- Email: [email protected]
The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain
ARTICLE IN PRESS The International Information & Library Review (2005) 37, 87–97
The International Information & Library Review www.elsevier.com/locate/iilr
The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain Rabia Karakaya Polat Department of International Relations, Isik University, Buyukdere Cad. Maslak, 34398 Istanbul, Turkey
Summary This article seeks to explore the role of the Internet in enhancing democratic local governance. The article suggests that the unique role of elected local authorities is under threat both because of declining levels of citizen participation as well as the transformation of the structure of local government into a system of local governance. In this context, local government can use the Internet to enhance its relations with citizens and to protect its unique position in the broad governance structure. The Internet enables the local authorities to open new channels of participation and actively encourages citizens to use these channels to participate. However, the Internet is not being exploited to its full potential. Likewise, not all authorities are benefiting from the Internet to the same extent. The article suggests that there are variations between local authorities and attempts to explain this variation drawing on concepts from new institutional theory and empirical evidence collected at three local authorities in Britain. & 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction This paper explores the role of the Internet in enhancing democratic local governance. Local authorities can use the Internet to increase their internal efficiency, to ensure better communication with their partner organizations and to join up their services with those organizations. However, the main interest of this paper is with the democratic aspect of local governance rather than its organizational and service delivery dimensions. The paper focuses on elected local government within the Tel.: +90 212 2862960 1701.
E-mail address: [email protected].
broad governance structure because of its unique democratic role as an elected body. However, this unique role is under threat on several grounds. First, low electoral turnouts undermine the representativeness and accountability of local councils.1 Second, growing emphasis on governance poses a 1 The terms ‘local authority’ and ‘local council’ are used interchangeably throughout this article. Local authority refers to a semi-independent, politically decentralized, multi-functional body, created by and exercising responsibilities conferred by Parliament. The council is the legal embodiment of the local authority: the body of elected councillors (or members), who have collectively determined and been ultimately responsible for the policy and actions of the authority. The officers, on the other hand, are paid employees and other staff of the authority (Wilson & Game, 2002, Chap. 6).
1057-2317/$ - see front matter & 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.iilr.2005.04.001
ARTICLE IN PRESS 88 threat to local councils, as local partnerships can also claim responsibility for decisions about the locality. In this context, local government can use the Internet to enhance its relations with citizens and to protect its unique position in the broad governance structure. The Internet enables local councils to open new channels of participation and actively encourage citizens to use these channels to participate. However, the Internet is not being exploited to its full potential. Likewise, not all councils are benefiting from the Internet to the same extent. This paper suggests that there are variations between local councils and attempts to explain this variation drawing on concepts from new institutional theory and empirical evidence collected at three local councils in Britain. The first section of the paper provides a conceptualization of democratic governance. The second discusses the ways in which the Internet can be used to support democracy by enhancing citizen participation. The third section draws some concepts from new institutional theory that may help in explaining the developments in British local government. The fourth presents the evidence from the case studies and describes the way in which the Internet is actually used in local government. The final section discusses the limitations that constrain the full exploitation of the Internet for enhanced citizen participation.
Conceptualizing democratic governance The 1990s witnessed a shift of emphasis from local government to local governance at both academic and policy levels (Rhodes, 1997; Stoker, 1996; Wilson, 1998). At the heart of this shift lay concerns about the capacity of the government to deliver public policy goals and a number of other wider societal factors. ‘‘Challenges facing communities and countries in the twenty-first century are sufficiently complex in scope and scale as to require the involvement of a range of actors with complementary perspectives, expertise and resources’’ (Sullivan & Skelcher, 2002, p. 3). In particular, issues such as crime, regeneration and the environment require the involvement of a range of actors. The emphasis in governance literature is mostly upon agencies, partnership working and networks as ways of solving ‘wicked social issues’ and delivering public services jointly with a range of actors. In this respect, the Internet could play a role in connecting these actors through a network-
R.K. Polat ing system in order to share information, expertise and resources. The Internet can also be used to establish multi-purpose portals designed to integrate departments and services and present a unified and user-friendly front end such as Directgov in Britain.2 These are examples of possible ways in which the Internet could be used to enhance governance mechanisms. However, governance, as opposed to government, is about the participation of different communities within a local governance structure. It changes the relations between government and people as well as the role of elected politicians. According to Stoker (1994), ‘good governance’ should incorporate a willingness to open channels for citizen participation and arenas for deliberation. This democratic dimension of governance requires the use of the Internet as a way of opening new channels for electronic participation and generating more participation from citizens. This can be achieved through the use of online polls, discussion forums, and other forms of online consultation. The Internet can also be used to assist elected councillors in their representative role by facilitating communication with their constituents. This paper focuses on the democratic dimension of governance rather than its organizational or service-delivery dimensions. The research focuses on elected local government within the local governance system because, although the elected local authority is only one element of local governance (Wilson, 1998), it is still the only elected body with the potential democratic legitimacy for locality-wide issues. The degree to which the democratic potential of the Internet is realized is related to the existence of ongoing communication between the council and the citizens. Local government needs strong mechanisms for citizen participation in order to consolidate its position in a governance structure that poses a threat to its role, particularly in the context of declining electoral turnouts. The Internet can be a helpful tool as long as there is a will to use it for such purposes. The way in which the Internet is designed depends on the national and local political context. In the UK, there is a clear political commitment to use the Internet both for providing public services online and for encouraging people to participate in the democratic process. In order to achieve the first goal, the government set an explicit target of 100 per cent availability of all public services online by the year 2005. There are also guidelines concerning democratic applications, but no explicit 2 www.direct.gov.uk is the main portal for a wide range of public services information in Britain.
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain target has been set. Despite these national standards and priorities, there is also a degree of flexibility and discretion, which allows local councils to develop strategies that are responsive to the needs of the locality and compatible with their understanding of governance and democracy.
The Internet and democratic deficit The debate about the ways in which technology can aid democracy has been ongoing, especially in the ‘advanced’ parts of the world, since the 1980s (Arterton, 1987; Mclean, 1989). This debate accelerated with the proliferation of the Internet as an information and communication medium. There has been considerable speculation about the possible contribution of the Internet to democracy. Suggestions range from the creation of a virtual public sphere (Schalken, 2000) and the expansion of opportunities to enhance civil liberties (Percy Smith, 1995), to increased accountability (Hague & Loader, 1999) and participation (Lenk, 1999; White, 1997). Two main factors have been influential in the acceleration of the debate on the use of the technology (recently, the Internet) for democratic governance: the specific features of the Internet that may potentially contribute to democracy, and the increasing problems of representative democracy, particularly that of declining interest and participation in politics.
Specific features of the Internet In order to evaluate the potential of the Internet for democratic governance, it is essential first to identify the key defining features of the Internet and to explore the new democratic possibilities those features create. Although not an exhaustive list, it is possible to identify six specific characteristics of the Internet which render it of particular value to participation and democracy. Percy Smith (1995) identifies those characteristics as the ability to transfer high volumes of information at considerable speed, user control, narrow casting, decentralized nature, and interactivity. To this list, Weare (2002) adds the Internet’s ‘inherently multidimensional’ nature in the sense that users are connected to each other without any kind of hierarchical order. Each of these features can potentially contribute to a more democratic society. For example, the decentralized nature of the Internet allows for a more pluralist environment than could be achieved by previous technologies such as television and radio. Its interactive
89
nature allows contribution from the user instead of broadcasting data from one centre to many users. Among these possible ways of enhancing democratic governance, this paper is concerned specifically with political participation as a principle of democracy. In the local governance context, citizens can potentially reach information about their council through the council’s website, contact their representatives easily via email and state their own views through online consultations.
Problems of declining interest and accountability Governance is sometimes perceived as a threat to the accountability of local decisions. Many of the partners in local partnerships are non-elected bodies and it is not always clear exactly how the decisions are made. The problem is not only whether or not electoral arrangements exist, but also whether there is accessible information explaining how the partnership works. A recent study shows that one quarter of the partnerships surveyed were failing to implement any of the accountability and openness practices that applied to local government (Robinson et al., 2000 in Sullivan & Skelcher, 2002). In this context, the elected local government can claim to be the true representative of the people with its open and accountable structure. However, this is problematic for various reasons. There is a widespread belief among observers of local politics that the public has little interest in the activities of local government. The indifference of citizens manifests itself in low electoral turnouts, which have fallen sharply since the mid 1990s to around 30 per cent in Britain. Moreover, many studies have shown that citizens are unaware of the structures, changes and services of their local council (Rallings, Temple, & Thrasher, 1994). While citizens believe that their participation would not make any difference anyway (Lowndes, Pratchett, & Stoker, 2001b), local authorities claim that people do not care as long as their bins are emptied (Lowndes, Pratchett, & Stoker, 2001a). This concern has prompted the central government in Britain to adopt some measures designed to bring the citizens and the councils closer. A White Paper published by the Department of Environment, Transportation and Regions (DETR, 1998) states that ‘‘the government wishes to see consultation and participation embedded into the culture of all councils’’. Later, the 2001 White Paper attributed a leadership role to local councils within their communities and recommended the use of the Internet as a way of realizing this role. In
ARTICLE IN PRESS 90 this context, it is suggested that the Internet can potentially help to build democratic governance where citizens are more informed and involved. At both national and local levels, there have been experiments with online voting as well as discussion forums and other sorts of online consultations. However, it would be too naı¨ve to suggest that the Internet offers an ultimate solution to low levels of participation. The Internet introduces easier methods of communication and hence potentially makes dissemination of information and participation more convenient. However, it does not solve the problem of motivation. People may still continue to abstain from participating if they do not believe that their participation will make a difference. Therefore, policies that are directed towards the utilization of the Internet for democratic purposes need to consider the reasons behind citizens’ lack of interest. Criticizing New Labour’s democratic renewal agenda, Rao (2000) claims ‘‘the problems are not attributed to any deep-seated malaise, but rather to the inflexibility and inconvenience of present arrangements’’ (p. 2). Moreover, the capacity of the Internet to solve these problems is limited because the Internet itself raises social, political and legal issues. One such issue is the so-called ‘digital divide’ (Norris, 2001), which refers to the exclusion of certain segments of society as Internet use becomes more common in the public arena. Looking at the regular users of the Internet demonstrates that the majority of users are male, relatively young, well educated, with a medium to high income (National Statistics, 2003). There are also inequalities related to urban–rural distinctions intensified by the profitoriented strategies of information technology companies. Since the provision of Internet access is largely dependent on market forces, the infrastructure is highly biased in favour of developed areas, because technology companies are reluctant to invest in deprived areas due to the likelihood of an insufficient return (OECD, 2001). Although governments are willing to exploit these technologies, they rely on market forces for their delivery. However, it is acknowledged that governments must develop a strategy to provide Internet access to those who cannot afford it. This is achieved, to a certain extent, by providing public access points in libraries, schools and community centres. However, providing physical access is insufficient because using the technology requires a certain level of familiarity and skill, the lack of which creates psychological barriers. This limits the reliability of the consultation and participation efforts conducted through the Internet because the participants are inevitably self-selected and un-
R.K. Polat representative. There are also privacy issues related to the use of the Internet in the public arena. There are problems concerning how to ensure that online records will not be abused by commercial interests or monitored by the government. There are also security issues concerning the protection of communications between citizens and government as well as between various government agencies against technical failure or deliberate attacks (Pratchett et al., 2002). These are mostly issues that need to be resolved at a national, even global, level, although local authorities do have some power to offer solutions to access issues. Therefore, this paper is not interested in analysing the impact of these problems on local governance and democracy. The main purpose is to look inside local councils in order to see how they use the Internet in the context of these developments. As Dutton (1999) suggests: Digital government can erode or enhance democratic processes y but the outcome will be determined by the interaction of policy choices, management strategies and cultural responses—not by advanced technology alone (p. 193). There are variations in preferred technologies, methods, and strategies. As Laudon (1977) suggests, ‘‘implicit in the development of certain information technologies are very definite models of democracy which differ considerably from one another’’ (p. 14). For example, some councils prefer to use their website primarily to inform people while others aim to use it for consulting the citizens. It is not only Internet use that differs depending on the aims of the specific council, the attitudes of councils towards citizen involvement as well as actual participation rates (both electoral and non-electoral) also vary across localities (Lowndes, Pratchett, & Stoker, 2002; Parry, Moyser, & Day, 1992; Rallings et al., 1994). Maloney, Smith, & Stoker (2000) explain this with reference to ‘political opportunity structures’ while Lowndes et al. (2002) stress the ‘filtering’ role of local political institutions. Sullivan and Skelcher (2002) also emphasize institutional elements (rules, culture and orientation) among the factors that influence citizen participation. In order to be able to explain the differences among local councils, it is helpful to use insights from new institutionalism literature.
New institutionalism The purpose of this section is not to provide a comprehensive review of the new institutionalism literature, but to introduce some concepts from
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain this literature that will assist the analysis of the data in the next section. The impact of institutions on policy has been an enduring concern in political studies. The first generation of institutionalism was concerned with the formal legal analysis of organizations and was attacked on various fronts, especially by the behaviourist approaches. It reemerged in the 1980s, notably with the works of March and Olsen (1984, 1989), with different tools and a new focus of analysis. Lowndes (2002, p. 97) suggests six analytical continua in relation to which new institutionalism departs from the old.
From a focus on organizations to a focus on rules: Political institutions are no longer equated with political organizations. Rather, they are seen as sets of rules that guide and constrain the behaviour of actors. From a formal to an informal conception of institutions: New institutionalism focuses upon both formal and informal conventions. The latter are not consciously designed or specified in writing; they are the routines, customs, traditions, and conventions that are part of habitual action. From a static to a dynamic conception of institutions: Institutions are often associated with stability and continuity. Institutions are treated as things which sustain over time and which are hard to change. New institutionalists, on the other hand, treat institutions as processes that are open to change. From submerged values to a value-critical stance: Old institutionalism was concerned with values and norms that would create ‘good government’. New institutionalists, by contrast, are concerned with finding out how different institutions embody different values. They claim that the structure of governance is not value neutral but embedded in and sustaining of political values (Pierre, 1999, p. 390). From a holistic to a disaggregated conception of institutions: New institutionalists tend to focus on various aspects and components of the government machine instead of studying the government as a whole. From independence to embeddedness: New institutionalists stress that political institutions are not independent entities existing outside of space and time. They are embedded in their wider social, economic, geographic and political context. They reflect the general values of the society they are embedded in.
The distinction is not clear-cut and ‘new institutionalism’ is not so ‘new’ anymore, as it was first
91
coined by March and Olsen in 1984. Therefore, the term institutionalism will be used hereafter. Before proceeding, it is also necessary to define institutions. Hall (1986) offers the concept of ‘standard operating procedures’ in order to differentiate institutions from broad terms like culture. Lowndes and Wilson (2003) define institutions as ‘formal and informal rules that guide and constrain political behaviour’. These are rules which are agreed upon and followed by the actors involved. Institutions offer a sense of stability but they can change as a result of accidents, evolution and intentional design (Goodin, 1996). Institutional design goes beyond structural design such as changes in management, organization or reshuffling of departments. Structural changes do not necessarily lead to changes in values because participants over time ascribe value to organizational structures and processes beyond their technical instrumental qualities (Olsen, 1997). Designs are more likely to be successful when there is harmony between the intentions of the designer and the existing institutions. Usually, new designs are resisted because ‘‘those affected see reform proposals not as improvements and progress but as disruptive, resource-demanding, painful and threatening in terms of status, power and policy consequences’’ (Olsen, 1997). This resistance is even greater if existing institutions are embedded within a wider institutional environment. The ideal designer is one who recognizes the importance of existing institutions. Goodin (1996) suggests an institutional design should be considered as a redesigning process. Institutions are not constructed upon a tabula rasa, they are built on existing institutions. However, designers might sometimes aim to introduce a more robust design process in order to achieve greater changes (Lowndes & Wilson, 2003). Timing of the design or special circumstances may also support (or otherwise) the design process (Olsen, 1997). For example, a reform programme can introduce change more easily following a major political control or management change because designs are more likely to be successful in relatively new arenas where there is only a limited level of institutionalization and consequently more space for new designs to take hold. Sometimes, change in institutions may occur as a reaction to an opportunity. For example, improvements in technology can open up new ways of doing things which organizations may adopt; this may in turn lead to changes in the role of employees or the services that the organization provides. Some institutional settings are more suitable than others for the exploitation of such opportunities.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 92 Institutions also change as a result of imitation of institutional arrangements elsewhere. New institutions may be adopted if they have acquired social meanings. Offe (1996) suggests that designers are more likely to succeed if they copy institutional arrangements with a high status and good record elsewhere, or if they present designs as such copies rather than as instruments for achieving substantive goals. Imitation serves to play down conflicts and reduces the likelihood that designers will be suspected of favouring their own interests. ‘‘Organisations which exist in highly elaborated institutional environments and succeed in becoming isomorphic with these environments gain the legitimacy and resources needed to survive’’ (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 352). DiMaggio and Powell (1983) suggest the term ‘institutional isomorphism’ to describe this process of homogenization between organizations (p. 149). Institutional isomorphism promotes the success and survival of organizations by incorporating ‘externally legitimated structures’ (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 348). The next section uses some of these themes in explaining the developments in local government. These themes are:
Compatibility between new and existing institutions, Windows of opportunity, Processes of isomorphism.
Three localities, three stories This research is based on a case study approach in order to capture the complexities within which local government operates. Three local authorities were examined. These were chosen according to two main criteria. First, it was decided that the three localities should possess similar social and economic characteristics in order to ensure that differences in electronic participation policies did not stem from different levels of Internet access, civicness3 or demographic factors. It was also decided that the localities should have a certain level of Internet access and civicness so as to ensure that local authority reluctance, were any to be observed, did not stem from low levels of Internet access or a lack of demand from citizens for participation. There is sufficient evidence to assume that Internet access is highly related to socio-economic 3 Civicness is broadly defined as attitudes towards political participation and associational activity in general.
R.K. Polat status (Foley, 2000; National Statistics, 2001). For socio-economic status, the deprivation index of the DETR (2000) which includes indicators of income, employment, education and skills and access to social services, was used to exclude most deprived localities (the lowest third). In ascertaining the level of civicness, the National League Table of ESRC Locality Effect project,4 which includes indicators of electoral turnout, volunteering and lottery applications, was used. The data were collected primarily through interviews conducted in three local councils in England. An analysis of local council websites was also conducted. In addition, the main documents produced by local authorities in relation to electronic government were analysed. Before beginning to present the evidence, a description of these cases is necessary.
Harborough District Council This very large rural district council spreads over 260 sq. miles. It is one of the most affluent localities in the whole country, and has a population of 77,500. It consists of two town centres and various villages dispersed in a very large area. Despite the level of affluence, access to services and communication with the council has been a problem because of its rural nature. The level of affluence has been an obstacle for securing government funds for a long time. The council established the Welland Partnership with four other rural councils in order to find solutions to similar problems and put in joint bids for government funding. As a result, the council succeeded in securing funds for a Pathfinder project, which aimed to develop electronic delivery of services and citizen participation through community portals. The whole e-government and e-democracy agenda in Harborough DC has been driven by the Welland Partnership. Internet access levels are above the national average.
Borough Council of Wellingborough This is a borough council with a population of 68,000. It is not as wealthy as Harborough due particularly to the existence of pockets of significant deprivation. There are also problems of declining industries. There are a substantial number of ethnic minority communities, especially 4
The project seeks to explain variation in levels of local political participation beyond that explained by socio-economic factors. The project is based on a data set of scores in all English local authorities for (a) democratic innovation by local authority and (b) social capital in the society.
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain African–Caribbean households. The council has a large housing stock and a significant portion of the population consists of ex-Londoners who have moved to the borough. In 1997, the council went through a political control change from Conservative to Labour, which was followed by a management change. The council had an inward-looking style both in terms of partnership working with other agencies and in terms of citizen participation. In order to reverse this, the new political and management leaders established a Community and Cultural Development Department, which had never existed before.
Oadby and Wigston Borough Council This is one of the smallest councils in England in terms of population (54,000), geographical size (9 sq. miles) and budget (£5 million). The council consists of three main areas with different levels of affluence as well as civicness. It is proud to have close, face-to-face relations with the residents and perceives this as its biggest strength. The council was Conservative controlled for a long period. In 1991, the Liberals took control on the strength of a campaign emphasizing consultation and a willingness to break from the past. The most heavily emphasized values throughout the interviews were those of being close to citizens and of being a small council that was willing to listen.
‘Everything fitted quite nicely’ versus ‘he must have been drunk’ New institutions need to be justifiable, both socially and economically, in the eyes of the public and the designers themselves. In some cases, there was a sense that new institutions associated with electronic participation were seen as unnecessary and unjustified. In Harborough, actors perceived the government agenda (Internet use for democratic renewal and for efficient/modern service provision) as something that the council already needed. Because of the rural environment, the council was having problems in providing services in some areas. In fact, the council established a partnership (Welland) with neighbouring rural councils in order to find solutions to their problems arising from the rural environment. Therefore, when the central government announced the Pathfinder scheme (to provide extra funding for councils who wanted to experiment with different technologies), the council did not hesitate to put forward a joint bid. There was an economic motivation because the scheme offered funding
93
for electronic services and consultation purposes. But the project also had social legitimacy because it would enable the council to provide services to remote areas. So, as one officer explained, ‘everything fitted quite nicely’. In Oadby and Wigston, by contrast, new institutions associated with electronic participation were considered illegitimate for three main reasons. First, there was a belief that there was no need for electronic participation due to the geography of the locality (it is very small). Second, there was a belief that the council offered sufficient mechanisms for people to participate anyway. Third, the fact that the council had to run parallel consultation, both online and offline, was considered economically unjustifiable. Actors complained that they had already cultivated good relations with residents, their surveys revealed satisfaction with the council and they did not want to jeopardize this by transforming themselves into a faceless and ‘remote call centre’. The Director of Resources was so shocked in disapproval that he suggested that ‘the Prime Minister must have been drunk’ when he came up ‘with this idea of citizens using the Internet to watch the committee meetings online’. The Chief Executive complained that because it would be unacceptably exclusionary for the council to stop providing face-to-face services, it was necessary, in order to meet the government targets, for it to run parallel services. Consequently, an enterprise that was supposed to save the council money actually ended up costing the council more. There was no economic or social legitimacy attached to the government agenda (in relation to Internet use) in Oadby and Wigston.
Isomorphism: Genuine adaptation or tokenism Whatever the degree of compatibility with old institutions, local councils have been doing similar things to address the government agenda. For example, all councils appointed e-champions to promote Internet use. They also employed webmasters or made agreements with external companies to take care of their websites. Apart from this functional isomorphism, there is also a normative homogenization process. In many interviews, actors mentioned that there is no big demand from citizens for the council to use the Internet to communicate with citizens. However, they still want to invest in technology projects because they believe that ‘this is going to be the way’ local councils communicate with citizens. Local councils monitor other authorities, especially those they
ARTICLE IN PRESS 94
R.K. Polat
perceive as similar to themselves. The purpose is to minimize the risks associated with change and the emergence of new structures. The risk is not only related to the financial cost of experimenting. Observing and imitating others provides an ‘external legitimization’ (Meyer & Rowan, 1977) to new structures and helps to minimize objections from opposition groups. When experiments with electronic participation (and e-democracy in general) have been perceived as successful or legitimate, they have often been imitated by other local authorities. A good example of such mimetic processes was observed in Harborough, where the idea of a community portal was in fact copied from a neighbouring council who had previously implemented a very successful portal. This normative homogenization is true of citizen participation as well. Local authorities are starting to perceive citizen participation as a norm. As one interviewee noted: In the past if somebody asked ‘have you consulted people’ you could say ‘no, this is our business’, these days you can’t say no. Everybody realises that they have got to do it (Best Value officer). So, both citizen participation and the use of the Internet for this purpose have started to gather some normative strength. However, it is difficult to understand whether this is genuine, or if it is still perceived as an external regulative pressure. In some cases, deadlines and rigid targets set by the central government cause councils to pay lip service to participation initiatives. Especially when harmony with the existing institutions is lacking, actors may choose to play tactically without actually believing in what they do. As one interviewee put it, ‘‘we all learnt how to play the tick box game’’.
Windows of opportunity Some councils are more advantaged in terms of the timing of their design efforts. For example, Harborough was part of the Welland Partnership and, when the government announced the Pathfinder scheme, the council made a joint bid and managed to secure funding. All interviewees agreed that were the council not in that partnership and were it not to have secured the funding, it could not have progressed on e-government as much as it had in fact done. The importance of that funding is that it triggered a virtuous circle in relation to Internet use. The council used the funds to put the council’s planning services online. Soon
after, other departments were expected to develop projects to use the Internet more effectively. The funding also saved the officers from the burden of trying to convince elected members to spend money on Internet projects. In other councils, this was a major problem because members wanted to see tangible benefits; they wanted to spend on ‘vote winners’. In Harborough, however, officers could secure the support of members so long as they used the fund and demonstrated tangible outcomes. Wellingborough also had the advantage of having experienced a political control and management change. The council used to be very inward looking and closed to citizen participation and partnership working. After the political control change in 1997, a new Chief Executive and some high-level officers were appointed. Also a Community Development department was established in order to change the council’s introspective character. Actors within this department were better able to grasp the significance of citizen involvement and the Internet than were actors within other departments. As a less institutionalized zone, this department played a crucial role in promoting citizen participation. In short, design efforts in relation to the use of the Internet for democratic purposes took place in conditions favourable to the emergence and consolidation of new institutions.
Discussion: Limitations and implications This section aims to discuss the limitations that prevent the full exploitation of the Internet for citizen participation and democratic governance. It is possible to analyse these limitations under two categories: organizational and local/societal. Organizational: One problem is the degree of compatibility of government demands with the councils’ strategy and existing institutions. If the design effort of the central government is seen as ‘external’ to the organization, local councils find it more difficult to ‘digest’. Actors within councils tend to be pragmatic in their use of the egovernment agenda: they aim not only to meet government targets, but also to realize some benefits for themselves at the same time. However, there is not always a clear strategy concerning the purpose of Internet use. Is it for providing online services, for making savings through increased efficiency or for citizen involvement? Both at officer and member levels, councils are concerned primarily with the first two viewing the promotion of citizen involvement as less important. Some
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain actors are aware of this and they blame the government for setting excessively rigid targets on electronic service delivery. They claim that they have to put aside resources in order to meet government targets before they can begin to invest in online citizen participation and other democratic purposes. Another issue is related to the institutionalization of new working methods or new approaches to citizen participation. Although there has been an obvious increase in the consultation and participation efforts of local councils in recent years, in many cases it has not been considered ‘part and parcel’ of their job. This is true for the use of the Internet as well. Actors believe that they must have a website, but, once it is launched, it is pushed aside and forgotten except for minor updates. Again, the problem is that the Internet is not regarded as an integral feature of working practice. Those who champion the use of the Internet acknowledge that this is a big issue. An e-champion remarked that ‘‘you can have all the resources in the world, but if you can’t convince people that they have got to change the way they do things it won’t do us any good at all’’. Although citizen involvement and partnership work are becoming increasingly common, they have not yet become the ‘norm’. The long arm of the past, as Olsen (1997) puts it, prevents the introduction of radical changes in terms of attitudes towards enhanced citizen participation. There are also practical limitations, especially in terms of resources. Local councils are constrained by the lack of financial and human resources. Regardless of size, all councils are expected to meet the same standards and the fund made available by the government is very small in information technology terms. This point echoes Pratchett and Leach’s (2003) remark that the national e-government strategy penalizes smaller local authorities because these authorities require the same technological base as larger authorities. This problem is exacerbated as the officers find it difficult to convince elected members of the need for IT expenditures because ‘they do not see the benefits’. Local/societal: This group of barriers largely stems from the limited levels of Internet access in the localities and the concern that electronic participation could disproportionately strengthen the voice of certain segments of the society. It is acknowledged that increased electronic participation can constitute a threat to democracy when it is not distributed equally among different sections of society. Frequently, respondents highlighted the lack of participation in their consultation events, and the fact that they were always attended by the
95
same people. This is in line with major studies on political participation which confirm that most of the existing participation comes from a small but active segment of society (Parry et al., 1992). In some cases, this very fact becomes a barrier to the design and implementation of electronic participation initiatives. Another important barrier to the use of the Internet is related to a perceived lack of demand from citizens. Actors claim that people are not interested in what the local government does as long as their bins are emptied. This might seem like an excuse but the actual take up levels of online consultation (responses to online polls, forums) show how limited their reach is. All councils shared a disappointment about the levels of response to their online consultation. In some cases, the councils think that face-to-face communication is important for the role of local government. Some actors do not want the council to be reduced to a website or a call centre because, again, that is not what their community wants. There is a belief that electronic communication should not replace traditional channels, especially face-to-face contact. These limitations and the actual usage of the Internet by local councils have some implications for local democratic governance. Although some councils may appear to be successful in experimenting with the Internet (obtaining government funding, satisfying government targets, establishing partnerships, putting online services and consultation), people living in those areas may still be unaware and unaffected. On the other hand, a council that is resistant to the use of the Internet for citizen involvement may have other conventional mechanisms of participation. The council’s resistance may stem from concerns about social exclusion or belief in the value of face-to-face relations with the community. But this raises questions about the leadership role of a local council. Should the local government use the Internet to generate demand despite low levels of demand? Should councils try to lead the way for future generations despite low Internet usage?
Conclusions This paper has sought to analyse how the Internet is being used to support democratic local governance. The local governance structure is open to criticism because of its unaccountable structure. In this sense, the local government can claim to have a privileged role in the structure due to its elected nature. However, this privileged role is under
ARTICLE IN PRESS 96 threat, especially in the context of declining voting turnouts. In this context, the Internet could be used by the local government to enhance its representativeness and accountability by opening new channels of citizen participation. However, the empirical evidence shows that neither the demands of central government nor the availability of the necessary technology are sufficient radically to change the attitudes of local government towards participation. There are institutional, organizational and societal barriers to the full exploitation of the Internet. Local councils prefer to adopt strategies that enable maximum continuity and compatibility with their perception of citizen participation. Therefore, there is a substantial amount of continuity in terms of their attitude towards participation. But it would be wrong to overlook the amount of change that has taken place in their attitudes towards both citizen participation and the use of the Internet for participative purposes. There are signs that citizen participation is becoming more institutionalized. However, if local government is to fulfil its unique role as an elected authority within the governance structure, there is still a lot to be done by exploiting the Internet to enhance its relations with the community.
References Arterton, F. C. (1987). Teledemocracy: Can technology protect democracy?. California: Sage. DETR. (1998). Enhancing public participation in local government: A research report. London: DETR. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160. Department of Environment Transport and Regions. (2000). Indices of deprivation. London: DETR. Dutton, W. H. (1999). Society on the line: Information politics in the digital age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foley, P. (2000). Whose net? Characteristics of Internet users in the UK. A report to DETR. Goodin, R. E. (1996). Institutions and their design. In R. E. Goodwin (Ed.), The theory of institutional design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hague, B. N., & Loader, B. D. (Eds.). (1999). Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age. London: Routledge. Hall, P. (1986). Governing the economy. New York: Oxford University Press. Laudon, K. J. (1977). Communications technology and democratic participation. New York: Praeger. Lenk, K. (1999). Electronic support of citizen participation in planning processes activity. In B. N. Hague, & B. D. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age. London: Routledge. Lowndes, V. (2002). The institutionalist approach. In D. Marsh, & G. Stoker (Eds.), Theory and methods in political science, (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
R.K. Polat Lowndes, V., & Wilson, D. (2003). Balancing revisability and robustness? A new institutionalist perspective on local government modernization. Public administration, 81(2), 275–298. Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2001a). Trends in public participation—1: Local government perspectives. Public Administration, 79(1), 205–222. Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2001b). Trends in public participation—2: Citizens’ perspectives. Public Administration, 79(2), 445–455. Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2002). Social capital and political participation: How do local institutions constrain or enable the mobilisation of social capital. Paper for Cambridge social capital seminar, November, Cambridge. Maloney, W., Smith, G., & Stoker, G. (2000). Social capital and urban governance: Adding a more contextualized ‘‘topdown’’ perspective. Political Studies, 48, 802–820. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organisational factors in political life. The American Political Science Review, 78, 734–749. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organisational basis of politics. New York: Free Press. Mclean, I. (1989). Democracy and new technology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalised organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. National Statistics. (2001). Internet access. London: National Statistics. National Statistics. (2003). Internet access. London: National Statistics. Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty and the Internet in democratic societies. New York: Cambridge University Press. OECD. (2001). Understanding the digital divide. France: OECD Publications. Offe, C. (1996). Designing institutions in East European transitions. In R. E. Goodin (Ed.), The theory of institutional design. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Olsen, J. P. (1997). Institutional design in democratic contexts. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 5(3), 203–229. Parry, G., Moyser, G., & Day, N. (1992). Political participation and democracy in Britain. London: Cambridge University Press. Percy Smith, J. (1995). Digital democracy: Information and communication technologies in local politics. Research Report No. 14. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Pierre, J. (1999). Models of urban governance: The institutional dimension of urban politics. Urban Affairs Review, 34(3), 372–396. Pratchett, L., & Leach, S. (2003). Local government: Selectivity and diversity. Parliamentary Affairs, 56(2), 255–269. Pratchett, L., Birch, S., Candy, S., Rogerson, S., Stone, B., & Wingfield, M. (2002). The implementation of electronic voting. Report by De Montfort University, University of Essex and BMRB International. Rallings, C., Temple, M., & Thrasher, M. (1994). Community identity and participation in local democracy. Research Report No.1. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Rao, N. (2000). Reviving local democracy: New labour, new politics?. Bristol: The Policy Press. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press. Schalken, K. (2000). Virtual communities: New public spheres on the Internet? In J. Hoff, I. Horrocks, & P. Tops (Eds.),
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain Democratic governance and new technology. London: Routledge. Stoker, G. (1994). The role and purpose of local government. Research Report No. 4. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Stoker, G. (1996). Governance as theory: Five propositions, Enjeux de Debates sur La Gouvernance. Universite de Lausanne. Sullivan, H., & Skelcher, C. (2002). Working across boundaries: Collaboration in public services. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
97
Weare, C. (2002). The Internet and democracy: The causal links between technology and politics. International Journal of Public Administration, 25(5), 659–691. White, C. S. (1997). Citizen participation and the Internet: Prospects for civic deliberation in the information age. The Social Studies, 88(1), 23–36. Wilson, D. (1998). From local government to local governance: Re-casting British local democracy. Democratisation, 5(1), 90–115. Wilson, D., & Game, C. (2002). Local government in the United Kingdom (3rd ed.). London: Macmillan.
The International Information & Library Review www.elsevier.com/locate/iilr
The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain Rabia Karakaya Polat Department of International Relations, Isik University, Buyukdere Cad. Maslak, 34398 Istanbul, Turkey
Summary This article seeks to explore the role of the Internet in enhancing democratic local governance. The article suggests that the unique role of elected local authorities is under threat both because of declining levels of citizen participation as well as the transformation of the structure of local government into a system of local governance. In this context, local government can use the Internet to enhance its relations with citizens and to protect its unique position in the broad governance structure. The Internet enables the local authorities to open new channels of participation and actively encourages citizens to use these channels to participate. However, the Internet is not being exploited to its full potential. Likewise, not all authorities are benefiting from the Internet to the same extent. The article suggests that there are variations between local authorities and attempts to explain this variation drawing on concepts from new institutional theory and empirical evidence collected at three local authorities in Britain. & 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction This paper explores the role of the Internet in enhancing democratic local governance. Local authorities can use the Internet to increase their internal efficiency, to ensure better communication with their partner organizations and to join up their services with those organizations. However, the main interest of this paper is with the democratic aspect of local governance rather than its organizational and service delivery dimensions. The paper focuses on elected local government within the Tel.: +90 212 2862960 1701.
E-mail address: [email protected].
broad governance structure because of its unique democratic role as an elected body. However, this unique role is under threat on several grounds. First, low electoral turnouts undermine the representativeness and accountability of local councils.1 Second, growing emphasis on governance poses a 1 The terms ‘local authority’ and ‘local council’ are used interchangeably throughout this article. Local authority refers to a semi-independent, politically decentralized, multi-functional body, created by and exercising responsibilities conferred by Parliament. The council is the legal embodiment of the local authority: the body of elected councillors (or members), who have collectively determined and been ultimately responsible for the policy and actions of the authority. The officers, on the other hand, are paid employees and other staff of the authority (Wilson & Game, 2002, Chap. 6).
1057-2317/$ - see front matter & 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.iilr.2005.04.001
ARTICLE IN PRESS 88 threat to local councils, as local partnerships can also claim responsibility for decisions about the locality. In this context, local government can use the Internet to enhance its relations with citizens and to protect its unique position in the broad governance structure. The Internet enables local councils to open new channels of participation and actively encourage citizens to use these channels to participate. However, the Internet is not being exploited to its full potential. Likewise, not all councils are benefiting from the Internet to the same extent. This paper suggests that there are variations between local councils and attempts to explain this variation drawing on concepts from new institutional theory and empirical evidence collected at three local councils in Britain. The first section of the paper provides a conceptualization of democratic governance. The second discusses the ways in which the Internet can be used to support democracy by enhancing citizen participation. The third section draws some concepts from new institutional theory that may help in explaining the developments in British local government. The fourth presents the evidence from the case studies and describes the way in which the Internet is actually used in local government. The final section discusses the limitations that constrain the full exploitation of the Internet for enhanced citizen participation.
Conceptualizing democratic governance The 1990s witnessed a shift of emphasis from local government to local governance at both academic and policy levels (Rhodes, 1997; Stoker, 1996; Wilson, 1998). At the heart of this shift lay concerns about the capacity of the government to deliver public policy goals and a number of other wider societal factors. ‘‘Challenges facing communities and countries in the twenty-first century are sufficiently complex in scope and scale as to require the involvement of a range of actors with complementary perspectives, expertise and resources’’ (Sullivan & Skelcher, 2002, p. 3). In particular, issues such as crime, regeneration and the environment require the involvement of a range of actors. The emphasis in governance literature is mostly upon agencies, partnership working and networks as ways of solving ‘wicked social issues’ and delivering public services jointly with a range of actors. In this respect, the Internet could play a role in connecting these actors through a network-
R.K. Polat ing system in order to share information, expertise and resources. The Internet can also be used to establish multi-purpose portals designed to integrate departments and services and present a unified and user-friendly front end such as Directgov in Britain.2 These are examples of possible ways in which the Internet could be used to enhance governance mechanisms. However, governance, as opposed to government, is about the participation of different communities within a local governance structure. It changes the relations between government and people as well as the role of elected politicians. According to Stoker (1994), ‘good governance’ should incorporate a willingness to open channels for citizen participation and arenas for deliberation. This democratic dimension of governance requires the use of the Internet as a way of opening new channels for electronic participation and generating more participation from citizens. This can be achieved through the use of online polls, discussion forums, and other forms of online consultation. The Internet can also be used to assist elected councillors in their representative role by facilitating communication with their constituents. This paper focuses on the democratic dimension of governance rather than its organizational or service-delivery dimensions. The research focuses on elected local government within the local governance system because, although the elected local authority is only one element of local governance (Wilson, 1998), it is still the only elected body with the potential democratic legitimacy for locality-wide issues. The degree to which the democratic potential of the Internet is realized is related to the existence of ongoing communication between the council and the citizens. Local government needs strong mechanisms for citizen participation in order to consolidate its position in a governance structure that poses a threat to its role, particularly in the context of declining electoral turnouts. The Internet can be a helpful tool as long as there is a will to use it for such purposes. The way in which the Internet is designed depends on the national and local political context. In the UK, there is a clear political commitment to use the Internet both for providing public services online and for encouraging people to participate in the democratic process. In order to achieve the first goal, the government set an explicit target of 100 per cent availability of all public services online by the year 2005. There are also guidelines concerning democratic applications, but no explicit 2 www.direct.gov.uk is the main portal for a wide range of public services information in Britain.
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain target has been set. Despite these national standards and priorities, there is also a degree of flexibility and discretion, which allows local councils to develop strategies that are responsive to the needs of the locality and compatible with their understanding of governance and democracy.
The Internet and democratic deficit The debate about the ways in which technology can aid democracy has been ongoing, especially in the ‘advanced’ parts of the world, since the 1980s (Arterton, 1987; Mclean, 1989). This debate accelerated with the proliferation of the Internet as an information and communication medium. There has been considerable speculation about the possible contribution of the Internet to democracy. Suggestions range from the creation of a virtual public sphere (Schalken, 2000) and the expansion of opportunities to enhance civil liberties (Percy Smith, 1995), to increased accountability (Hague & Loader, 1999) and participation (Lenk, 1999; White, 1997). Two main factors have been influential in the acceleration of the debate on the use of the technology (recently, the Internet) for democratic governance: the specific features of the Internet that may potentially contribute to democracy, and the increasing problems of representative democracy, particularly that of declining interest and participation in politics.
Specific features of the Internet In order to evaluate the potential of the Internet for democratic governance, it is essential first to identify the key defining features of the Internet and to explore the new democratic possibilities those features create. Although not an exhaustive list, it is possible to identify six specific characteristics of the Internet which render it of particular value to participation and democracy. Percy Smith (1995) identifies those characteristics as the ability to transfer high volumes of information at considerable speed, user control, narrow casting, decentralized nature, and interactivity. To this list, Weare (2002) adds the Internet’s ‘inherently multidimensional’ nature in the sense that users are connected to each other without any kind of hierarchical order. Each of these features can potentially contribute to a more democratic society. For example, the decentralized nature of the Internet allows for a more pluralist environment than could be achieved by previous technologies such as television and radio. Its interactive
89
nature allows contribution from the user instead of broadcasting data from one centre to many users. Among these possible ways of enhancing democratic governance, this paper is concerned specifically with political participation as a principle of democracy. In the local governance context, citizens can potentially reach information about their council through the council’s website, contact their representatives easily via email and state their own views through online consultations.
Problems of declining interest and accountability Governance is sometimes perceived as a threat to the accountability of local decisions. Many of the partners in local partnerships are non-elected bodies and it is not always clear exactly how the decisions are made. The problem is not only whether or not electoral arrangements exist, but also whether there is accessible information explaining how the partnership works. A recent study shows that one quarter of the partnerships surveyed were failing to implement any of the accountability and openness practices that applied to local government (Robinson et al., 2000 in Sullivan & Skelcher, 2002). In this context, the elected local government can claim to be the true representative of the people with its open and accountable structure. However, this is problematic for various reasons. There is a widespread belief among observers of local politics that the public has little interest in the activities of local government. The indifference of citizens manifests itself in low electoral turnouts, which have fallen sharply since the mid 1990s to around 30 per cent in Britain. Moreover, many studies have shown that citizens are unaware of the structures, changes and services of their local council (Rallings, Temple, & Thrasher, 1994). While citizens believe that their participation would not make any difference anyway (Lowndes, Pratchett, & Stoker, 2001b), local authorities claim that people do not care as long as their bins are emptied (Lowndes, Pratchett, & Stoker, 2001a). This concern has prompted the central government in Britain to adopt some measures designed to bring the citizens and the councils closer. A White Paper published by the Department of Environment, Transportation and Regions (DETR, 1998) states that ‘‘the government wishes to see consultation and participation embedded into the culture of all councils’’. Later, the 2001 White Paper attributed a leadership role to local councils within their communities and recommended the use of the Internet as a way of realizing this role. In
ARTICLE IN PRESS 90 this context, it is suggested that the Internet can potentially help to build democratic governance where citizens are more informed and involved. At both national and local levels, there have been experiments with online voting as well as discussion forums and other sorts of online consultations. However, it would be too naı¨ve to suggest that the Internet offers an ultimate solution to low levels of participation. The Internet introduces easier methods of communication and hence potentially makes dissemination of information and participation more convenient. However, it does not solve the problem of motivation. People may still continue to abstain from participating if they do not believe that their participation will make a difference. Therefore, policies that are directed towards the utilization of the Internet for democratic purposes need to consider the reasons behind citizens’ lack of interest. Criticizing New Labour’s democratic renewal agenda, Rao (2000) claims ‘‘the problems are not attributed to any deep-seated malaise, but rather to the inflexibility and inconvenience of present arrangements’’ (p. 2). Moreover, the capacity of the Internet to solve these problems is limited because the Internet itself raises social, political and legal issues. One such issue is the so-called ‘digital divide’ (Norris, 2001), which refers to the exclusion of certain segments of society as Internet use becomes more common in the public arena. Looking at the regular users of the Internet demonstrates that the majority of users are male, relatively young, well educated, with a medium to high income (National Statistics, 2003). There are also inequalities related to urban–rural distinctions intensified by the profitoriented strategies of information technology companies. Since the provision of Internet access is largely dependent on market forces, the infrastructure is highly biased in favour of developed areas, because technology companies are reluctant to invest in deprived areas due to the likelihood of an insufficient return (OECD, 2001). Although governments are willing to exploit these technologies, they rely on market forces for their delivery. However, it is acknowledged that governments must develop a strategy to provide Internet access to those who cannot afford it. This is achieved, to a certain extent, by providing public access points in libraries, schools and community centres. However, providing physical access is insufficient because using the technology requires a certain level of familiarity and skill, the lack of which creates psychological barriers. This limits the reliability of the consultation and participation efforts conducted through the Internet because the participants are inevitably self-selected and un-
R.K. Polat representative. There are also privacy issues related to the use of the Internet in the public arena. There are problems concerning how to ensure that online records will not be abused by commercial interests or monitored by the government. There are also security issues concerning the protection of communications between citizens and government as well as between various government agencies against technical failure or deliberate attacks (Pratchett et al., 2002). These are mostly issues that need to be resolved at a national, even global, level, although local authorities do have some power to offer solutions to access issues. Therefore, this paper is not interested in analysing the impact of these problems on local governance and democracy. The main purpose is to look inside local councils in order to see how they use the Internet in the context of these developments. As Dutton (1999) suggests: Digital government can erode or enhance democratic processes y but the outcome will be determined by the interaction of policy choices, management strategies and cultural responses—not by advanced technology alone (p. 193). There are variations in preferred technologies, methods, and strategies. As Laudon (1977) suggests, ‘‘implicit in the development of certain information technologies are very definite models of democracy which differ considerably from one another’’ (p. 14). For example, some councils prefer to use their website primarily to inform people while others aim to use it for consulting the citizens. It is not only Internet use that differs depending on the aims of the specific council, the attitudes of councils towards citizen involvement as well as actual participation rates (both electoral and non-electoral) also vary across localities (Lowndes, Pratchett, & Stoker, 2002; Parry, Moyser, & Day, 1992; Rallings et al., 1994). Maloney, Smith, & Stoker (2000) explain this with reference to ‘political opportunity structures’ while Lowndes et al. (2002) stress the ‘filtering’ role of local political institutions. Sullivan and Skelcher (2002) also emphasize institutional elements (rules, culture and orientation) among the factors that influence citizen participation. In order to be able to explain the differences among local councils, it is helpful to use insights from new institutionalism literature.
New institutionalism The purpose of this section is not to provide a comprehensive review of the new institutionalism literature, but to introduce some concepts from
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain this literature that will assist the analysis of the data in the next section. The impact of institutions on policy has been an enduring concern in political studies. The first generation of institutionalism was concerned with the formal legal analysis of organizations and was attacked on various fronts, especially by the behaviourist approaches. It reemerged in the 1980s, notably with the works of March and Olsen (1984, 1989), with different tools and a new focus of analysis. Lowndes (2002, p. 97) suggests six analytical continua in relation to which new institutionalism departs from the old.
From a focus on organizations to a focus on rules: Political institutions are no longer equated with political organizations. Rather, they are seen as sets of rules that guide and constrain the behaviour of actors. From a formal to an informal conception of institutions: New institutionalism focuses upon both formal and informal conventions. The latter are not consciously designed or specified in writing; they are the routines, customs, traditions, and conventions that are part of habitual action. From a static to a dynamic conception of institutions: Institutions are often associated with stability and continuity. Institutions are treated as things which sustain over time and which are hard to change. New institutionalists, on the other hand, treat institutions as processes that are open to change. From submerged values to a value-critical stance: Old institutionalism was concerned with values and norms that would create ‘good government’. New institutionalists, by contrast, are concerned with finding out how different institutions embody different values. They claim that the structure of governance is not value neutral but embedded in and sustaining of political values (Pierre, 1999, p. 390). From a holistic to a disaggregated conception of institutions: New institutionalists tend to focus on various aspects and components of the government machine instead of studying the government as a whole. From independence to embeddedness: New institutionalists stress that political institutions are not independent entities existing outside of space and time. They are embedded in their wider social, economic, geographic and political context. They reflect the general values of the society they are embedded in.
The distinction is not clear-cut and ‘new institutionalism’ is not so ‘new’ anymore, as it was first
91
coined by March and Olsen in 1984. Therefore, the term institutionalism will be used hereafter. Before proceeding, it is also necessary to define institutions. Hall (1986) offers the concept of ‘standard operating procedures’ in order to differentiate institutions from broad terms like culture. Lowndes and Wilson (2003) define institutions as ‘formal and informal rules that guide and constrain political behaviour’. These are rules which are agreed upon and followed by the actors involved. Institutions offer a sense of stability but they can change as a result of accidents, evolution and intentional design (Goodin, 1996). Institutional design goes beyond structural design such as changes in management, organization or reshuffling of departments. Structural changes do not necessarily lead to changes in values because participants over time ascribe value to organizational structures and processes beyond their technical instrumental qualities (Olsen, 1997). Designs are more likely to be successful when there is harmony between the intentions of the designer and the existing institutions. Usually, new designs are resisted because ‘‘those affected see reform proposals not as improvements and progress but as disruptive, resource-demanding, painful and threatening in terms of status, power and policy consequences’’ (Olsen, 1997). This resistance is even greater if existing institutions are embedded within a wider institutional environment. The ideal designer is one who recognizes the importance of existing institutions. Goodin (1996) suggests an institutional design should be considered as a redesigning process. Institutions are not constructed upon a tabula rasa, they are built on existing institutions. However, designers might sometimes aim to introduce a more robust design process in order to achieve greater changes (Lowndes & Wilson, 2003). Timing of the design or special circumstances may also support (or otherwise) the design process (Olsen, 1997). For example, a reform programme can introduce change more easily following a major political control or management change because designs are more likely to be successful in relatively new arenas where there is only a limited level of institutionalization and consequently more space for new designs to take hold. Sometimes, change in institutions may occur as a reaction to an opportunity. For example, improvements in technology can open up new ways of doing things which organizations may adopt; this may in turn lead to changes in the role of employees or the services that the organization provides. Some institutional settings are more suitable than others for the exploitation of such opportunities.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 92 Institutions also change as a result of imitation of institutional arrangements elsewhere. New institutions may be adopted if they have acquired social meanings. Offe (1996) suggests that designers are more likely to succeed if they copy institutional arrangements with a high status and good record elsewhere, or if they present designs as such copies rather than as instruments for achieving substantive goals. Imitation serves to play down conflicts and reduces the likelihood that designers will be suspected of favouring their own interests. ‘‘Organisations which exist in highly elaborated institutional environments and succeed in becoming isomorphic with these environments gain the legitimacy and resources needed to survive’’ (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 352). DiMaggio and Powell (1983) suggest the term ‘institutional isomorphism’ to describe this process of homogenization between organizations (p. 149). Institutional isomorphism promotes the success and survival of organizations by incorporating ‘externally legitimated structures’ (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, p. 348). The next section uses some of these themes in explaining the developments in local government. These themes are:
Compatibility between new and existing institutions, Windows of opportunity, Processes of isomorphism.
Three localities, three stories This research is based on a case study approach in order to capture the complexities within which local government operates. Three local authorities were examined. These were chosen according to two main criteria. First, it was decided that the three localities should possess similar social and economic characteristics in order to ensure that differences in electronic participation policies did not stem from different levels of Internet access, civicness3 or demographic factors. It was also decided that the localities should have a certain level of Internet access and civicness so as to ensure that local authority reluctance, were any to be observed, did not stem from low levels of Internet access or a lack of demand from citizens for participation. There is sufficient evidence to assume that Internet access is highly related to socio-economic 3 Civicness is broadly defined as attitudes towards political participation and associational activity in general.
R.K. Polat status (Foley, 2000; National Statistics, 2001). For socio-economic status, the deprivation index of the DETR (2000) which includes indicators of income, employment, education and skills and access to social services, was used to exclude most deprived localities (the lowest third). In ascertaining the level of civicness, the National League Table of ESRC Locality Effect project,4 which includes indicators of electoral turnout, volunteering and lottery applications, was used. The data were collected primarily through interviews conducted in three local councils in England. An analysis of local council websites was also conducted. In addition, the main documents produced by local authorities in relation to electronic government were analysed. Before beginning to present the evidence, a description of these cases is necessary.
Harborough District Council This very large rural district council spreads over 260 sq. miles. It is one of the most affluent localities in the whole country, and has a population of 77,500. It consists of two town centres and various villages dispersed in a very large area. Despite the level of affluence, access to services and communication with the council has been a problem because of its rural nature. The level of affluence has been an obstacle for securing government funds for a long time. The council established the Welland Partnership with four other rural councils in order to find solutions to similar problems and put in joint bids for government funding. As a result, the council succeeded in securing funds for a Pathfinder project, which aimed to develop electronic delivery of services and citizen participation through community portals. The whole e-government and e-democracy agenda in Harborough DC has been driven by the Welland Partnership. Internet access levels are above the national average.
Borough Council of Wellingborough This is a borough council with a population of 68,000. It is not as wealthy as Harborough due particularly to the existence of pockets of significant deprivation. There are also problems of declining industries. There are a substantial number of ethnic minority communities, especially 4
The project seeks to explain variation in levels of local political participation beyond that explained by socio-economic factors. The project is based on a data set of scores in all English local authorities for (a) democratic innovation by local authority and (b) social capital in the society.
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain African–Caribbean households. The council has a large housing stock and a significant portion of the population consists of ex-Londoners who have moved to the borough. In 1997, the council went through a political control change from Conservative to Labour, which was followed by a management change. The council had an inward-looking style both in terms of partnership working with other agencies and in terms of citizen participation. In order to reverse this, the new political and management leaders established a Community and Cultural Development Department, which had never existed before.
Oadby and Wigston Borough Council This is one of the smallest councils in England in terms of population (54,000), geographical size (9 sq. miles) and budget (£5 million). The council consists of three main areas with different levels of affluence as well as civicness. It is proud to have close, face-to-face relations with the residents and perceives this as its biggest strength. The council was Conservative controlled for a long period. In 1991, the Liberals took control on the strength of a campaign emphasizing consultation and a willingness to break from the past. The most heavily emphasized values throughout the interviews were those of being close to citizens and of being a small council that was willing to listen.
‘Everything fitted quite nicely’ versus ‘he must have been drunk’ New institutions need to be justifiable, both socially and economically, in the eyes of the public and the designers themselves. In some cases, there was a sense that new institutions associated with electronic participation were seen as unnecessary and unjustified. In Harborough, actors perceived the government agenda (Internet use for democratic renewal and for efficient/modern service provision) as something that the council already needed. Because of the rural environment, the council was having problems in providing services in some areas. In fact, the council established a partnership (Welland) with neighbouring rural councils in order to find solutions to their problems arising from the rural environment. Therefore, when the central government announced the Pathfinder scheme (to provide extra funding for councils who wanted to experiment with different technologies), the council did not hesitate to put forward a joint bid. There was an economic motivation because the scheme offered funding
93
for electronic services and consultation purposes. But the project also had social legitimacy because it would enable the council to provide services to remote areas. So, as one officer explained, ‘everything fitted quite nicely’. In Oadby and Wigston, by contrast, new institutions associated with electronic participation were considered illegitimate for three main reasons. First, there was a belief that there was no need for electronic participation due to the geography of the locality (it is very small). Second, there was a belief that the council offered sufficient mechanisms for people to participate anyway. Third, the fact that the council had to run parallel consultation, both online and offline, was considered economically unjustifiable. Actors complained that they had already cultivated good relations with residents, their surveys revealed satisfaction with the council and they did not want to jeopardize this by transforming themselves into a faceless and ‘remote call centre’. The Director of Resources was so shocked in disapproval that he suggested that ‘the Prime Minister must have been drunk’ when he came up ‘with this idea of citizens using the Internet to watch the committee meetings online’. The Chief Executive complained that because it would be unacceptably exclusionary for the council to stop providing face-to-face services, it was necessary, in order to meet the government targets, for it to run parallel services. Consequently, an enterprise that was supposed to save the council money actually ended up costing the council more. There was no economic or social legitimacy attached to the government agenda (in relation to Internet use) in Oadby and Wigston.
Isomorphism: Genuine adaptation or tokenism Whatever the degree of compatibility with old institutions, local councils have been doing similar things to address the government agenda. For example, all councils appointed e-champions to promote Internet use. They also employed webmasters or made agreements with external companies to take care of their websites. Apart from this functional isomorphism, there is also a normative homogenization process. In many interviews, actors mentioned that there is no big demand from citizens for the council to use the Internet to communicate with citizens. However, they still want to invest in technology projects because they believe that ‘this is going to be the way’ local councils communicate with citizens. Local councils monitor other authorities, especially those they
ARTICLE IN PRESS 94
R.K. Polat
perceive as similar to themselves. The purpose is to minimize the risks associated with change and the emergence of new structures. The risk is not only related to the financial cost of experimenting. Observing and imitating others provides an ‘external legitimization’ (Meyer & Rowan, 1977) to new structures and helps to minimize objections from opposition groups. When experiments with electronic participation (and e-democracy in general) have been perceived as successful or legitimate, they have often been imitated by other local authorities. A good example of such mimetic processes was observed in Harborough, where the idea of a community portal was in fact copied from a neighbouring council who had previously implemented a very successful portal. This normative homogenization is true of citizen participation as well. Local authorities are starting to perceive citizen participation as a norm. As one interviewee noted: In the past if somebody asked ‘have you consulted people’ you could say ‘no, this is our business’, these days you can’t say no. Everybody realises that they have got to do it (Best Value officer). So, both citizen participation and the use of the Internet for this purpose have started to gather some normative strength. However, it is difficult to understand whether this is genuine, or if it is still perceived as an external regulative pressure. In some cases, deadlines and rigid targets set by the central government cause councils to pay lip service to participation initiatives. Especially when harmony with the existing institutions is lacking, actors may choose to play tactically without actually believing in what they do. As one interviewee put it, ‘‘we all learnt how to play the tick box game’’.
Windows of opportunity Some councils are more advantaged in terms of the timing of their design efforts. For example, Harborough was part of the Welland Partnership and, when the government announced the Pathfinder scheme, the council made a joint bid and managed to secure funding. All interviewees agreed that were the council not in that partnership and were it not to have secured the funding, it could not have progressed on e-government as much as it had in fact done. The importance of that funding is that it triggered a virtuous circle in relation to Internet use. The council used the funds to put the council’s planning services online. Soon
after, other departments were expected to develop projects to use the Internet more effectively. The funding also saved the officers from the burden of trying to convince elected members to spend money on Internet projects. In other councils, this was a major problem because members wanted to see tangible benefits; they wanted to spend on ‘vote winners’. In Harborough, however, officers could secure the support of members so long as they used the fund and demonstrated tangible outcomes. Wellingborough also had the advantage of having experienced a political control and management change. The council used to be very inward looking and closed to citizen participation and partnership working. After the political control change in 1997, a new Chief Executive and some high-level officers were appointed. Also a Community Development department was established in order to change the council’s introspective character. Actors within this department were better able to grasp the significance of citizen involvement and the Internet than were actors within other departments. As a less institutionalized zone, this department played a crucial role in promoting citizen participation. In short, design efforts in relation to the use of the Internet for democratic purposes took place in conditions favourable to the emergence and consolidation of new institutions.
Discussion: Limitations and implications This section aims to discuss the limitations that prevent the full exploitation of the Internet for citizen participation and democratic governance. It is possible to analyse these limitations under two categories: organizational and local/societal. Organizational: One problem is the degree of compatibility of government demands with the councils’ strategy and existing institutions. If the design effort of the central government is seen as ‘external’ to the organization, local councils find it more difficult to ‘digest’. Actors within councils tend to be pragmatic in their use of the egovernment agenda: they aim not only to meet government targets, but also to realize some benefits for themselves at the same time. However, there is not always a clear strategy concerning the purpose of Internet use. Is it for providing online services, for making savings through increased efficiency or for citizen involvement? Both at officer and member levels, councils are concerned primarily with the first two viewing the promotion of citizen involvement as less important. Some
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain actors are aware of this and they blame the government for setting excessively rigid targets on electronic service delivery. They claim that they have to put aside resources in order to meet government targets before they can begin to invest in online citizen participation and other democratic purposes. Another issue is related to the institutionalization of new working methods or new approaches to citizen participation. Although there has been an obvious increase in the consultation and participation efforts of local councils in recent years, in many cases it has not been considered ‘part and parcel’ of their job. This is true for the use of the Internet as well. Actors believe that they must have a website, but, once it is launched, it is pushed aside and forgotten except for minor updates. Again, the problem is that the Internet is not regarded as an integral feature of working practice. Those who champion the use of the Internet acknowledge that this is a big issue. An e-champion remarked that ‘‘you can have all the resources in the world, but if you can’t convince people that they have got to change the way they do things it won’t do us any good at all’’. Although citizen involvement and partnership work are becoming increasingly common, they have not yet become the ‘norm’. The long arm of the past, as Olsen (1997) puts it, prevents the introduction of radical changes in terms of attitudes towards enhanced citizen participation. There are also practical limitations, especially in terms of resources. Local councils are constrained by the lack of financial and human resources. Regardless of size, all councils are expected to meet the same standards and the fund made available by the government is very small in information technology terms. This point echoes Pratchett and Leach’s (2003) remark that the national e-government strategy penalizes smaller local authorities because these authorities require the same technological base as larger authorities. This problem is exacerbated as the officers find it difficult to convince elected members of the need for IT expenditures because ‘they do not see the benefits’. Local/societal: This group of barriers largely stems from the limited levels of Internet access in the localities and the concern that electronic participation could disproportionately strengthen the voice of certain segments of the society. It is acknowledged that increased electronic participation can constitute a threat to democracy when it is not distributed equally among different sections of society. Frequently, respondents highlighted the lack of participation in their consultation events, and the fact that they were always attended by the
95
same people. This is in line with major studies on political participation which confirm that most of the existing participation comes from a small but active segment of society (Parry et al., 1992). In some cases, this very fact becomes a barrier to the design and implementation of electronic participation initiatives. Another important barrier to the use of the Internet is related to a perceived lack of demand from citizens. Actors claim that people are not interested in what the local government does as long as their bins are emptied. This might seem like an excuse but the actual take up levels of online consultation (responses to online polls, forums) show how limited their reach is. All councils shared a disappointment about the levels of response to their online consultation. In some cases, the councils think that face-to-face communication is important for the role of local government. Some actors do not want the council to be reduced to a website or a call centre because, again, that is not what their community wants. There is a belief that electronic communication should not replace traditional channels, especially face-to-face contact. These limitations and the actual usage of the Internet by local councils have some implications for local democratic governance. Although some councils may appear to be successful in experimenting with the Internet (obtaining government funding, satisfying government targets, establishing partnerships, putting online services and consultation), people living in those areas may still be unaware and unaffected. On the other hand, a council that is resistant to the use of the Internet for citizen involvement may have other conventional mechanisms of participation. The council’s resistance may stem from concerns about social exclusion or belief in the value of face-to-face relations with the community. But this raises questions about the leadership role of a local council. Should the local government use the Internet to generate demand despite low levels of demand? Should councils try to lead the way for future generations despite low Internet usage?
Conclusions This paper has sought to analyse how the Internet is being used to support democratic local governance. The local governance structure is open to criticism because of its unaccountable structure. In this sense, the local government can claim to have a privileged role in the structure due to its elected nature. However, this privileged role is under
ARTICLE IN PRESS 96 threat, especially in the context of declining voting turnouts. In this context, the Internet could be used by the local government to enhance its representativeness and accountability by opening new channels of citizen participation. However, the empirical evidence shows that neither the demands of central government nor the availability of the necessary technology are sufficient radically to change the attitudes of local government towards participation. There are institutional, organizational and societal barriers to the full exploitation of the Internet. Local councils prefer to adopt strategies that enable maximum continuity and compatibility with their perception of citizen participation. Therefore, there is a substantial amount of continuity in terms of their attitude towards participation. But it would be wrong to overlook the amount of change that has taken place in their attitudes towards both citizen participation and the use of the Internet for participative purposes. There are signs that citizen participation is becoming more institutionalized. However, if local government is to fulfil its unique role as an elected authority within the governance structure, there is still a lot to be done by exploiting the Internet to enhance its relations with the community.
References Arterton, F. C. (1987). Teledemocracy: Can technology protect democracy?. California: Sage. DETR. (1998). Enhancing public participation in local government: A research report. London: DETR. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160. Department of Environment Transport and Regions. (2000). Indices of deprivation. London: DETR. Dutton, W. H. (1999). Society on the line: Information politics in the digital age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foley, P. (2000). Whose net? Characteristics of Internet users in the UK. A report to DETR. Goodin, R. E. (1996). Institutions and their design. In R. E. Goodwin (Ed.), The theory of institutional design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hague, B. N., & Loader, B. D. (Eds.). (1999). Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age. London: Routledge. Hall, P. (1986). Governing the economy. New York: Oxford University Press. Laudon, K. J. (1977). Communications technology and democratic participation. New York: Praeger. Lenk, K. (1999). Electronic support of citizen participation in planning processes activity. In B. N. Hague, & B. D. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age. London: Routledge. Lowndes, V. (2002). The institutionalist approach. In D. Marsh, & G. Stoker (Eds.), Theory and methods in political science, (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
R.K. Polat Lowndes, V., & Wilson, D. (2003). Balancing revisability and robustness? A new institutionalist perspective on local government modernization. Public administration, 81(2), 275–298. Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2001a). Trends in public participation—1: Local government perspectives. Public Administration, 79(1), 205–222. Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2001b). Trends in public participation—2: Citizens’ perspectives. Public Administration, 79(2), 445–455. Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2002). Social capital and political participation: How do local institutions constrain or enable the mobilisation of social capital. Paper for Cambridge social capital seminar, November, Cambridge. Maloney, W., Smith, G., & Stoker, G. (2000). Social capital and urban governance: Adding a more contextualized ‘‘topdown’’ perspective. Political Studies, 48, 802–820. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organisational factors in political life. The American Political Science Review, 78, 734–749. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organisational basis of politics. New York: Free Press. Mclean, I. (1989). Democracy and new technology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalised organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. National Statistics. (2001). Internet access. London: National Statistics. National Statistics. (2003). Internet access. London: National Statistics. Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty and the Internet in democratic societies. New York: Cambridge University Press. OECD. (2001). Understanding the digital divide. France: OECD Publications. Offe, C. (1996). Designing institutions in East European transitions. In R. E. Goodin (Ed.), The theory of institutional design. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Olsen, J. P. (1997). Institutional design in democratic contexts. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 5(3), 203–229. Parry, G., Moyser, G., & Day, N. (1992). Political participation and democracy in Britain. London: Cambridge University Press. Percy Smith, J. (1995). Digital democracy: Information and communication technologies in local politics. Research Report No. 14. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Pierre, J. (1999). Models of urban governance: The institutional dimension of urban politics. Urban Affairs Review, 34(3), 372–396. Pratchett, L., & Leach, S. (2003). Local government: Selectivity and diversity. Parliamentary Affairs, 56(2), 255–269. Pratchett, L., Birch, S., Candy, S., Rogerson, S., Stone, B., & Wingfield, M. (2002). The implementation of electronic voting. Report by De Montfort University, University of Essex and BMRB International. Rallings, C., Temple, M., & Thrasher, M. (1994). Community identity and participation in local democracy. Research Report No.1. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Rao, N. (2000). Reviving local democracy: New labour, new politics?. Bristol: The Policy Press. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press. Schalken, K. (2000). Virtual communities: New public spheres on the Internet? In J. Hoff, I. Horrocks, & P. Tops (Eds.),
ARTICLE IN PRESS The Internet and democratic local governance: The context of Britain Democratic governance and new technology. London: Routledge. Stoker, G. (1994). The role and purpose of local government. Research Report No. 4. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Stoker, G. (1996). Governance as theory: Five propositions, Enjeux de Debates sur La Gouvernance. Universite de Lausanne. Sullivan, H., & Skelcher, C. (2002). Working across boundaries: Collaboration in public services. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
97
Weare, C. (2002). The Internet and democracy: The causal links between technology and politics. International Journal of Public Administration, 25(5), 659–691. White, C. S. (1997). Citizen participation and the Internet: Prospects for civic deliberation in the information age. The Social Studies, 88(1), 23–36. Wilson, D. (1998). From local government to local governance: Re-casting British local democracy. Democratisation, 5(1), 90–115. Wilson, D., & Game, C. (2002). Local government in the United Kingdom (3rd ed.). London: Macmillan.