Types, features and evaluation of permanent participatory online platforms: "One size fits all" or "More is less"?

Participatory online platforms include different functions and they are widely used in different participation processes/instruments (e.g. participatory budgeting, fix-my-street applications, urban development projects, …). When it comes to evaluating the individual implementation of participation processes/instruments, the platforms are mostly treated simply as specific digital channels for communication on the topic(s) in question. In recent years at the local level, many cities in Germany have launched platforms that are permanent and multi-use. They include functions for carrying out different processes (multi-purpose) and (at least apparently) generally invite citizens to actively participate in decision-making processes in politics and administration. Based on data from 2023, we found that nearly a quarter (22,3%) of medium-sized cities in Germany (20.000-100.000 inhabitants) and nearly three quarter (72%) of larger Cities have permanent participatory only platforms. In the theoretical part of our paper we analyze the form of blended participation where online and offline instruments are combined and how these are sequenced. We argue that when evaluating participatory processes carried out via permanent platforms, the platform cannot be seen simply as a new communication channel or a web portal, but that it serves as a process-shaping infrastructure and that therefore special attention must be paid to the platform design (technical, visual, UX). In the second, empirical section we use web-scraping and an explorative, descriptive research design to present an overview of platform types, use-cases and features. Here we provide an extended evaluation framework that complements established criteria for the evaluation of participatory instruments (purpose/goals, representativeness, deliberative quality, moderation, effectiveness etc.; see Kersting 2007) by adding platform design considerations.