Title: Digital Democracy and the Institutional Context

Authors: Gentian Elezi, Knowledge Management Consultant

Saimir Musta, Grant Manager, LevizAlbania

May 2022

Summary

This article summarizes an analysis conducted on the Albanian context in the framework of
promoting digital democracy, looking at the role of LevizAlbania (LA) in this area. Considering the
space that combines two already vital components for social development, democratization and
technological innovation, the article explains the main features of this interaction. This is done first
by traversing the main existing theories and models, and then analyzing and categorizing the
Albanian experiences. Finally, the experience and lessons learned from LA are discussed, focusing on
the recommendations for the future of digital democracy and the necessary interventions in this
area.

Introduction

Following a successful wave of democratization during the 1990s, democratic systems around the
world are experiencing stagnation or deterioration (Freedom House). Rapid developments and
fundamental societal transformations have put insufficiently consolidated democratic institutions to
the test. This situation has gradually led to a deepening of the distance between citizens and
decision-making, as well as an increase in lack of trust in democratic institutions. Albanian citizens
show a low level of participation in democratic processes. Lack of transparency and accountability
has further widened the gap between them and institutions (See article). Specifically referring to
local democracy, the 2015 territorial reform seems to have added to the challenges in this regard
(See article). However, technological development and advances in the digital field have also
affected the realm of democracy, offering new forms of online citizen participation. In this context,
LA is committed to the Albanian context to encourage and support such alternative participatory
practices to strengthen local democracy.
The purpose of this article is to introduce and discuss the dimension of institutional interaction of
LA-supported projects in the field of digital democracy. More specifically, the authors provide a brief
analysis of the response and institutional readiness in relation to these forms of participation,
focusing especially on good practices, obstacles and lessons learned for a successful collaboration.
Initially, the article will briefly present key theories and models in the field which will be followed by
the broad framework and context in which LA's efforts for digital democracy have been made. We
will then focus specifically on LA's experience in interacting with the institutions involved and the
efforts of other actors in the country. This section will also provide concrete data from the
interaction that grantees have had with local institutions, providing an analysis of the main features
of this relationship and the attitude that these actors have held towards the instruments of digital
democracy. The analytical part will continue with a discussion on the lessons learned from LA in
relation to institutions in this field. From this experience and lessons some conclusions will be drawn,
which will close the article in the form of recommendations for the future.

1
Conception and theorization of digital democracy
Participation through digital instruments empowers citizens to monitor and provide support to
public authorities so that they can perform their duties more efficiently, thus creating a closer
relationship between all actors involved. In many parts of the world, citizens use the Internet for all
their interactions, including their governance decisions (See article).
According to Erkul’s article (2014) some of the key advantages of e-participation are: Greater
government transparency; increasing citizen involvement; improved government accountability, etc.
First, through open initiatives, public authorities provide citizens with access to information that was
not previously available. Thanks to the means provided, transparency reaches a higher level, so that
citizen participation is improved and democratic processes are simplified. Second, countries improve
online methods of providing public services in order to meet the needs and requirements of citizens,
thus strengthening their electronic information, consultation and electronic decision-making activity.
Finally, in order to have successful democracies, government authorities must respond to citizens.
For example, public authorities can create sites where citizens can start petitions on various issues of
interest or they can vote on specific issues.
According to existing models and theories in this field, web solutions and digital instruments as a
whole can be used: 1. to strengthen democratic institutions (e-voting); 2. to change existing
institutions (webcasting for transparency); 3. to replace current practices with new ones (online
newsletter and other new communication tools); 4. to develop democratic institutions (online
forums and new ways of reflective approaches) and; 5. to expand democracy by using online
platforms to include groups that are marginalized or far from decision-making (Pratchett 2016).
It should be noted that from the point of view of their approach and goals, the models implemented
around the world so far are numerous and different from each other. Key models that can be
distinguished include:
 The consolidated Swiss model, which also stems from the relationship built over decades
between the citizen and the institution;
 Estonia's fast-paced and innovative model, led by the municipality of Tartu, where
participatory budgeting has been set up and sophisticated in its most optimal form;
 Romania's model, to be further approached in the context of the region, which increased
transparency and direct citizen engagement, leading to constitutional changes to include
instruments of continued participation;
 The case of Kosovo (GAP) where online monitoring of public revenues and expenditures at
the local level has produced significant results.
Leviz Albania has supported a considerable number of projects focusing on democracy and digital
participation (see article by Blerjana Bino and Anahi Martinez). But how are these instruments
integrated in the wider Albanian context and how have they dealt with institutions and decision-
making actors?

Digital democracy in the Albanian context

Efforts for democratization and civic engagement have been numerous in Albania over the past
three decades, both by domestic demand and by external factors (Albanian Institute for
International Studies). So far, we have identified and then categorized these experiences into three
main groups:

2
1. In the context of the digital agenda, some donors and international organizations have
contributed to pilot projects or local experiences that have served as a good test to understand the
main features of the Albanian context and related challenges. Almost all of these efforts have had
one thing in common: working with institutions. Their purpose and objective has been to strengthen
institutional capacity, providing models and instruments to enable civic engagement in information,
accountability to institutions, service delivery and participation. So, their direct and main beneficiary
have been the institutions and the improvement of the service they provide to the citizens,
especially in terms of access to governance and expression of opinion (For instance ISDA project and
STAR 3 project).
2. A second group, more complex and more debatable than the first, relates to the efforts of public
institutions themselves to create and disseminate instruments of civic participation in decision-
making. These experiences have mainly been ad hoc and have shown lack of transparence in
functioning and management. Despite the shortcomings, these cases have played a useful role in
educating citizens about online practices and familiarity with various instruments from the point of
view of functionality. However, from the point of view of democratization and improving civic
engagement and participation, these formats have had less effect on increasing civic trust in these
processes. This could be the case for government platforms (co-governance) or a few attempts from
big municipalities to introduce instruments of gathering public opinion.
3. The third category, which we have chosen to list separately, consists of the contribution of the
Swiss project LevizAlbania focused on local democracy. The focus of LA in this dimension, as well as
in other areas, has been direct work with citizens, various groups or civil society organizations, not
institutions. The aim has been the engagement and independent organization of sections of society
towards institutions, and not necessarily the alignment of practices with the latter. This approach is a
novelty and a separate category. The flexibility and diversity that has characterized the LA
philosophy in supporting these initiatives, has enabled the comprehensive exploration of digital
democracy models, without being conditioned by predetermined or standardized formats. Among
other things, this has brought as a contribution the easier adaptation of the instruments to the
Albanian context. Geographical extent is another aspect to be distinguished in LA's work in this area,
as the initiatives have represented different areas with special characteristics compared to each
other. In some cases the whole territory is covered or a centralized platform is given that provides
information for the whole country.
This independence that LA has enabled for these initiatives and instruments has made it possible for
the voice of the citizen to be transmitted directly to the local authorities.
LA-supported projects focusing on digital democracy have aimed at improving democratic and legal
processes such as: public consultation, participation in budgeting, monitoring of contracts and public
expenditures, online petition, promotion of participation in decision-making, etc.
LevizAlbania in the support it gives to its grantees initially contributes to the creation of tools in the
function of digital democracy.
In the context of digital democracy, tools consist of platforms, databases, forums and online
applications, which depending on the goals of specific projects, come in different forms, but are
based on the creation of communication channels and information transmission ready to use.
These communication channels generally have three actors involved, the data creator, the data
processor in the information, and the recipient of the information. Depending on the project, data
creators can be citizens (Buxhetim.AL), or public institutions (OpenData). Data processors in
information are generally the experts involved in the implementation of projects who package
data/content, extract data/content and adapt data/content for the needs of simplification and
transmission to the final recipient (citizens of choice), as well as in the opposite direction where
everyday issues identified during the project, should be codified and translated into technical

3
content to be submitted to public institutions (contractual violations, legal obligations or violations
of the rights of the parties) to take further action.
From the activities and utilization of the tools described above, to the popularization of
communication channels or to the innovation of packaged data, LA grantees create valuable
products for strengthening democracy and civic engagement. The nature of these products includes
publications, articles, reports, ongoing monitoring, research, etc. Beneficiaries of these products are
citizens but also experts in various fields, who are provided with instant access to information, real-
time reporting and consultation of reports created from reliable and verifiable data. These products
aim at interaction in terms of equal access to information, between the elected and the electorate
and consequently the removal of artificial barriers in communication between the government and
the electorate.
Creating products is not enough to enable digital democracy. The literature 1 suggests that a strong
flow of information in communications between the elected and the electorate is essential to having
a functioning governance system with satisfactory participation of all parties.
LevizAlbania through its grantees and its communication channels has aimed to increase the power
of this flow of information between citizens and local elected officials. This aspect of assembly and
interaction is part of all LA-funded projects, regardless of the scope of the intervention. Especially
projects that address digital democracy, have features of interaction with the general public.
These projects generally include as their part, activities that affect the ability and willingness of
citizens and institutions to embrace E-Government initiatives. 2
LevizAlbania and its grantees make simultaneous efforts to increase the usability of the tools of
digital democracy. Efforts are also reciprocal in terms of product distribution across all channels in
use. Beyond online media channels, social networks, the official website and PortaVendore, LA also
uses the network of supported journalists and its collaborators to engage citizens in recognizing and
using the tools and products of digital democracy.
The culmination of digital democracy initiatives is the undertaking by citizens to join implementing
organizations, initiatives and the "ringing of bells" for local government through online petitions,
formal written requests, presentations of reports and findings at thematic events or even lawsuits
addressed to law enforcement agencies.
LevizAlbania has successfully granted 11 projects and initiatives in the digital democracy sphere,
aiming creation of digital tools, channels and increased information flows among citizens and
institutions.
The number of citizens involved in local actions sprouting from the funded projects has overpassed
25003. After the termination of the projects, all the online platforms created are currently active and
continue to contribute to the initial set goals of the projects.
In conclusion, we consider that the contribution of LevizAlbania, as a supporter for civil society
actors in the implementation of initiatives in the function of digital democracy, in general, is an
intervention that creates and improves the enabling environment for civic engagement.
A very important aspect that is promoted using digital tools is also the impact of systemic changes at
the local and central level, which means changing the rules or regulatory and institutional processes

1
Crozier 2008
2
It is important to distinguish between e-government (e-Albania in the Albanian context) and e-Governance.
The first is the platform for providing online public services and the second is that phase of digital governance
that instills digital democracy and where the participation of online citizens in public discussion, politics and
decision-making is enabled along with the aspects of providing public services online.
3
All participants in activities organized by the grantees in projects are counted while petition signers
are not counted as the number are progressively changing.
4
through an advocacy process that aims to internalize functional models created by institutions and
used in the service of citizens. But this aspect is not part of this article and deserves a special
treatment.

Lessons Learned

Despite the positive innovations that LA has brought in the Albanian context in the field of digital
democracy such as making it possible to explore and test different models, some shortcomings
remain which are also connected to the broader conditions for local digital democracy more so than
LA itself. First, the lack of a proper and integrated strategy on the objectives and goals of promoting
these initiatives of digital democracy, has led to a fragmentation of results and made it difficult to
create genuine synergies between them. However, as argued in this article (Link Bino and Martizen),
digital democracy was not an intrinsic part of the theory of change of LA, but it strongly supported
the use of digital tools to foster local democracy. As such the lessons learned should be seen in this
context and serve other actors who have an interest in this regard. The experience of LA grantees
can be replicated, expanded and further consolidated. Another challenge is that of the difficulty of
sustainability of the initiatives and instruments conceived by them. One lesson that can be learned in
this context is the need for more focused and strategic work to create and maintain a better balance
between flexibility and freedom in producing ideas and tools (on the one hand) and delivering of a
macro structure for the field (on the other hand), where all ideas meet and interact.
A second lesson relates to the need for a more efficient dissemination of the models promoted, to
incentivize civic education and replication. Promoting successful practices in the field of digital
democracy requires the use of the entire LA network in the country, as well as cooperation with
other actors. To help in the sustainability and consolidation of good ideas in this field, a platform is
needed which, under a common denominator, can present and represent all tested models and
provide opportunities for capacity building and empowerment between other groups or other areas.
Finally, another aspect of this experience relates to the need to coordinate public with non-public
initiatives regarding digital democracy. From the above we have described a stage of the
environment in which there are formal initiatives of central and local level, supported or not by
foreign donors, (such as the co-governance platform of the Albanian government, participatory
budget in a few municipalities, Bashki të forta, etc.), and there are also initiatives of civil society
actors which receive donor support as LA, which were mentioned earlier.
The successful products of digital democracy are those that provide irrefutable data and studies,
known to both citizens and the elected. In consolidated democracies it is the governing bodies
themselves that implement projects oriented towards digital democracy. In the Albanian context, it
is still necessary to involve civil society actors in more instruments of interaction between
institutions, especially local ones and citizens.

Conclusions and recommendations for the future

The close connection that this field creates between the deepening of democratization and keeping
pace with technological developments in general, makes it a necessity for the future development
agenda of the country. The digital revolution can significantly help fill the gaps created between the

5
citizen and institutions. However, for an effective use of these instruments, a process of civic
education is needed on the one hand, as well as a cooperative work with institutions on the other
hand. Regarding the work of LA specifically, the contribution through initiatives has been invaluable
in the engagement of civil society and activists, who have independently proposed and developed
such instruments.
From this point of view, LA and/or other bodies should maintain this approach in the future as they
cover a role that other existing practices do not have, working primarily to directly support
institutions. However, the usefulness and sustainability of initiatives in this field would be higher if a
genuine strategy and an integrated map of practiced models were developed, recording this
knowledge, and making it replicable, in the service of citizen education and activism.
To conclude, digital democracy in the Albanian context is still at its early stages. A few actors have
attempted to introduce and implement some instruments. However, there is still plenty to do,
especially in terms of sustainability and establishing synergies which might help the overall
environment of this sector. Lessons learnt are also focused on sustainability of implemented models
and in the need for a better strategy when designing methodologies and dissemination activities.
Overcoming public skepticism and institutional apathy towards these instruments are crucial points
that have merged from projects supported by LA.

About LevizAlbania
LevizAlbania is the Local Democracy project of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
(SDC) implemented by a consortium of (i) the Open Society Foundation for Albania (OSFA), (ii)
Partners Albania and (iii) Co-Plan. Since 2015, LA has contributed to the growth of local democracy,
through grants to Non-Profit Organizations (NPOs), informal groups and individuals, supporting their
demand for transparent, and accountable local government and efficient public services. The project
supports the building of coalitions to foster structural and systematic change at the local and
national levels and to promote positive practices in support of local democracy

Knowledge Management System and Civic Engagement Platform

LevizAlbania's Knowledge Management and Civic Engagement Platform aims to collect, structure
and capitalize on all of LA's contributions and achievements in the last 6 years. At the same time, this
exercise examines the challenges that LevizAlbania faces in achieving its objectives, but also the
challenges of grantees and the broader context of local democracy. Knowledge management
analyzes the internal and external processes of LA, as well as conceives the establishment of
mechanisms based on the identified needs. This chosen approach aims to improve the effectiveness
of new projects and will instill a culture of systematic and structured use of the knowledge gained,
using the tools and mechanisms (platform) set up. The Knowledge Management System and the
Civic Engagement Platform contribute to increasing the effectiveness of interventions, and provide
an in-depth analysis and overview of the challenges in supporting local democracy and civic
engagement. Experts engaged for this by LevizAlbania (alphabetical order): Blerjana Bino and
Gentian Elezi.