EDemocracy Presentation JN441

1
(No Transcript)
2
e-DemocracyResearch Amongst the General Public,
Disadvantaged People and Ethnic MinoritiesCOI
Communications, for the Office of the e-Envoy
3
Research Objectives

• Identify specific issues of inclusion/ exclusion
  that need to be considered when developing policy
  proposals on e-democracy
• Explore current barriers to participation in
  entire democratic process (not only voting)
  evaluate potential for ICT to overcome these
• Evaluate potential benefits drawbacks of
  e-democracy for particular politically excluded
  groups
• Assess potential for specific policy initiatives
  to motivate increase participation among
  particular groups

4
Methodology

• Respondents ? people e-democracy might find
  hardest to attract
• unengaged from democratic system
• dont use internet (or other new technologies)
• 9 x focus groups amongst the General Public
• in rural urban locations across England Wales
• structured by lifestage and social grade
• mainly single gender
• 5 unengaged groups who do not participate
  regularly in the political system / mix of
  attitudes to the internet
• 4 engaged groups who participate in the system,
  and do not use / like using the internet

5
Methodology

• 5 x focus groups with Ethnic Minorities
• Indian, Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Black African,
  Black Caribbean
• all unengaged
• mix of attitudes to the internet
• Disadvantaged groups
• 3 x depths with representatives of organisations
  providing support
• 6 x focus groups- 1 each with visually impaired,
  physically disabled, people with learning
  difficulties (x 2), people with mental health
  issues and homeless people
• 2 x paired depths with hearing impaired
• varying levels of engagement
• mix of attitudes to the internet

6
Perceptions of Democracy

• Democracy defined in two key ways
• Voting/ Elections (usually national)
• Freedom of speech/ Choice
• Democracy seen as not working as well as it used
  to
• feel more excluded
• believe politicians dont listen
• think their vote doesnt make a difference
• BUT is still better than any other system
• Voting seen as essential element of democracy

7
Methods of Participating

• Distinct sample differences
• Engaged could name many methods
• Unengaged found this very difficult
• Most respondents mentioned methods like
• voting
• writing to MPs/ attending surgeries
• Reasonable numbers came up with

8
Personal Level of Participation I

• Unengaged people
• had never voted
• had voted in the past, but dont intend to
  anymore
• want to give views, but lack confidence/ time/
  opportunity
• Gap between engaged unengaged ? not clear
  cut
• some engaged voted regularly, but dont
  participate
• some unengaged dont vote, but participate
• BUT, engaged much more likely to participate
  than unengaged
• Two categories of unengaged
• disaffected ? have been put off participating
• disinterested ? dont see it as part of their
  lives

9
Personal Level of Participation II

• Some engaged ? highly involved in political
  system community activities
• football club committees
• residents associations
• community meetings
• Several disengaged involved in other ways
• protest marches
• signing petitions

Would sign because Someone my level has gone
out of their way to do something to make a
difference so Ive got to support them
(Non-voter, Bham)
Countryside march What impact has one person
got compared to 500? 500 stops traffic I was
helping just by being one person, and the more
people that do that... (Non-voter, Shampton)
10
Personal Level of Participation III

• Many unengaged some engaged hardly ever
  participated other than voting had only the
  vaguest interest in doing so

I think theyre going to make their own mind up
anyway It doesnt really make a great deal of
difference who gets in, because all that
changesare...the little things that dont
actually concern us. (Non-voter, Gloucester)
Youre a very small cog, arent you? (Voter,
Manchester)
Everyone just lives their own lives basically.
You dont worry about whatever everyone else is
doing. You get on do the best for yourself.
(Non-voter, Swansea)
11
Voting

• Most (inc. engaged) ? cynical about importance
  efficacy of voting
• conventional wisdom is one should vote but it
  doesnt do much good
• Some who dont vote nevertheless regard it as
  important
• Most more likely to vote at General Elections
  than local elections - no mention of European

12
Arguments in Favour of Voting

• Its the citizens duty

• responsibility of living in a democracy

• If you dont vote, you cant complain
• Secondary reasons
• Because I always have
• You never know when it MIGHT make a
  difference

13
Arguments in Favour of Voting II
People tell me, I never vote, and I say well
you have no right to open your bloody mouth
then! (Voter, North Wales)
Mainly because I was brought up to do it It
was considered something you did. (Voter,
Manchester)
I dont think youve got any right to have an
opinion if youre not prepared to go out and
vote. (Voter, Manchester)
Our seven votes could be vital. (Voter,
Gloucester)
Every single time, at local, general elections.
I would never dare not to. Because I had a
feeling that it was going to help. (Voter,
Southampton)
14
Arguments Against Voting I

• It doesnt make any difference
• Politicians dont listen/ only want your views at
  election time
• What difference does my one vote make?
• Its a foregone conclusion
• Were in a safe seat, we know whos going to win
• Theres no-one worth voting for. Theyre all the
  same
• Too little difference between the parties/
  candidates
• Policies I want arent being put forward

I'd just rather not vote at all. I wasnt going
to vote Labour and there isn't an alternative to
Labour. (Non-voter, Black Caribbean)
15
Arguments Against Voting II
They cant even answer a straight question if
you ask them one. Why cant they just tell you
the truth? It doesnt matter who runs the
country, were all screwed anyway. (Non-voter,
Swansea)
Why fight a battle youre going to lose?
Why get off your butt if youre going to
win? (Non-voters, Bham)
I think that the local MP thinks if hes going
to lose his seat hes going to do something about
it, but if its pretty safe you know it doesnt
get heard. (Voter, Shampton)
I live in Solihull but Solihulls been
Conservative for, I dont know, since I was born
I think, so really the odd vote here or there
isnt going to make any difference. (Non-voter,
Bham)
They dont fulfil their promises. Theyre
all the same (Non-voters, Greater Manchester)
16
Increasing Participation

• General consensus ? people becoming detached from
  and disillusioned with system
• seen as issue that needs to be addressed
• particular concern over participation of young
  people
• Most believe desirable for as many to participate
  as possible
• BUT often taken as a given rather than
  passionately argued
• seen by some as unrealistic

17
Experiences with New Technology

• Most very IT inexperienced
• heard of, but unfamiliar with basic
  technologies
• computers, websites, etc.
• little awareness/ use of sophisticated IT
  technologies
• e.g. web-cams/ MP3/ newsgroups, etc.
• a few technophiles were more knowledgeable/
  experienced
• Mobile phone use much more widespread
• for most, mobile phones not part of new
  technology
• BUT texting mainly for young people
• Digital TV understood, but only a few have it
• Widespread use of guides

18
Experiences with Specific Technologies
caution- very small sample size (n69)
INDICATIVE ONLY
19
Technophiles
Perceptions of New Technology

• Often, but not always, younger
• Comfortable with email basic web-browsing
• several use internet banking (entry-level use)
• however, use of chatrooms, web-cams etc. still
  limited
• Use ICT for specific tasks
• many dont feel comfortable going beyond these

20
Technophiles
Perceptions of New Technology
Psycho Drawing I like computers, but just dont
have the time. (Non-voter, Manchester)
21
Hesitant Users
Perceptions of New Technology

• Most accept importance and potential benefits of
  new technology, but hesitate to use it
• core barrier ? computers internet extremely
  complex
• Key reasons
• its so complicated, its beyond me
• what if I muck something up?
• its not really part of my world
• Several used computers for work, but not for
  leisure
• Often get someone (e.g. a relative) to help them
  out

22
Hesitant Users
Perceptions of New Technology
23
Rejecters
Perceptions of New Technology

• Some strongly against new technology, for others
  just not part of my world
• could use, but choose not to
• Computers internet much of whats wrong with
  world
• impersonal/ discourages human contact
• non-users get left further further behind
• Also less likely to use other technologies
• BUT some who dont like computers use mobile
  phones a lot

24
Rejecters
Perceptions of New Technology
25
Access Denied
Perceptions of New Technology

• Recognise benefits of new technology
• But feel will never use a great deal, or at all
• lack of access (e.g. cost)
• language barriers (particularly ethnic
  minorities)
• learning the technology is beyond them
• may have made tentative first steps but have now
  given up
• Resigned to, not annoyed about, this situation

26
Access Denied
Perceptions of New Technology
They are not for us. The expense of buying
using technology. (Non-voter, Bangladeshi)
I know watching that mouse go round the computer
like that, I would never be able to do it.
(Non-Voter, Greater Manchester)
I think sometimes would I be able to keep up
with it all. I think it might get a bit too
much. (Voter, Gloucester)
The price of the computer now is atrocious.
(Voter, Gloucester)
Its modern and very, very helpful in modern
life. I think we are going to be deprived.
(Non-voter, Indian)
27
Access Denied
Perceptions of New Technology
28
e-Democracy- Initial Impressions I

• General (tentative) consensus
• proposal was a fairly good idea
• Main emphasis was on it being inevitable
• its the way of the future
• its going to happen whether were ready for it
  or not
• Initially seen as of little personal interest
• dont use ICT
• not interested in politics/ participation

If youve not got a computer, you would just
forget it, Thats the end of that one. (Voter,
Manchester)
Its for the people that bought John Majors
book (Non-voter, Bham)
29
e-Democracy- Initial Impressions II

• Resistance to idea of e-democracy as the answer
  to non-participation - doesnt address
  fundamental issues
• Initial assumption
• e-democracy voting, not participation
• will replace (not supplement) existing system
• ?
• Definite need to emphasise
• existing methods of voting/ participating would
  still be available

30
Internet Security- Discussion

• Major concern about security
• fear that voting preference views may become
  known
• perception that internet is the wild west
• based on fear of the unknown and anecdotes
• i.e. Ive heard stories about hackers not this
  happened to me
• clearly fertile ground for urban myths
• Most not convinced by arguments that internet is
  as secure as other traditional systems
• Implication publicising the security systems
  that would protect e-democracy initiatives wont
  reassure
• hesitant users
• rejecters
• access denied

31
Internet Security
Every now again we hear somebody has got hold
of all the numbers you know, there is a bug
hanging about, you think good job I havent
done that. (Voter, Shampton)
Theres a little database in there. They know
when you shop, what you buy, youve got your
reward card or something, they know that you buy
coffee every month, two veg every three weeks.
(Non-voter, Bham)
When you get things, especially to do with
government, you can upset all sorts of people.
When youre talking on the Internet, its easy
for them to find out who you are and where you
are So if you start discussing things with
certain people, you dont know who youre talking
to. (Non-voter, Gloucester)
Youre just a bit wary of putting your details
into something you cant control. (Voter,
Manchester)
32
Chatrooms

• Crucial factor in influencing perception of the
  internet
• Two e-participation proposals based on live
  chatroom format were discussed
• Online Government Forum
• Citizen-led Discussion Group
• For some, chatrooms have many negative
  connotations
• the domain of fanatics/ imposters
• media reporting in connection with criminal
  activity (e.g. paedophilia)
• BUT, some of the most positive comments relate to
  people (e.g. my wife) using it for live
  discussions

33
Chatrooms
I think getting through to China Japan, which
I do, that is so good, because they actually get
in contact with us, I dont think they would
write. (Non-voter, Shampton)
The only time Ive ever heard of chatrooms is
for sex. Ive never hear about any other issue,
so everyone is assuming chatrooms perverts.
(Voter, Shampton)
Theyre for lonely people. Leaves yourself
open to problems. I think, with that, it
becomes addictive. You lose communication with
people very easily. (Non-voter, Shampton)
34
e-Participation I

• Some muted interest in using these methods
• mostly that might be interesting, not thats a
  really good idea
• Seen by some as evidence of democracy at work
• Online Government Forum most popular
• some might e-mail an MP
• General consensus is
• its not for me
• rather than Im being left out
• Some concerns
• could be domain of fanatics, rather than real
  people
• potential negative impact on Government policy if
  only channel

35
e-Participation II
What if policy changed b/c of discussions? Id
feel that was democracy working with us. At
least if they were on this thing, and they were
listening to you, and they changed their mind,
well OK, great, they have listened for a
change. (Voters, North Wales)
I think it might open it up to a lot more
people. I know specifically with young people
if it was based around the computer, Im pretty
sure they would all be logging in. (Voter,
Shampton)
This is the trouble. You would get all them
fanatics going every single day But people
going about their ordinary business wouldnt.
(Voter, Manchester)
The only thing is, down there the population is
bigger you know we live up here totally
different to what people do down there, we are
behind with the wages everything. And those
people would speak over us. (Voter, North Wales)
36
e-Participation Methods I

• Bulletin Board
• none had used one on the net, but a familiar
  concept (noticeboards)
• not much point using just a sounding board,
  nobody reads them

• Citizen-led Discussion Group
• associated with chatrooms
• again, just a sounding board whos going to be
  listening?
• easy to drift off into another topic

• Online Government Forum
• opportunity to raise concerns directly with
  influential person
• but how do you know its that person?
• might get over-loaded youd never be able to
  ask your question

• E-Mail/ Text Message
• text is unexpected
• fundamentally little different from sending a
  letter
• possibly faster/ more likely to reach right
  person
• but could be easy to delete

37
e-Participation Methods II
Bulletin Board You get that in factories as
well You get all these white collar workers,
they are putting how things should be done, it
is different when you are doing it yourself, you
might think of an easier way to do something
You can stop something or more safety, you write
it put it in the box. (Voter, North Wales)
E-mail/ Text I think if you feel really
strongly you want to get it out of your system
you put the anger into the letter you want him
to get it straight away dont you? (Voter, Bham)
On-line Govt Forum All day with people giving
them their views, in the end theyre just going
to switch it off or just ignore it. (Voter,
Gloucester)
Citizen-led Discussion GroupIt might be very
pleasant to talk to somebody down the road or in
the middle of Aberdeen but Im not going to gain
anything am I apart from venting my feelings.
(Non-voter, Bham)
On-line Govt Forum That is good, as in
Question Time or something like that where you
discuss the issues at hand sort of thing.
(Non-voter, Shampton)
Citizen-led Discussion Group We can type
anything we want You can start swearing or
abusing it, whats the point of that, it doesnt
achieve anything. (Non-voter, Swansea)
38
e-Voting I

• Despite initial resistance, some interest in
  e-voting
• would require less time and energy
• has some novelty value
• e.g. two respondents whod never voted before
  said that they might try it out of curiosity
• BUT concerns about
• security (confidentiality)
• exclusion
• e-voting implies computers/ internet
• once aware it includes touch-tone phone and
  digital TV, attitudes soften markedly

Say you come home from work and it was pouring
down with rain, or your up to your knees in snow,
then if you understand the digital- I would
probably do the digital. (Voter, North Wales)
Id have a butchers. (Non-voter, Bham)
39
e-Voting II

• Largest group still opt for pen paper at
  polling station
• more tactile
• have proof that votes been received
• enjoy sense of occasion
• Touch-tone phone Digital TV most popular
  e-voting options
• Still some concerns
• security
• will it be free?
• will anyone be excluded?
• might lose some of the excitement of election
  day

Mine is 10p a text. Would I have to pay 10p to
vote? (Voter, Shampton)
I enjoy watching that on the telly. Ill be
watching it all hours of the morning What would
Peter Snow do when all this comes in?! (Voter,
Manchester)
40
e-Voting Methods I

• Touch-tone phone
• very familiar concept (e.g. phone banking
• easy to understand, easy to use, quick,
  convenient
• needs to be as simple as possible

• Text message
• seen as surprise inclusion
• many not familiar with texting (its for young
  people)
• most think its a good idea, but would use
  another method

• Internet
• only of interest to those comfortable with net
  (but not 1st choice)
• possibility that website could include links to
  candidate profiles / simplified manifestos

41
e-Voting Methods II

• Computer Kiosk
• technology theyve used before
• halfway house between pen paper and e-voting
  
• agree that voting anywhere is a benefit
• but still have to leave home / deal with a
  computer

• Digital TV
• fairly familiar, but needs some explanation
• advocate in groups ? very positive response
• like familiarity simplicity of sitting in
  front of the TV with the remote
• low key concern about privacy

42
e-Voting Methods III
It would make it more easy for people to vote
who have got a busy work schedule. Most people
work from 8 until 5, sometimes 6, by the time
youre finished you cant be arsed going down to
the polling station But if you go home sit in
front of the TV youd think oh I can vote now
and there you go, done. (Voter, Southampton)
If it was a fine day, then you know, a piece of
paper would probably be better. Go and have a
chat around the polling booth. (Voter, Shampton)
Phone You do that already for gas or
electricity. Thats a good one. (Non-voter,
Black Caribbean)
For the novelty I suppose I would go for the
computer kiosk. Its like weighing your veg at
Sainsburys. (Non-voter, Bham)
As its internet you can get pictures, words,
everything else onto it You cant do that just
on a telephone Its much more interesting I
think. (Non-voter, Bham)
Text Because youve got your phone in your
pocket. (Non-voter, Bham)
43
Messages to the e-Envoy
Respondents were asked to write a postcard to the
people behind the e-democracy initiatives,
listing the main points that they would like to
get across.
44
Ethnic Minorities
45
Overview
Ethnic Minorities

• Hard to find unengaged Asian respondents in
  some areas (e.g. Leicester, Bradford)
• Black Caribbean most integrated
• opinions often follow those of General Public
• Black African more likely to be recent immigrants
• some fairly isolated, but less so than Asian
  groups
• Indian males not especially interested in wider
  society
• mainly focussed on local community
• Pakistani (esp.) Bangladeshi respondents most
  insular
• gender, low levels of English , significant
  cultural divide

46
Participation and Voting
Ethnic Minorities

• Black Caribbean Black African often
  disaffected
• could participate, but choose not to
• Indian men similar, but more disinterested
• some feel that their time for participating has
  passed
• Bangladeshi Pakistani women dont really
  consider participation an option
• several said husbands discouraged/ prevented them
  from participating
• language, confidence familiarity with system ?
  significant obstacles
• only showed interest in issues directly related
  to their lives
• Community Centres significant contact point

Men keep you, they pull you back and keep you
behind closed doors. (Non-voter, Pakistani)
We dont understand who we are voting for.
(Non-voter, Bangladeshi)
47
Technology and e-Democracy
Ethnic Minorities

• Technology use highest amongst young Black
  African men, and lowest amongst older Indian men
• use also very low amongst Asian women
• e-Democracy perceived fairly positively
• belief in importance of voting (perhaps stronger
  than General Public)
• encourages participation
• shows Government committed to helping more people
  to become involved
• can see others using it
• but would not use it themselves

48
e-Democracy Methods
Ethnic Minorities

• Views broadly in line with those of the General
  Public
• e-participation a nice idea, but not aimed at
  people like me
• some were interested
• but special difficulties in terms of language
  barriers, lack of access to and confidence with
  technology
• Online Government Forums E-Mail/ Text again
  most popular
• Reasonable numbers thought they might try
  e-voting
• would make voting more convenient and novel
• slightly higher numbers would stick to pen
  paper, but Touch Tone Phones, Digital TV Text
  Messaging fairly popular
• BUT only marginally addresses underlying barriers
  to participation

I can get to the polling station, its so near.
Thats not the problem. (Non-voter, Bangladeshi)
49
Disadvantaged Groups
50
Overview
Disadvantaged Groups

• Research covered six Disadvantaged Groups
• Visually Impaired, Hearing Impaired, Physically
  Impaired, Homeless, Learning Difficulties, Mental
  Health Issues
• substantial crossover between groups
• mix of engaged unengaged
• Recruited with aid of charities/ organisations/
  centres
• most involved with organisation or attended
  centre
• Homeless lived in hostels etc. but most had lived
  on streets in past
• volunteered to participate self-recruitment ?
  higher levels of engagement?

51
Participation and Voting
Disadvantaged Groups

• Relatively high levels of participation
• partly because of involvement in organisations
• generally focussed on issues relevant to personal
  situation
• participate as individuals but mainly, as part of
  group
• some experience of active protests
• Doesnt necessarily translate into voting
• significant disillusionment
• no-one listens or if listen, dont act
• Barriers
• physical access
• access to information including registration
• physical format
  language and style
• perceived lack of representation
• psychological barriers

52
Technology and e-Democracy
Disadvantaged Groups

• Most visual/ hearing impaired some physically
  disabled were active users of computers for day
  to day living
• Homeless had access thro training centre
• Mobile phone use low but deaf use text frequently
• Preference for human interface amongst those with
  mental health issues and learning difficulties
• Positive initial reception for e-democracy, as
  would increase access
• especially among visually impaired physically
  disabled
• real concerns about suitability of formats /
  content

53
e-Democracy Methods
Disadvantaged Groups

• e-Participation seen as good idea, but sceptical
• will they have the time? will they care about
  minority issues? will they listen?
• importance of form/content of written word and
  provision of interpretation (BSL, Makaton)
• broadly in line with General Public on methods,
  apart from
• Bulletin Boards vs live discussion formats
• text messaging
• e-Voting also quite liked
• convenience of voting from home
• some problems for Homeless
• Touch Tone liked, but problems for some groups
• Internet relatively popular with blind/ deaf/
  homeless/some physically disabled
• Digital TV Kiosk not suited to visually impaired

54
Summary of Key Findings
55
Summary of Key Findings I

• General atmosphere of detachment/ disillusionment
• some are disaffected, others are disinterested
• Level of comfort with new technologies varies
  greatly
• Concerns about computers/ internet frequently
  based on fear of unknown, media reports

56
Summary of Key Findings II

• e-democracy might encourage some increased
  participation, but its not a magic bullet
• tentatively seen as a fairly good idea, but not
  for me
• Some enthusiasm for e-participation
• BUT seen as being for those already interested in
  politics/ comfortable with technology
• most popular method is Online Government Forum
• e-voting reasonably popular once options are
  explained
• favourite methods are Touch Tone Phone Digital
  TV

57
Key Issues to be Addressed I

• Will people be excluded?
• emphasise that current methods will still be
  available
• reassure that access will be free
• continue and publicise initiatives to close
  digital divide
• recognise role of intermediaries (e.g. at day
  centres, cultural centres, hostels etc.) in
  helping those learning ICT
• ensure availability in appropriate formats/
  languages / styles
• Will results be representative?
• ensure opinions expressed via all channels (not
  just internet) taken into account
• potential for side-by-side use of touch-tone
  phone voting on issues, or allowing comment on
  issues by voicemail

58
Key Issues to be Addressed II

• Will it make any difference?
• show how results feed into decision-making
  process
• clearly link any decision influenced by public
  participation to e-democracy and other sources
• How can it overcome frustration with the style of
  politicians? Could it help address complaints
  about access to straightforward information?
• potential for ICT to provide plain English
  independent overview of party/ candidate
  information
• Will the systems be secure confidential?
• reassurance likely to be very difficult
• concerns appear based on fear of the unknown
  rather than concrete experiences