IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v31y2004i1p39-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Promise and perils of electronic public engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Gene Rowe
  • John G Gammack

Abstract

There is currently a trend in democratic societies towards greater involvement of the public in the policy setting of official bodies. Numerous mechanisms have been developed to enable such involvement, ranging from traditional forms, such as the public meeting, to more novel forms, such as the consensus conference. This paper considers the use of modern technologies, particularly computer, or internet-based, as the structural basis of novel engagement mechanisms. To many sponsors of engagement exercises, such technologies appear to provide solutions to specific public engagement problems. In this paper, however, we argue that a number of potential perils also await those who would use these technologies. We conclude with a call for more research into the effectiveness of technology-based engagement mechanisms. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Gene Rowe & John G Gammack, 2004. "Promise and perils of electronic public engagement," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 39-54, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:31:y:2004:i:1:p:39-54
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154304781780181
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nick F. Pidgeon & Wouter Poortinga & Gene Rowe & Tom Horlick‐Jones & John Walls & Tim O'Riordan, 2005. "Using Surveys in Public Participation Processes for Risk Decision Making: The Case of the 2003 British GM Nation? Public Debate," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 467-479, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:31:y:2004:i:1:p:39-54. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.