Yerel Yönetimlere Katılımın Sosyal Medya Üzerinden Artışı

Öz

Bu çalışma, dijital dönüşüm bağlamında sosyal medyanın yerel yönetişimde vatandaş katılımı üzerindeki etkisini incelemektedir. Dijitalleşme, vatandaşların kamu hizmetlerine erişim ve toplumsal katılım biçimlerini yeniden şekillendirerek, sosyal medyayı vatandaşlar ile yerel yönetimler arasında etkileşimin temel bir aracı hâline getirmiştir. Araştırmada ikincil veri analizi ve kapsamlı bir literatür taraması kullanılarak ulusal ve uluslararası örnekler, özellikle Türkiye bağlamında değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, sosyal medyanın bilgi paylaşımını kolaylaştırarak, şeffaf iletişimi destekleyerek, geri bildirim mekanizmaları sağlayarak ve topluluk bilincini güçlendirerek yerel düzeyde katılımı artırdığını göstermektedir. Özellikle genç vatandaşlar, dijital platformlar aracılığıyla yerel siyasi süreçlerde aktif rol almakta ve katılımları platformların etkileşimli özellikleriyle yakından ilişkilidir. Buna rağmen, dijital uçurum, eşitsiz erişim, yanlış bilgi, çevrimiçi manipülasyon ve farklı dijital okuryazarlık seviyeleri gibi zorluklar hâlâ önemli sorunlar olarak varlığını sürdürmektedir. Çalışma, yerel yönetimlerin sosyal medya stratejilerini geliştirmesi ve demokratik katılımı güçlendirmesi için pratik öneriler sunmakta ve sosyal medyanın vatandaş–yönetim iletişiminde ve vatandaş odaklı politika üretiminde dönüştürücü rolünü vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal Medya
• Yerel Yönetim
• Vatandaş Katılımı
• Dijital Katılım
• e-demokrasi

Destekleyen Kurum

Yazar bu araştırmayı desteklemek için herhangi bir dış fon almadığını kabul eder.

Etik Beyan

Çalışmanın hazırlanma sürecinde bilimsel ve etik ilkelere uyulduğu ve yararlanılan tüm çalışmaların kaynakçada belirtildiği beyan olunur.

The Increase of Citizen Participation in Local Governance Through Social Media

Öz

This study examines the impact of social media on citizen participation in local governance within digital transformation. Digitalization has reshaped access to public services and civic engagement, positioning social media as a key tool for interaction between citizens and local authorities. Using secondary data analysis and an extensive literature review, the research evaluates national and international cases, particularly Turkey. Findings indicate that social media enhances local participation by facilitating information sharing, transparent communication, feedback mechanisms, and community building. Young citizens are especially active in local political processes through digital platforms, with engagement closely linked to interactive features. Despite these benefits, challenges such as the digital divide, unequal access, misinformation, online manipulation, and varying digital literacy remain significant. The study offers practical recommendations for local governments to improve social media strategies and strengthen democratic participation, highlighting its transformative role in citizen–government communication and citizen-centered policymaking in local governance.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social Media
• Local Governance
• Citizen Participation
• Digital Engagement
• e-democracy

Destekleyen Kurum

The author acknowledges that received not external funding support of this research.

Etik Beyan

It is hereby declared that scientific and ethical principles were strictly adhered to throughout the research process and that all sources used have been appropriately cited in the reference list.

Kaynakça

1. Ajuntament de Barcelona. (2023). Decidim Barcelona annual participation report. https://www.decidim.barcelona
2. Ankara Metropolitan Municipality. (2023). Strategic communication and digital participation report. https://www.ankara.bel.tr
3. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
4. Benlahcene, A., Awang, H., Mansor, N. S., Ghazali, O., Mohd Nadzir, M., Mat Yamin, F., Uba Haruna, I., & Tudu Shehu Malami, S. (2024). Citizens’ e-participation through e-government services: A systematic literature review. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), Article 2415526. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2415526
5. Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.03.001
6. Bibri, S. E., Huang, J., & Krogstie, J. (2024). Artificial intelligence of things for synergizing smarter eco-city brain, metabolism, and platform: Pioneering data-driven environmental governance. Sustainable Cities and Society, 108, Article 105516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2024.105516
7. Borge, R., Balcells, J., & Padró-Solanet, A. (2023). Democratic disruption or continuity? Analysis of the Decidim platform in Catalan municipalities. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(7), 926-939. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221092798
8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

9. Correia, P. M. A. R., Pedro, R. L. D., Mendes, I. O., & Serra, A. D. C. S. (2024). The challenges of artificial intelligence in public administration in the framework of smart cities: Reflections and legal issues. Social Sciences, 13(2), Article 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13020075
10. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
11. Criado, J. I., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2013). Government innovation through social media. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 319-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.003
12. Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00667.x
13. Gilman, H. R. (2018). Participatory budgeting and civic tech: The revival of citizen engagement. Georgetown University Press.
14. Górska, A., Dobija, D., Grossi, G., & Staniszewska, Z. (2022). Getting through COVID-19 together: Understanding local governments’ social media communication. Cities, 121, Article 103453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103453
15. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press.
16. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. (2023). Digital transformation and citizen participation report. https://www.ibb.istanbul
17. Izmir Metropolitan Municipality. (2023). Participatory governance and digital municipality report. https://www.izmir.bel.tr
18. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
19. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
20. Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.003
21. Macintosh, A. (2004, January). Characterizing e-participation in policy-making [Paper presentation]. 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, HI, United States. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2004.1265300
22. Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society Research Institute. https://l24.im/QJlYt
23. Meijer, A. (2013). Understanding the complex dynamics of transparency. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12032
24. Mergel, I. (2012). Social media in the public sector: A guide to participation, collaboration and transparency in the networked world. John Wiley & Sons.
25. Mergel, I. (2016). Agile innovation management in government: A research agenda. Government Information Quarterly, 33(3), 516-523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.07.004
26. Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., & Crawford, J. (2013). Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major US cities. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 351-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.016
27. Nabatchi, T., & Amsler, L. B. (2014). Direct public engagement in local government. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(4_suppl), 63S-88S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013519702
28. Nam, T. (2012). Citizens’ attitudes toward open government and government 2.0. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(2), 346–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852312438783
29. New York City Mayor’s Office of Operations. (2023). NYC 311 annual report. https://www.nyc.gov/311 Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
30. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster. Ranchordás, S., & Klop, A. (2018). Data-driven regulation and governance in smart cities. In Research handbook in data science and law (pp. 245-273). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788111300.00018
31. Rasoulzadeh Aghdam, S., Bababeimorad, B., Ghasemzadeh, B., Irani, M., & Huovila, A. (2025). Social smart city research: Interconnections between participatory governance, data privacy, artificial intelligence and ethical sustainable development. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 6, Article 1514040. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2024.1514040
32. Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community: Finding connection in a computerized world. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing.
33. Seoul Metropolitan Government. (2023). Smart Seoul digital governance strategy report. https://english.seoul.go.kr
34. Sharma, S., Kar, A. K., Gupta, M. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Janssen, M. (2022). Digital citizen empowerment: A systematic literature review of theories and development models. Information Technology for Development, 28(4), 660-687. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2022.2046533
35. Shirky, C. (2011). Cognitive surplus: How technology makes consumers into collaborators. Penguin Books. Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge University Press.
36. Strauß, N., Kruikemeier, S., van der Meulen, H., & van Noort, G. (2015). Digital diplomacy in GCC countries: Strategic communication of Western embassies on Twitter. Government Information Quarterly, 32(4), 369-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.08.001
37. Tambouris, E., Liotas, N., & Tarabanis, K. (2007, January). A framework for assessing eParticipation projects and tools [Paper presentation]. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07), Hawaii, HI, United States. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2007.13
38. Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press. Valenzuela, S. (2013). Unpacking the use of social media for protest behavior: The roles of information, opinion expression, and activism. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 920-942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479375
39. Van Dijk, J. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press.
40. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. Ziosi, M., Hewitt, B., Juneja, P., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2023). Smart cities: Reviewing the debate about their ethical implications. In The 2022 yearbook of the Digital Governance Research Group (pp. 11-38). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28678-0_3