AN EXPERT-BASED EVALUATION MODEL

SOCIAL MEDIA AND E -LAND GOVERNANCE:

AN EXPERT -BASED EVALUATION MODEL

T o l i d i s K . a n d D i m o p o u l o u E .

S c h o o l o f R u r a l a n d S u r v e y i n g E n g i n e e r i n g , N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y o f A t h e n s , G r e e c e

1

Using ICT, Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster

Self-Organisation in Urban and Neighborhood Governance

Structure of Presentation

2



1. Short Introduction

ICT and e-participation



Contemporary views of social media

Social media and land governance



2. Research Framework and Methodology

Objectives and research characteristics



The expert-based model



3. Main results

1. Short Introduction

3



Benefits of Participatory Management (+):



Greater public acceptance of agency programs

Increased trust (stakeholders)



Mutual learning



Risks (related to the outcomes of the process) (-):



Heterogeneous/level of familiarity



Different goals/expectations/Social standings

Improvement of the information flow between

the different audiences

1. Short Introduction: Social Media

4

Many-to-Many

approach

Web 2.0+UGC for

Social Interaction

Definition (?)

(scope, content,

Differences

interaction etc.)

Social

Media

1. Short Introduction: Views

5

Social Media and Public Sector

Public Sector Transparency

Policy Making Public Services knowledge management and cross-agency cooperation Improvement

1. Short Introduction: Views

6

Social Media and Public Sector

Records Management

Privacy and Security

Accuracy and administration requirements

1. Social Media and Land Governance

7

Social Media and Land Governance



ICT tools are crucial for improving the citizen’s involvement.

The LM activities are related to spatial decision problems.

From User-Generated Content to "User-Geographical

Generated content”.



Social media (SM) tools are essential and provide the basis

for added value services improving both the land

administration and management systems



SM are potential quantitative and qualitative research

platforms which can improve spatial decision making

procedures in a systematic way.

2. Research Framework-Methodology

8

SO1: Usage profile of SM both for general professional use and especially in

land-related activities

SO2: Attitudes to reinforcement of e-governance SO3: Attitudes to key success factors

SO4: Attitudes to significance level of use by different types of organizations

(including professionals)

SO5: Geo-ICT tools and functionalities SO6: Willingness for future use of SM

SO7: Classification of potential impact factors in terms of potential benefits,

risks and opportunities.

Main Objective: To define and evaluate the potential impacts of social media

2. Research Framework-Methodology

9

Profile:

Type of Research:

Online survey

Instrument:

Prototype

_{sections. 17 conditional closed questions)}

web-based

questionnaire

(4

Type of respondents:

Land Experts from private and public sector

_{of employment}

Sample and Technique:

Mailing list of 140 colleagues + invitations to

social networks+“snowball” technique

Response Rate:

14% (N=32 )

2. Research Framework-Methodology

10

The questionnaire:

Section 1:

Demographic and occupational profile

Section 2:

Usage level factors of social media and attitudes on success

and significance level of SM utilization, by different types of

organizations.

Section 3:

State of the art: Social media and land activities, reasons of

_{not use and willingness for future use.}

Section

4:

(Evaluatio

n section)

Attitudes on pre-defined potential impacts of SM tools on

LA/LM related procedures (in terms of “benefits”, “risks”

and “opportunities”) and Evaluation of impacts'

importance (using AHP method).

2. Research Framework-Methodology

11

Type of Questions:

Scale/rating questions based on Likert’s 5-point scale:

Multiple choice:

2. Research Framework-Methodology

12

The evaluation model:

AHP Evaluation Approach

Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Multi-criteria Decision Making Method

decision criteria can be organized in a hierarchical way into sub-criteria

multiple pair wise comparisons

concerning the relative importance of two factors

1-9 scale-intensity of importance (preference/dominance)

3. Methodology of Impact Assessment

13

2. Research Framework-Methodology

14

AHP Algorithm

nxn evaluation matrix

These relative weights are given by the eigenvector (w) corresponding to the largest eigenvalue

2. Research Framework-Methodology

15

The Evaluation Model

Impact Analysis Identification of Potential Impacts on LA and LM systems (Benefits, Risks/Barriers, Opportunities factor groups) AHP Method Degree of Importance of Every Impact Factor – Ranking from pair

wise comparisons

Steps:

1. Pair wise comparisons between the three groups (Benefits, Risks, Opportunities) 2. Pair wise comparisons between the sub-factors within every factor group

3. Results

General Use of SM

Most of land experts (72%) believe that social media tools can significantly improve the communication between the public and private sector by promoting transparency, democracy and e-government

3. Results

17

SM for Land Tasks

source GIS platforms are the most frequent geo-ICT tools in land management

applications

Participatory planning and spatiotemporal analysis functions are not applicable in most of cases

3. Results

18

3. Results

19

3. Results

20

3. Results

21

3. Results

22

In the 34% of cases, the evaluations were sufficiently inconsistent (C.R.>0,1)

3. Results

23

4. Conclusions

24

•Most of experts use social media tools, mainly for dissemination of information.

•However, the utilization level of social media tools on land related activities, is rather limited (38%), due to the lack of an integrated policy regarding social media utilization.

•future policies are needed to focus on both the organization’s and citizens’ needs aiming to improve the transparency and the public participation concept.

•The results, demonstrate the ever-growing need of effective interaction between the geo-ICT tools and the web users, through user-friendly interfaces and options for spatial analyses or visualization.

•the e-land governance concept can be promoted by incorporating a web-based argumentation map and a discussion forum in single social media user interface

4. Conclusions

25

• The potential positive impacts (benefits and opportunities) outweigh the potential risks and barriers. However, there are significant potential risks.

• The proposed AHP approach can be a very efficient tool for the evaluation of specific social media tools in terms of benefits, risks and opportunities through a participatory planning process.

• Key factors: 1) the number of factors in pairwise comparisons (the less the better), 2) the quality of instructions for pair wise comparisons and 3) the user-friendly interface of the questionnaire.

•The utilization of social media tools in land activities for public participation purposes need to also be evaluated from a simple user’s perspective.

• The research has only scratched the surface of social media utilization in land related activities and we intent to repeat this survey capitalizing the experience gained.