e-Strategy and Legislatures: A Longitudinal Analysis of Southern Europe’s Parliaments

  • Vasiliki TrigaEmail author
  • Dimitra L. Milioni
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 3)


Parliaments are the cornerstone of representative democracy and one of the most significant loci of democratic politics. A growing number of studies have focused on the effects of ICTs on parliamentary function, but there is still a lack of systematic empirical research which measures change overtime. This chapter attempts to fill this gap by studying the extent and nature of change in ICT use by the parliaments of Southern Europe, focusing on whether parliaments have moved significantly forward toward opening up their digital gates to concerned citizens. To this end, comparative website analysis is deployed to track the use of ICTs by the legislatures in Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Spain, Portugal, as well as the legislature of the European Union, at three different time instances, namely 2004, 2011, and 2013. Change is measured using the ‘E-Legislature Index’ and its four dimensions: Information provision, Bilateral interactivity, Multilateral interactivity, and User-friendliness. The study’s findings show that ICT use by parliaments is characterized by volatility and discontinuity rather than continuous linear growth. Furthermore, the analysis reveals that e-government and e-governance follow different trajectories: whereas ‘Information Provision’ follows a steady but expected progress and ‘Bilateral Interactivity’ shows an upward but unsteady trend, ‘Multilateral Interactivity’ fluctuates between stagnation and retrogression, pointing to a tendency of the parliaments to avoid taking greater risk of opening up their practices to citizens. In light of these findings, ICT use by parliaments is evaluated from the perspective of ICT strategic planning, providing suggestions for future research in the field.


e-Democracy ICTs and legislatures Website analysis Southern Europe 


  1. Anstead, N., & Chadwick, A. (2009). Parties, election campaigning and the Internet: toward a comparative institutional approach. In A. Chadwick & P. N. Howard (Eds.), Routledge handbook of internet politics (pp. 56–71). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Bryson, J. M. (2011). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: a guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Bryson, J. M., Berry, F. S., & Yang, K. (2010). The state of public strategic management research: a selective literature review and set of future directions. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(5), 495–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calista, D. J., & Melitski, J. (2012). Digitized government best practices in country web sites from 2003 to 2008: the results are bifurcated. Business Process Management Journal, 18(1), 138–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, P., Gibson, R., & Geiselhart, K. (2006). Electronic democracy? The impact of new communications technologies on Australian democracy. Report No. 6 produced for the Democratic Audit of Australia.Google Scholar
  6. Coleman, S. (2006). Parliamentary communication in an age of digital interactivity. Parliamentary Communication, 58(5), 371–388.Google Scholar
  7. Coleman, S. (2009). Making parliamentary democracy visible: speaking to, with, and for the public in the age of interactive technology. In A. Chadwick & P. N. Howard (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics (pp. 86–98). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Coleman, S., Taylor, J., & van de Donk, W. (1999). Parliament in the age of the Internet. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Coursey, D., & Norris, D. (2008). Models of e-government: are they correct? an empirical assessment. Public Administration Review, 68, 523–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dai, X. (2007a). Prospects and concerns of e-democracy at the European Parliament. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 370–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dai, X. (2007b). Political ethics online: Parliamentarians’ use of email in Europe. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 458–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dai, X., & Norton, P. (2007). Parliamentary democracy online: lessons from Europe. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 477–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: the erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibson, R., Römmele, A., & Ward, S. J. (2004). Electronic democracy: mobilisation, organisation, and participation via new ICTs. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Gibson, R., & Ward, S. (2009). Parties in the digital age: a review article. Representation, 45(1), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Global Centre for Information and Communication Technologies. (2012). World e-parliament report. Accessed 3 March 2013.
  17. Gray, M., & Caul, M. (2000). Declining voter turnout in advanced industrial democracies, 1950 to 1997: the effects of declining group mobilization. Comparative Political Studies, 33, 1091–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Inter-Parliamentary Union. (2009). Guidelines for parliamentary websites. Accessed 3 March 2013.
  20. Kickert, W. (1997). Public management in the United States and Europe. In W. Kickert (Ed.), Public management and administrative reform in Western Europe (pp. 15–38). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  21. Leston-Bandeira, C. (2007). Are ICTs changing parliamentary activity in the Portuguese Parliament? The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 403–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lindh, M., & Miles, L. (2007). Becoming electronic parliamentarians? ICT usage in the Swedish Riksdag. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 422–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lusoli, W., Ward, S., & Gibson, R. (2006). (Re)connecting politics? parliament, the public and the internet. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(1), 24–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Norton, P. (2007). Four models of political representation: British MPs and the use of ICT. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 354–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pharr, S. J., & Putnam, R. D. (2000). Disaffected democracies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Reddick, C. G. (2011). Citizen interaction and e-government: evidence for the managerial, consultative, and participatory models. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(2), 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schneider, S. M., & Foot, K. A. (2004). The web as an object of study. New Media and Society, 6(1), 114–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith, C., & Webster, W. R. (2007). The emergent ICT culture of parliamentarians: the case of the Scottish Parliament. Paper presented at the European group of public administration annual conference, study group on egovernment: information and communications technologies in public administration, Madrid, September. Accessed 3 March 2013.
  29. Sophocleous, A. (2008). Mass media in Cyprus. Nicosia: Nicocles Publishing House [In Greek].Google Scholar
  30. Torres, L. (2004). Accounting and accountability: recent developments in governmental financial information systems. Public Administration and Development, 24(5), 447–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Trechsel, A., Kies, R., Mendez, F., & Schmitter, P. (2004). Evaluation of the use of new technologies in order to facilitate democracy in Europe. Accessed 3 March 2013.
  32. Vincente-Merino, M. R. (2007). Websites of Parliamentarians across Europe. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 13(3), 441–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weeks, R.V., & Lessing, N. (2001). Convergence of emerging information technology and business practice in the digital economy. South African Journal of Information Management, 3(3/4). Accessed 3 March 2013.
  34. Williamson, A. (2009). Hansard society: the effect of digital media on MPs’ communication with constituents. Parliamentary Affairs, 62(3), 514–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yang, K., & Melitski, J. (2007). Competing and complementary values in information technology strategic planning. Public Performance & Management Review, 30, 426–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zittel, T. (2003). Political representation in the networked society: the Americanization of European systems of Responsible Party Government? Journal of Legislative Studies, 9(3), 32–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zittel, T. (2004). Digital Parliaments and electronic democracy: a comparison between the US House, the Swedish Riksdag, and the German Bundestag. In R. Gibson, A. Römmele, & S. Ward (Eds.), Electronic Democracy. Mobilisation, Participation and Organisation via new ICTs (pp. 70–95). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication and Internet StudiesCyprus University of TechnologyLemesosCyprus

Personalised recommendations