Designing a New Generation of AI-aided e-Participation Public Services
Abstract
The liberal conception of democracy differentiates between (a) its institutions, such as free elections, political competition parties, freedom of speech that underline the western political system; and (b) regulative ideals that justify and let this system work. When the same institutions are justified differently depending on the underlying regulative ideals, the relationship between them becomes problematic, invoking often such notions as ‘democratic deficit’ and ‘democratic crisis’. These in turn point at the presence of political polarization, lack of meaningful civic participation in politics, and eventually the undermined democratic legitimacy. The aim of liberal democracy is to find an institution that can aggregate individual preferences into collective choice as fairly and efficiently as possible ensuring that different persons are equal and have the same weight in the political community. The aggregation is typically done by using the majoritarian principles of voting to make decisions or pluralistically, when disparate society’s groups influence decisions according to their interest in passing or rejecting such decisions, for example, through position voting. However, neither the majoritarian nor position voting does not envisage changing the initial political preferences so they could account for the views of other persons before the vote. Conversely, a deliberative concept of democracy is based on an open and uncoerced discussion – a form of e-participation public service – that is capable to transform initial preferences and thus accommodate other views. We argue that Artificial Intelligence (AI) can support a new type of e-participation services by using the algorithms specifically designed to alternate voting and discussion through the intertwined AI and human test actions and eventually aggregate political preferences in a more conciliatory manner. We propose that such preferences are semantically revealed with the help of AI through the Habermasian validity claims to normative rightness that serve as the discursively constructed argumentation vehicles. This logic could help better exploit AI benefits to overcome the ills of the social choice theory used in the liberal democratic model to count votes, improve user’s experience of interacting with technology and eventually make political decisions more democratic.
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, e-Participation, Democratic Deliberation, Social Choice Theory, Validity Claims, Jurgen Habermas
DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1006415
Cite this paper
More from this volume
- Attachment Theory in the Digital Age: Exploring the Psychosocial Dimensions of Technology Use
- Trading on Sentiment: Leveraging Generative Artificial Intelligence for Financial Market Predictions
- Co-Creation in Academic Education: Enhancing Future Skills for the Service Sector
- Sustainable Entrepreneurship in German Rural Areas: A Survey and Implications for Entrepreneurship Education and Support Programs
- Large Language Models for Tacit Knowledge Elicitation in Industry 5.0: A Literature Review
- From linear to circular: Redefining the customer journey in sustainable fashion
- Rethinking UX Education
- Expressions of Alamelu: A Cultural Narrative Enhanced with Technology
- Toward the Inclusion of Human Factors in Intelligence Augmentation: Perspectives From a Bibliometric Analysis
- Generative Artificial Intelligence for Effective Miner Training
- Key Findings of the ISSIP White Paper on "AI Challenges to Global Democracy"
- Engineering the 21st Century Service Economy - The Human Side of Service Innovation and Transformation with AI/ML, Robotics, and Automation


AHFE Open Access