INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT

11

capture of the medium; fourth, unrestricted and unregulated internet for all; and fifth, designing of
internet governance policies by following a multi-stakeholder approach involving governments, civil
society, and academia.

6. Discussion
Table 1 presents a comparative view of the four identified literature themes allowing us to see the
bigger picture of DCE in modern democracies. It attempts to give a literature review exploring
bridges between different research clusters, building up a single knowledge area based on a
review method employed by Raghuram et al. (2019). The themes correspond with the ladder of
citizen participation in policy development, as defined by Arnstein (1969) and improved by
Connor (1988). Heeks (2020a) discussed a similar ladder of citizens’ e-participation, outlining
different roles taken by citizen users during the participation process. We found that the MCSD
initiatives are identical to the rungs of Education and Feedback using ICTs; PB initiatives could be
seen as similar to the rungs of Education, Consultation, and Joint Planning. If we consider Deliberative Governance, it is related to the higher rungs of Mediation, Litigation, and Resolution/Prevention.
These initiatives are based on the state’s efforts and participation in response to these efforts. From
the point of citizen power, this comparison holds meaning as all these models require increasing
levels of citizen education, feedback, and participation in the policymaking process.
We observed this similarity with one more framework of citizen participation given by Rosanvallon (2008), who defines democracy as being of expression, involvement, and intervention. We note
that the MCSD and PB initiatives correspond to the Democracy of Expression. Service delivery and
feedback networks for participation pave the way for informing people and soliciting their
opinion on resource allocation decisions. The democracy of involvement dimension is reflected in
the DG initiatives where policies are designed and operationalized based on the collective
decision-making of state and citizen. At last, the democracy of intervention can be seen in the
acts of DA taken up by citizens when they get together to make their voice heard and intervene
in the state’s functioning.
Our study aimed to move beyond the notion of citizen from a mere user to empowered individuals who can leverage ICT infrastructure as solution innovators or collaborators in designing and
implementing policies and initiatives that govern society. Keeping this in mind, we suggest the
matrix view of these e-governance initiatives based on political and IS standpoints for a better understanding (see Figure 7).
The axes here denote the theoretical foundations of the DCE process. The horizontal axis is
inspired by the IS-dominant literature. It draws from the evolutionary model of e-governance
given by Layne and Lee (2001), defining the different stages of developing an ICT infrastructure.
The vertical axis draws from the social sciences side of the literature and majorly from the various
models of citizen power, as discussed earlier. The matrix is divided into four quadrants. Each quadrant is associated with one of the themes identified, considering the level of interaction between the
Government and its citizens.
One of the major issues covered in the literature is the persistence of the digital divide. Scholars
used the theory of diffusion of innovations to explain this divide that is seen in society (Shelley et al.,
2004), helping us understand that adopting any technology is a gradual process and differs from
person to person depending on their attitudes. A method of crossing this divide to empower citizens
through digital inclusion projects was discussed by Smith (2014). It involves a hierarchical structure
of institutionalized inclusion projects based on a reliable technical infrastructure for all, leading to
training citizens and increasing their awareness in terms of using the technology, providing equal
opportunity for all to interact with and influence the technology, and finally, enabling transference
of skills so that normal users could be transformed into digital innovators (Fraunholz & Unnithan,
2009).