Why do Civic-Tech Tools Struggle? A Qualitative Comparative Case Study Approach
Abstract
This study explores why civic technology (civic-tech) initiatives are often unable to scale, sustain citizen participation, and deliver lasting democratic effects in West Africa despite increased investment in digital participation. The study examines the differences among low-tech, high-tech, and hybrid civic-tech models; the barriers that impede their effectiveness; and the conditions that enable civic-tech to enhance voice, accountability, and public problem-solving among the citizenry. The paper relies on a qualitative comparative case-study design to compare and contrast eight purposively selected initiatives in Nigeria, namely Urban Alert, Alerti, Follow the Money, BudgIT, Tracka, BIMI AI, JENCIA, Dubawa Audio AI, and Podus AI in Mali. According to the authors, low-tech tools are defined as civic engagement tools that involve radio, SMS, USSD, basic social media, community meetings, or simple civic education and community verification, in contrast to tools that require advanced digital infrastructure, which are known as high-tech tools, and tools that use digital platforms alongside offline civic education, mobilisation, advocacy, and community verification, which are known as hybrid tools. The study draws on social accountability theory, digital divide scholarship, and user-centred design literature to conclude that civic-tech projects face more challenges not from technology but from digital exclusion, institutional unresponsiveness, low trust in the technology, donor reliance for sustainability, regulatory uncertainty, and poor alignment with citizen problems. For democratic impact, the analysis indicates that hybrid models generally have better prospects for scale, accessibility, trust-building, and community engagement. The paper argues for assessing civic-tech in West Africa by its ability to enable citizens to access information, express their voices safely, gain institutional responses, and resolve real civic issues, rather than relying on its technical sophistication.
