Methodical Snark critical reflections on how we measure and assess civic tech
Tag

debate

April 10, 2017

research links w 14-17

In Research Roundup
5 Min Read
10April

The weeds are deep in this one. Findings All the findings: @3ieNews‏ has mapped out existing evidence on citizen-state relations, put together a linked matrix organized according to the interventions and outcomes measured, plus confidence levels. It includes “18 completed systematic reviews and two systematic review protocols, 305 completed impact evaluations reported in 280 papers, 60...

Read on
February 6, 2017

research links w5-17

In Research Roundup
4 Min Read
06February

Papers & Findings What makes for a strong and democratic public media? According to comparative research on “12 leading democracies,” it’s all about multi-year funding, legal charters limiting gov influence, arms-length oversight agencies and audience councils. Compelling, but not shocking. Similarly, we know that the internet doesn’t drive democracy, but increased...

Read on
Methodical Snark critical reflections on how we measure and assess civic tech
This is a blog about how the civic tech and accountability field measures its work and its impact. It’s based on a critical perspective, but tries to be more productive than conference snark. It’s an effort to highlight how much work is being done in silos across the academic-NGO divide, to de-mystify important methods and findings, and to call out research that is sloppy or unhelpful.

Tags

africa anti-corruption big data brazil China civic engagement collaboration comparative indices corruption crowdsourcing development e-government elections europe facebook fake news field comment FOIA gender ghana health human rights impact India intermediaries Kenya latin america literature review methods OGP open data participation participatory budgeting procurement protest RCTs social media spain survey transparency trust twitter uganda US visualization