IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fufsci/v3y2021i1nffo260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Imagining democratic societies of the future: Insights from a foresight study

Author

Listed:
  • Lucia Vesnic‐Alujevic

Abstract

This paper explores the future government models and emerging societal challenges in the relationship between citizens and governments. By assessing various factors and their convergence, among which the uptake of participatory governance on the one hand, and the governance of digital technologies and media on the other, four scenarios have been created: DIY Democracy, Private Algocracy, Super Collaborative Government, and Over Regulatocracy. These scenarios, emerged from participatory workshops and based on civic imagination, are used as tools for reflection. They were further employed in conversations with stakeholders to explore new possibilities and challenge preconceived ideas about governments today, as well as assess the redistribution of power relations between societal actors and political institutions as we move toward 2030. The paper concludes by discussing the benefits of civic imagination for thinking about the futures of our democratic societies and the need for broader perspectives and a combination of theoretical and methodological approaches for setting the future policy and research agendas.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucia Vesnic‐Alujevic, 2021. "Imagining democratic societies of the future: Insights from a foresight study," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:3:y:2021:i:1:n:ffo260
    DOI: 10.1002/ffo2.60
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.60
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ffo2.60?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthias Benz & Alois Stutzer, 2004. "Are Voters Better Informed When They Have a Larger Say in Politics? -- Evidence for the European Union and Switzerland," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 119(1_2), pages 31-59, April.
    2. Lehoux, P. & Miller, F.A. & Williams-Jones, B., 2020. "Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Susan Morgan, 2018. "Fake news, disinformation, manipulation and online tactics to undermine democracy," Journal of Cyber Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 39-43, January.
    4. Kuziemski, Maciej & Misuraca, Gianluca, 2020. "AI governance in the public sector: Three tales from the frontiers of automated decision-making in democratic settings," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    5. Peter Mechant & Nils Walravens, 2018. "E-Government and Smart Cities: Theoretical Reflections and Case Studies," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 119-122.
    6. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia & Nascimento, Susana & Pólvora, Alexandre, 2020. "Societal and ethical impacts of artificial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vasiliki Koniakou, 2023. "From the “rush to ethics” to the “race for governance” in Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 71-102, February.
    2. Bruno Frey, 2011. "Tullock challenges: happiness, revolutions, and democracy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 269-281, September.
    3. Brunner, Beatrice & Kuhn, Andreas, 2014. "Immigration, Cultural Distance and Natives' Attitudes Towards Immigrants: Evidence from Swiss Voting Results," IZA Discussion Papers 8409, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Zhang, Weidong & Zuo, Na & He, Wu & Li, Songtao & Yu, Lu, 2021. "Factors influencing the use of artificial intelligence in government: Evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    5. Aldashev, Gani, 2010. "Political Information Acquisition for Social Exchange," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, April.
    6. Tan Yigitcanlar & Rashid Mehmood & Juan M. Corchado, 2021. "Green Artificial Intelligence: Towards an Efficient, Sustainable and Equitable Technology for Smart Cities and Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Micael Castanheira & Gaëtan Nicodème & Paola Profeta, 2012. "On the political economics of tax reforms: survey and empirical assessment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(4), pages 598-624, August.
    8. Stutzer, Alois & Baltensperger, Michael & Meier, Armando N., 2018. "Overstrained Citizens?," Working papers 2018/25, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    9. Mause, Karsten, 2019. "Governing Public-Private Partnerships: The Problem of Low-Cost Decisions," EconStor Preprints 209582, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    10. Benno Torgler & David Stadelmann & Marco Portmann, 2013. "The Power of Religious Organizations in Human Decision Processes: Analyzing Voting Behavior," CREMA Working Paper Series 2013-20, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    11. Inga Ulnicane & William Knight & Tonii Leach & Bernd Carsten Stahl & Winter-Gladys Wanjiku, 2021. "Framing governance for a contested emerging technology:insights from AI policy [The next space race is Artificial Intelligence]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 158-177.
    12. Stefan Voigt & Lorenz Blume, 2015. "Does direct democracy make for better citizens? A cautionary warning based on cross-country evidence," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 391-420, December.
    13. Felix Arnold & Ronny Freier & Magdalena Pallauf & David Stadelmann, 2015. "Voting for direct democratic participation: Evidence from an initiative election," CREMA Working Paper Series 2015-11, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    14. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2010. "Direkte Demokratie," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2010 2010-26, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    15. Benno Torgler & David Stadelmann & Marco Portmann, 2013. "The Power of Religious Organizations in Human Decision Processes: Analyzing Voting Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 4526, CESifo.
    16. Galletta, Sergio, 2021. "Form of government and voters’ preferences for public spending," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 548-561.
    17. Albert Sanchez-Graells, 2024. "Resh(AI)ping Good Administration: Addressing the Mass Effects of Public Sector Digitalisation," Laws, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, February.
    18. Mukherjee, Abheek Anjan & Raj, Alok & Aggarwal, Shikha, 2023. "Identification of barriers and their mitigation strategies for industry 5.0 implementation in emerging economies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).
    19. Jan Schnellenbach, 2016. "A Constitutional Economics Perspective on Soft Paternalism," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(1), pages 135-156, February.
    20. Oliveros, S, 2013. "Aggregation of endogenous information in large elections," Economics Discussion Papers 8984, University of Essex, Department of Economics.

    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:wly:fufsci:v:3:y:2021:i:1:n:ffo260. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2573-5152 .

    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.