As an application of deliberative democratic theory in practice, traditional public participation programs in urban planning seek to cultivate citizen input and produce public decisions agreeable to all stakeholders. However, the deliberative democratic ideals of these traditional public participation programs, consisting of town hall meetings, hearings, workshops, and design charrettes, are often stymied by interpersonal dynamics, special interest groups, and an absence of key stakeholder demographics due to logistical issues of meetings or lack of interest and awareness. This dissertation project proposes crowdsourcing as an online public participation alternative that may ameliorate some of the hindrances of traditional public participation methods.

Crowdsourcing is an online, distributed problem solving and production model largely in use for business. It leverages the collective intelligence of online communities by soliciting ideas and solutions for an organization from these communities through the form of an open call. The mechanism of one type of crowdsourcing, the peer-vetted creative production approach, aligns with the goals of public participation programs. In light of this, Next Stop Design was launched in 2009 in an attempt to test crowdsourcing in a public participation context for transit planning. Next Stop Design was an online competition where users submitted bus stop shelter designs and voted on the designs of peers to determine a best design.

This study examines the effectiveness of the Next Stop Design project as an online deliberative democratic process, as perceived by Next Stop Design participants, and also examines the motivations of participants on the site. Interviews via instant messenger were conducted with 23 participants focusing on their perceptions of the Next Stop Design project according to a list of ideal features for online deliberative democratic process and a list of motivations for participation.

Data suggest that Next Stop Design was perceived to be a generally effective online deliberative democratic process, with perceived weaknesses concerning the facilitation of the project through public voting and the equality of participants on the site in light of apparent voting fraud in the competition. Findings also suggest that participants were motivated to participate in the project because they saw an opportunity to advance their careers, they had fun, they learned new skills and knowledge, and they saw the project as an opportunity for creative self-expression. Participants were also motivated to participate because the Web site was appealing, usable, and had a low barrier to entry, and participants offered constructive feedback to improve the process as a whole.