Paul Walland and Brian Pickering IT Innovation Centre ......A roadmap for future human-machine networks for Citizen Participation Paul Walland and Brian Pickering IT Innovation Centre

1

A roadmap for future human-machine networks for Citizen Participation

Paul Walland and Brian Pickering IT Innovation Centre

Gamma House Enterprise Road

Southampton SO16 7NS

{pww,jbp}@it-innovation.soton.ac.uk

1 Introduction

WhilsttheOECDreportrecognisesthevalueofICTtechnologieswithindemocraticprocesses(Co-operation&Development,2004;Coleman&Norris,2005),notleastbecauseofthesizeandreachoftheInternet(Dutt&Kerikmäe,2014),therearestillmanyproblemswhichremain.Thereisadifferencebetweenon-andofflinedemocraticprocesses(Dutt&Kerikmäe,2014):peoplemaybeusedtosocialnetworksandonlinedebate,butthismaynottranslatedirectlyintoparticipatorybehaviour(Panagiotopoulos,Sams,Elliman,&Fitzgerald,2011).eDemocracyandeParticipationmaythereforecomplementratherthanreplacetraditionalprocesses(Coleman&Norris,2005).

There may be differences at the level of debate. For instance, socio-technical systems mayencouragetheextentofdebatebutmaynotimprovethequalityofthatdebate(Loukis&Wimmer,2012). In fact, the goal should not necessarily be about arriving at political decisions acrossdifferentfactionsandinterestgroups,butperhapsmoretoencourageagivengrouptodiscussandrefine what they think to be the main issues (Kreiss, 2015). And providing tools to supportdiscussion needs to strike a balance: very structured engagementmay lead tomore polishedoutcomes,thoughthismaybetotheexclusionofmanygroups(Loukis&Wimmer,2012).

Whatismore,thereisaneedtounderstandhowindividualsreactandbehaveonline:simplyput,howdowedefinean‘ePerson’(Dutt&Kerikmäe,2014)?This is important,becauseindividualshaveasocialidentitywhichaffectshowtheyinteractwithothers.Discussiononlineorofflineisaninherentlysocialactivity(Kreiss,2015)andwillbeinfluenced,therefore,bysocialforces(Ronson,2015;Stott&Reicher,2011).Allof this leadstothecomplex integrationofsocial,politicalandtechnicalfacets(Coleman&Norris,2005;Macintosh&Whyte,2008).Inthatcontext,thereneedstobeabalancestruckbetweenstakeholderinterestandexpectationontheonehand,andsocio-technicalissuessuchasacceptability,systemadoptionandwillingness(Macintosh&Whyte,2008).

Inexploringtheroadmapforcitizenparticipation,therefore,therearemultiplefactorswhichneedto be addressed. Online participation is clearly not about straight-forward transfer of offlineprocesses nor about getting the technology right. We need to engage with appropriatestakeholders,therefore,toidentifywhattheybelievetobetheultimategoalsandchallengesforthe domain. However, it will be important to consider too how HUMANE and the HUMANEapproachtoHMNcategorisationmightinformsuggestionsforunderstandingpotentialproblemsandproposingrelevantsolutions.

2

2 Creating the roadmap

Basedontheoutlinedescribedin(Jaho,Klitsi,Sarris,etal.,2017;Klitsi,Jaho,Pickering,&Walland,2017),theroadmapforcitizenparticipationisbasedonaniterativeapproachwhichissummarisedin Figure 1 below. As depicted, this is very much a ‘user-centric’ method, involving directparticipationinameta-discussionofthetypeofactivitieswhichdirectlyinvolvesthemorthattheywouldbeinterestedin.

Figure1:Summaryofroadmapcreationmethodology

Asoutlined,theprocess involvesanumberofkeyactivities.WithinthecontextofHUMANE,ofcourse,theHUMANEmethodology(Følstadetal.,2015;Følstad,Engen,etal.,2016)providesanessentialreferencepointtowardstheendoftheprocessinordertobeabletoidentifypossibleconflictresolutionstrategies.

Having identified the specific domain reviewed current knowledge and understanding of thatdomain(seetheIntroductionabove),thefirststepistoreviewtheecosystemandidentifythoseassumedtobethemostrelevantactorsinthenetwork.Inthefollowingsections,wesummariseourapproach.Further,bywayofupdatetotheresultspresentedinKlitsietal.(2017),additionalresponseshavebeenincludedintheanalysesreportedhere.

3

Identifystakeholders

WeneedtobeabletodifferentiatebetweenexpectationsandperspectivesofdifferentplayerswithintheHMN.Onlythendoweknowwhoweshouldapproach.

InHUMANE,throughsomeinitialresearchandfromexperiencewithrelatedprojects,weidentifiedasetofsixstakeholderroleswhomwefeltwouldprovideausefulperspectiveonthedomain:

1. Electedrepresentative:thatismembersofparliament(MPs)orsimilarelectedofficials.Thesewouldbeimportantactorsforcitizenstoengagewith.

2. Appointedofficial:anynon-electedofficialsuchasacivil-servant,orchairpersonandparticipantonaconsultationboardorcommittee.

3. Professionalresearcher:anyonewhoprovidesresearchandintelligencetoapoliticalpartyorNGOorsimilar.

4. Academicresearcher:theiroppositenumberinacademia,engagedinmoretheory-driveninvestigation.

5. Activist:thosedirectlyinvolvedinrepresentingspecificgroups(suchasalobbyist).

6. Interestedandengagedcitizen:thatisanyonenototherwiseinvolvedprofessionallyinthedomainbutwhohaveavestedinterestinparticipation.

Wealsoaskedthesestakeholderstoranktheimportanceofthefollowingpossibleparticipantsforcitizenparticipation:

7. Citizengroups8. Non-GovernmentOrganisations9. ITProfessionalsanddesigners10. Government11. Policymakers

Forthisinitialsetofquestions,weinvitedparticipantstoaddanyadditionalcommentstheymayhave,orsuggestothercategoriestheymaywanttouse.Wehadgoodcoverageoftheparticipantroleswehadsuggested((1)to(6)above):oftwentyparticipantsusingthecategorieswesuggested,theywereevenlysplitacrossAppointedofficial,Academicresearcher,andInterestedandengagedcitizen(4each);oneidentifiedthemselvesasaProfessionalresearcher,andthreeasActivists.Oftheremainingfour,theydescribedthemselvesas:

• CommissionofficialinvolvedwithOpenandCollaborativeGovernment• ADeputyMP• Facilitator(politicaltech)• Someoneworkingatapoliticalresearchorganisation

4

Participationwasfairlyvaried,therefore.

Withregardtothoseparticipantrolestheyfeltimportant,overall1participantsdecidedonthefollowingranking:

1st) CitizenGroups2nd) Non-GovernmentOrganisations3rd) Government4th) PolicyMakers5th) ITProfessionalsanddesigners

Thisrankorderthereforeinformsourproposedroadmapinthefollowingsection.

Suggestchallenges

Weneedtocheckwhatpotentialblockerstheremaybetocitizenparticipation

Weaskedparticipantstoconsiderwhichofthefollowingmightbeabarrierforcitizenparticipation

a) Lackofinterestfromcitizensintheprocessandfinalresults

b) Lackofinterestfrompoliticiansintheprocessorthefinalresults

c) DisbeliefthateGovernmentwillactoncitizencontributions

d) Difficultincommunicatingresultsofcitizenparticipationtoresponsiblepublicadministration

e) Smallnumbersofpoliticiansparticipatingintheprocessf) Lowdigitalliteracylevelsamongcertaindemographicsg) Dissatisfactionwiththedegreetowhichpoliticians

appeartotakeaccountofcitizencontribution

Inadditiontothechallengeswesuggestedabove,weaskedparticipantstorankthefollowingfactorsinregardtomotivatingparticipantsforpublicengagement

h) Motivationofcitizenstoengagei) Motivationofpoliticianstoengagej) Trustinthesystembycitizensk) Directaccessibilitybetweenpolicymakersandcitizensl) Greatertransparencyinthepolicymakingprocessm) Accountabilityofpolicymakersandpoliticiansto

citizensn) Accountabilityofcontributorstoonlinedebateo) Regulation/Legislationofcitizenengagementnetworks

1Onlysummaryresultsareshownhere.Inthedeliverable(D4.4)moredetailisprovidedonresponsesperstakeholdercategory.

5

Suggestgoals

Wewanttoexplorewhattheoverallaimsmightbeforonlineparticipation

Weaskedparticipantstoidentifywhichofthefollowingtheythoughtwouldbenefitonlineparticipation

i. Opennessandtransparencyii. AccesstoOpenGovernmentdataiii. Improvedtimelinessinpolicycreationiv. Creationofnewmarketsandinnovation

mechanismsv. Generationofacultureofpublicengagement

Inresponsetowhatparticipantsthoughtwhichofthebarrierswesuggested((a)–(g)above)tobeimportant,oftwenty-tworesponses,thefollowingsummaryresultswereprovided:

POTENTIALBARRIER RESPONSES

Lackofinterestfromcitizensintheprocessandfinalresults 11

Lackofinterestfrompoliticiansintheprocessorthefinalresults 12

DisbeliefthateGovernmentwillactoncitizencontributions 14

Difficultincommunicatingresultsofcitizenparticipationtoresponsiblepublicadministration

14

Smallnumbersofpoliticiansparticipatingintheprocess 6

Lowdigitalliteracylevelsamongcertaindemographics 6

Dissatisfactionwiththedegreetowhichpoliticiansappeartotakeaccountofcitizencontribution

18

Thistellsusthatthereisalackoftrustthatpoliticiansandgovernmentrespondtoandactonwhatparticipantscontribute.Thisisasignificantblockerthenwhichneedstobereflectedintheroadmap.

Giventhis,andlookingspecificallyatwhatmightimproveparticipationlevels((h)to(o)above),thefollowingoverall1rankingswereidentified:

1st) Trustinthesystembycitizens2nd) Motivationofcitizenstoengage3rd) Accountabilityofpolicymakersandpoliticianstocitizens

6

4th) Motivationofpoliticianstoengage5th) Greatertransparencyinthepolicymakingprocess6th) Directaccessibilitybetweenpolicymakersandcitizens7th) Accountabilityofcontributorstoonlinedebate8th) Regulation/Legislationofcitizenengagementnetworks

Trustandmotivationofparticipants(thecitizensthemselves)aswellasaccountabilityofpoliticianstothosecitizensseemtobethegreatestchallengeswhichmightreapthegreatestrewards.

Asfaraswhatweproposedasoverallgoals((i)to(v)above),thefollowingrankingsweregiven:

1st) Generationofacultureofpublicengagement2nd) Opennessandtransparency3rd) AccesstoOpenGovernmentdata4th) Improvedtimelinessinpolicycreation5th) Creationofnewmarketsandinnovationmechanisms

Twoparticipantsalsoidentifiedtheirowngoals:

• Thepossibilitytomakeuseofgamification,augmentedrealityandotherincentivisationmechanisms;and

• Directlinkbetweencitizenandelectedrepresentativeorcivilservant.Opportunitytoaskquestions.

Therankingsandindividualcommentshelpidentifyspecificgoalswhichweshouldaddtoourroadmap.

Identifychallenges

Basedonoursuggestionsabove,whatdidparticipantsactuallythink?

Themainchallengeswhichhavecomeoutoftheanalysessetoutaboveinclude:

• Understandtherealroleoftechnology,includingappropriateregulation.ThisrelatestoHUMANandMACHINEAGENCYwithinthenetwork.

• Managemotivation:howandwhydopeopleparticipate?ThisrelatestoencouragingparticipationeitherthroughincentiveorunderstandinghowtheHMNoperates.

• Publiciseoutcomes:howtodemonstratethatit’sworthdoing.ThisrelatestohowbesttoensuretransparencyaboutwhathappensintheHMN.

• ManageTrust:whatencouragesparticipantstotrustothersandthesystem?

Thesechallengesare,ofcourse,interrelated.WithintheHMN,therefore,thereappearstobefourmainissues.This

7

hasbeenmodelledinrelationtotrustandtrustrelations(Pickering,Engen,&Walland,2017).

AsdiscussedintheHUMANEproject(Følstadetal.,2017;Følstad,Engen,etal.,2016),identifyingimplicationsfortheHMN–experienceandmotivation,behaviourandcollaboration,innovationandimprovement,privacyandtrust,underlyingtechnicalinfrastructure–offersawaytoprovidingappropriateresolutionofanyrelatedproblems.

Identifygoals Basedontheabove,wesuggestthefollowingoverallgoalsfortheHMN:

• Dealwithissuesoftrust:asthebasisofparticipation,trustinoutcomes,trustinthecurationofdata,etc.,needstobeatthebasisofthedesignandoperationofanysystem;

• Generateacultureofpublicengagement:basedonprioritisationfromstakeholders,andthesuggestiontocapitaliseontechnology(e.g.,gamification,ARandotherincentives);

• Createopenandtransparentdebate:aspartoftrust(seebelow)andaccountability,theemphasisisondebateratherthanspecificpolicymaking;

• Motivationengagement(citizensandpoliticians):keepingtheHMNfunctioningrequirescontinuedparticipation,whichisbasedonunderstandingandaddressingmotivation.Notethatthisappliesbothtocitizensthemselvesbutalsopolicymakersandotherpoliticians;

• FosterAccountability:againaspartofparticipation,motivationandtrust,thereisaneedtodemonstratethattheCitizenParticipationHMNshowsthatitworksandhowitworks.

ThesegoalsformthebasistoidentifythewayfromthecurrentsituationtoprovideaneffectiveHMN.

Bringingalloftheseresultstogether,wehavedevelopedaroadmapforCitizenParticipation.Thisroadmapbeginswiththeissuesidentifyfromthebriefliteraturereview,butworkstowardstheoverallgoalsjustidentifiedaspartofthequantitativesurvey.

8

3 An initial roadmap for citizen participation

Figure2:ThedevelopmentoftheCitizenParticipationRoadmap

Figure2summarisesthestepstothegenerationoftheCitizenParticipationroadmapdescribedbelow. To beginwith, the roadmap startswith someof the conclusions from the introductionaboveandbasedonreferencescited.InrelationtotheoverallprocesssummarisedinFigure1,thefigureshowsthevariousstepstakenandtheoutcomesofthequantitativesurveyrunaspartofHUMANEroadmapping(Jaho,Klitsi,Følstad,etal.,2017;Jaho,Klitsi,Sarris,etal.,2017;Klitsietal.,2017).

Figure3:ARoadmapforCitizenParticipation

9

The roadmap clearly suggests away forward from false assumptions based on existing onlineparticipatoryactivitiestranslatingdirectlytoeParticipation.Thisisnotthecase,though,andfailsto identify the typesof goals andaspirations thatusershaveof theHMN.Asdescribed in theprevioussection,theoverallgoalsarenotintheformofspecificissuesaroundtechnologyorotherICT enablers, nor indeed about regulation of networks. Instead, they focus specifically oninteractionanddebateintheHMN:generatingacultureforengagementisexactlywhatisneededtoencouragepublicdebate,but tokeepparticipationgoing, thereneeds tobeanappropriatewillingnessonallsidestotrusteachotherandtheprocess,andtoprovethattheyareallworkingtogethertoachievetheoverallgoalsofthenetwork.

Alongthewaytothesegoals,specificchallengeshavebeenidentified.

4 Citizen Participation: HMN implications

In finalisingtheroadmap, it is importanttovalidatethat inaddressinganyspecificchallenge,asuitable result is reached for all stakeholders: noone stakeholder shouldbegivenany specificadvantageoveranyother. In this section,wewill consider caseswhere theremaybeconflictsbetweenthegoalsandprioritiesofindividualparties.

Identifypossibleconflict Inrelationtotheanalysesdescribedintheprevioussections,itisobviousthattherewillbeconflictsatvariouslevelsandbetweenvariousstakeholders.Thesemaybesummarisedasfollows:

• Stakeholderexpectation:attemptingtocontrolthenetworkforfixedgoalsandtowardsfixedoutcomesfailstorecognisethedynamismofsuchnetworksandmayevendiscourageorunderminehealthydebate.TheHMNmustbeallowedtodevelopasnetworkparticipantsallow.Thismeansthatpolicymakersmaynotalwaysgetwhattheywant.

• Trust:asoriginallyconceived,trustisaboutawillingnessofanindividualtoexposethemselvestovulnerability(Mayer,Davis,&Schoorman,1995;Rousseau,Sitkin,Burt,&Camerer,1998).However,thishastobetrustintheoverallprocessandnotinspecificoutcomes,sincenotallpoliticaldecisionsalmostbydefinitionwithinademocracywillpleaseallthosewhovote.Noteveryonewillgettheoutcometheywant;yetthisshouldbeusedto

10

underlineandstrengthentheperceivedintegrity,competenceandbenevolence2oftheHMNitself.

• Motivation:similarly,thoughnotalloutcomeswillpleaseallindividuals,andalthoughnotalldebateswillprovidequalityoutcomes,continuedparticipationisessentialfortheHMNtoflourish.Further,it’snotjustcitizensbutalsootherstakeholderswhoneedtobeseentobeactiveandacceptingwithintheHMN.Thismeansthatallactorsmustagreetosupportthenetworkandnotjusttheirowninterests.

Iftheoverallgoalsofthenetworkaretobeachieved,suchconflictsneedtoberesolved.Traditionally,thismaybebasedonappropriatebalancingofdifferentstakeholderpriorities(Clark,Wroclawski,Sollins,&Braden,2005).Yettheoverallgoalofthenetworkremainsoneofsuccessfuloperationasanetworkratherthanprovidinganyspecificoutcomesforindividualstakeholders.

Mechanismsforresolution Withthatinmind,andasoutlinedintheprevioussection,wecanexploitthedesignimplicationsanddesignsolutionsproposedinFølstad,Engen,etal.(2016)toaddresssuchissues.Thiswillbediscussedinthefollowingsection.

Increasingly,ithasbecomeclearthattheHMNitselfismorethanthesumofitsindividualparts.Trustforinstanceneedstobeinthenetworkratherthanindividualinterestsorgoals;similarly,motivationmustbebasedoncontributiontothesuccessfuloperationoftheHMNratherthanforindividualoutcomesorexpected results. Indeveloping this roadmap, therefore, it hasbecomeclearoncemorethananHMNassumesapurposeasacollaborativeentityandnotinservinganindividualwithinthenetwork.

5 Mechanisms for Conflict resolution

Asidentifiedintheprevioussections,anumberofspecificconflictshavearisenastheroadmaphas beendeveloped. Such conflicts reflect issues related to stakeholder expectations andhowthese differ from stakeholder to stakeholder, to providing trust mechanisms, and to supportmotivation.Toresolvetheseissues,theHUMANEtypologyandmethodologyprovidesasuitablesetofdesign solutionswhichofferHMN-centricnotnecessarily specific toCitizenParticipationnetworks.Theseare summarisedbelow; theorder is as theyappear in (Følstad,Yasseri, etal.,2016). The design solutions were separately validated and are grouped into specific areas:

2Mayeretal.,1995;seealsoSöllneretal.(2012)UnderstandingtheFormationofTrustinITArtifacts.InternationalConferenceonInformationSystems

11

Experience, Motivation, Reputation, Behavioural Change, Collaboration, Loyalty, SharedResponsibility,SocialInteraction,InnovationandImprovement,ProductQuality,NetworkGrowth,PrivacyandTrust,shown inbracketsalongwith the respectivedesign solutionsexamined.TherangeofsuchcategoriesreflectsthefactthatresolvingpotentialconflictrequiresmanydifferentHMN-centricissues.

Provide what is desired, not justwhatisknown(Experience)

This design solution is geared specifically towardsensuringthatrelevantinformationisprovidedandnotjuststandardmessages.Assuch,thiswouldmeanthatparticipants would be given access to informationrelated directed to any given interaction, i.e., theparticularlydiscussionthattheindividualsareengagedwith. This might be expected to relate to Trust andMotivationaspotentialsourcesofconflict.

Motivating users to contributecontentinHMNs(Motivation)

This solution is aimed at making it easy for users tocontributeandengage.Ofcourse,thismaybedifferentdependingonusercategory–e.g.,whethertheuserisa citizen or policy maker. This obviously relates toconflicts between Stakeholder Expectations, andsuggests thatall expectationsneed toconsideredanddesigned for. Clearly, this will also have relevance toMotivation.

Reward users to keep themmotivated(Motivation)

Althoughthis isostensiblyanobviousdesignsolution;gamification, for example, is often used to encourageparticipation.However,motivationmaynotsimplybeaproduct of ‘badges’: prosocial behaviours for instancearenotnecessarilymotivated thisway. It is thereforeimportantthattherewardbeassociatedwiththegoalsand expectations of users. For example, for CitizenParticipation, thismight be providing direct access topolicy makers for a specific discussion. This relatesspecifically to Motivation. However, if the rewardincludes appropriate transparency and informationaboutthenetworkandhowitfunctionsmaypromoteTrust.

Strengthensocialtiestokeepusersmotivated(Motivation)

This group of design solutions relate specifically toexploiting the social natureof online interaction (see,

12

Preserving reputation of anindividual,companyororganizationinHMNs(Reputation)

forinstance,Kreiss,2015).Clearly,muchcanbelearnedfrom understanding social forces, including socialidentity and intergroup factors. This clearly relates toMotivation; but as social engagement also includesfactorsofTrust.Behavioural change through social

motivation(Behaviouralchange)

Collaboration between machinesand humans through machinelearning(Collaboration)

Thismay seema surprisingdesign solution.However,allowing AI techniques to identify patterns ofbehaviours or activity would provide valuableinformationwhichcouldbeusedbyallparticipants inthe network to understand each other’s motives anddrivers.ThiswouldhelpsupportissuesofunderstandingStakeholder expectation, and might encourage TrustandMotivationinconsequence.

Apply loyalty ladder to build andmaintain a sustainable user base(Loyalty)

This design solution relates back to reward systemsoutlinedabove.Assuch,itmaysupportMotivationandTrust.

Encouraging shared responsibilityHMNs(SharedResponsibility)

IfparticipantscanbeencouragedtotakeownershipfortheHMN, then thismaybeexpected tocontribute tothesuccessofthenetwork.Insodoing,thiswouldhelpMotivation and Trust. It may also help participantsunderstandStakeholderexpectation,andmay leadtoincreasedparticipation.

Supporting social interactionthrough strengthening within-platform communication (SocialInteraction)

This design solution relates back to the social forcesmentionedabove.

Contributors learn to improve bybeing consumers first (InnovationandImprovement)

This design solution relates especially to Stakeholderexpectation: allowing different participants to gain aperspective of other players in the network mayencourageabetterunderstandingandappreciationofthosedifferentplayers.Assuch,thismaysupportTrustandMotivation.

Strengthen innovation throughinfrastructure for informal

This design solution explicitly recognises that HMNsmay develop in unexpected directions. However,

13

collaboration (Innovation andImprovement)

designing for serendipitous interaction betweenparticipantsatdifferenttimesmightencourageTrustattheveryleast,butalsoMotivation.

Employ automatic quality control(Productquality)

ThisrelatesbacktomachinelearningandAIwithinthenetwork. However, in respect to the quality ofcontributions (Loukis & Wimmer, 2012), having anautomatedsystempromptparticipantstoimprovethequality of their input privately rather than publicallyacross the networkmay encourage participation, i.e.,relatetoMotivation.

Protect new users for beginning(Networkgrowth)

As above, allowing new users to find their own way,possibly even via making mistakes, then this mayencourage Motivation, and possibly Trust in thenetwork.

Managingprivacy(Privacy) Thisisanobviousdesignsolution:participantsneedtoknowthattheirpersonaldatabutalsotheirinteractionsare protected. This would support Trust as well asMotivation.

Strengthen trust through efficienthandling at first point of contact(Trust)

Related to the social forces comments above, andobviouslyrelatedtoTrustandMotivation,thesedesignsolutions provide obvious support to the ongoingsuccessoftheHMN.

Strengthen interpersonal trustthrough rich profiles andrecommendations(Trust)

Supporting trust across HMNinteractions(Trust)

FortheconflictsidentifiedintheprevioussectionsandwhichmayintroduceanadditionallayerofchallengeinmovingtowardtheoverallgoalsoftheHMN,theHUMANEmethodologyoffershelpfulinformativedesignsolutionsasdescribedabove.DerivedfromasetofHMNusecaseswhichwerenotrelatedtoCitizenParticipation,thissuggeststhatthedesignsolutionsarenotspecifictoanyparticulartypeofHMN.Instead,theyprovidenetwork-centric,ratherthanuser-centric,solutionsandpatternswhichresolvenetworklevelissues.Insodoing,theHUMANEdesignsolutionshelp

14

finalise the roadmap creation as shown previously by providing solutions to possible conflictswhichmightotherwisemeanthatthechallengesidentifiedcannotbeaddressed.

6 Conclusion

LookingatissuesforCitizenParticipationprocesseshashighlightedboththeoverallaimsfortheHMNsthatmightbeusedtosupportparticipationinthisdomain.Indevelopingasuitableroadmapthoughitisimportantnotonlytoidentifypotentialchallengesalongthewaybutalsoanyparticularconflictswhichmayhamperprogress towards theultimate goals of thenetwork.Usingdesignsolutionsderived froma considerationof implicationsassociatedwithHMNs inotherdomains(Følstad,Engen,etal.,2016),possibleconflictscanberesolvedtoenablethesuccessfulgrowthandcontinuousdevelopmentofHMNsaimedatsupportforCitizenParticipation.

7 References

Clark, D. D., Wroclawski, J., Sollins, K. R., & Braden, R. (2005). Tussle in cyberspace: definingtomorrow's internet. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (ToN), 13(3), 462-475.doi:10.1109/TNET.2005.850224

Co-operation,O.f.E.,&Development.(2004).Promiseandproblemsofe-democracy:Challenges

ofonlinecitizenengagement:OECDPublishing.

Coleman,S.,&Norris,D.F.(2005).Anewagendafore-democracy.doi:10.2139/ssrn.1325255

Dutt,P.K.,&Kerikmäe,T.(2014).ConceptsandproblemsassociatedwitheDemocracyRegulating

eTechnologiesintheEuropeanUnion(pp.285-324):Springer.

Følstad,A.,Eide,A.W.,Pickering,B.,Tsvetkova,M.,GarciaGavilanes,R.,Yasseri,T.,&Engen,V.

(2015).D2.1:Typologyandmethodologyv1.Retrievedfrom Følstad,A.,Engen,V.,Mulligan,W.,Pickering,B.,Pultier,A.,Yasseri,T.,&Walland,P.(2017).D2.3:

TheHUMANEtypologyandmethod.Retrievedfrom Følstad,A.,Engen,V.,Yasseri,T.,GarciaGavilanes,R.,Walland,P.,Tsvetkova,M.,...Pultier,A.

(2016). D2.2 Typology and method v2. Retrieved fromhttps://humane2020.eu/publications/#reports

Følstad,A.,Yasseri,T.,GarciaGavilanes,R.,Walland,P.,Tsvetkova,M., Jaho,E., . . .Pultier,A.

(2016).D2.2:Typologyandmethodv2.Retrievedfrom Jaho,E.,Klitsi,M.,Følstad,A.,Lech,T.C.,Walland,P.,Pickering,J.B.,&Meyer,E.T.(2017).D4.4:

Finalroadmapoffuturehuman-machinenetworks.Retrievedfrom Jaho,E.,Klitsi,M.,Sarris,N.,Følstad,A.,Lech,T.C.,Walland,P., . . .Meyer,E.T. (2017).D4.2:

Roadmapoffuturehuman-machinenetworks.Retrievedfrom Klitsi,M.,Jaho,E.,Pickering,B.,&Walland,P.(2017).D4.3:Surveyofusers'needsresults.Retrieved

from Kreiss, D. (2015). The problem of citizens: E-democracy for actually existing democracy. Social

Media+Society,1(2),11.doi:10.1177/2056305115616151

15

Loukis, E.,&Wimmer,M. (2012).Amulti-methodevaluationofdifferentmodelsof structuredelectronicconsultationongovernmentpolicies.InformationSystemsManagement,29(4),284-294.doi:10.1080/10580530.2012.716990

Macintosh, A., & Whyte, A. (2008). Towards an evaluation framework for eParticipation.

Transforming government: People, process and policy, 2(1), 16-30.doi:10.1108/17506160810862928

Mayer,R.C.,Davis,J.H.,&Schoorman,F.D.(1995).AnIntegrativeModelofOrganizationalTrust.

The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335

Panagiotopoulos, P., Sams, S., Elliman, T.,& Fitzgerald,G. (2011).Do social networking groups

supportonlinepetitions?Transforminggovernment:People,processandpolicy,5(1),20-31.doi:10.1108/17506161111114626

Pickering,B.,Engen,V.,&Walland,P.(2017).TheInterplaybetweenHumanandMachineAgency.

Paperpresentedat the19th InternationalConferenceonHuman-Computer InteractionInternational,Vancouver,Canada.https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.04537

Ronson,J.(2015).SoYou'vePublicallyShamed.Oxford,England:Picador.

Rousseau,D.M.,Sitkin,S.B.,Burt,R.S.,&Camerer,C.(1998).Notsodifferentafterall:Across-

discipline view of trust. Academy of management review, 23(3), 393-404.doi:10.5465/AMR.1998.926617

Stott,C.,&Reicher,S.(2011).MadMobsandEnglishmen?:Mythsandrealitiesofthe2011riots