Empowering local citizens: assessing the inclusiveness of a digital democratic innovation for co-creating a Voting Advice Application

Figures & data

Table 1. Predicting internal inclusion.

	Contributors vs. Lurkers	Contributors vs. Review-Only Users	Review-Only Users vs. Lurkers
Internal efficacy	0.39**	0.28*	0.11
	(0.13)	(0.13)	(0.11)
External efficacy	0.04	0.06	−0.02
	(0.12)	(0.12)	(0.10)
Populism	−0.06	0.04	−0.10
	(0.11)	(0.11)	(0.09)
Digital affinity	0.21	0.29*	−0.08
	(0.12)	(0.12)	(0.12)
Left-right-placement	−0.10	−0.08	−0.03
	(0.07)	(0.07)	(0.06)
Sympathy for SVP	−0.02	0.56	−0.58
	(0.44)	(0.47)	(0.40)
Local political trust	−0.34*	−0.39**	0.05
	(0.14)	(0.14)	(0.12)
Local political interest	0.14	0.29	−0.15
	(0.17)	(0.17)	(0.15)
Satisfaction with local democracy	0.01	−0.02	0.03
	(0.11)	(0.11)	(0.10)
Political discussion	0.14	−0.02	0.16
	(0.14)	(0.14)	(0.12)
Gender	−0.13	0.11	−0.24
	(0.21)	(0.21)	(0.18)
Age (in years)	−0.01	0.002	−0.02**
	(0.01)	(0.01)	(0.01)
Education	0.08	0.12*	−0.04
	(0.05)	(0.05)	(0.04)
Job	−0.81**	−0.35	−0.47*
	(0.25)	(0.24)	(0.21)
Party affiliation	0.05	−0.10	0.15
	(0.22)	(0.22)	(0.19)
Involvement in association	0.58**	0.43*	0.15
	(0.20)	(0.20)	(0.18)
Constant	−1.05	−2.48*	1.43
	(1.08)	(1.05)	(0.94)
Observations	891
Akaike Inf. Crit.	1,623.48

Entries are multinomial logit coefficients (standard errors in parentheses); *p<0.05 ** p<0.01 *** p<0.001.

Table 2. Predicting integrative complexity.

	Integrative Complexity
Internal efficacy	−0.06
	(0.27)
External efficacy	0.10
	(0.24)
Populism	0.19
	(0.22)
Digital affinity	0.09
	(0.21)
Left-right-placement	−0.003
	(0.13)
Sympathy for SVP	0.86
	(0.93)
Local political trust	−0.08
	(0.27)
Local political interest	0.22
	(0.35)
Satisfaction with local democracy	−0.01
	(0.22)
Political discussion	0.12
	(0.28)
Gender	0.002
	(0.45)
Age (in years)	0.01
	(0.02)
Education	0.26*
	(0.10)
Job	0.23
	(0.50)
Party affiliation	−0.56
	(0.49)
Involvement in association	−0.16
	(0.43)
Constant	−3.40
	(2.28)
Observations	201
R^2	0.073

Entries are OLS coefficients (standard errors in parentheses); * p<0.05 ** p<0.01 *** p<0.001.

Table 3. Satisfaction with the Demokratiefabrik.

	Clear Instructions	Considers review process fair	Considers DDI meaningful	Intention to participate in future
Internal efficacy	0.08	0.44	0.24	0.21
	(0.17)	(0.27)	(0.16)	(0.20)
External efficacy	0.25	0.26	−0.02	0.34
	(0.16)	(0.23)	(0.15)	(0.19)
Populism	−0.20	−0.04	0.06	0.15
	(0.14)	(0.21)	(0.13)	(0.16)
Digital affinity	0.13	0.24	0.27	0.63*
	(0.16)	(0.25)	(0.15)	(0.25)
Left-right-placement	0.03	−0.17	−0.08	−0.06
	(0.09)	(0.14)	(0.09)	(0.11)
Sympathy for SVP	0.68	0.15	−0.89	0.53
	(0.67)	(0.99)	(0.62)	(0.81)
Local political trust	0.27	0.25	0.08	−0.10
	(0.18)	(0.26)	(0.17)	(0.20)
Local political interest	0.04	−0.15	0.15	0.30
	(0.22)	(0.35)	(0.21)	(0.26)
Satisfaction with local democracy	−0.15	−0.10	−0.03	−0.15
	(0.15)	(0.23)	(0.14)	(0.18)
Political discussion	−0.04	−0.73*	−0.07	−0.38
	(0.19)	(0.31)	(0.18)	(0.22)
Gender	0.16	−0.37	0.19	0.21
	(0.28)	(0.44)	(0.26)	(0.32)
Age (in years)	−0.003	−0.02	−0.03**	−0.03*
	(0.01)	(0.02)	(0.01)	(0.01)
Education	0.04	−0.05	−0.11*	0.05
	(0.06)	(0.09)	(0.06)	(0.07)
Job	−0.39	0.03	−0.60	−0.49
	(0.32)	(0.47)	(0.32)	(0.40)
Party affiliation	−0.21	−0.13	0.09	−0.08
	(0.29)	(0.45)	(0.27)	(0.33)
Involvement in association	−0.36	−0.01	0.49	0.41
	(0.27)	(0.40)	(0.25)	(0.32)
Constant	1.68	7.05**	2.71	3.22
	(1.45)	(2.37)	(1.44)	(1.80)
Observations	319	242	312	313
Akaike Inf. Crit.	398.04	216.42	427.64	313.44

Entries are logit coefficients (standard errors in parentheses); * p<0.05 ** p<0.01 *** p<0.001.

Table A1. External Inclusion regarding socio-demographics.

	Participants	Sample
Age
18–25	8.2%	9.1%
26–35	17.9%	16.4%
36–45	19.7%	15.3% ***
46–55	18.5%	15.3% *
56–65	18%	17.1%
66–75	13.4%	14%
76+	4.5%	12.8% ***
Gender
female	48.6%	52.8% **
male	51.4%	47.2% **
Location in the municipality
rural	21.2%	27.6% ***
suburban	19.5%	20.2%
urban	59.4%	52.3% ***
p<0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001

Table A2. Operationalisation, question wording and summary statistics of the used variables.

Variable	Operationalisation and question wording	Summary statistics
Independent variables
Internal efficacy	Index variable based on factor analysis of the following two items: 1. I can understand and evaluate important political issues well. 2. I dare to actively participate in a conversation about political issues. Higher index values indicate higher internal efficacy.	Min.: −3.72 Max.: 1.35 Mean: 0.04 SD: 0.98
External efficacy	Index variable based on factor analysis of the two items: 1. Politicians care about what ordinary people think. 2. Politicians strive to maintain close contact with the population. Higher index values indicate higher external efficacy.	Min.: −2.52 Max.: 2.80 Mean: 0.004 SD: 0.99
Populism	Index variable based on factor analysis (first factor extraction) of the following seven items: 1. Ordinary citizens are of good and honest character. 2. The people should always have the final say on important political issues by means of a referendum vote. 3. Ordinary citizens pull together. 4. The differences between citizens and the so-called elite are much greater than the differences between ordinary people. 5. Politicians do not have to spend time with ordinary citizens to do a good job. 6. The politicians in Parliament need to follow the will of the people. 7. Ordinary citizens share the same values and interests. Multivariate missing value imputation was used (R Package ‘mice’). Higher values indicate stronger populist values. The index values range from −2.9 to 3.1.	Min.: −2.89 Max.: 2.82 Mean: −0.02 SD: 0.97
Digital affinity	Question-wording: ‘How often do you post or share something about politics on the Internet, for example on blogs, by email or on social media such as Twitter, Instagram or Facebook?’ Ordinal variable with values: 1=never, 2=once in a while, but less than once a month, 3=once to four times a month (=up to once a week), 4=several times a week, 5=once a day, 6=several times a day	Min.: 1 Max.: 6 Mean: 1.54 SD: 0.83
Left-right self-placement	Question-wording: ‘Left, centre and right are three terms often used to characterise political views. Where do you place yourself on a scale from 0 (far left) to 10 (far right)?’ Scale from 0=far left to 10=far right	Min.: 0 Max.: 10 Mean: 3.97 SD: 1.85
SVP’s sympathy	Dummy variable with values: 0=Otherwise, 1=SVP most closely matches my own views and wishes	Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: - SD: 0.24
Local political trust	Index variable based on factor analysis (first factor loadings) of the following two items: 1. On a scale of 0 (no trust) to 10 (full trust), how much do you trust the local legislative body? 2. On a scale of 0 (no trust) to 10 (full trust), how much do you trust the local executive body? Higher values indicate higher trust in these political institutions.	Min.: −3.55 Max.: 1.99 Mean: −0.0009 SD: 0.99
Local political interest	Question-wording: ‘Generally speaking, how interested are you in local politics?’ Ordinal variable with values: 1=not interested at all, 2=rather not interested, 3=rather interested, 4=very interested	Min.: 1 Max.: 4 Mean: 3.04 SD: 0.70
Satisfaction with local democracy	Question-wording: ‘All in all, how satisfied are you with the way democracy works in the municipality of Köniz?’ Scale from 1= not at all satisfied to 7=very satisfied	Min.: 1 Max.: 7 Mean: 5.26 SD: 1.14
Political discussion	Question-wording: ‘On average, how often do you discuss politics with your friends, relatives and acquaintances?’ Ordinal variable with values: 1=never, 2=less than once per month, 3=ne to four times per month (= up to once per week), 4=several times per week, 5=daily	Min.: 1 Max.: 5 Mean: 3.34 SD: 0.80
Gender	Dummy variable with values: 0=men, 1=women	Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: - SD: 0.50
Age	Age in years	Min.: 17 Max.: 92 Mean: 48.5 SD: 16.16
Education	Question-wording: ‘What is the highest education you have completed with a certificate or diploma?’ Ordinal variable with values: 1=none (no school attended or compulsory school not completed), 2=compulsory school, 3 = 2-year apprenticeship with EBA, 4 = 3–4-year apprenticeship with EFZ, 5=general education without diploma (Diplommittelschule, Fachschule), 6=diploma (grammar school, vocational or specialist baccalaureate) or teacher training college), 7=higher vocational education (with federal certificate, federal diploma or master craftsman’s examination), 8=higher technical college (HTL, HWV, HFG, HFS, higher technical college for technology TS, business HKG), 9=university of Applied Sciences, University of Teacher Education, 10=university, ETH (Bachelor, Master, Lizentiat, Diplom, Staatsexamen, Postgrad), 11=Phd, Habilitation	Min.: 2 Max.: 11 Mean: 7.59 SD: 2.48
Job	Question-wording: ‘What is your current main employment situation?’ Dummy variable with values 0=in education (apprentice, pupil, student) OR Retired OR Housewife/househusband OR Looking for work OR Without employment due to health reasons OR Other, 1=employed	Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.67 SD: 0.47
Party affiliation	Question-wording: ‘Are you affiliated with a political party?’ Dummy variable with values 0=no, 1=yes	Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.56 SD: 0.50
Involvement in association	Question-wording: ‘Are you currently active in an organisation, club or association? By active we mean that you regularly participate in the events/meetings etc., as far as the COVID-19 situation allows’. Dummy variable with values: 0=no, 1=yes	Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.38 SD: 0.48
Dependent variables
Activity	Categorical variable with values 1=Lukers (neither engaged in the review processes nor contributed any content) (reference), 2=Contributors (actively contributed own content in form of comments, VAA-question proposals, or justifications), 3=Review-only users (did not actively contribute but participated in the review process reading and commenting on the proposals of other citizens)	Lurkers: N = 427 Contributors: N = 401 Review-only users: N = 251
Integrative complexity	Z-Score measured on the basis of an automated LIWC (Linguistic Inquiry & Word Count) dictionary-based approach	Min.: −7.03 Max.: 8.1 Mean: −0.16 SD: 2.66
Clear Instructions	Question-wording: ‘The tasks to be completed (evaluate questions and topics, propose questions, prepare expert opinions) were clearly formulated’. Ordinal variables with values: 1=Does not apply at all 2=Largely does not apply, 3=Partly applies, 4=Largely applies, 5=Fully applies Due to strong skewedness, the original variable is recoded to a dummy with values: 0=no [original values 1, 2, & 3], 1=yes [original value 4 & 5]	Original: Min.: 1 Max.: 5 Mean: 3.85 SD: 0.89 Recoded: Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.86 SD: 0.35
Considers review process as fair	Question-wording: ‘I felt the process of how new question proposals were reviewed by other participants was fair’. Ordinal variables with values: 1=Does not apply at all 2=Largely does not apply, 3=Partly applies, 4=Largely applies, 5=Fully applies Due to strong skewness, the original variable is recoded to a dummy with values: 0=no [original values 1, 2, 3], 1=yes [original value 4 & 5]	Original: Min.: 1 Max.: 5 Mean: 4.11 SD: 0.7 Recoded: Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.86 SD: 0.35
Considers DDI as meaningful	Question-wording: ‘How meaningful do you think it is that eligible voters were involved in creating the smartvote questionnaire?’ Ordinal variables with values: 1=Not at all meaningful, 2=Rather not meaningful, 3=Rather meaningful, 4=Very meaningful Due to strong skewedness, the original variable is recoded to a dummy with values: 0=less meaningful [original values 1, 2, & 3], 1=meaningful [original value 4]	Original Min.: 1 Max.: 4 Mean: 3.54 SD: 0.61 Recoded: Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.59 SD: 0.49
Intention to participate in future	Question-wording: ‘Can you imagine participating in the “Demokratiefabrik” again in the future?’ Ordinal variables with values: 1=Does not apply at all 2=Largely does not apply, 3=Partly applies, 4=Largely applies, 5=Fully applies Due to strong skewedness, the original variable is recoded to a dummy with values: 0=no [original values 1, 2], 1=yes [original values 3, 4 & 5]	Original: Min.: 1 Max.: 4 Mean: 3.13 SD: 0.88 Recoded: Min.: 0 Max.: 1 Mean: 0.41 SD: 0.49

Table A3. Final VAA-questionnaire.

Theme and Question		Question by Demokratiefabrik participants (DF) or parties (PAR)	Number of ratings	Average rating
Welfare State, Family & Health
1	Should the municipality provide more support for versatile forms of housing (e.g., assisted living, retirement communities, and mixed-age housing)?	PAR	258	71.8
2	Should the municipality provide more financial support for maternal and paternal counselling services?	DF	236	64.9
3	Should the municipality contribute more to the cost of childcare in daycare centres?	PAR	260	64.7
4	Are you in favour of cutting voluntary spending in the social sector (e.g., school social services, addiction counselling, youth and family counselling, social integration services)?	PAR	253	63.7
5	Should the ‘Midnight Sports’ offer for young people be continued?	DF	217	57.3
6	Should the municipality become more involved in sustainable nutrition (e.g., with school projects and poster campaigns that also inform about vegan and vegetarian nutrition)?	DF	61	54.0
Education & School
1	Should learning support for children be introduced at all schools in the municipality?	DF	118	73.3
2	Should the municipality work to expand compulsory swimming lessons at schools (currently at least one semester)?	DF	212	70.5
3	Should more sustainability topics be addressed at Köniz schools (e.g., in theme weeks)?	PAR	258	70.1
4	Should voluntary all-day schools be implemented in all community school districts?	PAR	262	69.9
5	Should Köniz invest more in learning structures in the area of digitalisation (e.g., expansion of ICT infrastructure in schools)?	PAR	269	69.4
6	Should the upper secondary school models in Köniz be standardised (commitment to a single school model that applies to all secondary schools in the municipality)?	DF	73	68.8
Migration & Integration
1	Should the municipality work to ensure that apprentices who have received a negative asylum decision can still complete their training?	DF	216	81.6
2	Should the municipality work harder to integrate the foreign population?	DF	194	67.1
3	Should Köniz join the alliance ‘Cities and Municipalities for the Reception of Refugees’ and agree to receive refugees directly from foreign camps?	PAR	221	65.6
4	Should the municipality make voting documents available in simple language?	DF	91	65.1
5	Should the municipality set up a service (so-called ‘Schreibstube’) to assist with administrative matters?	DF	161	64.2
Society, Culture & Ethics
1	Should the municipality promote offers of mutual support in the neighbourhoods (e.g., neighbourhood assistance, volunteering, support for family caregivers)?	PAR	224	66.1
2	Are you in favour of Köniz joining other municipalities in financially supporting the major cultural institutions in the region (e.g., Bern City Theatre, Bern Historical Museum, Mühle Hunziken)?	PAR	218	65.8
3	Köniz maintains four library locations. Do you support the continuation of all locations with the existing range of services?	PAR	223	63.1
4	Should the municipality of Köniz work harder for the equality of LGBTIQ people (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer people), analogous to the city of Bern?	DF	73	62.9
5	Should contributions to cultural institutions in the municipality be cut?	PAR	213	60.3
Finances & Taxes
1	Should married couples be taxed separately as individuals (individual taxation)?	DF	137	71.4
2	Are you in favour of a six-year tax increase of 1.1 tax tenths (increase in municipal tax rate from 1.49 to 1.60 effective Jan. 1, 2022)?	PAR	222	70.7
3	Are you in favour of lowering the basic charges for water and waste disposal and charging more for actual consumption in return?	DF	136	68.7
4	Should the municipality create an earmarked climate fund to finance municipal climate protection measures?	DF	59	67.5
5	Are you generally in favour of introducing a binding cost brake for the municipality’s expenditures (personnel and non-personnel expenses)?	DF	117	65.3
6	Should the voluntary services of the municipality (swimming pool, all-day schools, library locations, etc.) be subjected to a renewed task review?	DF	102	58.2
Economy & Work
1	Should the municipality support private efforts (e.g., start-ups) to reduce CO2 emissions more strongly (e.g., financial support, facilitated approval procedures, consulting)?	DF	70	73.1
2	Do you support the expansion of measures to facilitate the reconciliation of family and work (e.g., tax credits for working parents)?	DF	148	70.9
3	Should the municipality make additional efforts to become more attractive to small and medium-sized enterprises?	PAR	226	68.3
4	Should Köniz be actively involved in the regional economic development network?	PAR	221	63.5
Environment, Transport & Energy
1	Should more solar panels (photovoltaic systems) be installed on roofs of properties owned by the municipality?	DF	24	80.4
2	Should the municipality of Köniz do more to protect drinking water quality (e.g., by working with consumers and farmers to find solutions)?	DF	154	78.9
3	Should the municipality promote non-motorised traffic (pedestrian and bicycle traffic) more strongly (e.g., expansion of infrastructure such as bicycle paths, footpaths, thoroughfares in neighbourhoods, seating areas)?	PAR	316	78.5
4	Should municipal operations be carbon neutral (net zero greenhouse gas emissions) by 2030 at the latest?	DF	96	78.3
5	Are you in favour of a stronger involvement of the municipality in the establishment or expansion of heating networks (district heating/thermal networks for heating entire residential quarters)?	DF	54	78.2
6	Do you support a ban on new oil heating systems (in new buildings or the replacement of existing systems)?	DF	92	77.9
7	Should the municipality participate more financially in the operation and expansion of public transport?	DF	118	77.8
Municipality Development
1	Should the municipality do more to promote affordable housing?	DF	151	70.3
2	Should interim uses of vacant buildings in Köniz be promoted more strongly (incl. allowing non-zonal uses)?	PAR	219	66.8
3	Do you support densification in the building zone between Liebefeld Park and Liebefeld train station (‘Liebefeld Mitte’)?	DF	171	64.4
4	Are you in favour of establishing additional pedestrian zones (20 km/h zones) in Köniz?	DF	138	62.5
5	Should municipality properties be allowed to be sold to fund development investments?	PAR	205	57.7
Political System & Digitalisation
1	Should the financing of municipal election and voting campaigns in Köniz have to be disclosed in the future?	PAR	207	76.6
2	Should the municipality engage for the voting and active electoral age in the municipality of Köniz to be lowered to 16?	DF	184	62.4
3	Should the voting ratio be announced in the decisions of the Municipal Council?	DF	171	61.8
4	Should on-site administrative services (at the counter in the municipal building) be reduced in favour of electronic offerings?	DF	44	58.1
Security & Police
1	Should more be done against littering in Köniz (e.g., higher fines, more controls)?	DF	136	69.4
2	Should the police take more targeted action against ‘speeders’ (e.g., with traffic controls in the evening and on weekends)?	DF	177	68.2
3	Should Köniz do more against damage to property in public spaces (vandalism) (e.g., by setting up video cameras in neuralgic places)?	PAR	210	59.2
4	Should the police presence in Köniz be expanded?	PAR	211	54.1