I've been prompted by this kind post from Mick Phythian to think again about what eDemocracy is.

Previously, I've been content with this explanation of the differences between eGovernment and eDemocracy.

"To simplify, eDemocracy can be thought of as the application of technology to the legislative branch and other bodies with elected representatives (including the parties and politicians within them), while eGovernment is its application to the executive branch with a greater focus on service delivery and organisational efficiency."

This, I noted, means that both spheres include elements of improving transparency and encouraging participation.

But eGovernment also includes a third focus on collaboration, reflecting the way it is embedded into administrative processes.

The third aspect of eDemocracy, on the other hand, can be described as deliberation, reflecting the importance of shaping and developing opinion in relation to public policy.

But having thought again about those definitions, I think they are too focused on process and structures, and are somewhat lacking in specific outcomes - and outcomes are really what matter in policy questions.

To address this, as Mick notes, it is possible to swing to the other extreme and list a series of issues such as eVoting, ePetitions, crowd sourcing legislation, etc and say that this is what constitutes eDemocracy.

But that suffers from the opposite problem of missing the bigger picture.

So what should the definition be?

To start with the desired outcome, for me the key aim of any policies associated with eDemocracy must be greater public participation in the democratic and political processes, in whichever part of the state they are located (or outside the state for that matter).

eDemocracy therefore might simply be the use of technology to deliver greater participation.

But more can be said about capturing one of the defining characteristics of the internet, which has been its ability to cause major disruption to established processes.

In the world of politics, I think this will eventually manifest itself as upheaval in the traditional systems of political parties and the basis on which legislatures operate.

This will open up political systems and lower barriers to entry, and this is the fundamental mechanism which will make participation easier and result in greater democratic engagement.

Looking back 50 years from now, eDemocracy will be the name we give to the disruption needed to deliver more participation.

eDemocracy Blog