[
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. JAIP, 35: 4, 216-224.10.1080/01944366908977225
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arvidsson, A. and E. Colleoni. (2012). Value in Informational Capitalism and on the Internet. The Information Society. An International Journal, 28:3. doi: 10.1080/01972243.2012.669449.10.1080/01972243.2012.669449
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks. New Haven: Yale University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Benkler, Y. (2011). Networks of Power, Degrees of Freedom. International Journal of Communication, 5, 721-755.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bishop, C. (2012). Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship. London and Brooklyn: Verso.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
G. Bjerknes, P. Ehn, and M. Kyng. (Eds.) (1987). Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot: Avebury.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bowdin, G., J. Allen, W. O’Toole, R. Harris and I. McDonnell (2010). Events Management. Oxon and New York: Butterworth-Heinemann.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage (Digital Formations). New York: Peter Lang.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Carpentier, Nico (2011). Media and Participation. Bristol and Chicago: Intellect, The University of Chicago Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Castells, M. (2007). Communication, Power and Counter-power in the Network Society. International Journal of Communication, 1, 238-266.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chambers, R. (1997). Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.10.3362/9781780440453
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chase, J.M. Crawford and J. Kaliski (2008). Everyday Urbanism: Expanded. Monacelli Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cleaver, H (1999). Computer-linked Social Movements and the Global Threat to Capitalism. Recieved from: http://la.utexas.edu/users/hcleaver/polnet.html.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cohen, J.M. and Uphoff, N.T. (1980). Participation’s Place in Rural Development: Seeking Clarity through Specificity. World development, 8, 213-235.10.1016/0305-750X(80)90011-X
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cornwall, A. (2011). The Participation Reader. London and New York: Zed Books.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Couldry, N. (2010). Why Voice Matters: Culture and Politics after Neoliberalism. London, California, New Delhi and Singapore: Sage Publications.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Crehan, K. (2011). Community Art: An Anthropological Perspective. London and New York: Berg.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cuff, D. and R. Sherman (2011). Fast-Forward Urbanism: Rethinking Architecture’s Engagement with the City. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dahlgren, P. (2009). Media and Political Engagement: Citizens, Communication and Democracy. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo and Delhi: Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Delwiche, A. (2013). The New Left and the Computer Underground. In A. Delwiche and J.J. Henderson (Eds.). The Participatory Cultures Handbook. New York and Oxon: Routledge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Delwiche, A. and J.J. Henderson (2013). The Participatory Cultures Handbook. New York and Oxon: Routledge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dezeuze, A. (2010). The ‘Do-it Yourself’ Artwork: Participation from Fluxus to New Media (Rethinking Art’s Histories). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Duncombe, S. (2002). Cultural Resistance Reader. London and New York: Verso.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fenton, N. (2008). Mediating Hope: New Media, Politics and Resistance. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 11: 2, 230-248.10.1177/1367877908089266
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fill, C. (2013). Marketing Communications: Brands, Experiences and Participation. Edinburgh: Pearson.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fiske, J. (1996). Television Culture. London: Methuen.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy. Social Texts, 25/26, 56-80.10.2307/466240
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fuchs, C. (2011). Foundations of Critical Media and Information Studies. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203830864
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fuchs, C. (2014) Social Media: A Critical Introduction. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington DC: Sage.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fung, A. and E.O. Wright (2003). Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. London and New York: Verso.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gauntlett, D. (2011). Making is Connecting: The Social Meaning of Creativity, from DIY and Knitting to YouTube and Web 2.0. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gaventa, J. (2004). Towards Participatory Governance: Assessing the Transformative Possibilities. In S. Hickey and G. Mohan (Eds.), Participation - From Tyranny to Transformation: Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development. London and New York: Zed Books.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Giaccardi, E. (2012). Heritage and Social Media: Understanding heritage in a participatory culture. Oxon and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203112984
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, M. Trow (1994). The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Habermas, J. (1998). On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Handberg, C., C. Nielsen, C.V. and K. Lomborg (2013). Men’s reflections on participating in cancer rehabilitation: a systematic review of qualitative studies 2000-2013. European Journal of Cancer Care Online.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Henkel, H and R. Stirrat (2001). Participation as Spiritual Duty; Empowerment as Secular Subjection. In B. Crooke and U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: the New Tyranny? New York: Zone Books.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hess, D.J. (2009). Controversy in the Classroom: The Democratic Power of Discussion. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203878880
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Irwin, A. and B. Wynne. (1996). Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge, Cape Town, Melbourne and New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511563737
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York and London: New York University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jenkins, H., R. Purushotma, M. Weigel, K. Clinton and A.J. Robison (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge and London: MIT Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jenkins, H, S. Ford and J. Green (2013). Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. New York and London: New York University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Joss, S. and J. Durant (1995). Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum with the Support of the European Comapproachs Directorate General XIT.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kelty, C., A. Panofsky, M. Currie, R. Crooks, S. Erickson, P. Garcia, M. Wartenbe, and S. Wood (2014). Seven Dimensions of Participation Disentangled. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. Wiley Online Library. doi: 10.1002/asi.2320210.1002/asi.23202
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kestner, G. (2011). The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context. Duke University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kestner, G. (2013/2004). Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art. University of California Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Klein, J. T. (2012). A Taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity. In Frodeman, R and J. T. Klein (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lévy, P. (1997). Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace. Perseus Books.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lievrouw, L. (2011). Alternative and Activist New Media. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Livingstone, S. and P. Lunt, P. (1996). Rethinking the focus group in media and communications research. Journal of Communication, 46: 2, 79-98.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lottridge, D. M. and G. Moore (2010). Interaction Design in the University: Designing Disciplinary Interactions. Conference: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. doi : 10.1145/1753846.1753858.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lovink, G. (2008). Zero Comments. Blogging and Critical Internet Culture. New York: Routledge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lovink, G. and M. Rasch (Eds) (2013). Unlike Us Reader: Social Media Monopolies and Their Alternatives. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marres, N. (2012). Material Participation: Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mandiberg, M. (2012). Introduction. In M. Mandiberg (Ed.), The Social Media reader. New York and London: New York University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McGregor, S.L.T. (2014). Transdisciplinarity and Conceptual Change. World Futures: The Journal of New Paradigm Research, 70: 3-4, 200-232. doi: 10.1080/02604027.2014.934635.10.1080/02604027.2014.934635
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McQuail, D. (1997). Audience Analysis. London: Sage Publications.10.4135/9781452233406
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mukherjee, R. and S. Banet-Weiser (2012). Commodity Activism: Cultural Resistance in Neoliberal Times. New York: New York University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nicolescu, B. (2010). Methodology of Transdisciplinarity. Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering and Science 1:1, 19–38.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nowotny, H. (2003). The Potential of Transdisciplinarity. Rethinking interdisciplinarity. Paris: Interdisciplines Project. http://www.interdisciplines.org/medias/confs/archives/archive_3.pdf.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Olsson, T. (Ed.) (2013). Producing the Internet: Critical Perspectives on Social Media. Gothenborg: Nordicom.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0? Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. O’Reilly Media. http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511720444
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rahnema, M. (1997). Participation. In W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power. Hyderabad: Orient Longman.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rosanvellon, P. (2008/2006). Counter-Democracy: Politics in an Age of Distrust. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo, Delhi, Tokyo and Mexico City: Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rowe, G (2005). A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms. Science, Technology & Human Values, 30:2, 251–290.10.1177/0162243904271724
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Scholz, T. (2013). Digital Labor: The Internet as Playground and Factory. New York and Oxon: Routledge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Simonsen, J. and T. Robertson (2012). Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. New York and Oxon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203108543
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalisation and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Touraine, A. (1997). What is Democracy? Colorado and Oxford: Westview Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tritter, J.Q. and A. McCallum (2006). The Snakes and Ladders of User Involvement: Moving beyond Arnstein. Health Policy 76, 156-168.10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.05.008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Verbeek, P-P. (2005). Artifacts and Attachment: A Post-Script Philosophy of Mediation. In H. Harbers (Ed.), Inside the Politics of Technology: Agency and Normativity in the Co-Production of Technology and Society. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
White, S. (1996). Depoliticizing Development: The Uses and Abuses of Participation in Development. Development in Practice, 6, 6-15.10.1080/0961452961000157564
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Williams, G., B.V. Thampi, D. Narayana, S. Nandidama and D. Bhattacharyya (2011). Performing Participatory Citizenship – Politics and Power in Kerala’s Kudumbashree Programme. Journal of Development Studies, 47 (8), 1261–1280.10.1080/00220388.2010.527949
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wynne, B. (1996). May the Sheep Safely Gaze? A Reflexive View on the Expert-lay Knowledge Divide. In S. Lash, B. Szerynski and B. Wynne (Eds.), Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology. London and Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wynne, B. (2007). Public participation in science and technology: Performing and obscuring a political-conceptual category mistake. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal, 1:1, 99-110.
]Search in Google Scholar
