Tackling civic participation challenges with emerging technologies

4. Unlocking the potential of emerging technologies for citizen participation and deliberation

Emerging technologies offer valuable opportunities to improve civic participation by addressing current challenges. However, the use of emerging technologies in democratic processes entails significant challenges and risks. Through its work on digital government and public sector innovation, the OECD has mapped a series of challenges governments face when developing and deploying digital technologies or GovTech1 solutions in the public sector.

• Digital maturity challenges: countries’ digital transformation maturity is dependent on many factors including digital literacy and skills, a data-driven public sector, among others. Adoption of emerging technologies can be hindered by low or unequal levels of digital maturity.

• Governance and administrative challenges: Digital technologies are often deployed by different departments and public agencies in an uncoordinated manner, which prevents the ecosystem from having a clear point of contact and hampers government’s capacity to adopt a whole-of-government approach. Red tape or ill-adapted administrative processes like procurement can become a barrier to the deployment of emerging technologies.

• Sustainability and funding challenges: Learnings from the civic tech ecosystem point towards a funding and sustainability challenge. Emerging technologies require adequate business models and adapted sources of funding to invest in R&D, human resources, development, and impact measurement (Knight Foundation and Rita Allen Foundation, 2017[67]; Zhang et al., 2021[68]; International Republican Institute, 2023[69]).

When participatory and deliberative process are organised online or have a digital component, a new set of challenges can compound existing barriers. Among the most recurrent risks described in the literature and highlighted by public authorities in the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain:

• Mistrust of digital technologies: Digital technologies usually suffer from a lack of transparency and explainability which creates black boxes that are difficult to navigate for both governments and the public alike. Opacity and complexity can decrease trust in digital tools, and when these are used in democratic spaces, it can in turn affect trust in the participatory process and its outcomes.

• Digital threats to civic space and human rights: some governments have misused or abused digital technologies for surveillance or even to silence groups and digital opposition, thereby undermining online civic space (OECD, 2022[70]). The use of technology for surveillance purposes, content moderation, or predictive policing can threaten human rights and civic freedoms such as right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression.

• Digital inequalities: digital technologies can create new inequalities due to uneven access to and use of digital technologies. Factors such as limited access to high-speed internet, digital literacy, and affordable devices often exclude marginalized groups from engaging fully in online civic activities. This digital divide leads to unequal participation, reinforcing existing societal disparities and limiting the reach of participatory and deliberative processes.

• Online harms: Digital spaces can be impacted by the amplification of polarised positions in public debate, including through mis- and disinformation - often further amplified by algorithms. In addition, online hate and harassment can lead to the unequal weight of voices in democratic processes, often impacting women and minority communities.

• Environmental impact: digital technologies have environmental downsides, as data centers produce e-waste, consume large amounts of water and electricity, and rely on unsustainably mined minerals. This leads to resource strain and greenhouse gas emissions, impacting efforts to reduce global warming (UNEP, 2024[71]). This trend is particularly true for artificial intelligence and blockchain.

AI can create amplify existing threats and create new divides

While the potential of AI is promising, there are important risks to take into consideration such as language divides, opacity of algorithmic decision-making and biases, among others. Currently, AI systems are mainly trained in English, Spanish, and Mandarin, other languages being underrepresented (Peixoto, Canuto and Jordan, 2024[72]). In the context of participation, this means that inputs submitted in other languages than the main languages might not be processed and valued in the same way creating new democratic inequalities (Romberg and Escher, 2024[73]). In addition, as AI systems evolve, a new set of skills and infrastructures might be needed to harness its full potential, exacerbating an already visible digital divide in terms of access, skills, and usages.

To address the language divide, the government of Iceland partnered with OpenAI to train the Large Language Model GPT-4 in Icelandic in order to preserve the Icelandic language (Government of Iceland, 2023[74]). Similarly, the University of Turku (Finland) partnered in 2023 with the company SiloAI to build the Poro model, a family of multilingual open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) for all European official languages (University of Turku, 2023[75]).

Historical and social biases can be unconsciously encoded into AI systems due to data inequalities. This can result in a persistence and crystallization of the exclusion of marginalized groups (Chander, 2020[76]). AI moderation can affect the quality and depth of deliberation as the models might be trained to discourage diverse preferences, silencing minority views. AI could also compromise the creativity in language and reflection, focusing rather on efficiency and agreement (Peixoto, Canuto and Jordan, 2024[72]).

AI-generated content can pollute online debate and digital participatory processes (astroturfing) by amplifying specific interests and distort policymakers’ understanding of citizens’ preferences and opinions on a given policy issue (Kreps, 2024[77]; García-Orosa, 2021[78]).

Blockchain can create additional security risks

Some of the given benefits of blockchain can create additional risks and challenges for participatory practices. For some scholars, blockchain technologies are more vulnerable than paper ballots and can create additional and more critical security problems (Peixoto and Steinberg, 2019[61]). MIT researchers claim that blockchain-based voting would increase the risk of undetectable, nation-scale election failure and online voting may have little to no effect on turnout in practice, and it may even increase disenfranchisement (Park, Specter and Narula, 2020[62]). More importantly, given the current state of digital security, public trust on a blockchain-enabled voting is not a given. In addition, blockchain transactions are pseudonymous, which is useful when protecting personal information, but can make it easier for ill-intentioned actors to engage in unwanted activities, such as cybercrimes or electoral interference. Moreover, blockchain, in general, remains an opaque technology for the wider public which means that both its mechanisms and implications for citizen participation are hard to grasp.

Virtual and augmented realities are inaccessible for a large part of the population

The OECD (2024[17]) mapped five major downsides and risks for virtual and augmented realities. Privacy can be at risk, particularly around the tracking of body movements and the significant amount of data collection which also facilitates the generation and potential sharing of highly detailed user profiles. Other major risks relate to behavior, social interactions, and mental health impact of such technologies in particular in children, young people and cases of addiction or overuse. VR/AR technologies remain largely inaccessible for the majority of the population both in terms of the technical interface (headsets, applications) as well as to knowledge and capabilities of usage. The democratization of these technologies would require large investments both in access to infrastructure and software as well in leveraging digital skills.

A way forward to unlock the potential of emerging digital technologies for participation

Governments can play multiple roles in translating technological progress into public sector applications that deliver public value.

• Government as a convener, through the adoption of an overarching strategy that showcases high-level political commitment.

• Government as financier, typically through the provision of direct or indirect funds to support the research, development and adoption of emerging technologies.

• Government as direct user and co-developer, together with public sector organisations, can act through innovative procurement practices, or as a proactive co-developer through public-private partnerships, and other forms of collaboration, to build tailored solutions.

• Government as a regulator, as the diversity of challenges raised by the digital transformation calls for a reassessment of existing policy frameworks, holistic approaches to ensure policy coherence and international regulatory co-operation.

Public authorities can put in place guardrails to mitigate the risks associated with emerging technologies and ensure they have a positive impact on citizen participation. Table 8. Areas of action for governments, the participation ecosystem and civic technologists summarises a suggested list of actions based on existing guidance by the OECD2 in particular the OECD Framework for Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies (2024[4])3. These actions focus only on the intersection of emerging technologies and citizen participation, governments should implement additional guardrails when developing and deploying technology including legislation and regulatory frameworks (such as the European Union’s AI Act or General Data Protection Regulation).

Table 8. Areas of action for governments, the participation ecosystem and civic technologists

Guardrails	Concrete actions	Examples
Ensure transparency, accountability and contestability of emerging technologies used in participatory and deliberative processes	Designing dedicated guidelines, and tools to steer the ethical and responsible development and use of technology. Promoting and enabling scrutiny thanks to open source, open code, documentation, standards or registries.	Canada’s Algorithmic Impact Assessment tool Netherlands Algorithm Register The European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade France ‘s National Action Plan for Open-Source Software and Digital Commons adopted in 2021.
Promote inclusion and equality in the use and access of emerging technologies	Providing an in-person or analogue alternative to all participatory processes Investing in digital skills both in government and across society.	Portugal’s participatory budgeting includes online and in-person mechanisms.
Enable experimentation of emerging technologies in participatory settings	Support research and development in and outside government. Promote uses of emerging technologies in participatory and deliberative processes	France set up a partnership with universities and Make.org to launch “Democratic Commons” a global research program to build AI in service of democracy Basque country authorities in Spain are partnering with MIT Lab and DemocracyNext to explore tech-enhanced deliberation Innovation Labs can promote experimentation and collaboration among stakeholders, for example Arantzazulab (Spain) is experimenting with AI and deliberative processes.
Protect human rights and civic freedoms as inherent to the development and deployment of emerging technologies in participatory or deliberative processes	Addressing potential risks to civic freedoms in legislations, policies and strategies Establishing complaint mechanisms in the event of a discriminatory outcome of automated decision making Elaborating ethical guidelines and guardrails for the use of emerging technologies in participation developed in collaboration with CSOs. Build partnerships and protect the digital rights ecosystem	The European Union’s Declaration on digital rights and principles define citizens’ rights in the digital space and develop a framework for Member States The OECD G7 Toolkit for Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector translates principles for safe, secure, and trustworthy AI into actionable policies. The United Kingdom’s Ethics, Transparency and Accountability Framework for Automated Decision-Making making is designed to help departments with safe, sustainable and ethical use of automated or algorithmic decision-making
Nurture the innovation and participation ecosystems	Commitment to open source enables effective collaboration and adaptation of tools to different contexts. Building communities of practice or networks can support learning, peer-to-peer support and collaboration. Facilitating dedicated spaces such as innovation labs to promote collaboration among civil servants, and between civil servants and outside innovators	Spain's success with Decidim and Consul demonstrates the potential of open-source tools. The Network of Participative Municipalities (RAP) in Portugal, supports knowledge sharing and gives an annual award for Good Participation Practices, while the VNG in the Netherlands manages aspects of digital participation technologies that are too complex for individual municipalities, such as maintaining the codebase for open-source tools. The European Commission launched the Virtual and Augmented Reality Industrial coalition bringing together industry and policy makers
Build the right conditions for the development, adoption and scale of emerging technologies	Invest in developing the right skills and capabilities in the public sector Sustainable funding mechanisms connected to clear strategic goals can ensure that continue to be supported and developed. Adopt agile procurement environments adapted to the specificities of emerging technologies. Support digital public infrastructure and interoperability to scale public solutions.	Innovation labs such as Portugal’s LabX and Spain’s HazLab support capacity building in government. Programs like General Interest Entrepreneurs in France allows technical profiles to work in government  In Germany the Prototype Fund, a joint initiative between the government and Open Knowledge Germany offers funding and trainings to grantees. Spain developed the public large language model MarIA, tailored in Spanish language, to support the development of Spanish’ digital economy,  GovStack, a multi-stakeholder initiative led by Estonia supports the development and maintenance of digital publics goods

Source: Author’s own elaboration

Box 5. Examples of guardrails to mitigate risks of emerging technologies

Digital inclusion in Portugal

The Portuguese government has launched the project “Eu Sou Digital” (I am digital) to promote digital literacy by connecting volunteers with beneficiaries to teach them how to navigate the internet, use email, access social media, and understand privacy.

An Algorithm Register in the Netherlands

To address the lack of transparency and auditability of AI, the government of the Netherlands launched in 2022 an Algorithm Register to provide information about the algorithms used by the Dutch Government and guidance to object an algorithm-based decision.

Increased oversight of AI in the Spanish public sector

Spain adopted an ambitious strategy to deploy an ethical and public vision of AI. In addition to a National Strategy, the Spanish Government established a dedicated Agency to implement the EU AI regulations and supervise high-risk AI systems. Moreover, the Spanish government is developing an AI language model trained in Spanish and co-official languages, resulting from a public-private collaboration.

Source: EuSouDigital; Building a Resilient Community in Valongo (democracy-technologies.org); How Cascais includes elderly people in digital participation (Government of the Netherlands, 2022[79])

Involving the public in the design, development, regulation and governance of emerging technologies

The relationship between participation and technology is a two-way street. This paper focuses on the ways in which technology can be leveraged to reinforce, scale, and complement citizen participation, this final section focuses on the role that participation can play in the development and regulation of emerging technologies.

Participation in science and technology is not new and is known as PEST processes (Public Engagement and Participation in Science and Technology). The OECD considers stakeholder engagement as a pillar of its Framework for Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies (2024[4]) as it can “enrich the understanding of issues by contributing missing knowledge, opening problem framings, and illuminating key values at stake”. Citizens and stakeholders can be involved at different stages:

• Design and development: participatory, or deliberative mechanisms can be employed in technological design in ways that are accessible to the larger public and do not require expertise. Citizen and stakeholder participation in technology development is particularly relevant to address value-based debates prior to the deployment and adoption of tools. For instance, citizens can have a say on the features of a specific technology through open prototyping or can contribute to the development of AI models, as the French model PIAF, which is based on a collaborative effort to build a French LLM model that grasps the diversity of accents.

• Regulation: the public can be actively involved in defining collective rules and norms or the red lines not to be crossed. For example, in 2021, a Citizen Assembly provided recommendations on genome editing and in 2024 to define the Belgian vision for AI (see Box 6).

• Governance: participation could be used as a method to collectively decide on how to govern technology. For example, the global governance architecture for the internet (ICANN) is based on a multi-stakeholder process where public authorities and non-governmental actors have an equal voice (ICANN, 2025[80]).

• Digital commons: Governments can choose to collaborate with non-government stakeholders through digital commons. Digital commons are “a subset of the commons, where the resources are data, information, culture, and knowledge which are created and/or maintained online. They are shared in ways that avoid their enclosure and allow everyone to access and build upon them” (Dulong de Rosnay and Stalder, 2020[81]) which contributes to their quality and sustainability. Key components of the digital commons include open content, open standards and guidelines, open data, open software, and open hardware and physical infrastructure (Gill, Baeck and Whittington, 2022[82]). For instance, mapping platform Open Street Map is a crowdsourcing digital common on which other applications are built, such as monitoring platform Ushahidi or Humanitarian Open Street Map.

Box 6. Involving citizens to improve regulation and governance of emerging technologies

EU Panel on Virtual Worlds

In 2023, the European Citizens' Panel on Virtual Worlds brought together randomly-selected citizens from all 27 member states to come up with actions needed to create attractive and fair European virtual worlds. The recommendations are reflected in the EU roadmap on Web 4.0 and virtual worlds.

Citizens’ Panel on AI in Belgium

In 2024, 60 randomly selected citizens met in Brussels to deliberate over 3 weekends on the role the Europe Union could play in shaping AI. The conclusions were presented to Belgian and European representatives, including the Belgian Prime Minister and the vice-president of the European Commission. In total, 9 key messages formed what the members of the panel called the “citizens’ view of artificial intelligence within the EU” (e.g. “Learn to handle AI”, “AI and the environment”, or “Global agreements: the EU takes the initiative”).

Source: (OECD, 2023[83])

Notes

← 1.  OECD GovTech Policy Framework: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/enabling-digital-innovation-in-government_6bb7d90b-en#:~:text=Innovation%20in%20Government-,The%20OECD%20GovTech%20Policy%20Framework,innovative%2C%20and%20cost%2Deffective.

← 2. OECD Recommendation on Digital Government Strategies (2014), OECD Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence (2019), OECD Recommendation of the Council on Blockchain and Other Distributed Ledger Technologies (2022)

← 3.  (see 4Annex A for more information)