Exploiting Open Data to analyze discussion and controversy in online citizen participation

Abstract In this paper we propose a computational approach that applies data mining techniques to analyze the citizen participation recorded in an online digital platform. Differently to previous work, the approach exploits external knowledge extracted from Open Government Data for processing the citizens’ proposals and debates of the platform, enabling to characterize targeted issues and problems, and analyze the levels of discussion, support and controversy raised by the proposals. As a result of our analysis, we derive a number of insights and conclusions of interest and value for both citizens and government stakeholders in decision and policy making tasks. Among others, we show that proposals targeting issues that affect large majorities tend to be supported by citizens and ultimately implemented by the city council, but leave aside other very important issues affecting minority groups. Our study reveals that most controversial, likely relevant, problems do not always receive sufficient attention in e-participation. Moreover, it identifies several types of controversy, related to ideological and socioeconomic factors and political attitudes.

[1]  Tomasz Janowski,et al.  Examining government-citizen interactions on Twitter using visual and sentiment analysis , 2018, DG.O.

[2]  Xabier E. Barandiaran,et al.  Deliberative Platform Design: The case study of the online discussions in Decidim Barcelona , 2017, SocInfo.

[3]  Dipankar Das,et al.  Changing Views: Persuasion Modeling and Argument Extraction from Online Discussions , 2019, Inf. Process. Manag..

[4]  B. Santos,et al.  Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre: Toward a Redistributive Democracy , 1998 .

[5]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  The Role of Social Media in the Discussion of Controversial Topics , 2013, 2013 International Conference on Social Computing.

[6]  Vicenç Gómez,et al.  Interactive Discovery System for Direct Democracy , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[7]  H. A. Williams What's Going On. , 1972, Hospital topics.

[8]  D. Boyd,et al.  Dynamic Debates: An Analysis of Group Polarization Over Time on Twitter , 2010 .

[9]  Hua Yuan,et al.  Semantic Search for Public Opinions on Urban Affairs: A Probabilistic Topic Modeling-Based Approach , 2016, Inf. Process. Manag..

[10]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  Camargo Jorge,et al.  Characterization of citizens using word2vec and latent topic analysis in a large set of tweets , 2019 .

[12]  Adam Wierzbicki,et al.  Computing controversy: Formal model and algorithms for detecting controversy on Wikipedia and in search queries , 2018, Inf. Process. Manag..

[13]  Vladimir Vargas-Calderón,et al.  Characterization of citizens using word2vec and latent topic analysis in a large set of tweets , 2019, ArXiv.

[14]  Ana-Maria Popescu,et al.  Detecting controversial events from twitter , 2010, CIKM.

[15]  Sangwon Lee,et al.  Understanding the majority opinion formation process in online environments: An exploratory approach to Facebook , 2018, Inf. Process. Manag..

[16]  Karin Baier,et al.  The Uses Of Argument , 2016 .

[17]  Nils Rethmeier,et al.  Learning Comment Controversy Prediction in Web Discussions Using Incidentally Supervised Multi-Task CNNs , 2018, WASSA@EMNLP.

[18]  María E. Cortés-Cediel,et al.  Analyzing Citizen Participation and Engagement in European Smart Cities , 2019, Social Science Computer Review.

[19]  S. Ranchordás Digital agoras: democratic legitimacy, online participation and the case of Uber-petitions , 2017 .

[20]  Vicenç Gómez,et al.  Statistical analysis of the social network and discussion threads in slashdot , 2008, WWW.

[21]  Alejandro Bellogín,et al.  Personalized recommendations in e-participation: offline experiments for the 'Decide Madrid' platform , 2017, CitRec@RecSys.

[22]  Iván Cantador,et al.  Towards increasing citizen engagement in participatory budgeting digital tools , 2018, DG.O.

[23]  Angelo Corallo,et al.  Information and communication technologies and public participation: interactive maps and value added for citizens , 2017, Gov. Inf. Q..

[24]  Harith Alani,et al.  What's going on in my city?: recommender systems and electronic participatory budgeting , 2018, RecSys.

[25]  Luis F. Luna-Reyes,et al.  Promoting the use of open government data: Cases of training and engagement , 2018, Gov. Inf. Q..

[26]  Michael Dear,et al.  Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome , 1992 .

[27]  Sehl Mellouli,et al.  From citizens to government policy-makers: Social media data analysis , 2019, Gov. Inf. Q..

[28]  Sehl Mellouli,et al.  A Multidimensional Analysis Approach For Electronic Citizens Participation , 2016, DG.O.

[29]  T. Alizadeh,et al.  Capturing citizen voice online: Enabling smart participatory local government , 2019 .

[30]  Aristides Gionis,et al.  Quantifying Controversy on Social Media , 2018, ACM Trans. Soc. Comput..

[31]  Aristides Gionis,et al.  Quantifying Controversy in Social Media , 2015, WSDM.

[32]  Ryad Titah,et al.  Conceptualizing citizen participation in open data use at the city level , 2017 .

[33]  Shiri Dori-Hacohen,et al.  Probabilistic Approaches to Controversy Detection , 2016, CIKM.

[34]  Valentina Janev,et al.  Modeling, Fusion and Exploration of Regional Statistics and Indicators with Linked Data Tools , 2014, EGOVIS.

[35]  David Lo,et al.  Mining direct antagonistic communities in signed social networks , 2013, Inf. Process. Manag..

[36]  Patrick Grim,et al.  Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures , 2016 .

[37]  Shiri Dori-Hacohen,et al.  Automated Controversy Detection on the Web , 2015, ECIR.

[38]  Yueping Zheng,et al.  Explaining Citizens’ E-Participation Use: the Role of Perceived Advantages , 2017 .

[39]  Kalina Bontcheva,et al.  The evolution of argumentation mining: From models to social media and emerging tools , 2019, Inf. Process. Manag..

[40]  Archon Fung Putting the Public Back into Governance: The Challenges of Citizen Participation and Its Future , 2015 .

[41]  Amy X. Zhang,et al.  Controversy and Sentiment in Online News , 2014, ArXiv.

[42]  Niels Bjørn-Andersen,et al.  Generating Sustainable Value from Open Data in a Sharing Society , 2014, TDIT.

[43]  Sören Auer,et al.  A systematic review of open government data initiatives , 2015, Gov. Inf. Q..

[44]  Denilson Barbosa,et al.  Identifying controversial articles in Wikipedia: a comparative study , 2012, WikiSym '12.

[45]  R. V. Gestel The Theory and Practice of Legislation , 2017 .

[46]  Marc Gramberger,et al.  Citizens as Partners. OECD handbook on information, consultation and public participation in policy-making , 2001 .

[47]  Simon Buckingham Shum,et al.  Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 Argumentation , 2008, COMMA.

[48]  Hanspeter Kriesi,et al.  Models for democracy , 2013 .

[49]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions , 2011, dg.o '11.

[50]  Sehl Mellouli,et al.  Electronic Citizens Participation: Systematic Review , 2016, ICEGOV.

[51]  Noam Slonim,et al.  On the Retrieval of Wikipedia Articles Containing Claims on Controversial Topics , 2016, WWW.

[52]  Gianpaolo Baiocchi,et al.  Participatory Budgeting as if Emancipation Mattered* , 2014 .

[53]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government , 2012, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[54]  Zied Elouedi,et al.  Decision Model for Policy Makers in the Context of Citizens Engagement , 2016 .