Digitalization of the technology policy of joint management: the case of the platform "Public Services. We decide together"

Negulyaev Stanislav Vladimirovich Master's Degree, Department of Political Science, St. Petersburg State University 191060, Russia, g. Saint Petersburg, ul. Smol'nogo, 1/3 st.negulyaev@gmail.com

Introduction

Technopolitics is considered by researchers in various contexts and assumes a fairly wide range of understanding associated with the complexity of the object under study.

First of all, it makes sense to distinguish between technopolitics in the sense of "technopolitics" and "technopolicy". If in the case of the term "technopolitics" it is assumed to use technologies with specific political goals, which means that the use of "policies" in practical application to solve specific political problems, then the term "technopolicy" indicates a general course or strategy for the introduction of technologies into politics and, as a result, the transformation of the sphere of political governance.

Theoretical aspects of technopolitical research

Let's consider the main approaches in the framework of the analysis of technopolitics. A number of researchers suggest using a resource-based approach to the use of technology as a "competitive advantage" to achieve political goals ^[1].

In its basic form, the term "appeared in the history of the technological tradition to explain the ability of competing actors to foresee and implement political goals through the support of technical artifacts" ^[2]. The support of "technical artifacts" is the use of a technological resource offered by modern information and communication tools.

Researchers P.Edwards and G.Hecht expand their understanding of technopolitics as a network phenomenon related to power and governance. They define technopolitics as "hybrids of technical systems and political practices that create new forms of power and governance" ^[3]. Thus, the connection of technology with politics takes place on the basis of ideas about national and social identity with specific political positions and material results. At the same time, the combination of technology and politics usually does not cause special reactions, but can provide a wide range of opportunities when it comes to using technology for political purposes.

Researcher S. Rodota sees the potential of technopolitics as an improvement of traditional ways of conducting politics. In his opinion, technopolitics will allow reaching a general agreement among the participants of the political space, especially ordinary citizens involved in public policy ^[4]. Thus, transparency, accountability, strengthening of civil discourse and the influence of citizens on decision-making are ensured. At the same time, the main traditional structures and institutions of democratic participation remain unchanged.

Researcher J.Hughes expands the scope of technopolitics in the aspect of public policy and focuses on the use of bio- and nano-innovations.  The use of such technologies generates a number of ethical problems that can turn into political problems. He argues that "these upcoming technopolitical conflicts will occur due to the development, regulation and availability of technologies for improving human potential and will lead to a discussion of fundamentally different concepts of citizenship, rights and state structure" ^[5]. Based on Winner's assumption that technology is inherently inherent in politics, J. Hughes considers some technologies as a tool for human empowerment, while other tools are perceived by him as something opposite.

D. Kellner approaches the consideration of technopolitics through the prism of the theory of "social constructivism". For him, technology acts as an independent agent that can be strategically used by conflicting parties to achieve various political goals. His works contain a normative and strategic position regarding the use of technology in the development of democratic processes. D. Kellner does not consider technopolitics to be a self-enclosed phenomenon. On the contrary, in his understanding, technopolitics acts as "the tactical and strategic use of digital tools for organization, communication and collective action. This is the ability of united communities (...) create and change social movements" ^[6].

Public policy as joint management

State public policy is carried out by purposefully combining the actions of many people and organizations on the basis of network coordination. Such a process forms a new type of management – joint management ^[7].

The crisis of the economic approach to public administration has given rise to new management mechanisms based on the use of network models. The new term "governance" reflects the approach to governance in a networked society. Researcher R.Rhodes understands "governance" as a way of public administration, in which managerial decisions come not only from the citizens, but are also the subject of interaction within the established political networks. It should be noted that the concept of "governance" is extremely difficult to translate into Russian. Various interpretations of it can be found in research, such as general management; specific phenomena – co-management, governance, leadership, political management, horizontal management, network management, etc.

At the same time, increased attention was paid to issues of civil cooperation, which required the inclusion of new actors in the public administration system. The processes of political and administrative activity are beginning to include new forms of civil interaction, such as public expertise, public forums, joint commissions of the public and private sectors.

There are various definitions of new forms of public participation in policy-making and decision-making processes. M. Warren defines, for example, many of these phenomena as "democratization regulating governance" ^[8]. The concept of "collaborative governance" is also used: "Collaborative governance, as it is now known, unites public and private stakeholders with state institutions in collective forums to participate in consensus-oriented decision-making" ^[9]. The format of citizen participation and cooperation in public administration, P. Walker and P. Shannon call "joint management" ^[10]. There is also an independent direction in the modern theory of public administration, which reflects the transition from the process of community participation in politics to decision-making. Such concepts are called "governance through community participation" ^[11], "community involving government" ^[12] or "integrated public governance" ^[13]. 

In modern political science, there are tendencies to search for a qualitatively new model of public policy that could respond to challenges in conditions of uncertainty and complexity of social transformations. In this regard, the concept of "passive manageability" meets the requirements of such a management model, which is based on participation and cooperation. Patisipatory controllability in conditions of uncertainty is based on three basic principles: 1) openness of the state 2) coordination of state and civil responsibility for public interests and their satisfaction 3) the existence of fair political institutions.

The concept of participatory governance basically assumes that the state must constantly negotiate with the community coordinated by it, which as a result shows the "participatory" nature of public governance.

Technologies for improving state manageability: the case of the platform "Public Services. We decide together"

To date, a certain number of platforms have been formed for accumulating public opinion, transmitting requests for solutions to the authorities and building a dialogue with regional and local administrations. Let's consider the conceptual structure of one of these platforms as a tool of the technopolitics of joint management, which is currently being implemented in the regions of Russia.

Since the end of 2020, the feedback platform "Public Services. We decide together", which is designed to systematize the existing system of communication between society and government in the country.  The platform was created within the framework of the federal project "Digital Public Administration" and the strategic national project "Digital Economy".

This platform allows you to organize work in four directions: 1) work with citizens' appeals with the possibility of operational control of resolving issues 2) conducting online surveys on topics of social importance to the population and public discussions of local issues 3) centralized management of official state communities of authorities in social networks and messengers 4) monitoring open records in social networks addressed to regional or local authorities ^[14].

In total, over 7.4 million messages were processed through the platform in 2021. And 10.4 million Russians took part in the voting on the platform for the first time in 2021. Almost all subjects of the Russian Federation at the level of regional and local administrations are connected to the feedback platform. As the platform's functionality develops, the regulatory framework governing the platform's activities is being improved.

Interaction through the platform implements the service role of the state, including step-by-step monitoring of the quality of processing incoming appeals of citizens and the solutions received.  The result of this work will be a matrix of systemic problems for further adoption by the authorities of timely and competent management decisions. At the same time, it is important to note the relative openness of the request processing process – the ability to track the status of the request processing, as well as evaluate the quality of the response or solution received based on the results.

The functionality of the platform assumes a discursive part, where a citizen can comment on or challenge the decision received on the stated issue, as well as return it for revision by giving a low score (from 1 to 2 points). Thus, any reaction of citizens is taken into account when assessing the effectiveness of the work of regional and local authorities. All information is received for further work by the Coordination Center of the Government of the Russian Federation.

Another important component of the platform is a module that provides surveys, public votes and public hearings. With its help, any citizen can exercise his right to an authorized participation in decision-making in the implementation of state or public initiatives.

On the part of the public platform "Public Services. Solving Together" allows you to get objective information about current issues of concern to citizens and take the necessary measures to solve them. From the side of state policy implementation, the platform provides a unified standard for submitting citizens' appeals to authorities and organizations, and also provides a high-quality channel of interaction with citizens.

Conclusion

Today, technological and social development is a related two–way process that, on the one hand, ensures the mutual penetration of ideas and technologies, and on the other hand, legitimizes the division of society into a creative minority and a user majority.

In this context, technopolitics stabilizes the processes of social and technological development, but does not guarantee their absolute controllability due to the relative independence of the development of society and technology ^[15].

The influence of digital technologies on the political sphere raises the question not only of optimizing the chosen process and its further institutionalization, but also the problem of the future fate of traditional social institutions: traditional media, libraries, universities, "analog" laws, feedback systems, as well as the intermediary state itself, which establishes a balance of various interest groups.

Structural analysis of the capabilities of the platform "Public Services. We decide together" showed that the combination of technology and politics, building a feedback system, opens up qualitatively new opportunities both for ensuring civic participation and control, and for the realization of civil rights, for political participation in the process of making important administrative decisions. 

In digital reality, all institutions and their functions are the result of technology. If some time ago the meaning of political development was considered to reduce the presence of the state in the life of society, then a new stage may well be the minimization of the participation of the person himself in the structure of socio-political interaction. Technopolitics can potentially become an effective way to overcome the problems caused by the human factor as such: bureaucratization, corruption, wars, propaganda, post-truth and other similar phenomena.