Democratic Problem Solving In Denmark Digitalization for a Policy Response to Social Acceleration

Received: 02-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. Iphspr-23-13467; Editor assigned: 04-Feb-2023, Pre QC No. Iphspr-23-13467; Reviewed: 18-Feb-2023, QC No. Iphspr-23-13467; Revised: 21-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. Iphspr- 23-13467 (R); Published: 28-Feb-2023, DOI: 10.36648/2254- 9137.23.10.174

Abstract

For democratic issue resolution, societal acceleration—the ever quicker rate of technological, social and life-pace change poses a conundrum: It raises the number of new social issues that appear on the political calendar, which enhances the need for quick and impactful policy responses. However, democratic politics move slowly. Therefore, either the political system maintains democracy at the expense of problem solving or it speeds up decision-making at the expense of democracy. Both options are obviously undesirable. How do governments attempt to resolve this conundrum and offer positive-sum alternatives that are equally democratic and effective? We offer two "paradigm instances" of governments—Denmark and the Netherlands—that have responded to social acceleration through digitalization in a very swift and efficient manner. With attention We suggest how governments attempt to resolve the conundrum for democratic problem resolution under conditions of social acceleration based on four markers: awareness, timing, motivation for new strategic goals, and goal-directed strategic policy action.

Keywords

Digitalization; Democratic problem solving; Social acceleration; Paradigm case studies

Introduction

Social acceleration, which is described as the accelerating rate of technological, social, and lifestyle change, puts more social issues on the political agenda and increases the need for quick and effective policy responses [1]. Democratic politics, however, are infamously slow and always run the risk of introducing policies that are already out of date [2]. Our fast-paced civilization is run by a democracy that moves slowly. A radically new and troubling predicament for democratic problem solving, or the capacity of democracies to identify problems, place them on the political agenda, and address them through public policy, has resulted from this situation [3]. Either the political system slows down democracy at the expense of decision-making, or it maintains sluggish democracy at the expense of solving problems [4]. The grim reality is that popular cynicism in the democratic political system will probably grow regardless of whatever choice prevails [5]. Clearly, this is not desired. All throughout the world, governments have taken steps to adapt to the social acceleration, particularly by digitising government services [6]. As opposed to "digitalization" and "digital transformation," "digitalization" refers to the use of new information and communication technologies to enhance public service delivery and hasten policymaking [7]. We are aware, however, that there is a wide range in how well governments are able to pursue digitalization policies in order to successfully adapt to social acceleration. In reality, most governments appear to be completely unable to keep up with accelerating change [8]. Vis & Van Kersbergen This brings up several issues that could be important for knowledge of adaptive governance how do governments approach this conundrum? Do they succeed in offering practical, democratic positive-sum solutions? Why do certain countries resolve the conundrum better than others? The "grand theory" of social acceleration has so far only stimulated a small amount of comparative empirical research on the actual digitalization strategies that governments are using to address social acceleration and the conundrum for democratic problem solving, let alone on the circumstances under which such responses are effective [9].

Discussion

In contrast, wealth of possible implementation and adoption elements that can impact the effectiveness of digital government have emerged from the research. However, this later body of literature gives the outside forces that drive the desire for such programmes relatively little consideration [10]. In this essay, we compare and contrast the instances of Denmark and the Netherlands. We construct a straightforward working hypothesis What digitization tactics did governments in these nations use? To analyse how the Danish and Dutch governments have accomplished this. By providing an answer to this query using comparative paradigm case studies, we will be able to advance our theoretical understanding of how governments strategically try to resolve the impasse for democratic problem solving under social acceleration and find factors that account for variation in the effectiveness of digitalization responses for future comparative policy research [11]. The following is the order of the document [12]. Chapter gives a brief summary of the most recent findings in the field of social acceleration research [13]. We provide conceptual clarifications and further theoretical thoughts in section [14]. The section covers the study's design and methodology and examines operational challenges (How can we research how governments respond to the quandary. The case analyses and comparative findings are presented in Section [15]. The conclusions of the study are discussed for the operation of liberal democracy in Section 6, which also summarises our findings and offers theoretical arguments for additional comparative empirical research. The discussion among specialists in the fields of technology, management, law, and economics is prospering, but research on the political and policy ramifications of social acceleration is still lacking. Political scientists and academics in public administration have undoubtedly focused on how traditional political structures are being undermined and how new forms of government are being developed. We believe the optimists are correct when they note that democracy is incredibly adaptable and furnished with essential selfcorrecting mechanisms. However, liberal democracy's ability to solve problems as a political system is already being negatively impacted by social acceleration, and the pessimists emphasise that adaptations often lag behind the accelerating rate of change. We worry about what social acceleration means for democracy, just like the pessimists, but we also anticipate government action, just like the optimists. To the harm societal acceleration causes to liberal democracy. We went intended to demonstrate empirically how governments respond to societal acceleration by embracing digitization. We first define the important theoretical terminology before moving on to the research strategy, methodology, and empirical case analyses of our study. The pace and frequency with which workers and employees change occupations throughout the course of their careers, as well as the retraining needs that go along with it, are two famous examples of how social change is accelerating. It appears to be exceedingly challenging for public education policy to keep up with the rising rate of change. The lifelong learning strategy might, in theory, be a response to a more dynamic labour market. That is, however, there is probably a wide range in how well people are able to develop the abilities that a lifelong learning approach calls for, including being able to "communicate well in both native and foreign languages and use technology." The "objectively measured intensification of experiences and activities that we engage in during a specific period of time" is referred to as the "acceleration of life pace." Objectively speaking, social activity speeds up: The majority of individuals multitask more frequently, work steadily quicker, do more activities without stopping, and connect with more people on a daily basis in both their professional and personal lives.

Conclusion

The perception of time changes qualitatively as a result of the speeding up of social activities and manifests as a sense of neverending time. Time for oneself, being out of step with the times. As a result of constantly being pressed for time, one may develop a fear of missing out, feel compelled to adapt, and find they standing on precipices due to the knowledge that "in a dynamic society almost all of one's stock of knowledge and property is constantly threatened with obsolescence." The feeling of being behind and the need to adapt are reinforced by this syndrome, especially because of the increased connectedness. A third marker shows the degree to which new strategic goals are converted from awareness, for example in special reports, white papers, or other strategic publications. The extent to which such strategic goals are translated into goal-directed strategic policy action, such as the establishment of special committees and agencies and the delegation of precise and detailed tasks to ministries and ministers to address the social acceleration, serves as a fourth indicator of what governments are doing. In the paradigm case studies, we search for indicators of awareness and its chronology, motivation, new strategic goals, and goaldirected strategic policy action. To determine if these indicators are present, we look at both the current literature on digitization in Denmark and the Netherlands and official records. in the cases of these paradigms. We methodically our empirical study aims to spark theory-building and idea generation. First, we outline how two governments responded to social acceleration with digitalization policies in two different countries. Next, we theorise what elements help or impede a successful digitalization response. The public sector was portrayed as going digital in the first strategic digitalization report as a way to address social issues, improve public sector efficiency, and represent a particular facet of the network society's development. Digitalization was viewed as a chance to release resources from the burden of red tape, put them to better use, and streamline government operations. The government was recommended to create a comprehensive national digitalization strategy because the move to digital governance was considered as an organisational issue. Additionally, digitalization was supposed to improve chances for corporations and citizens to monitor and take part in political decision-making.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

References

Abdul MM, Sivasubramaniam S, Murthy GV, Gilbert C, Abubakar T, et al. (2009) Causes of blindness and visual impairment in Nigeria, The Nigeria national blindness and visual impairment survey. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50: 4114-4120.