Public Policy Formulation through Non Moderated Crowdsourcing in Social Media

  • Yannis Charalabidis
  • Anna Triantafillou
  • Vangelis Karkaletsis
  • Euripidis Loukis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7444)


The emergence of web 2.0 social media enables the gradual emergence of a second generation of e-participation characterized by more citizens’ control, in which government agencies post content (e.g. short or longer text, images, video) to various social media and then analyze citizens’ interactions with it (e.g. views, likes/dislikes, comments, etc.). In this paper we propose an even more citizens controlled third generation of e-participation exploiting web 2.0 social media as well, but in a different manner. It is based on the search by government agencies for content on a public policy under formulation, which has been created in a large set of web 2.0 sources (e.g. blogs and microblogs, news sharing sites, online forums) by citizens freely, without any initiation, stimulation or moderation through government postings. This content undergoes advanced processing in order to extract from it arguments, opinions, issues and proposals on the particular policy, identify their sentiments (positive or negative), and finally summarize and visualize them. This approach allows the exploitation of the vast amount of user-generated content created in numerous web 2.0 social media for supporting governments to understand better the needs, wishes and beliefs of citizens, and create better and more socially rooted policies.


e-participation public policy crowdsourcing social media sentiment analysis visual analytics 


  1. 1.
    Pateman, C.: Participation and Democratic Theory. University Press, Cambridge (1970)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barber, B.: Strong Democracy. University of California Press, Berkeley (1984)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Held, D.: Models of Participation. Polity Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J.: Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values 25(1), 3–29 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J.: Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values 29(4), 512–557 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development: Citizens as Partners – Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making. OECD Publication Service, Paris (2001a)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development: Engaging Citizens in Policy-making: Information, Consultation and Public Participation - PUMA Policy Brief. OECD Publication Service, Paris (2001b)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development: Evaluating Public Participation in Policy Making. OECD Publication Service, Paris (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD): Engaging Citizens Online for Better Policy-making- Policy Brief. OECD Publication Service, Paris (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD): Promise and Problems of e-Democracy: Challenges of Online Citizen Engagement. OECD Publication Service, Paris (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Timmers, P.: Agenda for eDemocracy – an EU perspective. European Commission (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saebo, O., Rose, J., Flak, L.S.: The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly 25, 400–428 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Loukis, E., Macintosh, A., Charalabidis, Y.: Editorial of the Special Issue on E-Participation in Southern Europe and the Balkans: Issues of democracy and participation via electronic media. Journal of Balkan and Near East Studies 13(1), 1–12 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferro, E., Molinari, F.: Making Sense of Gov 2.0 Strategies: No Citizens, No Party. In: Prosser, A., Parycek, P. (eds.) Proceedings of EDEM 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chadwick, A.: Guest Editor’s Introduction: The Internet and Politics in Flux. Journal of Information Technology and Politics 6(3-4), 195–196 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Honeycutt, C., Herring, S.C.: Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Agarwal, N., Lim, M., Wigand, R.: Finding her Master’s Voice: the Power of Collective Action among Female Muslim Bloggers. In: Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2011, Helsinki, Finland (2011) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Larsson, A., Moe, H.: Who Tweets? Tracking Microblogging Use in the 2010 Swedish Election Campaign. In: Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2011, Helsinki, Finland (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Osimo, D.: Web 2.0 in Government: Why and How? JRC Scientific and Technical Reports. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (2008), retrieved online,
  20. 20.
    Tapscott, D., Williams, A.D., Herman, D.: Government 2.0: Transforming Government and Governance for the Twenty First Century. nGenera Corporation (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meijer, A., Thaens, M.: Alignment 2.0: Strategic use of new internet technologies in govrnment. Government Information Quarterly 27, 113–121 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Charalabidis, Y., Loukis, E.: Transforming Government Agencies’ Approach to eParticipation through Efficient Exploitation of Social Media. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2011, Helsinki, Finland (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    United Nations: e-Government Readiness Knowledge Base (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    United Nations: e-Government Survey 2008: From eGovernment to Connected Governance (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Santucci, D.: Studying e-petitions: State of the art and challenges. In: ESF-LIU Conference on Electronic Democracy, Vadstena, Sweden (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cruickshank, P., Edelmann, N., Smith, C.: Signing an e-Petition as a Transition from Lurking to Particiption. In: Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A., Glassey, O. (eds.) Second IFIP International Conference on Electronic Participation, ePart 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland (2010)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Panopoulou, E., Tambouris, E., Sanchez-Nielsen, E., Zotou, M., Tarabanis, K.: Learning from eParticipation initiatives of regional and local level authorities in Greece and Spain. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 13(1), 13–35 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Medaglia, R.: Measuring the diffusion of eParticipation: a survey on Italian local government. Information Polity. An International Journal of Government and Democracy in the Information Age 12(4), 265–280 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mau, B., Leonard, J.: The Institute Without Boundaries: Massive Change. Phaidon, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lévy, P.: Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace. Plenum, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Surowiecki, J.: The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations. Doubleday, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brabham, D.C.: Crowdsourcing as a Model for Problem Solving An Introduction and Cases. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 14(1), 75–90 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Howe, J.: The Rise of Crowdsourcing. Wired 14(6) (2006), retrieved from,
  34. 34.
    Brabham, D.C.: Crowdsourcing: A Model for Leveraging Online Communities. In: Delwiche, A., Henderson, J. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Participative Cultures. Routledge (2012)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stewart, O., Huerta, J., Sader, M.: Designing crowdsourcing community for the enterprise. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD Workshop on Human Computation. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li, Z., Hongjuan, Z.: Research of crowdsourcing model based on case study. In: Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management, ICSSSM (2011)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brabham, D.C.: Moving the Crowd at Threadless – Motivations for Participation in a Crowdsourcing Application. Information, Communication & Society 13(8), 1122–1145 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nam, T.: Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Government Information Quarterly 29, 12–20 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hilgers, D., Ihl, C.: Citizensourcing: Applying the concept of open innovation to the public sector. The International Journal of Public Participation 4(1), 67–88 (2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bovaird, T.: Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review 67(5), 846–860 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Torres, L.H.: Citizen sourcing in the public interest. Knowledge Management for Development Journal 3(1), 134–145 (2007)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lukensmeyer, C.J., Torres, L.H.: Citizensourcing: Citizen participation in a networked nation. In: Yang, K., Bergrud, E. (eds.) Civic Engagement in a Network Society, pp. 207–233. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte (2008)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Chun, S.A., Shulman, S., Sandoval, R., Hovy, E.: Government 2.0: Making connections between citizens, data and government. Information Polity 15(1-2), 1–9 (2010)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    ELEON Ontology Authoring and Enrichment Tool,
  45. 45.
    Bilidas, D., Theologou, M., Karkaletsis, V.: Enriching OWL Ontologies with Linguistic and User-relatednAnnotations: the ELEON system. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2007), Patras, Greece (2007)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Konstantopoulos, S., Karkaletsis, V., Vogiatzis, V., Bilidas, D.: Authoring Semantic and Linguistic Knowledge for the Dynamic Generation of Personalized Descriptions. In: Sporleder, C., et al. (eds.) Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    ELLOGON Linguistic Analysis Platform,
  48. 48.
    Petasis, G., Karkaletsis, V., Paliouras, G., Androutsopoulos, I., Spyropoulos, C.D.: Ellogon: A New Text Engineering Platform. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2002), Las Palmas, Canary Islands, Spain (2002)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rentoumi, V., Petrakis, S., Karkaletsis, V., Klenner, M., Vouros, G.A.: A Collaborative System for Sentiment Analysis. In: Konstantopoulos, S., Perantonis, S., Karkaletsis, V., Spyropoulos, C.D., Vouros, G. (eds.) SETN 2010. LNCS, vol. 6040, pp. 411–416. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rentoumi, V., Giannakopoulos, G., Karkaletsis, V., Vouros, G.: Sentiment analysis of figurative language using a word sense disambiguation approach. In: Proceedings of RANLP 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wong, P.C., Thomas, J.: Visual analytics. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 24(5), 20–21 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Thomas, J., Cook, K. (eds.): Illuminating the Path: Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Keim, D.A., Kohlhammer, J., Ellis, G.P., Mansmann, F.: Mastering The Information Age – Solving Problems with Visual Analytics. In: Eurographics, Goslar, Germany (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yannis Charalabidis
    • 1
  • Anna Triantafillou
    • 2
  • Vangelis Karkaletsis
    • 3
  • Euripidis Loukis
    • 1
  1. 1.Information and Communication Systems Engineering Dept.University of the AegeanKarlovassiGreece
  2. 2.Athens Technology CenterHalandriGreece
  3. 3.National Center for Scientific Research "Demokritos"Institute of Informatics and TelecommunicationsAg. ParaskeviGreece

Personalised recommendations