Keywords
digitalization
local government
communication
transparency of management
How to Cite
Abstract
The article examines the role of information systems in shaping effective communication between local authorities and citizens in the context of digital transformation. The primary objective of this study is to examine the impact of integrating new information technologies on enhancing the efficiency, transparency, and democratic nature of governance processes at the local level. The article emphasizes the significance of digital platforms, including electronic voting, online petitions, and mobile applications for citizen appeals, as well as other tools that offer new avenues for communication between authorities and the population. This allows improving the improvement of management decisions, responding promptly to the needs of citizens, and increasing the level of public participation in governance processes. The authors emphasize that digital technologies not only reduce bureaucratic barriers but also contribute to the creation of transparent and accessible platforms for interaction, which increases trust in government bodies. The article uses methods of system analysis, comparison, and synthesis, as well as research into the impact of information technologies on the efficiency of governance processes. It was found that the integration of digital technologies into local self-government is a necessary step towards ensuring democracy and accountability of authorities, increasing transparency and quality of public administration. Thanks to the introduction of modern information systems, new communication channels are created that allow citizens to participate more actively in governance processes, as well as influence the support of reforms and the development of democratic institutions at the local level. From the point of view of development prospects, the article considers the great potential of digital technologies for improving governance processes and ensuring more effective models of local governance. However, along with the advantages, digitalization also carries certain risks, such as cyber threats, digital inequality, and information manipulation.
References
1. McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. SAGE Publications. https://nibmehub.com/opac-service/pdf/read/McQuail's%20Mass%20communication%20theory.pdf
2. Castells, M. (2009). Communication Power. Oxford University Press. https://books.google.com.ua/books/about/Communication_Power.html?id=3Q8oAAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
3. Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444319514
4. Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and Its Critics. Yale University Press. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300049381/democracy-and-its-critics/
5. Lasswell, H. (1948). The Structure and Function of Communication in Society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The Communication of Ideas (pp. 37–51). Harper & Brothers.
6. Lasswell, H. (1977). Building as Political Communication: The Signature of Power on Environment. In D. Lerner & L. Nelson (Eds.), Communication Research–A Half-Century Appraisal (pp. 280–294). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780824887070-015
7. Leibniz, G. (1666). Dissertatio de arte combinatoria. Leipzig
8. Osborne, D., Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Addison-Wesley
9. Bentham, J. (1834). The Works of Jeremy Bentham. John Bowring, Edinburgh: William Tait.
10. Granovetter, M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
11. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
12. Heidegger, M. (1977). The Question Concerning Technology. Harper & Row. https://monoskop.org/images/4/44/Heidegger_Martin_The_Question_Concerning_Technology_and_Other_Essays.pdf
13. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford University Press. https://books.google.com.ua/books/about/Social_Systems.html?id=zVZQW4gxXk4C&redir_esc=y
14. Luhmann, N., & Rasch, W. (2002). Theories of distinction: Redescribing the descriptions of modernity. Stanford University Press. https://surl.li/auypae
15. Toffler, A. (1981). The Third Wave. Bantam Books. https://books.google.com.ua/books/about/The_Third_Wave.html?id=DDVeuofiimgC&redir_esc=y
16. Toffler, A. (1970). Future Shock. Random House. https://books.google.com.ua/books/about/Future_Shock.html?id=atGCm-nvJVEC&redir_esc=y
17. Erkkilä, T. (2012). Government Transparency: Impacts and Unintended Consequences. Palgrave Macmillan London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137035547
18. Bedini, I., Farazi, F., Leoni, D., Pane, J., Tankoyeu, I., & Leucci, S. (2014). Open Government Data: Fostering Innovation. JeDEM – Ejournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 6(1), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v6i1.329
19. Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social Media and the Decision to Participate in Political Protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01629.x
20. Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs. https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=56791
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Marian Vovk