Call for EOIs: New editorial roles at Q1 journal Policy & Internet

by Joanne Gray 14/04/2025

Policy & Internet is seeking expressions of interest (EOI) from academics interested in joining the editorial team to help lead the journal through its next phase of development.

by Joanne Gray 14/04/2025

Policy & Internet is a Q1 (Scimago) interdisciplinary journal exploring the societal implications of digital technologies and responses from governments, industry, communities and individuals. The journal was established at the University of Oxford in 2009, before moving to the University of Sydney in 2021 under the leadership of Associate Professor Jonathon Hutchinson. Working closely with the journal’s new Editor-in-Chief, Dr Joanne Gray, and Senior Editor, Milica Stilinovic, newly appointed Editors will be responsible for managing manuscript workflows, coordinating peer review, making editorial decisions, and shaping the intellectual direction of the journal. We welcome EOIs from scholars across disciplines, including early career researchers, who will be supported with mentorship in editorial processes, with a view to gaining important experience for long-term academic career progression. Indigenous scholars are also strongly encouraged to apply and will be given the opportunity to design and lead an editorial stream dedicated to Indigenous scholarship. Submit your EOI including a brief statement about your research expertise (~200 words) and CV (~2 pages) to j.gray@sydney.edu.au by COB Friday 23 May, 2025. This opportunity is currently open to University of Sydney academics only. About the journal Policy & Internet is a leading interdisciplinary journal exploring the societal implications of digital technologies and responses from governments, industry, communities and individuals. We explore both enduring concerns—such as privacy, digital divides and freedom of expression—and emerging issues such as misinformation, digital geopolitics and automation. We prioritise original research on how the Internet and digital technologies—everything from social media and AI to blockchain and virtual reality—reshape power, participation and everyday life. We welcome submissions from all disciplines to submit work that deepens understanding of the Internet and digital technologies, and the social, ethical, and political choices that shape them. For more, visit Wiley and the journal blog.

Articles from Policy & Internet

Q1 Journal Policy & Internet Announces New Editorial Team

by Joanne Gray 14/04/2025

Policy & Internet is pleased to announce an exciting transition in its editorial leadership for 2025.

by Joanne Gray 14/04/2025

A leading Q1 interdisciplinary journal, Policy & Internet explores the social implications of digital technologies and the diverse responses of governments, industries, communities, and individuals around the world. Established at the University of Oxford in 2009, the journal relocated to the University of Sydney in 2021 under the leadership of Associate Professor Jonathon Hutchinson. Under Hutchinson’s guidance, the journal has significantly expanded its quality, reach and impact—growing from an impact factor of 1.9 in 2019 to 4.1 in 2024. While Hutchinson will continue to contribute to the journal’s strategic direction as part of the editorial team, the role of Editor-in-Chief will now be held by Dr. Joanne Gray. Gray, who has served as Commissioning Editor since 2022, brings to the position deep expertise in digital technology policy and governance. She will be joined by Millica Sililinovic, who steps into the role of Senior Editor, and two new Regional Editors: Professor Admire Mare (University of Johannesburg), covering the African region, and Nadia Tjahja (United Nations University-CRIS, Belgium), covering Europe. Would you like to join the editorial team? Policy & Internet is currently inviting expressions of interest from University of Sydney academics to join the editorial team as Academic Editors. We encourage colleagues interested in contributing to this dynamic period of growth to apply—or nominate someone—today. See here for instructions on how to apply. Save the Date: Policy & Internet Conference Returns in 2026 The Policy & Internet Conference will return to the University of Sydney in 2026. We look forward to welcoming scholars, practitioners, and policymakers from across the globe to share new research and ideas on 30 September – 2 October 2026 at The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia. Stay up to date with conference and journal news by subscribing to our newsletter. Learn more about Policy & Internet at our journal and our blog.

Articles from Policy & Internet, Economics, Policy, Politics & Government

How Can Digitalisation Close the VAT Gap? Insights for Policymakers

by Hana Zídková 16/12/2024

By embracing digital transformation, policymakers can create more efficient, transparent, and fair tax systems that benefit both governments and taxpayers.

by Hana Zídková 16/12/2024

Close-up of a calculator and pen on a bar graph, representing finance and accounting.

The digitalisation of tax administration is a hot topic in the EU, with significant implications for VAT collection. Our recent study explores how the level of e-government, measured by the E-Government Development Index (EGDI), impacts VAT evasion, specifically the VAT gap, across EU Member States from 2003 to 2020. The findings reveal that higher levels of digitalisation in tax administration significantly reduce the VAT gap, highlighting the importance of digital transformation in public services. Why is this research important to policymakers? Here are three key elements that resonate with their needs: Enhanced Efficiency and Transparency: Digitalisation improves the efficiency of tax collection by reducing information asymmetry between taxpayers and tax authorities. This exchange leads to better compliance and less tax evasion. Policymakers can leverage these insights to advocate for more robust digital infrastructure in tax administration, ensuring that tax systems are transparent and efficient. Tailored Policy Measures: The study shows that the impact of digitalisation varies between original and new EU Member States. For instance, while digitalisation and corruption perception significantly affect the VAT gap in the original Member States, new Member States are more influenced by household consumption and standard VAT rates. This differentiation suggests that policymakers should tailor their digitalisation strategies to the specific needs and contexts of their countries Combatting Tax Evasion: The research underscores the role of digital tools in combatting VAT fraud, including carousel fraud. By implementing measures such as electronic invoicing and real-time transaction reporting, policymakers can significantly reduce opportunities for tax evasion. These tools not only enhance revenue collection but also build public trust in the tax system. The findings suggest that investing in digitalisation is not just a technological upgrade but a strategic move to enhance tax compliance and reduce evasion. Policymakers should focus on: Promoting digital literacy among taxpayers to ensure they can effectively use e-government services. Implementing comprehensive digital reporting systems to track transactions and detect fraud Customising digitalisation efforts…

Articles from Policy & Internet, Policy

Deep Fakes and the AI Act: an Important Signal or a Missed Opportunity?

by Mateusz Łabuz 16/12/2024

How are deepfakes regulated by the AI Act? What are the main shortcomings of the AI Act in regard to regulating deepfakes?

by Mateusz Łabuz 16/12/2024

A woman with digital code projections on her face, representing technology and future concepts.

The EU finally accepted the Artificial Intelligence Act, signaling its commitment to global AI governance. The regulation aims to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for AI, setting new standards that might serve as a global benchmark in the future. Creating clear and precise rules that would enable the implementation of efficient safeguards for citizens against the manipulative potential of technology was not an easy task, and the EU failed to avoid visible shortcomings. In my study “Deep Fakes and the Artificial Intelligence Act – an Important Signal or a Missed Opportunity?” I raise legitimate questions about the effectiveness of the solutions proposed by the EU in regard to crafting protection against harmful applications of deepfakes. I concentrated on two primary research questions: How are deepfakes regulated by the AI Act? What are the main shortcomings of the AI Act in regard to regulating deepfakes? The EU has taken an important step towards regulating deepfakes, but the proposed solutions are, in my opinion, just a transitional phase. They require clarification, standardization, and, above all, appropriate enforcement. Regulations on deepfakes have not been a priority for the regulatory framework crafted by the EU, but experience with synthetic media teaches us that strict provisions are necessary. Deep fakes can be harmful when misused. We have already experienced that, namely, with attempts to manipulate electoral processes, discrediting politicians, and creating non-consensual pornographic content. These are only selected examples from the entire list of malicious applications. The basis for regulating deepfakes is the protection of citizens against disinformation and a strong focus on strictly political processes. In my opinion, this is a mistake. Statistics on video deep fakes show that non-consensual pornography is a key application, disproportionately targeting women. It contributes not only to the victimization of thousands of female individuals but also to misogyny and deepening gender-based discrimination. Failure to address this issue is, in my opinion, the biggest shortcoming of regulating deepfakes in…

Articles from Policy & Internet, Governance & Security, Policy, Politics & Government

Mediated Trust: From the open Internet to artificial intelligence

by Terry Flew 16/12/2024

Trust is a critical driver for AI adoption. If people do not trust AI, they will be reluctant to use it, writes Professor Terry Flew.

by Terry Flew 16/12/2024

Abstract illustration of AI with silhouette head full of eyes, symbolizing observation and technology.

There has been a resurgence of interest in recent years in setting policies for digital platforms and the challenges of platform power. It has been estimated that there are over 120 public inquiries taking place across different nation‐states, as well as by supranational entities such as the United Nations and the European Union. Similarly, the current surge in enquiries, reviews and policy statements concerning artificial intelligence (AI), such as the Biden Administration’s Executive Order on Safe Secure and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in the U.S., the U.K.’s AI Safety Summit and the EU AI Act, also speak to this desire to put regulatory frameworks in place to steer the future development of digital technologies. The push for greater nation‐state regulation of digital platforms has occurred in the context of the platformisation of the internet, and the concentration of control over key functions of the digital economy by a relatively small number of global technology corporations. This concentration of power and control is clearly apparent with artificial intelligence, where what the U.K. House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee referred to as the access to data challenge, with ‘the most powerful AI needs very large datasets, which are held by few organisations’, is paramount (House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, 2023, p. 18). As a result, the extent to which the political of platform governance appears as a direct contest between corporate and governmental power is clearer than was the case in the early years of the open Internet. In my Policy & Internet paper, “Mediated Trust, the Internet and Artificial Intelligence: Ideas, interests, institutions and futures”, I argue that trust is a central part of communication, and communication is central to trust. Moreover, the nature of that connection has intensified in an age of universal and pervasive digital media networks. The push towards nation‐state regulation of digital platforms has come from the intersection of two trust vectors: the…

Articles from Policy & Internet, Governance & Security, Policy, Politics & Government

The Power of Digital Participation – How Online Tools Affect and Are Affected by Policy Conflicts

by Ilana Schröder 16/12/2024

Can e-participation improve policy processes, or do existing conflicts hinder its potential?

by Ilana Schröder 16/12/2024

Vibrant abstract pattern of illuminated red LED lights forming a dynamic design.

Involving local communities in political decisions is essential for transparent governance. This involvement is especially important in controversial issues, such as the siting of infrastructure, where a balance must be struck between the collective benefits of projects and the personal costs for nearby residents. However, despite efforts to engage communities, participation processes often lead to protests, loss of trust, and project blockades. This is where e-participation tools can play a significant role. As digital transformation reshapes governance, an increasing number of online platforms are being integrated into traditional participation processes. These platforms aim to make participation more inclusive and transparent by allowing individuals to engage regardless of their location or the time and by fostering a space for clear knowledge exchange. Nonetheless, how effective are communities in accessing these tools, particularly when conflicts are already intense? Can e-participation improve policy processes, or do existing conflicts hinder its potential? Our recent article published in Policy & Internet, titled “Digital Citizen Participation in Policy Conflict and Concord: Evaluation of a Web-Based Planning Tool for Railroad Infrastructure” by Ilana Schröder and Nils C. Bandelow, explores these questions. The research examines the performance of e-participation in both low- and high-conflict settings by focusing on a web-based tool that allows citizens to propose alternative railroad routes. Study participants were asked to use the online tool in a hypothetical scenario characterized as either conflictual or consensual. They then assessed the tool’s ability to promote inclusion, transparency, conflict resolution, and efficiency in the decision-making process. Here are the key findings: E-Participation Can Enhance Transparency and Mutual Understanding: Participants in both low- and high-conflict scenarios indicated that digital participation tools help enhance transparency in decision-making processes. When used effectively, these tools clarify planning criteria, include local knowledge, and improve mutual understanding among stakeholders. Therefore, e-participation tools can help reduce conflict escalation and facilitate creative solutions to complex issues. Digital Tools Aren’t a One-Size-Fits-All Solution: While digital platforms have…

Articles from Policy & Internet, Democracy, Governance & Security, Policy, Politics & Government

A plot on democracy: has the role of e-petitioning changed with the mainstreaming of conspiracy theories?

by Ben Lyall 16/12/2024

The emergence of conspiracy theories within petitions is paradoxical: why target these beliefs at the government using an official government channel?

by Ben Lyall 16/12/2024

Silhouette of a hand placing a vote into a ballot box, symbolizing democracy.

In an era of increased digitisation, e-petitions have become a popular form of political engagement. However, as the parameters of truth, democracy, false news, and conspiracy are challenged, so too is the original role of parliamentary petitioning. In our article, published in Policy & Internet, my co-author and I argue that the amplification of conspiracy theories shifts the goalposts for e-petitioning in terms of function. Specifically, unlike traditional petitions, they are not primarily aimed at producing policy changes. Instead, they function as social objects that achieve various community outcomes while adhering to petition rules. Signatures on these petitions, although lacking automatic results, signal popularity. Thus, the content of petitions can serve as a platform for airing shared grievances on topics such as immigration, economics, and health—and can even experiment with new forms of communication, such as emojis. As it is known, petitions alone rarely lead to policy changes, though they often reflect public sentiment and can significantly impact protest campaigns or social movements. E-petitions exist in various formats, with private platforms like Change.org being among the most well-known. In Australia, there are different types of e-petitioning, and it’s important to distinguish between them. The first type is private e-petitions, which serve as gathering spaces for individuals united by a common cause. The second type is parliamentary petitions, which can be initiated at either the state or federal level. Parliamentary petitioning is a process entrenched in parliamentary conventions. The petitions committee enforces rules that enable Australian residents and citizens to express concerns to Parliament and has some authority to compel action from government representatives. While rare, there are notable examples of e-petitions that have led to meaningful change. For instance, the Senate inquiry into media diversity, initiated by former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in 2020, started with e-petitioning. Similarly, changes to teacher education requirements, which received numerous petitions in 2021, are currently being implemented. Our recent article for Policy & Internet…

Articles from Policy & Internet, Economics, Governance & Security

Blockchain for better e-governance? Understanding the latest developments in the industry

by Dr Maxat Kassen 06/05/2024

If the potential of blockchain-driven management is fully realised, what areas in the public, economic, social, political, technological, and business sectors would benefit most?

by Dr Maxat Kassen 06/05/2024

The rising popularity of crypto-currencies globally has dramatically increased attention to blockchain technology’s capabilities in advancing peer-to-peer transactions and interactions. Namely, blockchain can promote more agile, cost-effective, and intrinsically data-driven project management practices and decision-making in e-governance. These capabilities are translatable not only to the financial and technological sectors but can also promote more efficient public and corporate sector systems. However, there remains a lack of understanding among practitioners regarding how exactly this digital technology could be fully realised removed from the context of crypto-finances. Furthermore, questions remain in terms of what public and corporate values related to government, business actors and decision-makers could harness in various sectors of the economy as part of the implementation process (e.g. public, corporate, social, political, technological or regulatory ones). An article I recently published in Policy & Internet, titled “Prospects of Blockchain Governance”, addresses recent developments of blockchain-driven governance in various sectors of the economy. It answers the following questions: How exactly does blockchain technology work? How could one illustrate schematically the fundamental principles of its work in a practical way that is easily comprehensible for practitioners and project managers in both corporate and public sectors of the economy? What are the critical features of blockchain-driven project management? Why are they essential for public and corporate decision-makers? What benefits could the blockchain concept bring to different sectors of the economy? If the potential of blockchain-driven management is fully realised, what areas in the public, economic, social, political, technological, and business sectors would benefit most? Relying on the analysis of rich empirical data provided by experts in the industry across the globe (i.e. those directly engaged in promoting various related decentralised project management tools for a wide range of public and corporate digital ecosystems), the paper provides insider perspectives on the latest blockchain-driven public and project management advancements. Furthermore, it describes the essence of decentralised data governance, how it is intended to be realised by…

Collective Action, Articles from Policy & Internet, Democracy

Can e-participation be improved? Lessons from two successful initiatives.

by Professor Sonia Royo and Professor Lourdes Torres 06/05/2024

Many initiatives have been launched, but some of them fail and/or are abandoned, contributing to mistrust among citizens and consuming scarce resources.

by Professor Sonia Royo and Professor Lourdes Torres 06/05/2024

Electronic participation (e-participation) has grown across the world in recent decades and many governments offer a range of opportunities for e-participation. Many initiatives have been launched, but some of them fail and/or are abandoned, contributing to mistrust among citizens and consuming scarce resources. Therefore, it is crucial for policymakers and practitioners to understand what factors contribute to the success and continuity of e-participation initiatives. This blog entry is based on a research paper titled “The success of e-participation. Learning lessons from Decide Madrid and We asked, You said, We did in Scotland” by S. Royo, B. Bellò, L. Torres and J. Downe, recently published in Policy & Internet (P&I). These two initiatives were selected due to their international recognition (software adopted by hundreds of institutions worldwide) and duration (platforms launched in 2015 and 2014, respectively, and active at present). Decide Madrid, developed by Madrid city Council, received the 2018 United Nations Public Service Award and the open-source software developed for this platform (Consul) is the most widely used to enable active citizen participation. We asked, You said, We did is a feature of the platform Citizen Space, designed by the private company Delib, and used by more than 180 organizations. The results show that these two successful initiatives share a top-down approach, a strong leadership and senior management/political support, embeddedness in the formal policy-making processes, high levels of internal and external collaboration with clear accountability relationships and careful consideration of design features. Most of these factors are related to organizational or managerial dimensions, rather than being linked to the institutional context or the ICT component. These are good news, as policymakers should be able to influence on them more easily. Our results also show that support from politicians and senior managers is not only essential in the initial stages of e-participation, but also to provide resources and adjustments in the administrative structures to ensure the long-term continuity of these initiatives. Conversely, some factors highlighted in…

Articles from Policy & Internet, Democracy, Methods, Politics & Government

Do online consultations make citizens more satisfied with local democracy?

by Professor Tobias Escher 15/04/2024

We find that giving citizens an opportunity to have a say in political decisions influences their opinions about local politics—but not all of them are satisfied.

by Professor Tobias Escher 15/04/2024

In political discussions, the legitimacy crisis of democracy is a common theme. Even though citizens value the concept of democracy, they are often unhappy with how it is implemented. This issue also extends to the local level, where political decisions directly affect citizens. It is worth noting that whenever a local conflict arises, citizens (and policymakers themselves) often call for more participation as a means to increase the legitimacy of such decisions. As a result, municipalities frequently conduct public consultations and increasingly use the Internet to enable online participation. But what role can these online consultations play in improving legitimacy? In a recent study published by Policy & Internet, Bastian Rottinghaus and I investigated how participation in local consultation processes affects attitudes toward local politics. To achieve this, we examined participation procedures in which three German municipalities consulted their citizens on local cycling infrastructure. In each case, citizens submitted, commented on, and evaluated proposals through an online platform. After the end of these consultations, we surveyed nearly 600 citizens who had participated in these procedures. Here are some of our key findings: • The participation processes influenced the attitudes of those who participated in these consultations. • For many participants, the positive effect that was hoped for did indeed occur: they were more positive about local institutions (mayor, administration) and local politics as a whole. The decisive factor for the assessment was whether one expected local politics to take the citizens’ proposals seriously and act upon them. In other words, the result of the process was more important to attitudes than the process itself. • It is worth noting that this also applies to those with negative views of local politics. However, previous experience with local politics also played a role: those who already had a higher level of satisfaction and trust in the municipality became more positive by participating. • At the same time, participation may reduce satisfaction, especially…