Platformization of Politics in Non-democracies: Spaces of Participatory Experiments In Belarus in 2020S
Social Sciences, the European Humanities University, Lithuania
Data nadesłania: 02-11-2022
Data akceptacji: 02-12-2022
Data publikacji: 30-12-2022
Autor do korespondencji
Siarhei Liubimau   

Department of Social Sciences, The European Humanities University, 17 Savičiaus Str., 01127 Vilnius, Lithuania
Studia Humanistyczne AGH 2022;21(4):7-21
This paper’s focus is on the innovations in the urban public political agenda that are due to the interplay between participatory digital platforms, the socio-economic paths of specific urban environments, and long-term policy orientations on the national and urban levels. The context of the 2020 presidential elections in Belarus and the resulting boom of participation in the local and national political agendas is taken here as a particular configuration of the mentioned interplay and its outcomes. The first part of the paper focuses on the role of digital platforms in the studied boom of participation in 2020, the second documents the urban policy developments in Belarus during the period of 2015–2020, and the third reflects on the compatibility of the Belarusian case with wider discussions on the political impact that the spread of digital platforms has on urbanism. It is argued that the repressive state, the gradual marketization of urban development and the accompanying strengthening of urban dwellers’ economic autonomy, and the proliferation of commercial digital platforms and civic tech are the factors that have defined the studied politicization and the boom of participation in Belarus. The examined case shows the contours of emerging politics in non-democracies under conditions of ubiquitous digitalization and the pressure on the state’s redistributive capacities.
Afzalan, N., Muller, B. (2018). Online Participatory Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges for Enriching Participatory Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 84(2), 162–177.
Barns, S. (2019). Negotiating the Platform pivot: From Participatory Digital Ecosystems to Infrastructures of Everyday Life. Geography Compass, 13(2), 1–13.
Barns, S. (2020). Re-Engineering the City: Platform Ecosystems and the Capture of Urban Big Data. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 2(32), 1–8.
Boland, Ph., Durrant, A., McHenry, J., McKay, S., Wilson, A. (2021). A ‘Planning Revolution’ or an ‘Attack on Planning’ in England: Digitization, Digitalization, and Democratization. International Planning Studies, 1–18.
Boyer, D. (2019). Infrastructure, Potential Energy, Revolution. In: N. Anand, H. Appel, A. Gupta (eds.), The Promise of Infrastructure (pp. 223–243). Duke University Press.
Eom, S.-J. (2022). The Emerging Digital Twin Bureaucracy in the 21st Century. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(2), 174–186.
Fields, D. (2019). Automated Landlord: Digital Technologies and Post-Crisis Financial Accumulation. A Economy and Space, 54(1), 1–22.
Fields, D., Bissell, D., Macrorie, R. (2020). Platform Methods: Studying Platform Urbanism Outside the Black Box. Urban Geography, 41(3), 462–468.
Finlayson, A. (2022). YouTube and Political Ideologies: Technology, Populism and Rhetorical Form. Political Studies, 1–19.
Huitema, D., Jordan, A., Munaretto, S., Hilden, M. (2018). Policy Experimentation: Core Concepts, Political Dynamics, Governance and Impacts. Policy Sciences, 51(2), 143–159.
Kananovich, V. (2022). #presidentspartingwords at a Critical Juncture: Reclaiming the Autonomous Subject in Social Media Discourse on Coronavirus in Belarus. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 46(3), 244–267.
Krastev, I. (2014). From Politics to Protest. Journal of Democracy, 25(4), 5–19.
McDermott, R. (2002). Experimental Methods in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science, 5, 31–61.
Norkunaite, G., Kunkel, A. (2019). A Key to the Community’s Knowledge: Participatory Mapping Methodology in the Eastern European Context. Pieriekriostki [Перекрёстки], 32–55.
Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society. The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
Plantin, J.-Ch. et al. (2018). Infrastructure Studies Meet Platform Studies in the Age of Google and Facebook. New Media & Society, 20(1), 293–310.
Pollio, A. (2020). Uber, Airports, and Labour at the Infrastructural Interfaces of Platform Urbanism. Geoforum, 118, 47–55.
Raven, R., Sengers, F., Spaeth, Ph. Xie, L., Cheshmehzangi, A., de Jong, M. (2019). Urban Experimentation and Institutional Arrangements. European Planning Studies, 27(2), 258–281.
Repette, P., Sabatini-Marques, J., Yigitcanlar, T., Sell, D., Costa, E. (2021). The Evolution of City-as-a-Platform: Smart Urban Development Governance with Collective KnowledgeBased Platform Urbanism. Land, 10(33), 1–25.
Scholl, Ch., Kemp, R. (2016). City Labs as Vehicles for Innovation in Urban Planning Processes. Urban Planning, 1(4), 89–102.
Scholl, Ch., de Kraker, J. (2021). Urban Planning by Experiment: Practices, Outcomes, and Impacts. Urban Planning, 6(1), 156–160.
Susskind, L., Cunningham, D., Cruxen, I.A. (2018). Teaching Participatory Action Research: The Search for Pedagogical Insights. In: J. Calder, J. Foletta (eds.), (Participatory) Action Research (pp. 125–150). Nova Science Publishers.
Swyngedouw, E. (2007). The Post-Political City. Urban Politics Now Reflect Series. Rotterdam: Netherland Architecture Institute (NAI)-Publishers.
van Dijck, J., Poell, Th., de Wall, M. (2018). The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connective World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top