ENHANCING PARTICIPATIVE POLICY MAKING THROUGH MODELLING AND SIMULATION: A STATE OF THE ART REVIEW

While previously public policy making was predominantly technocratic, based mainly on ‘first generation’ approaches employing mathematical optimization algorithms, in the last thirty years it has become much more participative, adopting ‘second generation’ approaches which involve the affected citizens to a continuously increasing extent. This trend has been reinforced by the explosive growth of the information and communication technologies (ICT) and especially the Internet, resulting to the development of e-participation. Public participation provides to the competent government organizations useful information on citizens’ interest in and acceptance of public policies under formation or application, and also numerous proposals for changes, improvements and enhancements of them. It is therefore necessary to support and enhance participative policy making with technocratic mechanisms and tools for screening these proposals and analysing them as to their outcomes, and also for forecasting the future evolution of citizens’ interest in and acceptance of them. The use of simulation can be a very useful tool for these purposes. In this paper we present a state of the art review of existing modelling and simulation approaches from the above perspective. In particular, we examine Discrete Event Modelling and Simulation, Monte Carlo Simulation, System Dynamics, Dynamic Systems, Cellular Automata and Agent-Based Modelling and Simulation. From this investigation it is concluded that System Dynamics seems to be the most promising for the above purposes, followed by Agent-Based Modelling and Simulation, and that both can contribute significantly to the technocratic enhancement of participative policy making.

[1]  Mike Cibulskis,et al.  Simulation tools for developing policies for complex systems: Modeling the health and safety of refugee communities , 2007, Health care management science.

[2]  Frédéric Adam,et al.  Encyclopedia of Decision Making and Decision Support Technologies , 2008 .

[3]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[4]  G. Rowe,et al.  Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda , 2004 .

[5]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Towards a Systematic Exploitation of Web 2.0 and Simulation Modeling Tools in Public Policy Process , 2010, ePart.

[6]  A. Borshchev,et al.  From System Dynamics and Discrete Event to Practical Agent Based Modeling: Reasons, Techniques, Tools , 2004 .

[7]  Mallika Kanyal Models of participation , 2014 .

[8]  Alexandros Xenakis,et al.  An evaluation framework for e-participation in parliaments , 2010 .

[9]  Emre A. Veral,et al.  OUTPATIENT SCHEDULING IN HEALTH CARE: A REVIEW OF LITERATURE , 2003 .

[10]  Eric Bonabeau,et al.  Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  James S. Fishkin,et al.  The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy , 1995 .

[12]  Vikas Singh Use of Queuing Models in Health Care - PPT , 2006 .

[13]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area , 2008, Gov. Inf. Q..

[14]  João Balsa,et al.  Policy Decision Support Through Social Simulation , 2008 .

[15]  J. Forrester Industrial Dynamics , 1997 .

[16]  Gregory R. Madey,et al.  Tools of the Trade: A Survey of Various Agent Based Modeling Platforms , 2009, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[17]  J. Ramon Gil-Garcia,et al.  Using institutional theory and dynamic simulation to understand complex e-Government phenomena , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[18]  David Osimo Web 2.0 in Government: Why and How? , 2008 .

[19]  Joshua M. Epstein,et al.  Agent-based computational models and generative social science , 1999, Complex..

[20]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Developing Theory Through Simulation Methods , 2006 .

[21]  Hans Jochen Scholl,et al.  Agent-based and system dynamics modeling: a call for cross study and joint research , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[22]  Eric R. Zieyel Operations research : applications and algorithms , 1988 .

[23]  J. March,et al.  An introduction to models in the social sciences , 1975 .

[24]  V. Frissen,et al.  Public Services 2.0: The Impact of Social Computing on Public Services , 2010 .

[25]  Bastien Chopard,et al.  Cellular Automata Modeling of Physical Systems , 1999, Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science.

[26]  Steven L. Lytinen,et al.  Agent-based Simulation Platforms: Review and Development Recommendations , 2006, Simul..

[27]  Klaus Sutner,et al.  De Bruijn Graphs and Linear Cellular Automata , 1991, Complex Syst..

[28]  Enrico Ferro,et al.  ICT Diffusion in an Aging Society: A Scenario Analysis , 2010, EGOV.

[29]  Averill M. Law,et al.  Simulation Modeling and Analysis , 1982 .

[30]  Jarkko Kari,et al.  On the Circuit Depth of Structurally Reversible Cellular Automata , 1999, Fundam. Informaticae.

[31]  Markus Schwaninger,et al.  Policy Analysis and Design in Local Public Management: A System Dynamics Approach , 2008 .

[32]  J. Casti Would-Be Worlds: How Simulation Is Changing the Frontiers of Science , 1996 .

[33]  Klaus G. Troitzsch,et al.  Social Science Simulation — Origins, Prospects, Purposes , 1997 .

[34]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Policy Processes Support through Interoperability with Social Media , 2010, MCIS.

[35]  Robert T. Clemen,et al.  Making Hard Decisions with Decisiontools Suite , 2000 .

[36]  Colin F. Smith,et al.  Signing an e-petition as a transition from lurking to participation. , 2010 .

[37]  Daniel Lewis,et al.  What is web 2.0? , 2006, CROS.

[38]  Ines Mergel,et al.  The Transformational Effect of Web 2.0 Technologies on Government , 2009 .