1. eParticipation, social capital and the public sphere: a theoreticalframework Marius Rohde Johannessen

2. Agenda 3 Propositions: Social capital can contribute to explain why we participate The public sphere is about general political(-ish) debate eParticipation is more than government and decision-making Socialmedia use in eParticipation Public Sphere Social Capital Summary: How social capital and the public spherecontributes to eParticipation 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

3. Context: Social media use in eParticipation Many eParticipation projectsfail fewusers, or usersleaveafter a shortburstofinterest But citizens still want to participate Lackof public spacesfor debate on thecitizen’sown terms Manyexamplesofuser-driven debate (burma, WTO, Egypt) Cansocial media be part ofthesolution? Java governance: online debateinfluences top-leveldecisions Obama campaign: social media for campaigning, organising, fundraising Butwhatdoes it mean to participate? 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

4. Context: the Public Sphere and Social capital Participationmeansdebatingissuesof public interest: Not necessarilygovernment- or political party-driven The public sphere is «such a place in whichsuch a thing as public opinion can be formed» (Habermas) What is the public sphere, whatarethetopicsdebated? Many different viewpoints This paper attempts to show one ofthem Why do peopleparticipate? Social capital? 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

5. The Public Sphere …is not a black box: Bourgeoisie (elitist)? workingclass (open)? Suitabletopics (top levelpoliticsvseverydayconcerns) …is dead? Habermas: Mass media killedthe public sphere …is a living «space» for public debate: Autonomous from state and economic power Rational and criticaldiscourse. Participantsopen to others’ arguments Inclusive. Everyone is equallyentitled to participate 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

6. The Networked Public Sphere …is online Discussionboards, online newspapers Facebook, Twitter theblogosphere …is networked: society(and government) organisedthroughnetworks Governmentis a network node, influenced by othernodes Indirectinfluence on decision-making Objective: facilitatecommunitiesofinterest rationaldebate Butwhydo citizens participate? 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

7. Social capital …Is aboutpeople’sneed for being part ofsomething Trust (individual, institutional) and reciprocity Accumulated via «gooddeeds» Central thinkers: Bourdieu, Putnam …Is the «glue» that holds societytogether: Scandinavia: A highlevelofsocial capital explainsthewelfare state. Social capital «greases» transactions. We trust government and eachother, and assumethatgooddeedsarereciprocated. …Is used in eParticipation: characteristicsofuserpopulationinfluencesocial capital  debate online activitycan lead to increasedsocial capital 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

8. Summary eParticipation is more than government and decision-making Citizen-driven online public spheres The public sphere is about general political(-ish) debate But the topics covered are not always obviously “political”. Indirect influence on decision making through social networks Social capital can contribute to explain why we participate High levels of social capital strengthen participation, and participation increases social capital. Trust and reciprocity linked with public sphere ideals  better deliberation non-anonymousdiscussionsspaces, peoplestaying, community-formation 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen

9. Topics for discussion Social capital How to measure Shouldwemeasure, or just use it as a concept? Or just listen to thecritics, call it a fluffy concept and drop it? Possible alternative/supplement: Stakeholder theory. Urgencydecideswhoparticipates Networked public spheres How aretheseconnectedwiththephysicalworld/RL? How canwe trace ideasbetween nodes in a seeminglyboundarylessnetwork? 07.02.2011 SWEG - Marius Rohde Johannessen