Civic engagement and associationalism : the impact of group membership scope versus intensity of participation

The relationship between participation in civic and political activities and membership of voluntary associations is now well established. What is less clear is the relative impacts of how much time people spend on group activities (associational intensity), and the number and type of groups that individuals are involved with (associational scope). Does it matter in terms of civic engagement, for example, whether one is a member of a quilting-circle or trade union? Does it matter whether association ‘membership’ is simply an annual payment or a major commitment of time and energy? In this article, we use a large survey to explore these questions empirically by focusing on the membership patterns and civic engagement practices of 4,001 citizens drawn from eight suburbs across Greater Melbourne, Australia. Our findings indicate that, while associational intensity is positively related to civic engagement, associational scope (the number of group memberships per person), is a more influential determinant of the level of civic and political participation. The results also suggest that while all forms of associationalism are important in terms of fostering greater levels of civic activity, not all forms have the same impact.

International journalism and democracy : civic engagement models from around the world

"International Journalism and Democracy" explores a new form of journalism that has been dubbed ‘deliberative journalism’. As the name suggests, these forms of journalism support deliberation — the processes in which citizens recognize and discuss the issues that affect their communities, appraise the potential responses to those issues, and make decisions about whether and how to take action. Authors from across the globe identify the types of journalism that assist deliberative politics in different cultural and political contexts. Case studies from 15 nations spotlight different approaches to deliberative journalism, including strategies that have been sometimes been labeled as public or civic journalism, peace journalism, development journalism, citizen journalism, the street press, community journalism, social entrepreneurism, or other names. Countries that are studied in-depth include the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Finland, China, India, Japan, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Nigeria, Brazil, Colombia and Puerto Rico. Each of the approaches that are described offers a distinctive potential to support deliberative democracy. However, the book does not present any of these models or case studies as examples of categorical success. Instead, it explores different elements of the nature, strengths, limitations and challenges of each approach, as well as issues affecting their longer-term sustainability and effectiveness. The book also describes the underlying principles of deliberation, the media’s potential role in deliberation from a theoretical and practical perspective, and ongoing issues for deliberative media practitioners.

Participatory action research for civic engagement

The future of civic engagement is characterised by both technological innovation as well as new technological user practices that are fuelled by trends towards mobile, personal devices; broadband connectivity; open data; urban interfaces; and, cloud computing. These technology trends are progressing at a rapid pace, and have led global technology vendors to package and sell the ‘Smart City’ as a centralized service delivery platform predicted to optimize and enhance cities’ key performance indicators – and generate a profitable market. The top-down deployment of these large and proprietary technology platforms have helped sectors such as energy, transport, and healthcare to increase efficiencies. However, an increasing number of scholars and commentators warn of another ‘IT bubble’ emerging. Along with some city leaders, they argue that the top-down approach does not fit the governance dynamics and values of a liberal democracy when applied across sectors. A thorough understanding is required, of the socio-cultural nuances of how people work, live, play across different environments, and how they employ social media and mobile devices to interact with, engage in, and constitute public realms. Although the term ‘slacktivism’ is sometimes used to denote a watered down version of civic engagement and activism that is reduced to clicking a ‘Like’ button and signing online petitions, we believe that we are far from witnessing another Biedermeier period that saw people focus on the domestic and the non-political. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary, such as post-election violence in Kenya in 2008, the Occupy movements in New York, Hong Kong and elsewhere, the Arab Spring, Stuttgart 21, Fukushima, the Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul, and the Vinegar Movement in Brazil in 2013. These examples of civic action shape the dynamics of governments, and in turn, call for new processes to be incorporated into governance structures. Participatory research into these new processes across the triad of people, place and technology is a significant and timely investment to foster productive, sustainable, and livable human habitats. With this chapter, we want to reframe the current debates in academia and priorities in industry and government to allow citizens and civic actors to take their rightful centerpiece place in civic movements. This calls for new participatory approaches for co-inquiry and co-design. It is an evolving process with an explicit agenda to facilitate change, and we propose participatory action research (PAR) as an indispensable component in the journey to develop new governance infrastructures and practices for civic engagement. This chapter proposes participatory action research as a useful and fitting research paradigm to guide methodological considerations surrounding the study, design, development, and evaluation of civic technologies. We do not limit our definition of civic technologies to tools specifically designed to simply enhance government and governance, such as renewing your car registration online or casting your vote electronically on election day. Rather, we are interested in civic media and technologies that foster citizen engagement in the widest sense, and particularly the participatory design of such civic technologies that strive to involve citizens in political debate and action as well as question conventional approaches to political issues (DiSalvo, 2012; Dourish, 2010; Foth et al., 2013). Following an outline of some underlying principles and assumptions behind participatory action research, especially as it applies to cities, we will critically review case studies to illustrate the application of this approach with a view to engender robust, inclusive, and dynamic societies built on the principles of engaged liberal democracy. The rationale for this approach is an alternative to smart cities in a ‘perpetual tomorrow,’ (cf. e.g. Dourish & Bell, 2011), based on many weak and strong signals of civic actions revolving around technology seen today. It seeks to emphasize and direct attention to active citizenry over passive consumerism, human actors over human factors, culture over infrastructure, and prosperity over efficiency. First, we will have a look at some fundamental issues arising from applying simplistic smart city visions to the kind of a problem a city is (cf. Jacobs, 1961). We focus on the touch points between “the city” and its civic body, the citizens. In order to provide for meaningful civic engagement, the city must provide appropriate interfaces.

DoGood : A gamified mobile app to promote civic engagement

The rise of the mobile Internet enables the creation of applications that provide new and easier ways for people to organise themselves, raise issues, take action and interact with their city. However, a lack of motivation or knowledge often prevents many citizens from regularly contributing to the common good. Therefore, this thesis presents DoGood, a smartphone app, that aims at motivating citizens to carry out civic activities. The thesis asks what kinds of activities citizens consider to be civic and to what extent gamification can motivate users in this context. The DoGood app uses gamified elements to encourage citizens to submit and promote their civic activities as well as to join the activities of others. Gamification is sometimes criticized for simply adding a limited number of game elements, such as leaderboards, on top of an existing experience. However, in the case of the DoGood app, the process of game design was an integral part of the development, and the gamified elements target the user’s intrinsic motivations instead of providing them with an external reward. DoGood was implemented as hybrid mobile app and deployed to citizens of Brisbane in a five weeks long user study. The app successfully motivated most of its users to do more civic activities and its gamified elements were well received. Based on the results of the user study, civic activities can be defined as activities that give citizens the opportunity to become involved and improve life in their local community.

Participation in Urban Interaction Design for Civic Engagement

The future of civic engagement is characterised by both technological innovation as well as new technological user practices that are fuelled by trends towards mobile, personal devices; broadband connectivity; open data; urban interfaces; and cloud computing. These technology trends are progressing at a rapid pace, and have led global technology vendors to package and sell the “Smart City” as a centralised service delivery platform predicted to optimise and enhance cities’ key performance indicators – and generate a profitable market. The top-down deployment of these large and proprietary technology platforms have helped sectors such as energy, transport, and healthcare to increase efficiencies. However, an increasing number of scholars and commentators warn of another “IT bubble” emerging. Along with some city leaders, they argue that the top-down approach does not fit the governance dynamics and values of a liberal democracy when applied across sectors. A thorough understanding is required, of the socio-cultural nuances of how people work, live, play across different environments, and how they employ social media and mobile devices to interact with, engage in, and constitute public realms. Although the term “slacktivism” is sometimes used to denote a watered down version of civic engagement and activism that is reduced to clicking a “Like” button and signing online petitions, we believe that we are far from witnessing another Biedermeier period that saw people focus on the domestic and the non-political. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary, such as post-election violence in Kenya in 2008, the Occupy movements in New York, Hong Kong and elsewhere, the Arab Spring, Stuttgart 21, Fukushima, the Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul, and the Vinegar Movement in Brazil in 2013. These examples of civic action shape the dynamics of governments, and in turn, call for new processes to be incorporated into governance structures. Participatory research into these new processes across the triad of people, place and technology is a significant and timely investment to foster productive, sustainable, and liveable human habitats. With this article, we want to reframe the current debates in academia and priorities in industry and government to allow citizens and civic actors to take their rightful centrepiece place in civic movements. This calls for new participatory approaches for co-inquiry and co-design. It is an evolving process with an explicit agenda to facilitate change, and we propose participatory action research (PAR) as an indispensable component in the journey to develop new governance infrastructures and practices for civic engagement. We do not limit our definition of civic technologies to tools specifically designed to simply enhance government and governance, such as renewing your car registration online or casting your vote electronically on election day. Rather, we are interested in civic media and technologies that foster citizen engagement in the widest sense, and particularly the participatory design of such civic technologies that strive to involve citizens in political debate and action as well as question conventional approaches to political issues. The rationale for this approach is an alternative to smart cities in a “perpetual tomorrow,” based on many weak and strong signals of civic actions revolving around technology seen today. It seeks to emphasise and direct attention to active citizenry over passive consumerism, human actors over human factors, culture over infrastructure, and prosperity over efficiency. First, we will have a look at some fundamental issues arising from applying simplistic smart city visions to the kind of a problem a city poses. We focus on the touch points between “the city” and its civic body, the citizens. In order to provide for meaningful civic engagement, the city must provide appropriate interfaces.

The Second Life of urban planning? Using neogeography tools for community engagement

The majority of the world’s citizens now live in cities. Although urban planning can thus be thought of as a field with significant ramifications on the human condition, many practitioners feel that it has reached the crossroads in thought leadership between traditional practice and a new, more participatory and open approach. Conventional ways to engage people in participatory planning exercises are limited in reach and scope. At the same time, socio-cultural trends and technology innovation offer opportunities to re-think the status quo in urban planning. Neogeography introduces tools and services that allow non-geographers to use advanced geographical information systems. Similarly, is there potential for the emergence of a neo-planning paradigm in which urban planning is carried out through active civic engagement aided by Web 2.0 and new media technologies thus redefining the role of practicing planners? This paper traces a number of evolving links between urban planning, neogeography and information and communication technology. Two significant trends – participation and visualisation – with direct implications for urban planning are discussed. Combining advanced participation and visualisation features, the popular virtual reality environment Second Life is then introduced as a test bed to explore a planning workshop and an integrated software event framework to assist narrative generation. We discuss an approach to harness and analyse narratives using virtual reality logging to make transparent how users understand and interpret proposed urban designs.

From social butterfly to engaged citizen: Urban informatics, social media, ubiquitous computing, and mobile technology to support citizen engagement

Web applications such as blogs, wikis, video and photo sharing sites, and social networking systems have been termed ‘Web 2.0’ to highlight an arguably more open, collaborative, personalisable, and therefore more participatory internet experience than what had previously been possible. Giving rise to a culture of participation, an increasing number of these social applications are now available on mobile phones where they take advantage of device-specific features such as sensors, location and context awareness. This international volume of book chapters will make a contribution towards exploring and better understanding the opportunities and challenges provided by tools, interfaces, methods and practices of social and mobile technology that enable participation and engagement. It brings together an international group of academics and practitioners from a diverse range of disciplines such as computing and engineering, social sciences, digital media and human-computer interaction to critically examine a range of applications of social and mobile technology, such as social networking, mobile interaction, wikis, twitter, blogging, virtual worlds, shared displays and urban sceens, and their impact to foster community activism, civic engagement and cultural citizenship.

Neoliberal social inclusion? The agenda of the Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance

University–community engagement (UCE) represents a hybrid discourse and a set of practices within contemporary higher education. As a modality of research and teaching, ‘engagement’ denotes the process of universities forming partnerships with external communities for the promised generation of mutually beneficial and socially responsive knowledge, leading to enhanced economic, social and cultural developments. A critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge) of the Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance’s (AUCEA) ‘Position Paper’(2008 Universities and community engagement (Position paper 2008–2010)), as reported in this article, suggests that its uneasy synthesis of neoliberal, social inclusion and civic engagement discourses into a hybrid UCE discourse semantically privileges neoliberal forms of engagement. Perhaps, as a result, the AUCEA seems to have missed an opportunity to influence the Australian ‘widening participation’ debate on securing access and opportunity for marginalised students at universities and building social and cultural capital within their communities of origin.

Citizens breaking out of filter bubbles: Urban screens as civic media

Social media platforms risk polarising public opinions by employing proprietary algorithms that produce filter bubbles and echo chambers. As a result, the ability of citizens and communities to engage in robust debate in the public sphere is diminished. In response, this paper highlights the capacity of urban interfaces, such as pervasive displays, to counteract this trend by exposing citizens to the socio-cultural diversity of the city. Engagement with different ideas, networks and communities is crucial to both innovation and the functioning of democracy. We discuss examples of urban interfaces designed to play a key role in fostering this engagement. Based on an analysis of works empirically-grounded in field observations and design research, we call for a theoretical framework that positions pervasive displays and other urban interfaces as civic media. We argue that when designed for more than wayfinding, advertisement or television broadcasts, urban screens as civic media can rectify some of the pitfalls of social media by allowing the polarised user to break out of their filter bubble and embrace the cultural diversity and richness of the city.

From social butterfly to urban citizen workshop

Web applications such as blogs, wikis, video and photo sharing sites, and social networking systems have been termed ‘Web 2.0’ to highlight an arguably more open, collaborative, personalisable, and therefore more participatory internet experience than what had previously been possible. Giving rise to a culture of participation, an increasing number of these social applications are now available on mobile phones where they take advantage of device-specific features such as sensors, location and context awareness. This workshop made a contribution towards exploring and better understanding the opportunities and challenges provided by tools, interfaces, methods and practices of social and mobile technology that enable participation and engagement. It brought together a group of academics and practitioners from a diverse range of disciplines such as computing and engineering, social sciences, digital media and human-computer interaction to critically examine a range of applications of social and mobile technology, such as social networking, mobile interaction, wikis (eg., futuremelbourne.com.au), twitter, blogging, virtual worlds (eg, hub2.org), and their impact to foster community activism, civic engagement and cultural citizenship.

Urban informatics and sustainable cities (Workshop)

One way to build more sustainable cities through network technologies is to start with monitoring the level and usage of resources as well as encourage citizens to participate in sustainable everyday practices. This workshop focuses on three fundamental areas of sustainable cities through urban informatics and ubiquitous computing: Environment: climate change adaptation Health: Food practices and cultures Civic engagement: citizen participation and interaction In particular, the workshop seeks to come up with locally (Oulu) specific ‘mash-up’ solutions that enhance the interactions of citizens with the physical city using data from various sources such as sensor networks. Students will work in groups to research, analyze, design, and develop local mash-ups. The workshop is designed to help students gain understanding of sustainability in a techno-social context, such as how the existing data can be effectively utilized, how to gather new data, and how to design efficient and engaging computer-human interactions. Further issues of consideration include access to and privacy of information and spaces, cultural specificities, and transdisciplinary research.

Deliberation and journalism

The first chapter in 'International Journalism and Democracy' re-examines current ideas about the role of journalism in promoting democracy, introducing the concept of "deliberative journalism". 'Deliberation and Journalism' lists the ways in which journalists can assist deliberation and politics in communities around the world. The chapter defines deliberation as a specific form of conversation that precedes and promotes decision-making and action by members of a community. The author recognises the difficulty of engaging in deliberation in communities that are divided by different interests, identities, backgrounds, resources and needs. She provides examples of strategies that journalists can use to encourage inclusive and productive deliberation in the face of community diversity. The chapter introduces examples of types of deliberative journalism that have emerged around the globe. These include strategies that have been sometimes been labeled as public journalism, civic journalism, peace journalism, development journalism, citizen journalism, the street press, community journalism, environmental journalism, and social entrepreneurism. The chapter also includes models of journalism that have not yet been given any particular name. Although the book identifies problems surrounding the theory and practice of these forms of journalism, the author notes that this is to be expected. Most models of deliberative journalism are relatively new, with none being more than a few decades old. The author concludes that resolution of these problems will only occur incrementally.

American public journalism versus other international media models

Chapter 2 of 'International Journalism and Democracy' provides examples of what the author dubs "deliberative journalism". Following a definition of deliberative journalism in Chapter 1, the book's second chapter examines major models of deliberative journalism that are in operation around the world. These models include public journalism, citizen journalism, community and alternative media, development journalism and peace journalism. The author argues that when these new forms of journalism are practiced well, they extend people's ability to identify, express, understand and respond to politics and issues affecting their communities. However, the main models of deliberative journalism all have contentious elements. Many deliberative journalism practioners have been subjected to criticism for lack of objectivity and poor professional standards. Many of their activities have clearly been ill-conceived. The author also finds that neither professional nor citizen journalists have a strong understanding of what constitutes "good practice" in deliberative journalism. Furthermore, there is much debate as to whether the type of "citizen journalism" that is posted intermittently on Facebook, Twitter, blogs and other social media can even be defined as "journalism". The practice of deliberative journalism can potentially contribute to public deliberation, but it does not always do so in any immediate or obvious way. The author finds that even so, deliberative journalism indirectly strengthens the environments that support fertile deliberation and decision making. (See the Extended Abstract for further details.)