Abstracts
Résumé
La présente étude jette un éclairage original sur la participation citoyenne en ligne en montrant de façon explicite les règles qui orientent les pratiques gouvernementales en cette matière, à savoir le souci de neutralité et de rigueur méthodologique, la préservation de l’image et de l’unicité du message, la crédibilité du mécanisme et la qualité du contenu. Ces règles bien ancrées dans le fonctionnement administratif de l’État québécois amènent les organismes publics à privilégier une gestion hiérarchique des mécanismes de participation citoyenne et, ainsi, à jouer de prudence avec les médias sociaux, en particulier les forums en ligne. L’étude montre aussi qu’Internet contribue à la consolidation des outils traditionnels de consultation publique au Québec. Enfin, les auteurs proposent quelques pistes pour mieux exploiter le potentiel délibératif et collaboratif des nouvelles plateformes interactives de participation citoyenne.
Mots-clés:
- participation citoyenne,
- Internet,
- médias sociaux,
- délibération,
- collaboration et règles institutionnalisées
Abstract
This study sheds new light on online citizen participation by explicitly showing the rules that guide government practices in this area. These comprise, mainly, a priority for neutrality and methodological rigour, the preservation of the meaning and the uniqueness of the message, the credibility of the mechanism and the quality of the content. Due to these rules, which are well entrenched in the governance of Quebec, public agencies tend to privilege a hierarchical management of citizen participation mechanisms and to therefore exercise caution with regard to social media, especially online forums. The study also shows that the Internet contributes to the consolidation of the traditional tools of public consultation in Quebec. Finally, the authors propose several ways to better exploit the deliberative and collaborative potential of new interactive platforms for citizen participation.
Keywords:
- citizen participation,
- Internet,
- social media,
- deliberation,
- cooperation and institutionalized rules
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Arnstein, Sherry R., 1969 « A Ladder of Citizen Participation », Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 4 : 216-24.
- Åström, Joachim, Mikael Granberg et Abdul Khakee, 2011 « Apple Pie–Spinach Metaphor: Shall e-Democracy make Participatory Planning More Wholesome? », Planning Practice & Research, 26, 5: 571-586.
- Bekkers, Victor, 2004 « Virtual policy communities and responsive governance: Redesigning on-line debates », Information Polity, 9: 193–203.
- Bonsón Enrique, Lourdes Torres, Sonia Royo et Francisco Flores, 2012 « Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities », Government Information Quarterly, 29, 2: 123-132.
- Chadwick, Andrew, 2009 « Web 2.0: New Challenges for the Study of E-Democracy in an Era of Informational Exuberance », A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 5, 1: 9-41.
- Dahlberg, Lincoln, 2007 « Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: From consensus to contestation », New Media & Society, 9, 5: 827-847.
- Dryzek, John S., 2000 Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Liberals, Critics, Contestations, Oxford (UK), Oxford University Press.
- Dunne, Kerill, 2010 « Can Online Forums Address Political Disengagement for Local Government? », Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7, 4: 300-317.
- Dutton, William et Rebecca Eynon, 2009 « Networked individuals and institutions: A cross-sector comparative perspective on patterns and strategies in government and research », The Information Society, 25, 3: 198-207.
- Giddens, Antony, 1984 La constitution de la société, Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.
- Greitens, Thomas J. et Cherie Strachan, 2011 « E-government and Citizen Engagement: An Overview of US States’ Government Websites », International Journal of Public Administration, 34, 1-2: 54-58.
- Habermas, Jürgen, 1989 Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press.
- Habermas, Jürgen, 1996 « Three Normative Models of Democracy”, dans : Seyla Benhabid (dir.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 22-30.
- Janssen, Davy et Raphaël Kies, 2005 « Online Forum and Deliberative Democracy », Acta Politica, 40, 4: 317-335.
- Jensen, Linaa, J., 2003 « Virtual Democratic Dialogue? Bringing together citizens and politicians », Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age, 8, 1/2: 29-47.
- Karlsson, Martin, 2012 « Understanding Divergent Patterns of Political Discussion in Online Forums - Evidence from the European Citizens’ Consultations », Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9, 1: 64-81.
- Katz, James et Daniel Halpern, 2013 « Political and Developmental Correlates of Social Media Participation in Government: A Global Survey of National Leadership Websites », International Journal of Public Administration, 36, 1: 1-15.
- Leston-Bandeira, Cristina et David Bender, 2013 « How deeply are parliaments engaging on social media? », Information Polity, 18, 4: 281-297.
- Mergel, Ines, 2012 « The social media innovation challenge in the public sector », Information Polity, 17, 3-4: 281-92.
- Mergel, Ines, 2013a Social Media in the Public Sector: A Guide to Participation, Collaboration and Transparency in The Networked World, San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Mergel, Ines, 2013b « A framework for interpreting social media interactions in the public sector », Government Information Quarterly, 30, 4: 327–334.
- Mossberger, Karen, Yonghong Wu et Jared Crawford, 2013 « Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major US cities », Government Information Quarterly, 30, 4: 351-358.
- Muhlberger, Peter, Jennifer Stromer-Galley et Nick Webb, 2011 « Public policy and obstacles to the virtual agora: Insights from the deliberative e-rulemaking project », Information Polity, 16, 3: 197-214.
- Noveck, Beth Simone, 2004 « The electronic revolution in rulemaking », Emory Law Journal, 53: 433-522.
- Noveck, Beth Simone, 2009 Wiki Government. How Technology Can Make Government Better, Democracy Stronger, and Citizens More Powerful, Washington (D.C.), Brooking Institution Press.
- Rose, Jeremy et Øystein Saebø, 2010 « Designing deliberation systems », The Information Society: An International Journal, 26, 3: 228-240.
- Paillé, Pierre et Alex Mucchielli, 2008 L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales, 2e édition, Paris, Armand Colin.
- Preece, Jennifer et Ben Shneiderman, 2009 « The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation », AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 1, 1: 13-32.
- Rheingold, Howard, 1993 The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier, Reading Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley.
- Rowe, Gene et Lynn J. Frewer, 2005 « A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms », Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30, 2: 251-290.
- Stromer-Galley, Jennifer, Nick Webb et Peter Muhlberger, 2012 « Deliberative E-Rulemaking Project: Challenges to Enacting Real World Deliberation », Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9, 1: 82-96.
- Shulman, Stuart W., 2006 « Whither deliberation? Mass e-mail campaigns and the U.S. regulatory rulemaking », Journal of E-Government, 3, 3: 41-64.
- Soon, Ae Chuna et June-Suh Cho, 2012 « E-participation and transparent policy decision making », Information Polity, 17: 129-145.
- Susha, Iryna et Åke Grönlund, 2014 « Context clues for the stall of the Citizens’ Initiative: lessons for opening up e-participation development practice », Government Information Quarterly, 31, 3: 454-465.
- Vedel, Thierry, 2006 « The Idea of Electronic Democracy: Origins, Visions and Questions », Parliamentary Affairs, 59, 2: 226-235.
- Young, Iris, 2000 Inclusion and Democracy, New-York, Oxford University Press.