulletin of Postgraduate Education: Series «Management and Administration», 1, 15(44), 233–274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32405/2522-9931-2021-15(44)-233-274 [in Ukrainian].
Acquier, A., Carbone, V., & Masse, D. (2019). How to Create Value(s) in the Sharing Economy: Business Models, Scalability, and Sustainability. Technology Innovation Management Review, 9, 4–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1215
Bigon, L. (2023). Urban Renewals: Learning from a Country’s Recent Experience for Enhancing Socially-Sustainable Global Planning Policy. Urban Sci, 7(4), 109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci7040109
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2012). From Engagement to Co-production: The Contribution of Users and Communities to Outcomes and Public Value, 23, 1119–1138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9309-6
Brown, G., & Kyttä, M. (2014). Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography, 46, 122–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.004 URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0143622813002531
Cepiku, D., & Giordano, F. (2014). Co-Production in Developing Countries: Insights from the Community Health Workers Experience. Public Management Review, 16, 317–340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.822535
Council of Europe. (2016). Georgia: 2016 Report on the State of Citizenship and Human Rights Education in Europe. URL: https://www.coe.int/ru/web/edc/georgia
The World bank. (2023). Croatia: digital diagnostics. Policy brief 2023. 14 pages. URL: http://surl.li/taxkw
European Commission. (2022). Croatia: New Developments in Digital Democracy. URL: https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/inline-files/DPA_Factsheets_2022_Croatia_vFinal_0.pdf (date of access: 30.05.2024).
Dunayev, I., Byelova, L., Kud, A., & Rodchenko, V. (2023). Implementing the «government as a platform» concept: the assessment method and an optimal human-centered structure to address technological challenge. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2 (13 (122)), 6–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2023.275613 URL: http://journals.uran.ua/eejet/article/view/275613
Dunayev I., Kuchma, M., Byelova, L. et. al. (2024). Wartime destruction: regional assessment of damage to Ukraine’s infrastructure. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 81 (1), 8–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2024.2314862 URL: http://surl.li/pmeidg
Falco E., & Kleinhans R. (2018). Digital Participatory Platforms for Co- Production in Urban Development: A Systematic Review. International Journal of E-Planning Research, 7, 1–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEPR.2018070105
Georgi, R. (2023). Peace that antagonizes: Reading Colombia’s peace process as hegemonic crisis. Security Dialogue, 54 (2), 173–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106221084444
Guribye, E., & Iversen, L. (2020). Methods and Tools for Citizen Participation and Co-Creation. Arendal, Norway, Norwegian Research Centre (NORCE), 40 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25607/OBP-1924 URL: https://repository.oceanbestpractices.org/handle/11329/2313
Janowski, T., Estevez, E., & Baguma, R. (2018). Platform governance for sustainable development: Reshaping citizen-administration relationships in the digital age. Government Information Quarterly, 35 (4), S1–S16. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0740624X1830383
Lember, V., Brandsen, T., & Tõnurist, P. (2019). The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Management Review, 21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619807
Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29 (4), 446–454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.003 URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0740624X12000883
Petrović, R. (2019). Crowdsourcing War Crimes Evidence: The Case of Croatia. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 11 (3), 515–529. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huz033
Pilemalm, S., Lindell Per-Ola, Hallberg, N., & Eriksson, H. (2007). Integrating the Rational Unified Process and participatory design for development of socio-technical systems: A user participative approach. Design Studies, 28, 263–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.02.009
Regmi, K., Naidoo, J., & Pilkington, P. (2010). Understanding the Processes of Translation and Transliteration in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691000900103
Rohde, M., Aal, K., et al. (2016). Out of Syria: Mobile Media in Use at the Time of Civil War. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2016.1177300
Royo, S., Pina, V., & Garcia-Rayado, J. (2020). Decide Madrid: A critical analysis of an award-winning e-participation initiative. Sustainability, 12 (4), 1674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041674
