Patrick Meier (PhD)
Patrick is an internationally recognized thought leader on the application of new technologies for crisis early warning, humanitarian response, human rights and civil resistance. He currently serves as Director of Crisis Mapping at Ushahidi and previously co-directed Harvard's Program on Crisis Mapping and Early Warning. He also consults extensively for international organizations in Africa, Asia and Europe. Patrick holds a PhD from The Fletcher School, a Pre-Doctoral Fellowship from Stanford and an MA from Columbia University. He was born & raised in Africa.
Follow on Twitter: @patrickmeier-
-
Follow me on RSS or enter your email address below to receive blog posts:
Topics
- Conferences
- Crisis Mapping
- Crowdsourcing
- Digital Activism
- Early Warning
- Humanitarian Tech
- iRevolution
- Mobile Banking
- New Media
- Satellite Imagery
- Ushahidi
-
Popular Posts
- Stranger than Fiction: A Few Words About An Ethical Compass for Crisis Mapping
- Bio
- Drones for Human Rights: Brilliant or Foolish? (Updated)
- On Crowdsourcing, Crisis Mapping and Data Protection Standards
- Dissertation
-
Lastest Posts
- Stranger than Fiction: A Few Words About An Ethical Compass for Crisis Mapping
- Drones for Human Rights: Brilliant or Foolish? (Updated)
- On Crowdsourcing, Crisis Mapping and Data Protection Standards
- Some Thoughts on Real-Time Awareness for Tech@State
- How to Crowdsource Better Governance in Authoritarian States
- Google Inc + World Bank = Empowering Citizen Cartographers?
- What do Travel Guides and Nazi Germany have to do with Crisis Mapping and Security?
- How Crisis Mapping Proved Henry Kissinger Wrong in Cambodia
- Time to #Occupy my #Holiday
- SMS for Violence Prevention: PeaceTXT International Launches in Kenya
- Amplifying Somali Voices Using SMS and a Live Map: #SomaliaSpeaks
- Why Bounded Crowdsourcing is Important for Crisis Mapping and Beyond
- Crowdsourcing vs Putin: “Mapping Dots is a Disease on the Map of Russia”
- Why Architecture and Calendars Are Trojan Horses for Repressive Regimes
- Information Forensics: Five Case Studies on How to Verify Crowdsourced Information from Social Media
- Beyond the Dot: Building Visual DNA for Crisis Mapping
- Using Ushahidi Data to Study the Micro-Dynamics of Violent Conflict
- Do “Liberation Technologies” Change the Balance of Power Between Repressive Regimes and Civil Society?
- My Opening Speech at CrisisMappers 2011 in Geneva
- Crowdsourcing Satellite Imagery Analysis for UNHCR-Somalia: Latest Results
Speaking Tour / Keynotes
Skoll World Forum 2011 - London
Club de Madrid 2011 - NYC
PopTech 2011 - Camedn
TEDx 2011 - SF
TEDx 2011 - KC
SxSW 2011 - Austin
CrowdConf 2011 - SF
Where 2.0 2011 - SF
Net Impact 2011 - Portland
Re:publica 2011 - Berlin
ICRC GC Forum 2011 - Geneva
Amnesty Int'l 2011 - SF
IPI World Congress 2011 - Taiwan
The Same Wavelength 2011 - London
LinuxConf 2011- Tokyo
Share 2011 - Belgrade
Golden Tag 2011 - Oslo
HAS 2011 - Boston
One World 2011 - Prague
Re:campaign 2011 - Berlin
Newseum 2011 - DC
MORE 25 2011 - Bermuda
PopTech 2010 - Camden
Where 2.0 2010 - SF
CrowdConf 2010 - SF
CGI-U 2010 - Miami
Mashable 2010 - NY
Twitter Chirp 2010 - SF
TEDx 2010 - SF
CrisisMappers 2010 - Boston
Foo Camp 2010 - Phoenix
Genocide Prevention - Cambodia
TechCamp 2010 - Santiago
PDF 2010 - Santiago
ValGEO 2010 - Milano
Liberation Tech 2010 - SF
Gov 2.0 Expo 2010 -DC
UN Global Pulse 2010 - Bellagio
ICT4D 2009 - Doha
LIFT 2009 - Geneva
CrisisMappers 2009 - Cleveland
ABWxD 2009 - Rhode Island
My Tweets
- PatrickMeier: Kamran Khan: Using big data on international air travel (13 billion passenger movements) to predict risks of disease outbreaks #DDD
- PatrickMeier: Dr Kulldorff talks "Space-Time Outbreak Detection" at #DDD. He was also as speaker at @CrisisMappers Conference in 2009 t.co/CURkXOQC
- PatrickMeier: Thx u4 the invite! RT @johnbrownstein: @PatrickMeier was a phenomenal opening keynote to our #DDD conference. Huge thanks for your insights!
- PatrickMeier: Could @BioCaster's automated 24/7 global media monitoring platform for public health hazards be used by @CrisisMappers & @SBTaskForce? #DDD
- PatrickMeier: Learning about new large scale participatory pandemic surveillance initiative https://t.co/n7oYum0J #DDD #Crowdsourcing #CrisisMapping
Favorites & Recent Reads
MacroWikinomics 2011
Locavesting 2011
What Technology Wants 2011
Digital Origins of Dictatorship & Democracy 2011
Switch 2010
Rework 2010
Cognitive Surplus 2010
The Daemon 2009
Here Comes Everybody 2008
The Starfish and the Spider 2006
Mapping Vulnerability 2004
Wasp 1999
Seeing like a State 1998Archives
Democratic Effects of the Internet: Latest Findings
Jacob Groshek from Iowa State University just published his large-N quantitative study on the “Democratic Effects of the Internet” in the International Communication Gazette. I’m particularly interested in this study given it’s overlap with my own dissertation research and recent panel at ISA 2009. So thanks to Jacob for publishing and to my colleague Lokman Tsui at the Berkman Center for letting me know about the article as soon as it came out.
Using macro-level panel data on 152 countries from 1994 to 2003 and multi regression models, Jacob found that “increased Internet diffusion was a meaningful predictor of more democratic regimes.” This democratic effect was greater in countries that were at least partially democratic where the Internet was more prevalent. In addition, the association between Internet diffusion and democracy was statistically significant in “developing countries where the average level of sociopolitical instability was much higher.”
The author thus concludes that policy makers should consider the democratic potential of the Internet but be mindful of unintended consequences in countries under authoritarian rule. In other words, “the democratic potential of the Internet is great, but that actual effects might be limited because Internet diffusion appears conditional upon national-level democracy itself.”
Introduction
While many like Al Gore have professed that information and communication technologies (ICTs) would “spread participatory democracy” and “forge a new Athenian age of democracy,” the lessons of history suggest otherwise. Media system dependence theory maintains that ICTs, “including the Internet, are unlikely to drastically alter asymmetric power and economic relations within and between countries specifically in the short term.”
Others counter that ICTs are “nonetheless vital to democracy and the process of democratization.”For example, both Jefferson and de Tocqueville remarked that a catalyst for American democracy was the free press. While most communication technologies over the last hundred years have failed to fulfill their predicted impact, the Internet is considered special and different. The Internet is “the most interactive and technologically sophisticated medium to date, which enhances user reflexitivity in terms of user participation and generated content and thus has a greater likelihood of affecting change.”
According to media system dependency theory, the framework used in this study, there are two scenarios in which media diffusion may demonstrate micro- and macro-level effects. First, the greater the centralization of specific information-delivery functions, the greater the societal dependency on that media. Second, “as media diffusion and dependency increase over time, the potential for mass media messages to achieve a broad range of cognitive, affective and behavioral effects [is] further increased when there is a high degree of structural instability in the society due to conflict and change.”
Data
The author selected 1994-2003 because “the public launch of the Internet is generally marked around 1994, following the introduction of the Mosaic web browser in 1993 and at the time of writing, 2003 was the latest available year for much of the data.”
- Socio-political variables included population, urbanism, education, resources, media development, sociopolitical instability, accountability of governors (democracy), gross national income (GNI) and the Human Development Index (HDI), which was included to place countries in developmental categories. While other studies use gross national product (GNP) per capita, Jacob employs GIN per capita, “which is a similar but updated version of GNP that has become the standard for measuring countries’ wealth.”
- For social instability measures, Jacob used the weighted conflict index found in the Bank’s Cross-Polity Time-Series Database, which represents “an index of domestic stress” used to “approximate domestric stress as a function of sociopolitical instaiblity. “In terms of this study, increased domestic stress was identified as one of the key sociopolitical conditions, namely instability, that might engender a greater democratic effect as a result of the increased diffusion of [...] media technologies.” This variable includes codings of assassinations, general strikes, guerrilla warfare, government crises, riots, revolutions, and anti-government desmonstrations.
- The ICT variables included in the study were Internet diffusion per 100 and a combined figure of televisions and radios divided by popluation figures available from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The author did not include newspaper figures because “recent trends in declining newspaper readership suggest newspaper circulation figures may no longer accurately represent mass media development.”
- The democracy data was drawn from the Polivy IV database, specifically the ‘Polity 2′ democracy score, which is “often recognized for its validity, sophistication and comprehensiveness.” Jacob also notes that factor analyses of the data showed that the Polity 2 scores “load highly (over .90 for all years in this study) with Freedom House (2005) government accountability figures, which have been used previously [...].” Note that Jacob used the Polity 2 score with a one-year time lag.
- The 152 countries were chosen on the basis of their inclusion in many existing databases. The author omitted countries if 15% or more of the data was missing for any category or year. For countries included with missing figures, “mean substitution at the country level was used for each missing case per variable.” It would be helpful if Jacob had noted the number of countries for which mean substitutions was used.
Binary regional and time operators were also added as part of specifying fixed effects regression models.” Like several previous studies, the author did not include government control of the press because an important collinearity problem with democracy measures. “
Method
Jacob used multiple regression models to test his hypothesis that Internet diffusion has democratic effects. a number of potential causal arguments. He also used fixed effects panel regression to control for time and region-specific effects, omitted variables bias and heteroskedasticity problems. “Specifically, the fixed effects models controlled for unobserved variables that differed across time but did not vary across state.”
Findings
The figure below fits a fractional polynomial (linear-log) regression line to a scatterplot of all countries for all years. Of the most non-democratic countries in 2003 (Belarus, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates), only Bahrain showed an increase in the Polity 2 democracy measure. In Belarus, the democracy measure fell dramatically during the 10-year time period despite the fact that the important increase in Internet users by 2003.
While Jacob doesn’t draw on the Open Net Initiative (ONI) research on censorship, the group’s 2008 empirical study “Access Denied” does demonstrate an important global rise in Internet filtering. In other words, repressive regimes are becoming increasingly savvier in their ability to regulate the impact Internet diffusion within their borders.
When taken together, Jacob’s findings suggest that “the democratizing effect of the Internet is severely limited among non-democratic countries.” In addition, Jacob’s results suggest that higher levels of sociopolitical instability in “developing countries proved to be just as important in cultivating a democratic effect as the increased diffusion of Internet.” Another interpretation might be that, “sociopolitical instability may contribute to more apparent levels of Internet effects, even when presented with seemingly inconsequential levels of diffusion” that characterize developing countries.”
This is a surprising finding regardless of the interpretation. At the same time, however, Jacob should have noted that empirical studies in the political science literature have debated the destabilization effects of democratization. See Mansfield and Snyder (2001) for example. In addition, the political transitions literature does note the importance of mass social protests and nonviolent civil resistance in sustainable transitions to democracy. See Stephan and Cherdowith (2008) and my recent findings on the impact of ICTs on the frequency of protests in repressive regimes.
Conclusion
Jacob’s empirical research is an important contribution to the study of ICTs and impact on society, both from a development context—developing versus developed countries—and regime type—democratic versus nondemocratic.
Patrick Philippe Meier
4 Responses to Democratic Effects of the Internet: Latest Findings
Pingback: culture, politics & the network environment « blah'g
Pingback: Latest Empirical Findings on Democratic Effects of the Internet | iRevolution
Pingback: Impact of Technology on Democracy and Activism: Findings from Multiple Statistical Studies | iRevolution
Pingback: Conversation, discovery and reputation: navigating the age of abundance « Planning in High Heels