Case study: Digital and Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan
This article was written by Momo Sakudo.
Introduction
Taiwan, officially known as the Republic of China (ROC) is a small island nation off the coast of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Despite its uncertain political status due to historical and ongoing conflicts with the PRC, Taiwan has seen considerable economic development since the 1970’s which coincided with the gradual democratization of the nation. By 1996, Taiwan transitioned into a fully-fledged democracy under a multi-party semi-presidential system with free and competitive elections. Nevertheless, as with any democracy, Taiwan has faced various problems and in 2014, large protests now called the sunflower movement took place due to a trade agreement with the PRC which was largely negotiated behind closed doors. Among protesters, there was a civic tech community called g0v.tw who promotes government transparency and citizens participation in the legislative process.
In response to the abovementioned protests, the Taiwanese government asked volunteers at a g0v.tw hackathon to create a digital participatory platform for national issues which led to the creation of vTaiwan; an online-offline “open consultation process to bring together experts, government officials, and relevant citizens on a national scale to deliberate and reach consensus and craft legislation.” Now, Taiwan and its unique system of digital democracy is gaining widespread international attention as a new way of fostering democracy but, upon understanding these new tools of, what can we learn and can it be a solution for the democratic deficits prevalent throughout the world?
Case study: The vTaiwan Process
Since the creation of Taiwan’s open consultation process, vTaiwan, great success has been seen especially in the problem identification stage of the lawmaking process. Despite the fact that vTaiwan is funded by the government, it is an independent platform run by volunteers which allow it to have both legitimacy and autonomy. Structurally, vTaiwan is broken up into the four phases of proposal, opinion, reflection and legislation (figure 1) although the process may change according to the circumstances. As such, the Digital Minister of Taiwan, Audrey Tang, has called the vTaiwan process an experiment in permanent beta that is flexible, modifiable and adaptable. Rather than establishing a rigid process, vTaiwan continues to evolve and seek out new information on participatory democracy and citizens engagement through the use of digital technologies. So far, more than 26 processes have been debated by more than 200,000 people resulting in government action for over 80% of the processes.
As mentioned above, the first phase of vTaiwan is the proposal stage where participants may propose various issues during a weekly mini-hackathon. Issues presented must first be accepted by a competent government authority who will be held accountable for the vTaiwan process to move forward to the next phase. In the Opinion stage, public opinion is gathered through various online tools such as surveys on social media, online forums, a discussion tool called Discourse or an opinion mapping platform Pol.is. After opinion collection is complete, it is followed by a period of reflection in which face-to-face events are convened to determine if another round of opinion collection is necessary. If opinion collection is deemed sufficient, an in-person consultation meeting is held with stakeholders, scholars, public servants and highly active participants. This is livestreamed and published on social media sites so that citizens may participate through chat and continue to input their opinion even after the meeting is complete. In the final legislation stage, a discussion is held to decide government action which may result in a guideline, policy, statement or the creation of a draft bill which will be sent to the legislature. Throughout all phases of the vTaiwan process, transparency is ensured in the form of information sharing where meeting recordings, transcriptions, notes and slides are shared online to be open and accessible for all.
Conclusion
Through the use of online tools such as Discourse and Pol.is, vTaiwan has successfully bridged the gap between citizens and government. On Discourse, ministries are responsible for directly responding to comments in a timely manner, and since 2017 each ministry has assigned a participation officer to further citizen engagement. This mandatory public engagement has furthered mutual trust between the government and citizens which has also fostered greater trust in the democratic system. Within the vTaiwan process, citizens have a larger voice while reducing the burden for lawmakers which results in decreased opposition and increased collaboration. One aspect to note during the vTaiwan process is the notion of a “rough consensus” which resembles consent. Due to the high volume of comments, the existence of internet “trolls” and the possibility of unequal, dominant discourse, even with the use of digital tools, it is impossible to consolidate the input of every individual. Thus, the goal of this participatory process is not unanimity but consensus building for large groups to the extent that they may at least consent to certain things throughout the process.
Given Taiwan’s unique characteristics of being a small country that is highly digitalized, some may question the plausibility of extending Taiwan’s digital democracy to other states. Indeed, an extensive digital infrastructure as well as an informed population with digital literacy is necessary for this form of digital democracy to take place. Nevertheless, for Taiwan, it is emphasized that the vTaiwan process should not replace in person participation but rather augment the already existing tools. Therefore, the potential for replicating and adapting the vTaiwan process in other states is endless, especially if we look beyond the national level. Despite the multiple dangers that digital technologies may pose, it is undeniable that technology also presents new methods to strengthen democracy. Taiwan has exemplified that it is possible to increase transparency, accountability, legitimacy, and trust in government through collaborative tools used in a “fast, fair, and fun” manner.
This article has been published as per submission by the student (the author) and based on the lecture given by the professor in the context of an assignment, for comments or edits please contact the author : name.lastname@sciencespo.fr
References
Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2020). Digital democracy — what europe can learn from taiwan — Web discussion with audrey tang — Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5uMMKaSbSw&feature=emb_logo
Diamond, L. J., & Shin, G.-W. (Eds.). (2014). New challenges for maturing democracies in Korea and Taiwan. Stanford University Press.
Govlab. (n.d.). Case Study vTaiwan Democracy as a Work in Progress. https://congress.crowd.law/case-vtaiwan.html
