10

S. SHARMA ET AL.

designers and managers of the initiative are not careful (Leong et al., 2016; Okunola et al., 2017;
Young & Gilmore, 2017). Local administrations also stand to improve in time by preparing the
younger generation for participating in local democratic governance and using deliberative platforms (Thijssen & Van Dooren, 2016). The process of deliberative democratic decision-making may
suffer when citizens, politicians, and administrators are strongly divided by ideology, religion,
regional issues, ethnicity, generations, and other socio-political schisms, economic disparities, and
identities (Bay-Meyer, 2013; Hendriks et al., 2013; Park et al., 2017; van der Merwe & Meehan,
2012). It is also essential to validate and generate support for deliberative decisions made with
the public to legitimise the actions of reg-neg committees or the policy jury, ensuring acceptance
and sustainability for such initiatives.
Scholars have discussed factors that facilitate and ensure the successful implementation of such
initiatives targeting DG: first, inclusive participation of all stakeholders; second, setting up of an
unbiased information-sharing infrastructure to break the silos; third, promotion of shared leading
and mutual understanding of issues; fourth, setting up ground rules to run neutral debates with a
focus on consensus-building; and fifth, designing an ICT platform based on these rules to facilitate
transparent and open discussion on policy decisions. Similarly, factors that may hinder such practice
are noted in the literature as: first, deeply divided representation based on creed, caste, religion, and
other social constructs; second, the problem of elite capture, which may lead to concentration of
power in place of distribution; third, an unbiased commitment of the state in providing support
to these initiatives; and fourth, ensuring that the ICT tools used in the PB initiative are actively targeting the marginalized without bias so that the expected social goals can be achieved (Park et al.,
2017; Saguin, 2018).

5.4 Digital activism
Political and social movements are the mainstays of democratic exercise of citizen power (Bucy &
Gregson, 2001). DA refers to the phenomenon where civic protests and activist action takes shape
and is conducted on the web sphere. Some of the most common forms seen throughout the literature are online petitions, cyber campaigns, and video activism (counter-surveillances) on social
media platforms (Coromina, 2017). Literature gives us cases such as the Arab Spring and the
#metoo campaign, where the internet and Web 2.0 technologies have been crucial in voicing
people’s concerns in oppressed political situations through user-generated content (Hermida & Hernández-Santaolalla, 2018; Soengas-Pérez & Assi, 2017). Access to information and the internet is now
seen as a fundamental human right. It forms the foundation for promoting activist behavior online
along with the low cost of access and basic digital literacy (Casero-Ripollés, 2017). Researchers call for
a shift towards the context of connective action in place of collective action (Leong et al., 2019) and
the association of human dignity with citizen activism and empowerment (Leidner & Tona, 2021).
Digitally active citizens can use and leverage ICT to drive collective action by developing self-generating knowledge networks. They can engage in crowdsensing initiatives to monitor the performance
of local governments, enforcing transparency and accountability (Fasoli & Tassinari, 2017; Georgiadou et al., 2011; Schradie, 2018).
The corruption of mainstream media and the dilution of their role in delivering information to the
public has given rise to digital journalism (Gertrudis-Casado et al., 2016; Nothias & Cheruiyot, 2019).
Studies were conducted on the need to generate a new type of political content based on big data
(Treré, 2016). Policymaker also have recognized the need to study citizen opinions and sentiments
on digital platforms like twitter (Ahn et al., 2021; Ridhwan & & Hargreaves, 2021). Research also highlights the need to be careful against elite capture and the algorithmic manufacturing of consent and
privacy violations in the name of security (Svärd, 2017). Contextual factors that play a significant role
in the promotion of cyber-activism are: first, ensured access to public ICT infrastructure; second, providing a low cost of access by employing proper policy mechanisms; third, ensuring a basic level of
digital literacy across all social classes and active targeting of marginalized groups to avoid elite