Methodology of Comprehensive e-participation Index
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23882/emss.24212Keywords:
Comprehensive e-participation index, Normal distribution, Absolute measure, Progress path, Equivalent scoresAbstract
e-participation refers to participation of citizens in the governance process through ICTs. Importance of e-participation is growing with rapid technological changes and increasing use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), overcoming limitations of physical participations in terms of time and distance. Ignoring the issues relating to augmentation of dimensions and indicators, the paper describes methodological shortcomings of existing measures of e-participation and suggests a method of comprehensive e-participation index ( covering both supply and demand sides. CEPI involves transformation of each sub-indices and component indices to normally distributed scores. Normality enables meaningful arithmetic aggregation of scores of sub-indices, dimensions and CEPI as sum of dimension scores. The proposed CEPI avoids scaling and satisfies desired properties enabling meaningful comparisons, better ranking, classification of countries and also facilitates testing hypothesis of equality of CEPI means for two countries, assessment of progress and testing significance of growth registered by a country or a group of countries. Elasticity of dimension as ratio of change in CEPI due to unit change in the dimension can be used to rank the dimensions. Policy makers and researchers may take advantages of the proposed method to find relationship between supply and demand sides of e-participation.
References
Alshehri M and Drew S. (2010): E-government fundamentals, IADIS International Conference ICT, Society and Human Beings 2010
Blanc DL (2020): e-participation: a quick overview of recent qualitative trends. DESA Working Paper No. 163
Bwalya KJ and Mutula SM (2014): E-Government: Implementation, Adoption and Synthesis in Developing Countries, Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG
Chakrabartty, Satyendra Nath (2022): Disability and Quality of Life. Health Science Journal, Vol. 16. No.12, 1 – 6. https://www.itmedicalteam.pl/articles/disability-and-quality-of-life-115716.html
Chakrabartty SN (2021): Optimum number of Response Categories. Current Psychology, 42, 5590–5598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01866-6
Chakrabartty, Satyendra Nath (2020): Improved Quality: Item and Test parameters. Health Sciences, Volume 1, 1 – 5. https://doi.org/10.15342/hs.2020.267
Chakravarty, SR (2003): A Generalized Human Development Index. Review of Development Economics, 7(1), 99-114
Coppedge M, Gerring J, Knutsen, C. et al. (2021): V-Dem Codebook v11. V-Dem Working Paper forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.23696/vdemds21
Davies D and Bouldin W (1979): A cluster separation measure, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 1(2), 224 – 227
Greco S, Ishizaka A, Tasiou M and Torrisi G. (2019): On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness, Soc Indic Res 141:61–94 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9
Hamed KH and Rao AR (1998): A modified Mann-Kendall trend test for autocorrelated data, Journal of Hydrology, 204; 182 196
Hand, D. J. (1996): Statistics and the Theory of Measurement, J. R. Statist. Soc. A; 159, Part 3, 445-492
Jamieson, S (2004): Likert scales: How to (ab) use them. Medical Education, 38, 1212 -1218
Kabanov, Yury (2022): Refining the UN E-participation Index: Introducing the deliberative assessment using the Varieties of Democracy data, Government Information Quarterly, 39 (1) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101656
Macintosh, PA (2004): Characterizing e-participation in policy-making, in: 37th Annual Hawaii Interna¬tional Conference on System Sciences. IEEE, 5–8.
Medaglia, R. (2012): e-Participation research: Moving characterization forward (2006-2011). Government Information Quarterly 29, 346–360.
Montgomery D and Runger G (2013): Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2021): Better governance, planning and services in local self-governments in Poland. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/550c3ff5-en
Paruolo P, Saisana M, and Saltelli A (2013): Ratings and rankings: voodoo or science? Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 176(3):609- 634
Preston CC. & Colman AM (2000): Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences, Acta Psychologica 104, 1-15
Sæbø Ø, Rose J, Skiftenes Flak L. (2008): The shape of e-Participation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly 25, 400–428.
Seth S and Villar A (2017): Measuring human development and human deprivations. OPHI Working Paper 110, University of Oxford
Susha, Iryna and Grönlund, Ake (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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.02.005.
Tambouris E, Liotas N, Tarabanis K.(2007): A framework for assessing e-participation projects and tools, in: Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences on E-Business, E-Management and E-Learning.
United Nations (2020): E-government survey 2020. Digital Government in the decade of action for sustainable development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, https://bit.ly/4cs33KD
UN (2019): E-Participation Index. https://publicadministration.un.org/en/eparticipation
UN DESA (2016): Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sdgs.un.org/goals. Evaluating e-Participation ( METEP ): Assessment of Readiness at the Countr Evaluating e-Participation ( METEP ): Assessment of Readiness at the Country Level. 1–24
UN (2014): E-Government for the Future We Want, E-Government Survey 2014, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York.
United Nations (2013): Measuring and evaluating e-participation (METEP): Assessment of Readiness at the Country Level, 1 – 24
UNDP (2010): Human Development Report 2010. New York: Palgrave Macmillan
Waheduzzaman, W., & Khandaker, S. (2022). E-participation for combating corruption, increasing voice and accountability, and developing government effectiveness: A cross-country data analysis. Aust J Publ Admin, 81, 549-568. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12544
Whitmore, A. (2012): A statistical analysis of the construction of the United Nations E-Government Development Index, Government Information Quarterly, 29(1); 68-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.06.003
Welch, E. (2012): The Rise of Participative Technologies in Government, in: Transformational Government through E-Gov Practice: Socioeconomic, Cultural, and Technological Issues. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Satyendra Chakrabartty
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
