The 29th NISPAcee Annual Conference

The 30th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Bucharest, Romania, June 2 - June 4, 2022

Excellent conference. I really enjoyed the papers, speakers, schedule and location and great staff!

D.B., United States, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...relating to public administration and policy. Good opportunities for networking.

N.D., Georgia, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

Excellent participants, argument-driven discussions, impartial and supportive Chairs in the Working Group.

D.G., Republic of North Macedonia, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague detail and I really enjoyed the supportive and encouraging atmosphere there. Thank you!

R.B., Lithuania, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...both in terms of academic quality and logistics, and also social events. It was a true joy.

E.Z., Bulgaria, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...The special programmes were really excellent and we took home many varied experiences.

P.N., Hungary, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...Sessions were interesting, scholars were engaging and all the social events were amazing!

B.K., Kazakhstan, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

Excellent organization, excellent food. Compliments to the organizers, they did a wonderful job!

V.J., Netherlands, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

...I must say that the PhD pre-conference seminar was the most useful seminar of my life. Very well...

K.V., Czech Republic, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

... I would even argue that they are the very best - both in terms of scientific content and also entertainment…

P.W., Denmark, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

An opportunity to learn from other researchers and other countries' experiences on certain topics.

G.A.C., Hungary, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Very well organised, excellent programme and fruitful discussions.

M.M.S., Slovakia, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

The NISPAcee conference remains a very interesting conference.

M.D.V., Netherlands, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Thank you for the opportunity to be there, and for the work of the organisers.

D.Z., Hungary, 24th Conference 2016, Zagreb

Well organized, as always. Excellent conference topic and paper selection.

M.S., Serbia, 23rd Conference 2015, Georgia

Perfect conference. Well organised. Very informative.

M.deV., Netherlands, 22nd Conference 2014, Hungary

Excellent conference. Congratulations!

S. C., United States, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

Thanks for organising the pre-conference activity. I benefited significantly!

R. U., Uzbekistan, 19th Conference, Varna 2011

Each information I got, was received perfectly in time!

L. S., Latvia, 21st Conference 2013, Serbia

The Conference was very academically fruitful!

M. K., Republic of Macedonia, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

 :: Anonymous user Login / Register 

Optimised for Tablet | Smartphone

 Paper/Speech Details of Conference Program  

for the  30th NISPAcee Annual Conference
  Program Overview
WG3: Public Administration Reform in CEE and CA
Author(s)  Tiina Randma-Liiv 
  Tallinn University of Technology
Tallinn  Estonia
Tiina Randma-Liiv, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia Rasa Bortkeviči?t?, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania Veiko Lember, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia Vitalis Nakrošis, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania Visvaldis Valtenbergs, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia  
 Title  Advancing citizen engagement via digital tools:
A comparative study of the Baltic States
File   Paper files are available only for conference participants, please login first. 
Presenter(s)  Tiina Randma-Liiv
Focus of the paper. The aim of this paper is to explore and comparatively analyze how recent e-participation initiatives have been implemented in the three Baltic states. With the advent and evolution of digitalization, researchers have become more interested in the potential of digitalization and the benefits that digital technologies are expected to produce for open government (Norris, 2010b, Bannister and Connolly, 2012) rather than studying empirical cases and actual implementation of e-participation initiatives. Moreover, drawbacks in implementing e-participation are sometimes argued to relate to societal, administrative, and organizational factors rather than technical aspects (Chadwick, 2011; Zheng et al., 2014). For example, previous research has shown that the societal characteristics such as the number of internet users (e.g. ?ström et al., 2012), digital divide (e.g. Min, 2010; Van Deursen and Helsper, 2015), trust in e-participation (e.g. Scherer and Wimmer, 2014), the socio-economic background of the population (e.g. Medaglia, 2007; Williams et al., 2013) as well as management and organization of citizen participation (Randma-Liiv and Lember, 2022) are related to the adoption and institutionalization of e-participation.

Research question. The study at hand addresses the following research questions: Which societal and administrative characteristics influence the adoption and institutionalization of e-participation initiatives in the Baltic states? What are the similarities and differences across the Baltic states?

Empirical study. The paper draws on three recent e-participation cases from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The focus is on national-level e-participation platforms which have been set up to foster long-term collaboration between citizens, civil society organizations and the government. The following cases have been chosen for the comparison: The Estonian Citizens’ Initiative Portal, the Latvian e-participation platform MyVoice and the E-Citizen platform in Lithuania. The Baltic states are characterized by similar historical-cultural, political and economic contexts which allows to apply a most similar case design. Case studies are conducted in each country following a common case study protocol in order to empirically uncover drivers and barriers to digital participation. Thorough desk research as well as interviews with the stakeholders involved in each e-participation project will be conducted in all cases.

Expected results. The study shows that the impact of technology on the public sector is strongly mediated by the institutional context that frames the ways public sector interacts with citizens and other governmental and non-governmental units contributing to participatory democracy. Citizen involvement is embedded in existing institutional arrangements and constrained by societal, political, administrative, and organizational factors. Despite the positive connotation of the word “digital democracy” and the high expectations policy-makers have with regard to the potential of digital democracy tools, in reality, it takes a lot of systematic effort, time, and adaptability of the governance systems to incorporate digital democracy processes into the existing institutional routines. Yet another concern in the Baltic states is related to civil society with its low capacity to substantially influence the processes of policy-making.