Communication Platforms for Cities: Critical Analysis of Management Technology
https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2021-1-20-31
Abstract
Development of digital technologies creates opportunities for the implementation of new forms and innovative methods into the state management system. For a long time, public administration specialists have discussed vividly the idea of an electronic state (e-government), as well as have de bated the advantages and disadvantages of specific digital technologies. Recently, urban communication platforms have become very popular, which indicates that the involvement of citizens into the public administration processes. In recent years, there has been a transition from a model of simple informing and providing public services with digital format to a model of active involvement of citizens through the so-called state platforms. The idea of “the state as a platform” involves the creation of digital platforms to attract business and civil society to receive services, organize discussions and votes on various issues, as well as exchange goods created by both state and non-state producers. The article provides an overview and analysis of existing urban communication platforms in Russia and abroad. To this end, the article used the method of comparative analysis of urban communication platforms based on the criterion of functional features. It was found that today in Russia there are four types of urban communication platforms, which differ in their goals and functionality. The article substantiates the following typology: (1) platforms (sections of sites, pages) of citizens’ appeals; (2) portals of urban (regional) problems; (3) portals for evaluating initiatives; (4) public participation portals / platforms. Communication platforms have been created in all constituent entities of the Russian Federation, but the level of citizen participation in their activities varies greatly. The article analyzes the obstacles to the development of urban communication platforms.
About the Authors
A. G. Baryshkin
Netrika Ltd.
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Manager For business-development,
St. Petersburg
I. A. Bykov
St. Peterburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Professor, PhD in Political Science,
St. Petersburg
O. A. Ignatieva
St. Peterburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Assistant Professor, PhD in Sociology,
St. Petersburg
K. S. Kondratenko
St. Peterburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Assistant Professor, PhD in Philosophy,
St. Petersburg
References
1. Belova L. N. Citizens participation in the process of government administration: a case of ‘Active citizen’ // Herald of government and local management [Vestnik gosudarstvennogo i munizipalnogo upravleniya]. 2015. N 4. P. 61–67. (In rus)
2. Beldugin P.S. Effectivness of ICT-implementation to the system of government in Moscow // Economis: yesterday, today, tomorrow [Ekonomika: vchera, segodnya, zavtra]. 2020. Vol. 10. N 1. P. 346–351. (In rus)
3. Bronnikov I. A. E-referndum as a factor of boosting citizens participation // Herald of SouthWest State University [Izvestia Ugo-Zapadnogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Istoriya I pravo] 2018. Vol. 8. N 1. P. 104–110. (In rus)
4. Volkova A. A., Plotnikov V. A., Rukinov M. V. Digital Economy: Essence of the Phenomenon, Problem and Risks of Formation and Development // Managment Consulting [Upravlencheskoe Konsultirovanie]. 2019. N 4. P. 38–49. (In rus)
5. Zotov V.B., Bronnikov I. A. Citizens participation in the the process of government administration: a case of ‘Active citizen’ // Power [Vlast]. 2015. N 11. P. 94–100.
6. Information society in Russia. 2019: Statistical book [Informazionnoe obshestvo in Russia. 2029: Statisticheskii sbornik. M. : HSE, 2019. 326 p. (In rus)
7. Kastelse M. Information age: economics, society and culture [Informacionnaya epoha]. M. : HSE, 2000. 608 p. (In rus)
8. Konkov A. E. Digitalization of politics Vs Policy of digitalization // Herald of SpbGU [Vestnik SpbGU. International relations]. 2020. Vol. 13. N 1. P. 47–68. (In rus)
9. Latur B. Rebuilding social: Introduction to actors-networking theory [Peresborka socialnogo]. M. : HSE, 2014. 382 p. (In rus)
10. Malahova O. V. Modern ICT and net-sources: perspectives to use for NGO // Meddle-Russian herald sociology-humanitarian sciences [Srednerusskii vestnik obshestvennyh nauk]. 2014. N 4. P. 56–59. (In rus)
11. Medennikov V. I. Mathematical model of digital platforms in economics // Digital economy. 2019. N 1 (5). P. 25–35. (In rus)
12. Moazed A., Johnson H. Platform. Practical usage of revolutionary business-model [Platforma: Prakticheskoe primenenie revoluzionnoi bisnes-modeli]. M. : Albina Publisher, 2019. 288 p. (In rus)
13. Perezolova A. S. City e-referndums: a case of ‘Active citizen’ // Power [Vlast]. 2015. N 2. P. 108–113. (In rus)
14. Revyakin S. A. On effectiveness of e-platforms for citizens participation in public administration // Questions of state and local management [Voprosy gosudarstvennogo I munizipalnogo upravleniya]. 2018. N 2. P. 94–113. (In rus)
15. Smorgunov L. V. Participatory governance and digitalization: platforms and cooperation // Power [Vlast]. N 5. P. 9–19. (In rus)
16. Habermas J. Structural changes of public sphere [Strukrurnye izmeneniya pulbichnoi sfery]. M. : Ves mir, 2016. 344 p. (In rus)
17. Udina U. N., Zaharova S.A. Crowd-sourcing for development of civil-activities in Russia // Herald of University [Vestnik Universiteta]. 2016. N 1. P. 263–268. (In rus)
18. Babbie E. The Basics of Social Research. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning, 2008. 552 p.
19. Van Dijck J. 2013. The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. USA : Oxford University Press. 228 p.
20. Van Dijck J., Poell Th., De Waal M. The platform society: Public values in a connective world. New York : Oxford University Press, 2018. 226 p.
21. Gomez-Uribe C. A., Hunt N. The Netflix Recommender System: Algorithms, Business Value, and Innovation. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS). 2016. Vol. 6 (4). P. 1–19.
22. Isajiw W. Causation and functionalism in sociology. London: Routledge, 2002. 167 p.
23. Meijer A., Thaens M. Social media strategies: Understanding the differences between North American police departments. Government Information Quarterly 30. N 4 (2013). P. 343–50.
24. Moore M. Tech Giants and Civic Power. London: Centre for the Study of Media, Communication and Power, Policy Institute, King’s College London, 2016. 92 p.
25. Mulkay M. Functionalism, Exchange and Theoretical Strategy. London : Routledge, 2014. 273 p.
26. O’Reilly T. Government as a Platform // Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice (ed. D. Lathrop, L. Ruma). Sebastopol, Calif. : O’Reilly Media. P. 11–40.
27. Sharakhina L. V., Azarova L. V., Bykov I. A., Achkasova V. A. Government communication strategies of global city: Opportunities and risks // Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Communication Strategies in Digital Society Workshop. 2018. P. 57–60.
Review
For citations:
Baryshkin A.G., Bykov I.A., Ignatieva O.A., Kondratenko K.S. Communication Platforms for Cities: Critical Analysis of Management Technology. Administrative Consulting. 2021;(1):20-31. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2021-1-20-31
Views:
619
Email this article 