Sonia Royo Ana Yetano Basilio Acerete University of Zaragoza, Spain

E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed?

There is widespread acceptance that current institutions are inadequate to address the challenges of sustainable development. At the same time, there is an urgent need to build awareness and increase capacity for promoting action with respect to environmental protection at the local level. This article analyzes the Web sites of the environment departments of European local governments that signed the Aalborg Commitments to determine the extent to which they are using the Internet to promote e-participation in environmental topics and to identify the drivers of these developments. Potential drivers are public administration style, urban vulnerability, external pressures, and local government environmental culture. Findings confirm that e-participation is a multifaceted concept. External pressures influence the transparency of environmental Web sites, while public administration style and local government environmental culture influence their interactivity.

T

here is widespread acceptance that current institutions are inadequate to address the challenges of sustainable development and that new arrangements are needed to achieve economic, environmental, and social objectives in a balanced and integrated way. While sustainable development has received international attention and become a global philosophy,1 the economic and financial crisis could be eroding social and environmental concerns and values and creating a sustainability downturn (Cooper and Pearce 2011; Correa-Ruiz and Moneva-Abadía 2011). The failure to develop a global agreement on climate protection and the global financial crisis are good reasons to consider the possible benefits of actions on a smaller scale (Ostrom 2009). According to Sheppard et al. (2011), there is an urgent need for meaningful information and effective public processes at the local level to build awareness and increase capacity for promoting environmental protection. Household consumption patterns and behavior have a major impact on natural resource stocks, environmental quality, and climate change. Furthermore, projections indicate that

these impacts are likely to increase in the near future (OECD 2011). The literature has emphasized the strong role of stakeholder involvement in sustainability issues (Alió and Gallego 2002; Astleithner and Hamedinger 2003; Portney 2005, 2013; Wang et al. 2012). A citizen who is well informed about environmental policies and initiatives can become part of the global effort for environmental protection. The use of information and communications technologies and, in particular, the Internet may have an important role in this regard, given the potential for informing, educating, and empowering citizens. Thus, the use of e-participation may be a cost-effective tool to actively involve citizens in environmental protection. This article analyzes the Web sites of the environment departments of European local governments that have signed the Aalborg Commitments. The aim is to establish to what extent these presumably committed local governments are making use of the Internet to promote environmentally friendly behaviors among their citizens and to offer them opportunities for strengthening democracy by creating e-participation tools. Particular attention will be paid to the type of citizen participation being promoted: information, consultation, or active involvement (Martin and Boaz 2000; OECD 2001). The article also analyzes why some local governments voluntarily make a greater effort in e-participation regarding environmental topics than others. It seeks answers to the following research questions: (1) Does the signing of nonmandatory commitments, such as the Aalborg Commitments, promote the use of environmental e-participation initiatives? (2) Are these initiatives oriented toward promoting higher levels of citizen participation and involvement or just toward enhancing transparency? And (3) what factors drive the differences in the development of these tools at local level? This study is useful for two main purposes. First, it serves as a check for public sector managers to

Sonia Royo is senior lecturer in the Department of Accounting and Finance at the University of Zaragoza, Spain. She participates in the research team led by Lourdes Torres in accounting, management, and auditing of public sector reforms (http:// gespublica.unizar.es). Her primary research interests are in the fields of e-government and citizen participation. She has published articles in leading international journals, such as Public Administration, International Public Management Journal, and Government Information Quarterly. E-mail: [email protected]

Ana Yetano is senior lecturer in the Department of Accounting and Finance at the University of Zaragoza and belongs to the Gespública research group (http:// gespublica.unizar.es). Her research interests include citizen participation, performance measurement and management in the public sector, and public sector accounting. She has published in international journals such as Public Administration, European Accounting Review, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, and Public Performance and Management Review. E-mail: [email protected]

Basilio Acerete is senior lecturer in the Department of Accounting and Finance at the University of Zaragoza. He participates in the research team led by Lourdes Torres in accounting, management, and auditing of public sector reforms (http://gespublica. unizar.es). His research interests are concerned with citizen participation and public–private partnerships. His articles have been published in top referenced journals, and he has been a visiting researcher at the University of Manchester. E-mail: [email protected]

Public Administration Review, Vol. 74, Iss. 1, pp. 87–98. © 2013 by The American Society for Public Administration. DOI: 10.1111/puar.12156.

E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed? 87

evaluate and benchmark their environmental e-participation offerings. Second, it allows legislators and environmental associations to understand the motivations that lead to the disclosure of environmental information and the development of e-participation, as well as to consider further improvements in current environmental agreements to achieve in-depth changes within local governments. Cities, Citizens, and Environmental Protection: The Aalborg Commitments As a growing proportion of the global population lives in urban areas, cities are emerging as key “battlegrounds for global sustainability” (Núñez, Alessi, and Egehofer 2010; Krause 2012). In 2011, more than half of the world’s population lived in urban areas, and this figure is expected to reach 67 percent in 2050 (UNDESA 2011). Cities are central to the sustainability policy challenge because they are home to the majority of global energy use—between 60 percent and 80 percent (OECD 2010). Thus, significant advances in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and environmental protection can be achieved at local level (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011). Participation at the urban level tends to be regarded as an essential tool for climate governance (Alió and Gallego 2002; Solomon 2011), and it is an integral aspect of how some define sustainability (Portney 2013; Portney and Berry 2010). For Astleithner and Hamedinger (2003), the ideal model of locally sustainable policies is characterized as a new governance mix, based on procedures such as dialogue and participation. In the case of environmental protection, citizen participation is particularly important because citizens not only should be consulted on governmental actions but also can make their own contributions by changing their behavior (for example, by reducing energy consumption and private motorized transport use). In fact, one of the features that helps distinguish cities’ sustainability efforts is the extent to which such efforts actually seek to promote citizen participation and involvement (Portney 2013).

active in sustainable development (such as Eurocites and ICLEI) have also joined this initiative. The Aalborg Commitments were adopted in 2004 as a follow-up to the Aalborg Charter. The commitments envisage “cities and towns that are inclusive, prosperous, creative and sustainable, and that provide a good quality of life for all citizens and enable their participation in all aspects of urban life.” Signatories voluntarily agree to (1) produce a review of their city within 12 months; (2) set individual environmental targets, in consultation with stakeholders, within 24 months; and (3) monitor progress in delivering the targets and regularly report to their citizens. There are 10 Aalborg Commitments, and they understand sustainability in a very broad sense. They have a strong focus on environmental protection and highlight the importance of citizen participation,2 although they do not specify the mechanisms or tools that should be adopted and leave much leeway to the municipal governments to decide how to put the commitments into practice. As shown by Portney (2013), sustainability is a multidimensional concept, and not all cities have the same environmental problems, but, in any case, signatories are expected to promote both citizen participation and environmental protection. The Role of E-Participation in Environmental Protection and Determining Factors E-Participation and Environmental Protection

Citizen engagement is considered to have positive influences on citizen trust in government (Cooper, Bryer, and Meek 2006; Yang 2005), governmental legitimacy (Fung 2006) and governmental responsiveness (Buček and Smith 2000; Yang and Holzer 2006). All of this positive rhetoric has led to a reemergence of ideas and values of community, localism, and citizen participation in academic and political discourse (Reddel 2002; Summerville, Adkins, and Kendall 2008). However, the literature acknowledges that authentic public participation is rarely found (Cornwall 2008; Taylor 2007, Yang and Callahan 2007) and that a big gap remains between the rhetoric on participation that is present in political discourses, legal texts, and policy documents and the real-life implementation of participatory processes (Burby 2003; Rauschmayer, Van den Hove, and Koetz 2009; Yetano, Royo, and Acerete 2010).

Because local governments are the level of government closest to citizens, they have unique opportunities to influence individual behavior toward sustainability through education and raising awareness. Municipal governments around the world are becoming involved in environmental protection, partly in response to having realized A precondition for the success of sustainable development and its impact (Krause 2011). To achieve this objective, some initiaenvironmental protection is that these initiatives are acknowledged tives have been implemented in Europe and worldwide, including and attain visibility in the eyes of citizens and local stakeholdthe Aalborg Commitments, the Covenant of ers (Núñez, Alessi, and Egenhofer 2010). Mayors, the European Green Capital Award, However, local governments are often unable E-participation can help give and the Network of Local Governments for to foster widespread interest and engagethe necessary visibility to enviSustainability (ICLEI). ment in climate-related issues (Anguelovski ronmental protection initiatives and Carmin 2011). E-participation can help The European Commission sponsored the give the necessary visibility to environmenand promote the engagement Aalborg Commitments to provide support in tal protection initiatives and promote the and cooperation of citizens and implementing European strategies and poliengagement and cooperation of citizens and other key stakeholders. cies for sustainable development. At the First other key stakeholders. In fact, the potential European Conference on Sustainable Cities and of the Internet to enhance civic participaTowns, which took place in Aalborg, Denmark, in 1994, the Charter tion has been highlighted since the very beginnings of the Internet of European Cities and Towns Towards Sustainability (known as the (Kakabadse, Kakabadse, and Kouzmin 2003; Mahrer and Krimmer Aalborg Charter) was adopted as a framework for the delivery of local 2005). According to the United Nations (2012, 108), e-governsustainable development. A group of 10 networks of cities and towns ment can play a key role in supporting sustainable development 88

Public Administration Review • January | February 2014

because of its potential contribution to enhancing the efficiency, transparency, and responsiveness of public institutions and promoting the participation of key stakeholders.

becomes a challenge (Portney and Berry 2010), especially in studies covering different countries, such as this one.

Some quantitative large-N studies focusing In spite of the recent developments in enviThe following discussion devel- on the factors that influence cities to make explicit environmental protection commitronmental protection and e-participation, ops four different rationales to ments have been conducted (Brody et al. the effectiveness of the initiatives adopted has explain why some signatories 2008; García-Sánchez and Prado-Lorenzo been questioned. Krause (2011, 2012) raises of the Aalborg Commitments 2008; Krause 2011; Portney 2013; Zahran legitimate questions about the extent and show higher levels of develet al. 2008). Based on previous studies of type of follow-through on municipal enviopment in environmental environmental protection and citizen particironmental protection commitments. Other pation, the following discussion develops four authors have indicated that, in some cases, the e-participation. different rationales to explain why some sigadoption of sustainability policies represents natories of the Aalborg Commitments show more “greenwashing” than actual commitment (Astleithner and Hamedinger 2003; Feichtinger and Pregernig higher levels of development in environmental e-participation. For each area, a proposition to be tested is indicated. 2005; Portney 2013). Furthermore, existing initiatives have been criticized for being fragmented rather than global (Romero-Lankao Public administration style. Some authors have pointed out 2012). (Hood 1995; Pollitt, Van Thiel, and Homburg 2007; Torres 2004) that the dissemination of public management innovations is Despite the current rhetoric about the benefits of e-participation, influenced by the organizational and administrative culture, previous research has shown that the use of the Internet in the historical background, and legal structure. Public administration public sector for external purposes has been mainly directed at style has been an important element for explaining the evolution of the provision of public services and information to citizens and other areas of public sector reforms and recent developments in other stakeholders, neglecting the citizen participation dimension e-government related to transparency, accountability, and (Bonsón et al. 2012; Brainard and McNutt 2010; Coursey and e-participation (García-Sánchez, Rodríguez-Domínguez, and Norris 2008; Mahrer and Krimmer 2005; Musso, Weare, and Hale Gallego-Álvarez 2011; Pina, Torres, and Royo 2007, 2010). 2000; Norris and Reddick 2013; Torres, Pina, and Acerete 2006; United Nations 2012). The search for legitimacy also seems to be Among the countries in this study, five broad styles of public adminbehind the adoption of e-participation initiatives (García-Sánchez, istration can be identified: Anglo-Saxon, Eastern European, Nordic, Rodríguez-Domínguez, and Gallego-Álvarez 2011; Mahrer and Germanic, and Napoleonic. With regard to citizen participation, Krimmer 2005). studies characterize Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, and Germanic countries as leaders, while Napoleonic and Eastern European countries usuTherefore, local governments can be expected to vary substanally lag behind (Allegretti and Herzberg 2004; Royo, Yetano, and tially in their e-participation offerings. Two types of adoption of Acerete 2011; Yetano, Royo, and Acerete 2010). e-participation in environmental topics can be anticipated: local governments with great commitment and development and local Anglo-Saxon and Nordic countries have a long-standing reputagovernments that exhibit symbolic behavior, that is, those that have tion of public sector reforms, transparency, and citizen engagement. introduced some soft e-participation mechanisms, mainly related Germanic countries have a long tradition of consultation with social to the provision of information, but without a real commitment to partners (Astleithner and Hamedinger 2003; OECD 2001). On the consultation and cooperation initiatives. contrary, Napoleonic and Eastern European countries are considered laggards in introducing public sector reforms, and in some of these Determinants of E-Participation in Environmental Issues countries, such as Spain, associations have traditionally been the The environment is a public good that cannot readily be fenced only legal participants in most participative processes (Allegretti and in or allocated according to need or willingness to pay (Zahran Herzberg 2004). The 2012 United Nations E-Government Survey et al. 2008). The nonexcludability of collective benefits signifi(United Nations 2012) and the Voice and Accountability Index of cantly undermines incentives to participate, leading to suboptimal the World Bank show a similar pattern, with higher levels of citizen provision of public goods. In addition, the local authority culture (political, managerial, and organizational) of short-termism militates participation in Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, and Germanic countries. Therefore, a priori, a higher level of development of e-participation against a realistic view of the long haul implied by sustainability. can be expected in these cities.3 Local-level characteristics are the dominant drivers of cities’ decisions to commit to environmental protection (García-Sánchez, Proposition 1: Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, and Germanic cities Rodríguez-Domínguez, and Gallego-Álvarez 2011; Krause 2011; will show greater development in environmental e-participaPortney 2013; Prado-Lorenzo and García-Sánchez 2009). Very tion initiatives. often, the context in which citizen participation processes take place, more than the methods used, determines the ability of public Urban vulnerability. Environmental protection presupposes a sector entities to succeed. However, the identification of local faccertain degree of pressure from environmental problems or crises tors that might promote sustainability is a complex task (Alió and (Portney 2013, Astleithner and Hamedinger 2003). It is reasonable Gallego 2002, 129), and the lack of appropriate and robust data to expect that the extent to which a locality is vulnerable to E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed? 89

environmental problems will affect its level of commitment to promoting environmental protection (including its willingness to voluntarily introduce environmental e-participation initiatives). However, previous studies have found mixed results. Brody et al. (2008) and Zahran et al. (2008) indicated that urban vulnerability may be an explanatory factor of interest in environmental topics (defined as membership). However, Portney (2013), who measured the number of policies and programs adopted, found no relationship. The extent of urban vulnerability to environmental problems has been measured using proxy variables such as population density, population growth rate,4 and whether the city is located on the coast. People living in densely populated urban areas are more exposed to air pollutants, and the limits of air quality fixed by the European Commission are often exceeded (Urban Ecosystem Europe 2007). Similarly, urban growth and development patterns are contributing to increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the expected impacts of climate change are particularly harmful to coastal settlements because of the increasing risk of sealevel rise (Brody et al. 2008; Zahran et al. 2008). Proposition 2: Cities that are more vulnerable to environmental problems will show greater development in environmental e-participation initiatives. External pressures. There is increasing pressure on public sector organizations to lead the way with sustainability practices. Environment-related behaviors, in both the public and private sectors, are often used as a public relations tool to enhance the public image of organizations (Anguelovski and Carmin 2011; Correa-Ruiz and Moneva-Abadía 2011; Solomon 2011). Recent research has shown that the online disclosure of information about policies on air pollution at the local level responds to external group demands (Grimmelikhuijsen and Welch 2012) and that the pressure exerted by interest groups is a key factor in the development of e-participation (García-Sánchez, Rodríguez-Domínguez, and Gallego-Álvarez 2011). This study considers that external pressures to adopt e-participation in environmental topics come from different actors, namely, local residents, city visitors, and the central government. The pressure exerted by citizens is measured using the percentage of citizens with tertiary education and the share of Internet access in the region where the city is located.5 Several studies have shown that highly educated citizens increase their involvement in pro-environment campaigns (Brody et al. 2008; Zahran et al. 2008) and that residents of cities that are more serious about sustainability are more likely to have higher educational levels (Portney and Berry 2010). According to García-Sánchez , Rodríguez-Domínguez, and Gallego-Álvarez (2011), a higher level of development of e-participation is strongly linked to countries with high technological development. Internet penetration creates demand for the information and services offered by local government Web sites. Thus, as the level of Internet penetration increases, local governments will feel more social pressure to provide environmental information, online services, and e-participation initiatives. Additionally, the higher the external visibility of the city for nonresidents, the more pressure there will be to have a more developed 90

Public Administration Review • January | February 2014

Web site. The degree of external visibility of the city is measured by the number of city visitors (tourist nights per year). Finally, it is expected that in countries where the level of development of e-environment-related policies is higher, local governments will feel more pressure to adopt environmental e-participation initiatives.6 Proposition 3: Cities with more external pressures will show greater development in environmental e-participation initiatives. Local government environmental culture. Betsill (2001) observed that most of the cities belonging to environmental networks had a prior interest in environmental issues. There are many multilateral environmental agreements in effect.7 The participation of cities in networks and competitions, namely, the Local Governments for Sustainability network, the Covenant of Mayors, and the European Green Capital Award, is considered an indicator of their willingness to implement environmental initiatives. Local Governments for Sustainability is an association of more than 1,220 local governments worldwide that are committed to sustainable development (http://www.iclei.org). Given its specific focus on sustainable energy and climate change, this article also takes into account whether the cities analyzed have joined the Covenant of Mayors and submitted the requested action plan for reducing their carbon emissions.8 The European Green Capital initiative is an award that aims to provide an incentive for cities to inspire each other and share best practices while engaging in friendly competition. Proposition 4: Cities with a higher-profile environmental culture will show greater development in environmental e-participation initiatives. Methodology Sample and Data Collection

This article examines the signatories to the Aalborg Commitments, which, by signing, show some degree of interest in environmental protection and citizen participation. By January 2013, a total of 665 local governments had signed the Aalborg Commitments. They belonged to 35 different countries (some of them non-European, for example, Egypt, Israel, Morocco, Senegal, and Tunisia). The sample of the study was defined as European cities with more than 50,000 inhabitants. However, because of disproportionate representation, the number of cities studied in Italy and Spain was limited.9 Bigger local governments were selected for this study, as they are usually the most innovative in the adoption of new technologies and, at the same time, have more need for them because the distance between the governors and the governed is greater. The final sample comprised 67 European cities. The countries covered and the number of cities per country are as follows: Austria (1), Belgium (1), Bulgaria (2), Denmark (3), Estonia (3), Finland (5), France (4), Germany (5), Greece (4), Iceland (1), Italy (8), Latvia (1), Lithuania (2), Norway (3), Portugal (3), Spain (7), Sweden (8), Switzerland (2), and the United Kingdom (4). A comprehensive Web content analysis of the cities selected was carried out. The Web sites were accessed between February and April 2011, and each was analyzed for 134 items (see tables 1, 2 and

3).10 As the study aims to analyze the use of the Internet to promote environmental protection and e-participation, the items included refer to e-participation in its broader sense, including the online disclosure of information and some e-services (permits, licenses, and grants) related to environmental topics. Most items are rated 1 if they appeared on the Web site and 0 if not. Some items are scored 0.5 if they partially fulfilled the coding criteria. This method has been used previously in the analysis of local government Web sites (Pina, Torres, and Royo 2007, 2010; Torres, Pina, and Acerete 2006). Dimensions Analyzed

The level of development of e-participation regarding environmental issues was assessed by grouping the 134 items into four dimensions: transparency, interactivity, usability, and Web site maturity, which are adapted from Pina, Torres, and Royo (2007). Most of the items analyzed belong to transparency and interactivity, the two key dimensions of the study. Citizen participation efforts can take many forms that can be classified into three main types (Martin and Boaz 2000; OECD 2001): information, consultation, and active participation (also known as cooperation). The transparency dimension is

related to the first type (information). As a clear distinction between consultation and active participation is difficult to draw in practice (OECD 2001), the interactivity dimension includes items related to these two types of citizen participation. The other two complementary dimensions analyze the usability and accessibility of Web sites and aspects related to Web site sophistication. These are key aspects to ensure that citizens can easily access the information and facilities provided (usability) and indicate standards of Web site quality (Web site maturity). Transparency (71 items) on Web sites refers to the extent to which an organization provides information about internal works, decision processes, and procedures (Pina, Torres, and Royo 2007). The items in this dimension are grouped into six broad categories dealing with (1) general information about the environment department, (2) explanations and instructions of requirements for citizens resulting from the department’s activities (citizen consequences), (3) general information about environmental issues, (4) information about specific policies and initiatives, (5) indicators and data about sustainability, and (6) information about citizen participation processes in environmental issues.

Table 1 Transparency Dimension: Average City Scores (percent) 1. Transparency-Accountability (71 items) 1.1. General information about the department (6) Address and telephone, organization chart, number of employees, budget, annual sustainability report, mission statement 1.2. Citizen consequences (4) Information about environmental procedures, instructions about environmental procedures, searchable index for downloadable forms or forms to submit online, instructions for appealing decision-making processes or address of an ombudsman 1.3. General information about environmental issues (14) Strategic plan for a sustainable city, information about causes and probable impacts of climate change, index for reports and publications, drafts of new regulations regarding sustainability, environmental publications in electronic format for free, participation in national or European environmental networks/projects, Agenda 21 project and information, Agenda 21 schools program and information, information about activities linked to Agenda 21, policies for sustainable local public service delivery, local government sustainable procurement policy, FAQ (environmental topics), environmental glossary, and “What’s new” section about environmental matters 1.4. Information about specific policies and initiatives (41) Carbon dioxide/energy (5), water (5), waste management/recycling (6), air quality (5), transport and mobility (11), parks and green spaces (5), noise pollution (4) 1.5. Indicators and data about sustainability (3) Sustainability indicators defined, objectives and time frame established regarding these indicators, sustainability indicators reported 1.6. Information about citizen participation processes in environmental issues (3) Information about current participatory processes (online/offline), information about the level of participation and results of past participatory processes (online/ offline), information about future participatory processes

71.2 67.3 82.8

74.5

74.3 32.3 43.8

Note: Numbers in parentheses represent the number of items in each dimension. Table 2 Interactivity Dimension: Average City Scores (percent) 2. Interactivity-Citizen Dialogue (40 items) 2.1. Obtaining information from the department (5) Department’s general e-mail, subunits’ e-mails, individual employees’ e-mails, searchable database for reports, online request for information or publications 2.2. Development of e-services for environmental topics (5) Forms for downloading, online form completion and submission, online payment of utility bills, taxes, fines, or other government obligations, possibility of making an appointment with officials or staff, link to appeal process 2.3. Services to provide periodic information (8) E-mail alerts about new reports/news about environmental topics, RSS feeds about environmental topics, SMS alerts about issues of interest, possibility of redistributing contents of the Web through blogs or social networks, periodic electronic journal about sustainability, information about air quality, water quality, and noise pollution updated on the Web 2.4. Projects with online participation (or possibility of signing up to a project online) (8) Carbon dioxide/energy, water, waste management/recycling, air quality, transport and mobility, parks and green spaces, Agenda 21, e-participation processes in the last year 2.5. Initiatives to promote responsible behavior (3) Location of recycling centers on an interactive map, simulators (e.g., of household electricity consumption), journey planner (public transport) 2.6. Initiatives to allow citizens to express their opinion regarding sustainability (9) Complaints/suggestion boxes (Web site), chat, asking for opinions about specific topics (by e-mail, forms), e-consultation (short surveys yes/no; specify preferences), e-consultation (long surveys), blogs, Web forum, Facebook page or other type of social network, activity at Facebook official page 2.7. Formal initiatives to participate in sustainability plans and environmental regulations (2) E-rulemaking, e-petitions

39.2 68.1 67.2

29.9

9.3 45.0 43.8 25.4

Note: Numbers in parentheses represent the number of items in each dimension.

E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed? 91

Table 3 Usability and Web Site Maturity Dimensions: Average City Scores (percent) 3. Usability (9 items) 3.1 Provides other-language access to site for visitors unable to speak or read the language of the host country 3.2 Site map 3.3 A–Z index (alphabetical order index) 3.4 Search engine 3.5 Help section 3.6 Homogeneity of the different subpages 3.7 Provides a text-only or accessible version of the Web site 3.8 Provides audio access to the site for the visually impaired 3.9 Web site contains some conformance icon that guarantees compliance with some accessibility standards 4. Web Site Maturity (14 items) 4.1 No broken links 4.2 Provides the date of publication (“last updated”) on the main page of the department (or in a key subordinate page), and it has been updated within the last month 4.3 Content arranged according to different topics (versus content arranged according to the hierarchical structure of the department) 4.4 Credit card payments 4.5 Secure servers (https://...) 4.6 Private areas with passwords are used in order to access personal information 4.7 Site entails the use of digital signature for transactions 4.8 Live broadcast of important speeches or events 4.9 Privacy policy 4.10 Security policy 4.11 Interactive database of environmental/sustainability indicators 4.12 Indicators downloadable in Microsoft Excel format 4.13 Audio/video files for environment-related activities 4.14 Possibility of commenting on those audio/video files

Interactivity (40 items) is a measure of the degree of immediate feedback and the development of possibilities to interact with the environment department, either through online services or through citizen dialogue and e-participation initiatives. The items analyzed are classified into seven categories related to (1) the possibilities of obtaining information from the department, (2) the development of e-services, (3) services to be updated with periodic information, (4) projects with online participation (or the possibility of signing up for a project online), (5) initiatives to promote environmentally friendly behaviors, (6) initiatives to allow citizens to express their opinion regarding sustainability processes (complaint/suggestion boxes, chats, e-consultations, blogs, online forums, social media), and (7) more formal online initiatives to participate in sustainable planning and local environmental regulations by sending comments or promoting discussion on drafts about environmental regulations (e-rulemaking) or by using an e-petitions system. Usability (9 items) refers to the ease with which users can access information and navigate the Web portal. This dimension has been included because Web portals deliver value to users according to how accessible and usable the specific contents are. The features included in this section refer to general characteristics of the local entity Web site and online facilities for people with some kind of disability. Finally, Web site maturity (14 items) embraces those aspects that indicate a high degree of Web site sophistication, such as regular updating of the Web site, the existence of an interactive database of environmental indicators, the possibility of downloading them in Microsoft Excel format, audio/video files for environmentrelated activities, and the possibility of commenting on them. The partial scores in transparency, interactivity, usability, and Web site maturity were obtained by adding the individual scores for each item in each dimension and dividing the total by the maximum possible score in each dimension. The total scores of Web sites by city were obtained by adding the scores for transparency, interactivity, 92

Public Administration Review • January | February 2014

61.2 46.3 82.1 41.8 97.0 46.3 95.5 59.7 20.9 61.2 54.4 77.6 83.6 94.0 85.1 91.0 91.0 88.1 19.4 56.7 41.8 4.5 4.5 19.4 4.5

usability, and Web site maturity and weighting each of the first two dimensions by 40 percent and each of the last two dimensions by 10 percent to reflect their relative importance to e-participation. As indicated earlier, the first two dimensions are the most important in this research because they measure the development of e-participation on environmental topics. The other two are complementary dimensions that represent the capacity of the local government Web site to support e-participation developments. The analysis of the development of e-participation requires the study of these four dimensions, but with a greater weight in transparency and interactivity. Pina, Torres, and Royo (2007, 2009) previously used this weighting method. According to O’Sullivan, Rassel, and Berner (2007), index definitions should be consistent with past research unless a rationale exists for doing otherwise. Statistical Techniques

The research first carried out descriptive analysis to provide a general perspective on the use that European local governments that are signatories to the Aalborg Commitments make of the Internet in environment-related activities. Then, univariate and multivariate analyses analyzed which factors cause divergences in the level of development of e-participation. Besides the variables used to measure public administration style, urban vulnerability, external pressures, and local government environmental culture, the population of each city was also included as a control variable. Pearson correlations tested the influence of the continuous independent variables, while the Mann-Whitney U test assessed the influence of dichotomous independent variables. The independent variables for which a significant relationship was found with the e-participation indices were then included in the regression analysis (using the ordinary least squares estimation11). This multivariate analysis enabled us to study more deeply the determinants that influence the decision of the local governments analyzed to voluntarily implement environmental e-participation initiatives.

Analysis of Results Tables 1–3 show the average score of each dimension and the average frequency of implementation of each category of items or individual items. In the transparency dimension (table 1), the category related to service delivery, “citizen consequences,” is the most highly developed. High scores are also obtained for “general information about environmental issues” and “information about specific policies and initiatives.” Conversely, the items included in “indicators and data about sustainability” and “information about citizen participation processes in environmental issues,” which allow citizens to access updated data about the state of the environment and information about past and future participatory processes, present levels of implementation below 45 percent. Thus, the disclosure levels are lower when the information requires a greater effort of elaboration or when it is related to participatory processes. In regard to the interactivity dimension (table 2), an important drop in the global mean can be seen (39.2 percent versus 71.2 percent for transparency). The categories related to the possibility of obtaining information from the environment department and the development of e-services are the most highly developed, with average scores of 68.1 percent and 67.2 percent, respectively. The least developed groups of items are those related to the existence of projects with online participation (9.3 percent), formal initiatives to participate in sustainability plans and environmental regulations (25.4 percent), and the possibility of receiving periodic information about environmental topics (29.9 percent). The categories

“initiatives to promote responsible behavior” and “initiatives to allow citizens to express their opinion regarding sustainability” obtain intermediate scores of around 45 percent. Again, important variations in the categories exist, with a sharp decrease in those that imply opening the debate to the citizens (e-rulemaking and e-petitions) and the existence of projects with online participation. Similar results can be found in the usability and Web site maturity dimensions (table 3). Usability shows a high degree of development in technical items (search engine, homogeneity of subpages, and site map) but low percentages of development in items that enhance the accessibility of Web sites and bring about social inclusion, such as text-only versions, audio access for the visually impaired, different languages, or compliance with international accessibility standards. Likewise, in the Web site maturity dimension, the technical items (no broken links, last update) and those related to service delivery (credit card payments, secure servers for transactions, private areas, digital signature) are the most developed, whereas the items related to innovation and citizen participation, such as live broadcasts of important speeches or events, interactive database of environmental indicators, indicators downloadable in Microsoft Excel format, audio/video files for environment-related activities, and the possibility of commenting on them, show the lowest scores. The average total score of the sample is 55.7 percent (see table 4), showing a moderate degree of development of e-participation among the biggest European cities that have signed the Aalborg

Table 4 Ranking of Cities and Scores of E-Participation Dimensions (percent) City Hamburg Leicester Malmö Ferrara Stockholm Heidelberg Göteborg Aberdeen Kaiserslautern Barcelona Neu-Ulm Freiburg Aalborg Almada Norrköping Glasgow Kristiansand Paris Edinburgh Vasteras Odense Reggio Emilia Brussels Zaragoza Jönköping Rome Kolding Umea Vienna Växjö Seville Stavanger Trondheim Turku

Country GER UK SWE ITA SWE GER SWE UK GER SPA GER GER DEN POR SWE UK NOR FRA UK SWE DEN ITA BEL SPA SWE ITA DEN SWE AUT SWE SPA NOR NOR FIN

Trans. 94.4 94.4 85.9 90.1 85.9 91.5 87.3 93.0 91.5 93.0 91.5 95.8 91.5 88.7 76.1 91.5 77.5 86.6 83.1 87.3 87.3 90.1 80.3 84.5 76.1 83.1 76.1 81.7 73.2 77.5 84.5 78.9 78.9 81.7

Inter. 63.8 57.5 61.3 60.0 45.0 48.8 55.0 53.8 50.0 47.5 51.3 48.8 50.0 46.3 65.0 46.3 51.3 42.5 45.0 41.3 42.5 46.3 41.3 38.8 60.0 46.3 48.8 40.0 40.0 41.3 38.8 35.0 36.3 42.5

Usab. 72.2 88.9 88.9 66.7 100.0 94.4 88.9 77.8 83.3 72.2 83.3 83.3 94.4 72.2 83.3 66.7 83.3 72.2 88.9 77.8 72.2 44.4 94.4 72.2 50.0 44.4 61.1 77.8 94.4 77.8 55.6 83.3 83.3 61.1

Mat. 57.1 57.1 64.3 57.1 100.0 64.3 57.1 50.0 64.3 78.6 57.1 50.0 50.0 64.3 28.6 57.1 64.3 71.4 57.1 64.3 57.1 57.1 50.0 64.3 28.6 57.1 57.1 50.0 64.3 50.0 50.0 57.1 50.0 35.7

Total 76.2 75.3 74.2 72.4 72.4 72.0 71.5 71.5 71.4 71.3 71.2 71.1 71.1 67.6 67.6 67.5 66.2 66.0 65.8 65.6 64.9 64.7 63.1 63.0 62.3 61.9 61.7 61.5 61.2 60.3 59.9 59.6 59.4 59.4

City Bologna Nantes St. Gallen Madrid Riga Geneva Malaga Lahti Tartu Genoa Kaunas Hämeenlinna Reykjavik Orleans Tallin St. Etienne Pamplona Naples Palermo Kotka Tampere Halandri Coimbra Alytus Cornellá Patras Trikala Bourgas Sofia Ponta Delgada Narva Ancona Thessaloniki Mean

Country ITA FRA SWI SPA LAT SWI SPA FIN EST ITA LIT FIN ICE FRA EST FRA SPA ITA ITA FIN FIN GRE POR LIT SPA GRE GRE BUL BUL POR EST ITA GRE

Trans. 83.1 78.9 87.3 78.9 76.1 85.9 80.3 76.1 59.2 76.1 63.4 77.5 71.8 67.6 53.5 60.6 69.0 57.7 71.8 66.2 52.1 26.8 50.7 46.5 45.1 26.8 29.6 29.6 36.6 39.4 22.5 11.3 1.4 71.2

Inter. 33.8 37.5 33.8 30.0 42.5 32.5 33.8 33.8 50.0 38.8 42.5 26.3 31.3 25.0 40.0 31.3 25.0 28.8 26.3 21.3 23.8 40.0 26.3 27.5 25.0 33.8 42.5 33.8 23.8 12.5 20.0 7.5 17.5 39.2

Usab. 55.6 55.6 55.6 66.7 38.9 44.4 33.3 44.4 38.9 22.2 50.0 50.0 50.0 72.2 50.0 61.1 50.0 50.0 27.8 50.0 66.7 66.7 33.3 50.0 55.6 61.1 22.2 50.0 27.8 38.9 16.7 22.2 11.1 61.2

Mat. 64.3 64.3 42.9 71.4 57.1 35.7 57.1 50.0 57.1 50.0 57.1 50.0 50.0 57.1 64.3 50.0 50.0 71.4 42.9 35.7 35.7 64.3 50.0 28.6 35.7 64.3 50.0 42.9 64.3 57.1 42.9 50.0 35.7 54.4

Total 58.7 58.5 58.3 57.4 57.0 55.4 54.7 53.4 53.3 53.1 53.1 51.5 51.2 50.0 48.8 47.8 47.6 46.7 46.3 43.6 40.6 39.8 39.1 37.4 37.2 36.7 36.1 34.6 33.4 30.4 23.0 14.7 12.2 55.7

Note: Mean, maximum, and minimum in bold.

E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed? 93

Commitments. The transparency of local governments about interdimensions, although higher in transparency and usability. These nal works and decision processes dealing with procedures to reach results show that the signing of the Aalborg Commitments has not environmental commitments is the dimension promoted convergence in the level of use of that scores the highest average value (71.2 e-participation in environmental issues at the These results show that some, percent). On the contrary, the possibility of local level in Europe. The results also suggest but not all, variables from the citizens interacting online with the correthat in order to improve their e-participation sponding local government department is the offerings, most cities are promoting the develfour areas—public administradimension with the lowest score, only 39.2 opment of transparency and usability (the tion style, urban vulnerability, percent. The other two dimensions, usability dimensions that require less effort and cost), external pressures, and local and sophistication of the Web site, have values creating great differences in the development government environmental quite close to the average e-participation score. of these two dimensions in comparison with culture—are related to develinteractivity and maturity. opments in e-participation, Looking at the data from the individual cities (table 4), most local governments obtain especially to the key dimensions Tables 5 and 6 include the results of the transparency scores of more than 75 percent of this study: the total, transpar- univariate analyses. Table 5 shows a positive (44 local governments). On the contrary, the correlation between the total e-participation ency, and interactivity scores. maximum score obtained in interactivity is index and the population growth rate, tourist 65 percent, and only 12 local governments nights per year, the level of Internet access, obtain scores over 50 percent in this dimension. The differand the level of development of e-environment policies at the central ences between the minimum and maximum are great in the four level. While transparency shows a similar behavior, interactivity is not related to tourist nights per year. Usability is related to the same variables, except for tourist nights, and with the addition of tertiary Table 5 Pearson Correlations (continuous independent variables) education. Web site maturity only shows a relationship with three Transp. Interact. Usability Maturity Total variables: population growth, tourist nights, and population. The Population density –0.136 –0.133 –0.099 0.101 –0.134 results of the Mann-Whitney tests show that public administration Population growth rate 0.324** 0.296** 0.362** 0.311* 0.377** style, ICLEI membership, and having a Covenant of Mayors plan (% 2001–11) all have a positive and significant correlation with the total, transpar% Tertiary education 0.116 0.115 0.279* 0.052 0.155 % Internet access in the 0.568** 0.373** 0.621** 0.000 0.564** ency, and interactivity e-participation indices (see table 6). None of region the dichotomous independent variables, except public administration Tourist nights per year 0.373** 0.203 0.264 0.424** 0.373** style, is related to usability, and none of them with Web site maturity. (log) (N = 48) National e-environment Population (log)

0.485** 0.203

0.306* 0.126

0.550** 0.035

0.020 0.434**

0.482** 0.208

** Significant at the 1% level; * significant at the 5% level.

These results show that some, but not all, variables from the four areas—public administration style, urban vulnerability, external

Table 6 Mann-Whitney Tests (dichotomous independent variables) Independent Variable Public administration style Z Asymptotic significance Anglo, Nordic, Germanic (means) Napoleonic, Eastern European (means) Coastal location Z Asymptotic significance Coastal city (means) Inland city (means) ICLEI membership Z Asymptotic significance Members (means) Not members (means) Covenant of Mayors plan Z Asymptotic significance Action plan submitted (means) Not submitted† (means) Green Capital Award Z Asymptotic significance Applicant, finalist, or winning cities (means) Not applicant cities (means) **Significant at the 1% level; *significant at the 5% level. † Not submitted or not adhering to the Covenant of Mayors initiative.

94

Public Administration Review • January | February 2014

Transp.

Interact.

Usability

Maturity

Total

4.009 0.000** 83.1 61.0

3.557 0.000** 44.9 34.3

4.860 0.000** 75.1 42.9

1.043 0.297 53.0 55.6

4.489 0.000** 64.0 48.6

1.010 0.313 67.7 74.0

0.095 0.925 38.6 39.6

0.443 0.658 59.3 62.8

0.026 0.979 55.0 53.9

0.340 0.734 54.0 57.1

2.083 0.037* 76.5 66.6

2.235 0.025* 42.3 36.5

1.483 0.138 65.8 57.3

0.669 0.0503 56.2 52.3

2.263 0.024* 59.7 52.3

2.480 0.013** 78.7 65.1

3.023 0.002** 44.0 35.2

1.019 0.308 64.4 58.6

1.762 0.078 57.6 51.7

2.812 0.005** 61.3 51.2

1.933 0.053 81.3 67.5

0.609 0.543 41.3 38.4

1.349 0.177 67.6 58.8

1.586 0.113 57.9 53.1

1.754 0.079 61.6 53.5

Table 7 Standardized Regression Coefficients and Statistical Significance Dependent Variable VIF Constant Public administration style Population growth rate % Internet access in the region Tourist nights per year (log) National e-environment ICLEI membership Covenant of Mayors plan submitted R2 Model significance (F statistic) N

Transp.

3.310 1.365 3.149 1.383 1.842 1.179 1.339

–45.887 0.085 0.077 0.398* 0.244* 0.055 0.003 0.220 0.483 5.331*** 48

Interact. 34.696* 0.443** 0.078 0.104 0.003 –0.149 0.112 0.462*** 0.529 6.414*** 48

Usability

Maturity

Total

–76.612 0.103 0.091 0.492*** 0.231* 0.128 0.077 –0.053 0.575 7.722*** 48

–1.083 –0.413* 0.236 0.292 0.368** –0.072 0.049 0.003 0.318 2.661** 48

–12.246 0.179 0.107 0.380** 0.218* –0.003 0.055 0.281** 0.593 8.318*** 48

***p < .01; **p < .05; *p < .10.

pressures, and local government environmental culture—are related to developments in e-participation, especially to the key dimensions of this study: the total, transparency, and interactivity scores. In order to show whether these factors are driving the development of local governments in environmental e-participation initiatives, regression analysis has been applied. Five regression analyses were run, one per e-participation score, taking the scores in table 4 as dependent variables. As table 7 shows, all of the models are statistically significant, the signs of the significant coefficients are in the expected direction, and high R2 coefficients are obtained (ranging from 0.32 to 0.59).12 The variables that explain the total environmental e-participation index of the cities are tourist nights, the level of Internet access in the region, and having a Covenant of Mayors plan. Therefore, the implementation of e-participation in environmental issues is driven by a combination of external pressures and local government environmental culture. However, important insights are obtained by analyzing the influence of the independent variables on transparency and interactivity separately. External pressures, in particular the Internet access and tourist nights variables, influence the transparency of local government environmental Web sites. Cities seem to be interested in creating a good image for visitors who may use the municipal Web site to look for information about the city they plan to visit. Similar reasoning can be used to explain the influence of the level of Internet access in the region, as it reflects potential visits to the Web site by local residents. Local government environmental culture (represented by having a Covenant of Mayors plan) and public administration style influence the interactivity of the environmental section of the local government Web site, confirming what other studies about the use of new technologies have concluded in different areas of public management. To summarize, these empirical results provide support for propositions 1 (public administration style explains the level of interactivity of environmental Web sites) and 4 (local government environmental culture, measured by the Covenant of Mayors plan, explains both the level of interactivity and the total score). In regard to proposition 3 (external pressures), it has been found to explain a higher disclosure of environmental information (information-transparency side of citizen participation) but not the consultation-active participation side of citizen participation. Finally, no empirical evidence supporting proposition 2 (urban vulnerability) has been found.

Discussion This article analyzed the level of development of environmental e-participation initiatives in European local governments that were signatories to the Aalborg Commitments. Results show that, in general terms, the use of environmental e-participation initiatives is still in its infancy in these presumably committed cities. Membership in some environmental networks frequently results in symbolic adoption because of the minimal costs associated with membership and the lack of follow-through actions, which makes it easy for weakly committed cities to join (Krause 2012). The total e-participation average (55.7 percent) indicates a low level of development among cities that are interested in environmental topics and citizen participation. Furthermore, results show important variations among signatory cities. This suggests that becoming a signatory to the Aalborg Commitments has not fostered convergence in the development of e-participation in environment-related topics and that other variables need to be studied to understand the developments in this area. Similar results were obtained by Krause (2011) and Wang et al. (2012) when analyzing membership in climate protection networks in the United States. It could be argued that signing the Aalborg Commitments, in some cases, is just a symbolic act to present an image of modernity, global citizenship, and commitment to the environment and citizen participation but without promoting significant changes in government-to-citizen relationships. A further objective was to see whether e-participation in environmental issues was being used only to inform citizens about policies and practices (transparency) or also to promote debate and active participation (interactivity). The results show that, similar to other citizen participation studies (Yetano, Royo, and Acerete 2010), the developments in e-participation are higher in transparency. However, it is noticeable that when this information requires a greater effort from the local government, the level of disclosure decreases. The level of development of interactivity and citizen dialogue is much smaller. The offer of real participative projects, up-to-date indicators, or e-petition initiatives is hardly present. These findings are consistent with previous research (Bonsón et al. 2012; Coursey and Norris 2008; Norris and Reddick 2013), indicating that local e-government is mainly informational, with some transactions but virtually no indication of the high-level functions predicted at the theoretical level.

E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed? 95

The creation of a true e-dialogue seems to for e-participation. Thus, e-government is The creation of a true e-dialogue confirmed as mainly an add-on to traditional remain a pending issue for European local seems to remain a pending governments, even in local governments that government-to-citizen relationships (Coursey are presumably committed to promoting and Norris 2008). issue for European local govcitizen participation in environmental topics. ernments, even in local govAs Romero-Lankao (2012) argues, given the Finally, the limitations of this study should ernments that are presumably complexity of the interconnected processes be acknowledged and the avenues for further committed to promoting citizen research indicated. As in all Web content involved in the relationships between cities participation in environmental and the environment, it is not surprising that analyses, this study is just a snapshot of local topics. local authorities tend to move toward rhetoric government practices at a specific moment in rather than meaningful responses. As a contime, and future research should update the sequence, it does not seem that the Internet findings obtained here. Future studies could is going to lead to a revolution in government-to-citizen relationcompare cities that are members of environmental associations with ships or to a convergence in governance styles and decision-making nonmembers to clarify the effects of membership. Perhaps the main structures (at least in the short term). Thus, the theoretical claims extension for future research should be a greater emphasis on the that indicate that the Internet is going to foster a revitalization of real impact of environmental e-participation projects, reinforcing the public sphere must be taken with caution. the qualitative analysis of the specific online initiatives of the local entities and the changes in governmental actions resulting from the The article also aimed to identify the factors that foster the developuse of e-participation tools. ment of e-participation in environmental topics. These factors are Conclusions classified into four areas: public administration style, urban vulnerLocal governments have adopted a narrow approach to the impleability, external pressures, and local government environmental mentation of environmental e-participation initiatives, using their culture. Overall, the findings confirm that e-participation is a mulWeb sites mainly as a public relations tool. As a consequence, they tifaceted concept, with different perspectives whose development is are missing out on opportunities to make use of the Internet to driven by different rationales. Empirical results show that although promote e-participation and citizen engagement in environmental some correlation exists between public administration style and protection. All of this shows that previous studies focusing only on the development of the e-participation indices, this variable is only membership in environmental associations explanatory for interactivity in the regression may have overlooked the real commitments analysis. This suggests that the steps toward Local governments have resulting from these memberships. As memreal e-participation are only taken by local adopted a narrow approach to bership does not equal action, it is necessary governments that have a public administrathe implementation of envito evaluate local government developments tion style that is more friendly toward citizen so as to identify best practices and determine ronmental e-participation participation, which confirms the findings of García-Sánchez, Rodríguez-Domínguez, and initiatives, using their Web sites local governments’ levels of commitment. Gallego-Álvarez (2011). mainly as a public relations Legislators and environmental associations tool. As a consequence, they are need to take additional steps to foster action. In regard to urban vulnerability, our results missing out on opportunities to Initially, membership seemed to be enough show that it does not explain developments make use of the Internet to pro- to promote environmental awareness and has in e-participation related to environmental mote e-participation and citizen been fruitful in diffusing the importance of protection, which is consistent with Portney environmental protection. But now, further (2013). External pressures have a greater engagement in environmental initiatives, which may include incentives, influence on the disclosure of environmental protection. more specific guidelines or requirements, and information (information-transparency side follow-through actions, are needed. Future of citizen participation) than on the consulresearch should try to shed light on which measures are more effectation-active participation side. These external pressures seem to tive to achieve in-depth changes within local governments. be favoring a narrow approach to the implementation of environmental e-participation initiatives, centered more on the diffusion Acknowledgments of information than on really promoting the active participation of This study was carried out with the financial support of the Spanish citizens in environmental policies and processes. National Research and Development Plan through research project EC02010-17463 (ECON-FEDER) and of the European Science With regard to local government environmental culture, only local Foundation/European Collaborative Research Projects through governments with an active commitment (having submitted the project EUI2008-03788. Covenant of Mayors plan) show greater developments in interactivity and higher total e-participation scores. Overall, these results are Notes an example of “politics as usual” in the adoption of new technolo1. Earth Summit in Rio (1992), Kyoto Protocol (1997), Copenhagen Climate gies, as local governments that are traditionally more concerned Change Conference (2009), and Rio+20 Conference (2012). about citizen participation and environmental issues are those that 2. The first commitment (governance) deals with participatory democracy, while make more use of new technologies to promote environmentally other commitments deal with environmental protection, including the second friendly behaviors among citizens and offer more possibilities 96

Public Administration Review • January | February 2014

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

(local management toward sustainability), fourth (responsible consumption and lifestyle choices), and sixth (better mobility, less traffic). A full description of the Aalborg Commitments can be found at http://www.sustainablecities.eu. To test this proposition, a dummy variable is defined the takes the value of 1 for Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, and Germanic cities and 0 otherwise. This variable is measured as the percentage of variation of the city’s population during a 10-year period (2001–2011). Data obtained from http://www. citypopulation.de. It is not possible to obtain data on Internet access at the city level. Internet access at the regional level is taken from the Eurostat database. To measure the level of pressure from the central government, the e-environment scores of the United Nations E-Government Survey have been used (2012, 135). By 2005, the United Nations Environmental Programme listed more than 200 (UNEP 2005). The Covenant of Mayors is a European Commission initiative launched in January 2008 that asks mayors to compromise to cut carbon emissions by at least 20 percent by 2020 (http://www.eumayors.eu/). In Italy and Spain, the inclusion of all of the signatory cities with more than 50,000 inhabitants would have distorted the composition of the sample. According to García-Sánchez and Prado-Lorenzo (2008), the number of municipalities that have signed on in Italy and Spain is too high to be assumed realistically. The public management literature (Hood 1995; Pollitt, Van Thiel, and Homburg 2007; Torres 2004) often distinguishes Southern European countries for adopting symbolic policies. In these two countries, only the five most populated cities have been included, together with some other cities with a good reputation regarding sustainability and environmental policies. Most of the items have been derived from the lists of the Aalborg Commitments and the European Commission framework Cohesion Policy and Cities (European Commission 2006) and refer specifically to the environment. Other relevant items usually included in local governments’ Web site content analyses have also been included. Because of space requirements, tables 1 and 2 only include a summary of the items analyzed. The complete tables with data on individual items are available from the authors upon request. The results of the regression analysis are almost the same if all possible independent variables are included in the model. However, the exclusion of the independent variables with no significant relationship found in the univariate analysis is preferred because of higher VIF coefficients that could suggest the existence of multicollinearity problems when including all the variables. As can be seen in table 7, only 48 cities have been included in the regression analysis. The reason is that the variable for tourist nights per year has missing data for 19 cities.

References Alió, M. Àngels, and Albert Gallego. 2002. Civic Entities in Environmental Local Planning: A Contribution from a Participative Research in the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona. GeoJournal 56(2): 123–34. Allegretti, Giovanni, and Carsten Herzberg. 2004. Participatory Budgets in Europe: Between Efficiency and Growing Local Democracy. Amsterdam: Transnational Institute. http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/archives/reports/newpol/participatory.pdf [accessed November 7, 2013]. Anguelovski, Isabelle, and JoAnn Carmin. 2011. Something Borrowed, Everything New: Innovation and Institutionalization in Urban Climate Governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 3(3): 169–75. Astleithner, Florentina, and Alexander Hamedinger. 2003. Urban Sustainability as a New Form of Governance: Obstacles and Potentials in the Case of Vienna. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences 16(1): 51–75. Betsill, Michele M. 2001. Mitigating Climate Change in U.S. Cities: Opportunities and Obstacles. Local Environment 6(4): 393–406.

Bonsón, Enrique, Lourdes Torres, Sonia Royo, and Francisco Flores. 2012. Local E-Government 2.0: Social Media and Corporate Transparency in Municipalities. Government Information Quarterly 29(2): 123–32. Brainard, Lori A., and John G. McNutt. 2010. Virtual Government–Citizen Relations: Informational, Transactional, or Collaborative? Administration & Society 42(7): 836–58. Brody, Samuel D., Sammy Zahran, Himanshu Grover, and Arnold Vedlitz. 2008. A Spatial Analysis of Local Climate Change Policy in the United States: Risk, Stress, and Opportunity. Landscape and Urban Planning 87(1): 33–41. Buček, Ján, and Brian Smith. 2000. New Approaches to Local Democracy: Direct Democracy, Participation and the “Third Sector.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 18(1): 3–17. Burby, Raymond, J. 2003. Making Plans that Matter: Citizen Involvement and Government Action. Journal of the American Planning Association 69(1): 33–49. Cooper, Stuart, and Graham Pearce. 2011. Climate Change Performance Measurement, Control and Accountability in English Local Authority Areas. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 24(8): 1097–1118. Cooper, Terry L., Thomas A. Bryer, and Jack W. Meek. 2006. Citizen-Centered Collaborative Public Management. Special issue, Public Administration Review 66: 76–88. Cornwall, Andrea. 2008. Democratising Engagement: What the UK Can Learn from International Experience. London: Demos. Correa-Ruiz, Carmen, and José Mariano Moneva-Abadía. 2011. Special Issue on “Social Responsibility Accounting and Reporting in Times of Sustainability Downturn/Crisis.” Supplement, Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review 14: 187–211. Coursey, David, and Donald F. Norris. 2008. Models of E-Government: Are They Correct? An Empirical Assessment. Public Administration Review 68(3): 523–36. European Commission. 2006. Cohesion Policy and Cities: The Urban Contribution to Grow and Jobs in the Regions. http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/regional_ policy/review_and_future/g24239_en.htm [accessed November 7, 2013]. Feichtinger, Judith, and Michael Pregernig. 2005. Participation and/or/versus Sustainability? Tensions between Procedural and Substantive Goals in Two Local Agenda 21 Processes in Sweden and Austria. European Environment 15(4): 212–27. Fung, Archon. 2006. Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Special issue, Public Administration Review 66: 66–75. García-Sánchez, Isabel M., and Jose-Manuel Prado-Lorenzo. 2008. Determinant Factors in the Degree of Implementation of Local Agenda 21 in the European Union. Sustainable Development 16(1): 17–34. García-Sánchez, Isabel-María, Luis Rodríguez-Domínguez, and Isabel GallegoÁlvarez. 2011. The Relationship between Political Factors and the Development of E-Participatory Government. Information Society 27(4): 233–51. Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan G., and Eric W. Welch. 2012. Developing and Testing a Theoretical Framework for Computer-Mediated Transparency of Local Governments. Public Administration Review 72(4): 562–71. Hood, Christopher. 1995. The New Public Management in the 1980s—Variations on a Theme. Accounting Organizations and Society 20(2–3): 93–109. Kakabadse, Andrew, Nada K. Kakabadse, and Alexander Kouzmin. 2003. Reinventing the Democratic Governance Project through Information Technology? Public Administration Review 63(1): 44–60. Krause, Rachel M. 2011. Symbolic or Substantive Policy? Measuring the Extent of Local Commitment to Climate Protection. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 29(1): 46–62. ———. 2012. An Assessment of the Impact that Participation in Local Climate Networks Has on Cities’ Implementation of Climate, Energy, and Transportation Policies. Review of Policy Research 29(5): 585–604.

E-Participation and Environmental Protection: Are Local Governments Really Committed? 97

Mahrer, Harald, and Robert Krimmer. 2005. Towards the Enhancement of E-Democracy: Identifying the Notion of the “Middleman Paradox.” Information Systems Journal 15(1): 27–42. Martin, Steve, and Annette Boaz. 2000. Public Participation and Citizen-Centred Local Government: Lessons from the Best Value and Better Government for Older People Pilot Programs. Public Money and Management 20(2): 47–53. Musso, Juliet, Christopher Weare, and Matt Hale. 2000. Designing Web Technologies for Local Governance Reform: Good Management or Good Democracy? Political Communication 17(1): 1–19. Norris, Donald F., and Christopher G. Reddick. 2013. Local E-Government in the United States: Transformation or Incremental Change? Public Administration Review 73(1): 165–75. Núñez, Jorge, Monica Alessi, and Christian Egenhofer. 2010. Greening EU Cities: The Emerging EU Strategy to Address Climate Change. Brussels: Center for European Policy Studies. http://www.ceps.be/book/greening-eu-cities-emerging-eu-strategy-address-climate-change [accessed November 7, 2013] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2001. Citizens as Partners. Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making. Paris: OECD. ———. 2010. Cities and Climate Change. Paris: OECD. ———. 2011. Greening Household Behaviour: The Role of Public Policy. Paris: OECD. Ostrom, Elinor. 2009. A Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change. Washington, DC: World Bank. O’Sullivan, Elizabethann, Gary R. Rassel, and Maureen Berner. 2007. Research Methods for Public Administration. 5th ed. New York: Longman. Pina, Vicente, Lourdes Torres, and Sonia Royo. 2007. Are ICTs Improving Transparency and Accountability in the EU Regional and Local Governments? An Empirical Study. Public Administration 85(2): 449–72. ———. 2009. E-Government Evolution in EU Local Governments: A Comparative Perspective. Online Information Review 33(6): 1137–68. ———. 2010. Is E-Government Promoting Convergence Towards More Accountable Local Governments? International Public Management Journal 13(4): 350–80. Pollitt, Christopher, Sandra Van Thiel, and Vincent Homburg, eds. 2007. New Public Management in Europe: Adaptation and Alternatives. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Portney, Kent. 2005. Civic Engagement and Sustainable Cities in the United States. Public Administration Review 65(5): 579–91. ———. 2013. Taking Sustainable Cities Seriouly. Economic Development, the Environment, and Quality of Life in American Cities. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Portney, Kent E., and Jeffrey M. Berry. 2010. Participation and the Pursuit of Sustainability in U.S. Cities. Urban Affairs Review 46(1): 119–39. Prado-Lorenzo, Jose-Manuel, and Isabel M. García-Sánchez. 2009. Efecto de las estructuras organizativa y política del gobierno municipal en la organización social de la Agenda 21 Local [Effect of Organizational and Political Structures of Municipal Government in the Social Organization of Local Agenda 21]. Revista de Economía Mundial 21: 195–226. Rauschmayer, Felix, Sybille van den Hove, and Thomas Koetz. 2009. Participation in EU Biodiversity Governance: How Far beyond Rhetoric? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 27(1): 42–59. Reddel, Tim. 2002. Beyond Participation, Hierarchies, Management and Markets: “New” Governance and Place Policies. Australian Journal of Public Administration 61(1): 50–63.

98

Public Administration Review • January | February 2014

Romero-Lankao, Patricia. 2012. Governing Carbon and Climate in the Cities: An Overview of Policy and Planning Challenges and Options. European Planning Studies 20(1): 7–26. Royo, Sonia, Ana Yetano, and Basilio Acerete. 2011. Citizen Participation in German and Spanish Local Governments: A Comparative Study. International Journal of Public Administration 34(3): 139–50. Sheppard, Stephen R. J., Alison Shaw, David Flanders, Sarah Burch, Arnim Wiek, Jeff Carmichael, John Robinson, and Stewart Cohen. 2011. Future Visioning of Local Climate Change: A Framework for Community Engagement and Planning with Scenarios and Visualisation. Futures 43(4): 400–412. Solomon, Jill F. 2011. Private Climate Change Reporting: An Emerging Discourse of Risk and Opportunity? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 24(8): 1119–48. Summerville, Jennifer A., Barbara A. Adkins, and Gavin Kendall. 2008. Community Participation, Rights, and Responsibilities: The Governmentality of Sustainable Development Policy in Australia. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 26(4): 696–712. Taylor, Marilyn. 2007. Community Participation in the Real World: Opportunities and Pitfalls in New Governance Spaces. Urban Studies 44(2): 297–317. Torres, Lourdes. 2004. Trajectories in Public Administration Reforms in European Continental Countries. Australian Journal of Public Administration 63(3): 99–112. Torres, Lourdes, Vicente Pina, and Basilio Acerete. 2006. E-Governance Developments in European Union Cities: Reshaping Government’s Relationship with Citizens. Governance 19(2): 277–302. United Nations. 2012. United Nations E-Government Survey 2012. E-Government for the People. http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/publications/connecting-governments-to-citizens.html [accessed November 7, 2013]. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). 2011. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2011 Revision. http://esa.un.org/unup/ [accessed November 7, 2013]. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2005. Register of International Treaties and Other Agreements in the Field of the Environment. Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP. Urban Ecosystem Europe. 2007. An Integrated Assessment on the Sustainability of 32 European Cities. http://iume.ew.eea.europa.eu/reports/ecourb-ue2007finalreport-en7.pdf. [accessed November 7, 2013]. Wang, XiaoHu, Christopher V. Hawkins, Nick Lebredo, and Evan M. Berman. 2012. Capacity to Sustain Sustainability: A Study of U.S. Cities. Public Administration Review 72(6): 841–53. Yang, Kaifeng. 2005. Public Administrators’ Trust in Citizens: A Missing Link in Citizen Involvement Efforts. Public Administration Review 65(3): 273–85. Yang, Kaifeng, and Kathe Callahan. 2007. Citizen Involvement Efforts and Bureaucratic Responsiveness: Participatory Values, Stakeholder Pressures, and Administrative Practicality. Public Administration Review 67(2): 249–64. Yang, Kaifeng, and Marc Holzer. 2006. The Performance–Trust Link: Implications for Performance Measurement. Public Administration Review 66(1): 114–26. Yetano, Ana, Sonia Royo, and Basilio Acerete. 2010. What Is Driving the Increasing Presence of Citizen Participation Initiatives? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 28(5): 783–802. Zahran, Sammy, Samuel D. Brody, Arnold Vedlitz, Himanshu Grover, and Caitlyn Miller. 2008. Vulnerability and Capacity: Explaining Local Commitment to Climate-Change Policy. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 26(3): 544–562.