D3 Congress: Germany - Digital - Democratic
Ten theses as a guiding thread
To kick off the programme and serve as a guiding thread for the event, Jörg Sommer, political scientist and director of the ‘Berlin Institute for Participation’, presented ten theses on digitalisation in democracy:
- Democracy is becoming more digital – in all areas
- Digitalisation is NOT democratisation
- Nothing is improved by digitalisation
- Digitalisation is a catalyst for shortcomings
- Digitalisation is a de-organiser
- Digitalisation makes democracy faster
- Digitalisation makes democracy more permanent
- Digitalisation makes democracy more subjective
- Digitalisation makes democracy more transparent
- Digitalisation makes democracy more diverse
Accordingly, digitalisation does not improve poor processes, but rather brings them into sharper focus. Nor does democracy become more democratic simply because it takes place digitally; it merely becomes faster and more transparent – for better or for worse.
Debates are conducted online in real time, online backlashes must be managed, and opinion polls deliver immediate results that need to be processed and presented just as quickly.
Jörg Sommer, who has worked for more than 30 years as an expert and consultant for parliaments, ministries, foundations and associations, points in this context to inertia as a major strength of democracies to date: “Major shifts in direction have always been the result of protracted negotiation processes. Rapid shifts in direction create greater centrifugal forces at the periphery and deeper rifts at the centre. Something we can clearly observe at present.”
Digitalisation across all areas of education, society and politics
The event covered a wide range of topics, from digital opportunities in schools and education, the use of digital voting tools in citizens’ parliaments or political discourse, to the potential of virtual reality applications in urban development.
For example, digital participation platforms enable governments, administrations and organisations to involve people in collective activities. Proposals for new projects, consultations on agreements, prioritisation of alternatives, planning of public spaces, voting on the use of budgets, and many other possibilities can be mentioned here.
Best practice examples of successful participatory processes made it clear that for some city administrations, such as in Stuttgart or Mannheim, digital applications and platforms are already a key component of public consultations or participatory processes.
As a tool for visualising urban development projects, augmented reality opens up great possibilities. Citizens are ‘taken along’ from the very start and can not only see what is being planned and what it is intended to look like, but they can also help plan, make suggestions and vote. And all of this is straightforward and quick, without having to visit the council offices.
Analogue is not dead
However, the value of analogue communication was also emphasised once again in the discussion, as not everyone can participate in digital services. People from migrant backgrounds who lack the necessary language or technical skills, people with disabilities, or older citizens who are not sufficiently tech-savvy must not be left behind in this digital development. It is important either to create appropriate educational programmes or not to lose sight of analogue communication for those who still need it.
Conclusion
For us as communicators, the congress made it clear that we must keep track of digital possibilities and assess for our clients when and to what extent it makes sense to integrate digital tools. A combination of tried-and-tested, analogue events such as round-table discussions, supplemented by fast, versatile digital applications, can be a good solution. Particularly when illustrating complex planning processes in the infrastructure sector, the digital presentation of local conditions helps to create a better understanding and, consequently, greater acceptance.
Image: ©Van Bo Le Menzel