Developing local e‐democracy in Bristol

Purpose – Bristol City Council has received national and international recognition for its local e‐democracy work. This paper seeks to tell the story of three phases of development of local e‐democracy in Bristol. In summarising findings from the national evaluation of the Local E‐democracy Project, the paper also aims to consider stage four – where Bristol's e‐democracy programme is headed next. Design/methodology/approach – Bristol acted as a lead authority on the evaluation of the Local E‐democracy National Project. This was a large multi‐method academic study, which set out to examine the aspirations and experiences of a variety of “actors” involved in more than 20 e‐democracy pilot projects across England. Professors Stephen Coleman of the Oxford Internet Institute and Ann Macintosh of the International Tele‐democracy Centre at Napier University undertook the evaluation, working with Bristol City Council as part of an E‐democracy Experts Group. Findings – Findings from the national evaluation have been published in reports covering “top‐down” (authority‐led) and “ground‐up” (community‐led) approaches to local e‐democracy. This paper applies evaluation findings to Bristol City Council's experiences. It highlights how authorities can use e‐democracy to move between information sharing and consultation and then to creating space and conditions for ground‐up participation. Research limitations/implications – The paper focuses on common themes, rather than an in‐depth account of all of the national evaluation findings as they relate to each project that was considered. As a case study, this paper concerns the particular experiences of Bristol City Council. Practical implications – The study offers insight aimed at local authority e‐democracy practitioners. Originality/value – Over the past five years, Bristol City Council has accumulated considerable practical experience of local e‐democracy. The authority has benefited from a close association with leading academic experts, leaving it perhaps uniquely positioned to share learning from critical self‐reflection.