Evaluating eParticipation projects: practical examples and outline of an evaluation framework

Abstract

As regards the need for sound evaluation, research on eParticipation has not kept eParticipation practice. This pace importance of systematic analyses of article acknowledges processes with advances in the and outcomes against predefined criteria and intends to contribute to closing the “evaluation gap”. The assumption is that benefits to be gained from evaluation are manifold: e.g., identifying conditions and extent of success as well as deficits; using insights as leverage for change, organisational learning and improved management; or determining how far an eParticipation project helps to enhance democracy. The contribution focuses on government-driven eParticipation activities especially within the area of consultation and deliberation, and takes into account practical experience of the evaluation of a four-year transnational project including more than 30 eParticipation pilot cases. A common feature of these pilots is the combination of multiple communication channels and media which promote engagement. It is shown that the strength of the Internet mainly concerns its potential to provide transparency and to converge interests and information in a process through carefully elaborated websites. A layered model of an evaluation framework is presented with distinctive criteria, indicators and methods which are seen as an important step to support “real” evaluation. We are aware of the principle problems of such a framework – e.g. that it is either too comprehensive or that many aspects are missing or require further specification from a practitioner’s view. This theory-practice tension is addressed while we describe the evaluation method and problems ex- perienced in three specific eParticipation cases. They include two research designs – comparative and offline-online synthesising methods. Some principle challenges of the research designs are explained; i.e. in comparative design the difficulty to find comparable cases, cultural and technical differences, advantages and disadvantages of remote and mediated evaluation. For the design of combined offline and online tools, especially resource and data problems, and cooperation demands among government agencies are addressed. Independent from the design, the effort to take into account the users’ perspectives is highlighted. The outlined framework is introduced as a reference model with the intention to complement and extend the scope of evaluation perspectives and to stimulate ideas for individual evaluation projects on eParticipation.