E-participation and e-governance from the perspective of citizens in the Central and
Eastern European region
Prepared by Chuck Hirt and Mate Varga
CEE Citizens Network
The Central and Eastern Europe region provides an interesting place to consider the issues
related to e-governance and e-participation. The region is an area in considerable transition
and a mixture of near extremes including the eight countries admitted to the EU that have
rather rapidly converted from a socialist country and economy to becoming capitalistic and
democratic. On the other extreme are countries like the Republic of Belarus and its neighbor
Russia that are strongly resisting democratic and certainly participative reforms. Within
countries such as Slovakia there are considerable extremes as well as there are several small
towns that are very interested and open to develop increased and meaningful participation
including e-governance approaches. Meanwhile there are others including the city of Banska
Bystrica where Chuck has lived for the past ten years for which issues of e-governance are
considered by citizens to be “science fiction”.
Much of the material being published related to e-governance and e-participation describes
the situation in which western established democratic countries are struggling with
participation. The situation is the CEE region has some similarities but also many differences
from established democracies. There are fundamental problems about democracy and
participation but they originate from quite different places and thus require a number of
different solutions.
The CEE region trails significantly behind western countries when talking about e-related
issues. It might be helpful to start with some background context to help understand this
situation.
Context for the CEE region
Historical aspect: The region “woke up” only in the very end of the 1980’s. They received
the chance to even consider these issues much later that the rest of Europe. It was only twenty
years ago that most in the region had to wait five years get telephone service hooked up or to
be able to buy a car. There was nearly zero communication and zero mobility outside the
region. While this has changed significantly in the last fifteen years, there are more than a
few who wonder if times weren’t better then.
Social aspect: Middle aged and older people in the region found themselves trying to
“survive” the new tempo and changes that were ushered in. In general, they find themselves
unable to accommodate to the too-quick technical and lifestyle changes. They have been
described by some as like deer caught in the headlights. The younger generation has been
able to accommodate very well with the technical challenges but in general, they have totally
lost a sense of social sensitivity as the orientation for them has been on very intensive
individualism. This has been reinforced primarily from the economic sphere but from the
state and parents as well who at last had the possibility to run their own lives and businesses.
Psychological aspect: There are a number of those who are not able to deal with all of the
changes. They simply hate virtually all changes and either can’t or don’t want to keep up
with the new tempo that has been ushered in. They grew up disliking capitalism and were not
trained in technical items including computers, telephones and technology in general. There
is little or no trust. They are searching for a calm, quiet, safe and of course more successful
life.
Existing frameworks in the region
Government: The national governments generally support the usage of technical
developments but do this with infrastructure, not an actual belief in citizen participation. The
priorities for government do not include participation. There are a number of pressing issues
facing all of the countries in the region and rarely do governments have a sense that greater
participation will assist in the solutions. There has been a much greater reliance on “experts”
than on citizens. The fact that citizens are “experts” on their own neighborhoods has not been
realized as yet. Another significant factor in relation to governance is that for many
politicians, involvement of citizens also increases the transparency and thus the opportunities
for corruption are reduced. They are generally not happy about this and thus make no effort
to include citizens. Even in countries where NGO’s helped to provide a change of
government like occurred in Slovakia in 1998, the newly elected officials almost immediately
ignored them and continue to operate without desire to hear from their “NGO friends”. The
situation with local governments is generally worse, especially in urban areas. There are a
growing number of exceptions but generally the situation in local urban areas is not one open
or interested in participation. There are a number of smaller towns and rural areas that are
more interested and open to these ideas but they are more often stretched for resources to
support these activities. Possibly this is because there are fewer chances for corrupt business
in this setting.
Education: The education systems in most countries in the region have poor strategies
regarding the preparation of future citizens. Schools are producing “encyclopedias” but
without any real practical aspects of life and citizenship. The emphasis is on preparation for
work and a growing individualism rather than on citizenship. Young people are generally
emerging as “islands on the sea of reality”. There is less and less motivation and
encouragement for students to connect to community life.
Employment: Most often significant changes from socialism since 1989 are described as
“democracy” but actually the larger influence is probably “capitalism”. Money is the much
larger driving force. Along with this change has been a significant growth of individualism.
This is most noticeable with young people who are moving to the capital cities to find work or
moving to western countries to make even more money. There is little attention paid to
community activity. Related to this phenomenon is adult education which has as its focus the
training of professional and employable skills. People are getting trained as managers,
secretaries and computer technicians. There is zero democratic education, zero community
skills, zero practice and zero culture being provided.
Physical space: Construction under the period of socialism has left a number of
complications. This was a period of considerable urban migration so there was tremendous
pressure to build housing for many people in the cities. Each decade these new
neighborhoods were generally constructed more densely and with less and less public space.
In many of these areas, there still are no community centers or spaces where citizens can hold
meetings much less have access to things like the internet. There are a few notable exceptions
to this like in Hungary where their legislation requires the existence of “culture houses” which
serve a part of this function. There is one significant advantage resulting from this form of
housing in that neighborhoods are not economically segregated. They are still quite mixed in
professions, skills, talents and income. With the emerging capitalism, they are becoming
more income segregated but for the time being, they remain mixed.
Minority groups: Problems related to segregation remain very high in the region. The most
significant issue in the region is that faced by Roma although the percentage of Roma in
several countries is much lower than in others. In many cases, Roma are socially excluded
and thus their ability to connect to issues of e-governance and e-participation are much more
difficult to address. There are several projects which have helped to create community
centers and computer/internet training programs in minority communities which will provide
some help in this area but there remains a considerable amount to do to better ensure that
minority participation is ensured.
It starts with information
As has been said a number of times regarding the topic of e-governance and e-participation,
the stating point is not technology, money or training or any of the other details related to
information technology. The starting point is the political will to include and involve citizens
in decision making. The engagement of citizens in public discourse is not growing as rapidly
in the CEE region as in other more developed democracies. There are continued signs of
improvement but they remain all too limited.
One model for citizen participation that has been used for several decades is the “ladder of
participation” which has appeared in several different forms but generally suggests that the
minimal starting point for participation is simply providing information. There are additional
steps of consultation, deciding together, acting together and then government supporting
citizen initiated activities. Governments, especially local governments across the CEE region
struggle even with this basic issue of providing information to its citizens.
The city of Banska Bystrica in Slovakia is a good example of one that still hasn’t yet crossed
this basic threshold of involving citizens. One of the best examples of this has just occurred
as this paper was being prepared. A new urban plan was prepared for a rather large and
significant space in the city where a National Museum exists and one of only two parks and
which continued beyond the park for several additional blocks of the adjoining neighborhood.
The plan was prepared without any consultation of citizens as is the continued practice in the
city. An initial decision was made by the City to utilize a minimum legally required level of
information to citizens so the project with three variants was posted in City Hall on the first
floor for thirty days. Citizens could write their comments regarding the variants but there was
no information provided about where to send their comments. Before the end of the thirty
days, several city council members raised this issue at the regular meeting of City Council in
April. A resolution was presented and approved to extend this period for an additional thirty
days with an additional requirement that a public hearing was to be held during this time.
The date of the public meeting was finally set and there was some, but very limited
information provided about the event. A newly formed citizen’s initiative became very active
in this issue and began informing citizens about the plans and the opportunity to attend the
public hearing. The week prior to the public hearing, a number of fliers were posted on
entrances to buildings and around local businesses informing people about the event. Several
days before the actual meeting, both local police as well as the Mayor himself were seen
taking these posters down. Despite the city’s attempt to limit the information about the event,
over three hundred citizens came and nearly all expressed their strong displeasure with the
proposed plans. While the eventual outcome of this project is uncertain, it does serve as a
clear example of the problems in front of us as we explore the issue of e-participation in the
context of the CEE region.
To move to a more positive note finally, there is an example fifty kilometers away in a
smaller town that has just asked the Center for Community Organizing (where Chuck works)
to assist them in a project of working with young people in the city to get them more active in
public issues. They have applied for a project with the Ministry of Education but have
already started the activity by inviting young people from each of the local high schools to
come together. They have begun identifying issues they wish to work on based on surveys
taken in each of the schools. The group then met once with the Mayor to begin a conversation
with him on their concerns. The City had agreed that they are going ahead with the project
regardless of the outcome of the proposed grant. While discussing this project together, they
mentioned that they are participating as well in a proposed project of e-participation in which
they would simulcast meetings of City Council via the internet. Citizens would be invited and
encouraged to write their comments on issues as they are being discussed live.
This serves as an indication that there signs of hope in the region and that there are minimally
“islands of interest” in this issue currently. As citizens become aware of these new ways of
managing cities and being able to influence decision, the desire and demand for changes will
increasingly grow.
Participation in EU funded projects, where a new EU member countries are partnering with
established EU partners, is also assisting the learning as well as interest to bring about needed
changes in the CEE region. The Center for Community Organizing (CCO) has been
participating in a two year project dealing with issues of large housing estates. One of the
major contributions of CCO’s involvement was to document the involvement of citizens in
the various partner projects. There were a number of interesting results from this study. One
of which was that the level of participation of citizens was significantly higher in the western
EU countries. All partners from western countries had a number of examples of significant
levels of participation. The CEE region partners had only a couple of examples and they were
clearly at the minimal level of involvement. But another interesting finding was that
involvement in the EU project itself was cause for at least two of the CEE region cities to
decide to begin involving citizens in the project. They both concluded that while they would
not have done so without the encouragement under the project, they were very delighted with
the results and would expand their efforts to involve citizens. These kinds of projects need to
be continued with an increased emphasis fro the EU directly on participation.
What about the citizens?
Beside the aspect of government initiated involvement of citizens there is another side of eparticipation. It is the interest and capacity of citizens themselves to participate. This is a
somewhat unique challenge in the CEE region as there was a learned helplessness that
occurred during the period of socialism. There was not a tradition for citizens to become
active. It was dangerous to do so. This was further complicated by the fact that you couldn’t
trust others as one in five was an informant. People learned to keep to themselves. One
manifestation of this is that there were not mass demonstrations on issues like the war in Iraq
in the CEE region like were experienced in Western Europe. Although there was
considerable opposition to the war at the citizen level and the national governments actively
supported the war, citizens did not go to the streets to voice their protest as happened in other
European countries.
Another aspect of this issue is the lack of citizen structures to allow them to participate. Very
few neighborhood initiatives exist in the region. They are starting to be formed, like in
Banska Bystrica when there are issues like the proposed plans for the area of the park. In the
previous decade, there was a considerable amount of international money which helped to
mobilize citizens and much of this money still remains in the more eastern and southern parts
of the CEE region. Much of this development work was concentrated in rural areas as
opposed to urban areas however. There is a lack of existing organizations, leaders and
experience. There is much more fertile ground remaining in this area.
The region contains a number of people with good technical knowledge but who are primarily
motivated by money and their individual objectives who would say; “participate? for what?”.
There are others with good intentions and social sensibility but who are without much skill
and sensibility to the globalized physical changes who would likely reply; “participate?
how?”. There are then yet others who are against everything who would reply: “participate?
why?”
Each of the three categories mentioned are represented in those who are currently in power.
They are almost always separated from each other and have different handicaps in dealing
with issues like e-governance. But there also are a small number of people who are interested
in making changes in society and ready to “make the world better”. But among them, there
are only a handful of those who can be really effective and who have the attitude, knowledge,
sensibility and capacity to influence. Their main task is to cooperate with the partly
handicapped responsible bodies and to link them to each other and also with citizens to ensure
that they will be able to become engaged in the public discourse.
Citizens are learning to use the new technology and are making headway in using these tools
in the public area. In Hungary recently, the Hungarian Association for Community
Development successfully carried out a project in several village areas to work with
inhabitants in the local “telehouses” in what they called “internet browser nights” to teach
them how better to utilize the internet to both improve their person access to information but
also to ultimately learn to become better engaged as citizens. Citizens had little experience
before this on how to utilize the limited resources in the village and were quite thankful for
the opportunity to learn this new skill.
As citizens struggle to just get accurate information in Banska Bystrica, one civic leader with
significant technical skills initiated several web sites devoted to increasing the flow of
information. He did this after being appointed several years ago to the City Council
committee who makes recommendations on communication and found it nearly impossible to
make any progress. One of the new web sites was devoted to offering a communication
channel between citizens and their elected city council members. The interest in this site has
been growing and it has provided an important tool in communication. This is a good
example of a bottom up approach to e-participation. It will be difficult to keep it operating
however, at its current level of effectiveness without some limited funding as it is a very time
consuming activity.
Exchanges with other EU countries have also influenced the motivation for citizens to become
more involved in the use of new technology to increase effective participation. This has
occurred at least twice alone in Banska Bystrica in this past year. In January, a group of five
citizens traveled along with me to visit several groups in England. When we met with the eplanning staff from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in London, they were amazed at
what could be done. On one hand, they referred to it as “science fiction for Slovakia”. On the
other hand, they have begun to tell the stories of their experiences to others and are now
fighting harder for changes in our city.
There was also a chance to visit this past year with the impressive project operating in the
Marghera section of Venice where the city has made a significant investment in e-governance
and e-participation. They have trained thousands of citizens how to use the internet. They are
connecting this effort to participation in the budgeting process and have now launched a new
effort that has created citizen groups in each part of the city who in turn have received a
wireless computer connection and training on how to use the equipment in order to allow
them to have regular access to all the city officials. Contacts with these types of efforts
continue to provide motivation but occasionally lead to a sense of discouragement when the
gap between the two conditions is realized.
Basic questions
The conference is attempting to address several questions regarding e-governance and eparticipation.
What should constitute e-governance and e-participation?
We would see this as a commitment to a broad but appropriate inclusion of citizens into
governance issues utilizing the technological tools available to support this effort. The local
level of governance is most critical to this as this is the place where most citizens come in
contact with governmental issues. Fundamental to this being actualized is a belief and desire
to have citizens involved. The tools will support and follow.
What should be the objectives of e-government and e-participation in the service of the
citizen?
Quite simply, that technological tools and strategies continue to be developed and
implemented which help to improve the involvement of citizens in governance. If we
continue to see increased levels of participation and tools to support this, the objectives are
being met.
Is one conceptual model of “how to” for e-government indeed feasible or desirable?
One conceptual model does not seem feasible or desirable. There is certainly a need for a
basic vision and common standards which need to be used as a way to measure progress for
all countries. But the backgrounds and realities in various parts of the world are different.
One example would be that in developed western countries, the emphasis on national activity
makes considerable sense and has made a significant difference in countries like England.
But in the CEE region, it might make more sense to emphasize the local level at this point
more than the national level.
How can we measure e-government and e-participation?
Measurement tools that are being used at this point seem quite good and particularly the
indicators of inclusion. What was not clear was issue of use at the local level as opposed to
the readiness and use at a national level. This seems to be a very critical issue, at least in
terms of the CEE area.
What does all this mean?
There is a growing awareness of attention to the topic of e-governance and e-participation
within the CEE region. There is some recognition of this issue at a national governmental
level as the UN Global E-government Readiness Report 2005 reflects. Progress is being
made in the CEE region. Estonia is undoubtedly the leading country in the region as they
have managed to make a considerable investment into high technology and it cuts across all
sectors of the country. But as recent research in this matter has shown, most of the experience
in e-participation is top-down, not bottom-up.
But in fact, this issue rarely ever reaches citizens themselves in the CEE region. The fact that
some national services are available on-line has not reached many people and will have
limited impact as they are more concerned with services locally. However, citizens are
intuitively learning about these issues though their own life experience and are beginning to
utilize tools such as e-mail groups, websites and blogs in the public area.
There are of course a number of real obstacles for this to occur. The first of which is the basic
access to computers and internet connection. A growing number of people have access at
their work but the use for public area activity is prohibited or certainly limited. There are also
a number of people who have been able to purchase a personal computer and can afford to
connect to the internet but this constitutes a significant minority of the population. There are
a number of internet cafes available and increasingly schools are able to offer a computer and
internet connection. But the usage is still quite limited.
Mobile phones are increasingly offering an available option for customers and the
technological capacity is constantly increasing.
What are critically missing in most areas of the region are community centers with available
capacity for access to computers and internet. Along with this is the need for training for
many, especially the elderly and minorities that are so often left behind in these strategies.
Money is of course then another critical factor to make progress in this area. Funding will be
needed to broaden the number of computers, internet connections, provide the training and to
create the public spaces for the thousands without the ability to finance their own. However,
the primary obstacle to making this happen is the vision and will to make it occur. One this
starts to move forward, the resources will follow.
The CEE Citizens Network was formed in 2000 as an attempt to bring together the leading
NGO’s in the region who were attempting to improve citizen participation in their countries.
We now have members from seventeen countries. The mission of the Network is to promote
citizen participation in Central and Eastern Europe and provide opportunities for grassroots
initiatives to learn and exchange experiences and ideas. We carry this mission out through a
number of activities including Citizen Participation Week, an annual training event, an enewsletter and an every other year conference.
The issue of e-participation has recently come more clearly to the attention of our Network
and we have decided to become more directly involved as we believe that it will serve as a
critical capacity in the near future. We know that new forms of democracy will continue to
emerge in the digital era. E-participation will serve as an important tool in helping us to
accomplish our mission throughout the region. But in fact, we have quickly realized that we
ourselves are far behind in this capacity as well. While there is limited use of technology
within the Network itself, we are far behind the public and private sector in many ways.
There was clear realization that if our member organizations are far behind, citizen groups
themselves must be nearly left out of the conversation entirely at this point. Thus a new
group has been formed to develop a strategy for how to move forward with this issue and to
prepare a pilot project for the Network.
Our long term objective in this work is to ensure that citizens are engaged and prepared to be
able to utilize the emerging technological tools which will help promote participation. As
citizens continue to press for increased participation, they need to be prepared to enter into the
public area. The CEE Citizens Network would set as an ideal to ensure that citizens are
provided training in technology that provides:






Development of attitude – to provide knowledge to citizens which is linked to the
reality of the public discourse, to make this as useful and simple as possible and to
give them the skills to season the change.
Knowledge – make this easy to use, affordable (if not for free) and provide variety.
Culture – not just entertainment and access to games but also provides invention,
innovation, education and change.
Contents – appropriate, motivating and useful and lets the users contribute and
develop as well.
Real chances for participation – they must experience that it means something, it can
help and make a difference and that it is for me! And by me! It is important that
people are able to express what they need and also offers appropriate opportunities.
Encouragement – give reflections and real feedback
This is certainly an ambitious goal for the Network and we are just beginning. But we
strongly believe passionately in the value of and need for significant citizen participation in
our countries. We know that new technologies can assist this effort and applaud the United
Nations and others involved in this issue for giving this attention and support to this important
work. We look forward to our future cooperation together.