Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Problematic Relationship Between Trust and Democracy; Its Crisis and Web Dangers and Promises

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Future of Digital Democracy

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 11300))

Abstract

In this chapter we discuss the revolution of digital democracy (a.k.a. on-line democracy), by arguing that it should integrate (rather than replace) representative democracy based on computational tools and platforms, and that the relationship between people and their representatives and institutions remains absolutely crucial to democracy as a bilateral trust relation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    On representative democracy theory and nature, see [23].

  2. 2.

    Of course, references on the very rich and important political and philosophical literature on the theory of democracy and its problems should be extended considerably; but this is not the right place—and not our competence, indeed. We just pay homage to a very remarkable thinker, Norberto Bobbio, as well as to his defence and criticism to democracy [2]. Moreover, on the specific issue of deliberative democracy – as a critical view of other conceptions of democracy – we would like to mention (apart from that review) Jurgen Habermas’ famous work [15].

  3. 3.

    Some specific form of trust is structurally necessary, intrinsic also for a working cooperation/organisation or in market.

  4. 4.

    “I shall not define them, but I shall say something about what someone who trusts, takes a risk, or exercises power de facto does, to show how closely connected trust, risk, and power are. If A trusts B, then:

    1. 1.

      A leaves or has something, X, in B’s custody for a period of time.

    2. 2.

      A transfers – always de facto, sometimes de iure – discretionary powers over X to B for this period of time or is in a situation where B has such powers.

    3. 3.

      A values X.

    4. 4.

      A expects that

      1. (a)

        B is not going to do something that harms A’s interests.

      2. (b)

        B is competent to take care of X according to A’s interests.

      3. (c)

        B has the necessary means to take appropriate care of X.

    5. 5.

      A takes few precautions against B’s misuse or careless use of his discretionary powers over X (in other words, A takes risks from this situation and he is aware of these risks.)” [14].

  5. 5.

    We do not present here the fundamental and substantial reasons for which transparency has to be a pillar of democracy.

  6. 6.

    Extracted from a remark by Yurij Castefranchi, who we thank—to be found here: https://www.academia.edu/s/89deafc094/dennets-secrets-about-democracy.

  7. 7.

    For a good documented discussion about digital democracy, in the perspective of current post-modern democracy, of Liquid Feedback and Pirate Parties—see also Pianini & Omicini’s contribution in this volume. Also relevant are their critical remarks about most common e-democracy platforms, in an engineering perspective.

  8. 8.

    On the dramatic transformation of democracy, on “distrust”, and on the need of reacting to the expropriation of democracy by hidden and strong powers, see Rosanvallon’s analysis [22].

  9. 9.

    On current impact of demagogy, populism, distrust, etc., in democracies, see the important contribution of Nadia Urbinati [24]. For a critical view of populism, demagogy, and their utility, see also [12] as well as the initiative of World Interdisciplinary Network for Institutional Research (WINIR) at Utrecht University on “Institutions and Open Societies” (http://winir.org/?page=past_events&side=winir_2017).

  10. 10.

    In this direction, some ICT systems seem to go in order to support discussion for decision (like in [18]—yet, this is still rather preliminary and not enough aware of political theory and problems.

  11. 11.

    Take as example in that direction the pilot initiative from European community called REIsearch Program “A necessary bridge between citizens, researchers, and policy makers” (http://www.eismd.eu/reisearch/).

References

  1. Bacharach, M., Gambetta, D.: Trust as type detection. In: Castelfranchi, C. (ed.) Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3614-5_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bobbio, N.: The future of democracy. Telos 61, 3–16 (1984). http://journal.telospress.com/content/1984/61/3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Castelfranchi, C.: Making visible “the invisible hand”. The mission of social simulation. In: Adamatti, D.F., Pereira Dimuro, G., Coelho, H. (eds.) Interdisciplinary Applications of Agent-Based Social Simulation and Modeling. IGI Global (2014). http://www.igi-global.com/chapter/making-visible-the-invisible-hand/106758

  4. Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model. Wiley, Chichester (2010). http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/9780470519851

  5. Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R., Marzo, F.: Trust as relational capital: its importance, evaluation, and dynamics. In: 9th International Workshop on “Trust in Agent Societies”, AAMAS 2006 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dennett, D.: Fake News Isn’t the Greatest Threat to Democracy. Total Transparency Is. Huffington Post (2017). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fake-news-transparency-trump_us_58dd8a54e4b0e6ac7093b460

  7. Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Grounding autonomy adjustement on delegation and trust theory. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 12(2), 149–152 (2000). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/095281300409801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Levels of delegation and levels of adoption as the basis for adjustable autonomy. In: Lamma, E., Mello, P. (eds.) AI*IA 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1792, pp. 273–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46238-4_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: The human in the loop of a delegated agent: the theory of adjustable social autonomy. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum. 31(5), 406–418 (2001). Special Issue on “Socially Intelligent Agents - the Human in the Loop”

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Issues of trust and control on agent autonomy. Connect. Sci. 14(4), 249–263 (2002). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/0954009021000068763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Feldman, R.: Thinking, reasoning, and education. In: Siegel, H. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Education. Oxford University Press (2009). http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195312881.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195312881-e-005

  12. Fraser, N.: Against progressive neoliberalism, a new progressive populism. Dissent Magazine (2017). http://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/nancy-fraser-against-progressive-neoliberalism-progressive-populism

  13. Gbikpi, B.: Dalla teoria della democrazia partecipativa a quella deliberative: quali possibili continuità? Stato e Mercato 73 (2005). http://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.1425/19636

  14. Grimen, H.: Power, trust, and risk: some reflections on an absent issue. Med. Anthropol. Q. New Ser. 23(1), 16–33 (2009). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1548-1387.2009.01035.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Habermas, J.: Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. The MIT Press (1996). http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/between-facts-and-norms

  16. Helbing, D., Klauser, S.: How to make democracy work in the digital age. Huffington Post (2016). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-to-make-democracy-work-in-the-digital-age_us_57a2f488e4b0456cb7e17e0f

  17. Jaishankar, D.: Brexit: the first major casualty of digital democracy. Huffington Post (2016). http://www.huffingtonpost.in/dhruva-jaishankar/brexit-the-first-major-ca_b_10695964.html

  18. Klein, M., Iandoli, L.: Supporting collaborative deliberation using a large-scale argumentation system. The MIT Collaboratorium. MIT Sloan Research Paper 4691–08. MIT (2008). http://ssrn.com/abstract=1099082

  19. Landa, D., Meirowitz, A.: Game theory, information, and deliberative democracy. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 53(2), 427–444 (2009). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00379.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lawlor, M.: The Economics of Keynes in Historical Context: An Intellectual History of the General Theory. Palgrave Macmillan (2016). http://www.palgrave.com/br/book/9780333977170

  21. Mercier, H., Boudry, M., Paglieri, F., Trouche, E.: Natural-born arguers: teaching how to make the best of our reasoning abilities. Educ. Psychol. 52(1), 1–16 (2017). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosanvallon, P.: Counter-Democracy. Politics in an Age of Distrust. Cambridge University Press (2008). http://www.cambridge.org/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/political-theory/counter-democracy-politics-age-distrust

  23. Urbinati, N.: Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy. University of Chicago Press (2008). http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo3793416.html

  24. Urbinati, N.: Democracy Disfigured: Opinion, Truth, and the People. Harvard University Press (2014). http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674725133

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione (ISTC), CNR, Rome, Italy

    Cristiano Castelfranchi & Rino Falcone

Authors
  1. Cristiano Castelfranchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rino Falcone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rino Falcone .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Pierluigi Contucci

  2. University of Bologna, Cesena, Italy

    Andrea Omicini

  3. University of Bologna, Cesena, Italy

    Danilo Pianini

  4. University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

    Alina Sîrbu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R. (2019). The Problematic Relationship Between Trust and Democracy; Its Crisis and Web Dangers and Promises. In: Contucci, P., Omicini, A., Pianini, D., Sîrbu, A. (eds) The Future of Digital Democracy. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11300. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05333-8_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05333-8_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05332-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05333-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation