Paper by Mark Kleinman: “Developments in digital innovation and the availability of large-scale data sets create opportunities for new economic activities and new ways of delivering city services while raising concerns about privacy. This paper defines the terms Big Data, Open Data, Open Government, and Smart Cities and uses two case studies – London (U.K.) and Toronto – to examine questions about using data to drive economic growth, improve the accountability of government to citizens, and offer more digitally enabled services. The paper notes that London has been one of a handful of cities at the forefront of the Open Data movement and has been successful in developing its high-tech sector, although it has so far been less innovative in the use of “smart city” technology to improve services and lower costs. Toronto has also made efforts to harness data, although it is behind London in promoting Open Data. Moreover, although Toronto has many assets that could contribute to innovation and economic growth, including a growing high-technology sector, world-class universities and research base, and its role as a leading financial centre, it lacks a clear narrative about how these assets could be used to promote the city. The paper draws some general conclusions about the links between data innovation and economic growth, and between open data and open government, as well as ways to use big data and technological innovation to ensure greater efficiency in the provision of city services…(More)“
How tech is forcing firms to be better global citizens
Catherine Lawson at the BBC: “…technology is forcing companies to up their game and interact with communities more directly and effectively….
Platforms such as Kritical Mass have certainly given a fillip to the idea of crowd-supported philanthropy, attracting individuals and corporate sponsors to its projects, whether that’s saving vultures in Kenya or bringing solar power to rural communities in west Africa.
Sponsors can offer funding, volunteers, expertise or marketing. So rather than imposing corporate ideas of “do-gooding” on communities in a patronising manner, firms can simply respond to demand.
HelpfulPeeps has pushed its volunteering platform into more than 40 countries worldwide, connecting people who want to share their time, knowledge and skills with each other for free.
In the UK, online platform Neighbourly connects community projects and charities with companies and people willing to volunteer their resources. For example, Starbucks has pledged 2,500 days of volunteering and has so far backed 70 community projects….
Judging by the strong public appetite for supporting good causes and campaigning against injustice on sites such as Change.org, Avaaz.org, JustGiving andGoFundMe, his assessment appears to be correct.
And LinkedIn says millions of members have signalled on their profiles that they want to serve on a non-profit board or use their skills to volunteer….
Tech companies in particular are offering expertise and skills to good causes as way of making a tangible difference.
For example, in January, Microsoft announced that through its new organisation,Microsoft Philanthropies, it will donate $1bn-worth (£700m) of cloud computing resources to serve non-profits and university researchers over the next three years…
And data analytics specialist Applied Predictive Technologies (APT) has offered its data-crunching skills to help the Capital Area Food Bank charity distribute food more efficiently to hungry people around the Washington DC area.
APT used data to develop a “hunger heat map” to help CAFB target resources and plan for future demand better.
In another project, APT helped The Cara Program – a Chicago-based charity providing training and job placements to people affected by homelessness or poverty – evaluate what made its students more employable….
And Launch, an open platform jointly founded by Nasa, Nike, the US Agency for International Development, and the US Department of State aims to provide support for start-ups and “inspire innovation”.
In the age of internet transparency, it seems corporates no longer have anywhere to hide – a spot of CSR whitewashing is not going to cut it anymore….(More)”.
A machine intelligence commission for the UK
Geoff Mulgan at NESTA: ” This paper makes the case for creating a Machine Intelligence Commission – a new public institution to help the development of new generations of algorithms, machine learning tools and uses of big data, ensuring that the public interest is protected.
I argue that new institutions of this kind – which can interrogate, inspect and influence technological development – are a precondition for growing informed public trust. That trust will, in turn, be essential if we are to reap the full potential public and economic benefits from new technologies. The proposal draws on lessons from fields such as human fertilisation, biotech and energy, which have shown how trust can be earned, and how new industries can be grown. It also draws on lessons from the mistakes made in fields like GM crops and personal health data, where lack of trust has impeded progress….(More)”
Meet your Matchmaker: New crowdsourced sites for rare diseases
Carina Storrs at CNN: “Angela’s son Jacob was born with a number of concerning traits. He had an extra finger, and a foot and hip that were abnormally shaped. The doctors called in geneticists to try to diagnose his unusual condition. “That started our long, 12-year journey,” said Angela, who lives in the Baltimore area.
As geneticists do, they studied Jacob’s genes, looking for mutations in specific regions of the genome that could point to a problem. But there were no leads.
In the meantime, Jacob developed just about every kind of health problem there is. He has cognitive delays, digestive problems, muscle weakness, osteoporosis and other ailments.
“It was extremely frustrating, it was like being on a roller coaster. You wait six to eight weeks for the (gene) test and then it comes back as showing nothing,” recalled Angela, who asked that their last name not be used to protect her son’s privacy. “How do we go about treating until we get at what it is?”
Finally a test last year, which was able to take a broad look at all of Jacob’s genes, revealed a possible genetic culprit, but it still did not shed any light on his condition. “Nothing was known about the gene,” said Dr. Antonie Kline, director of pediatric genetics at the Greater Baltimore Medical Center, who had been following Jacob since birth.
Fortunately, Kline knew about an online program called GeneMatcher, which launched in December 2013. It would allow her to enter the new mystery gene into a database and search for other clinicians in the world who work with patients who have mutations in the same gene….
the search for “someone else on the planet” can be hard, Hamosh said. The diseases in GeneMatcher are rare, affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the United States, and it can be difficult for clinicians with similar patients to find each other just through word of mouth and professional connections. Au, the Canadian researcher with a patient similar to Jacob, is actually a friend of Kline’s, but the two had never realized their patients’ similarities.
It was not just Hamosh and her colleagues who were struck by the need for something like GeneMatcher. At the same time they were developing their program, researchers in Canada and the UK were creating PhenomeCentral and Decipher, respectively.
The three are collectively known as matchmaker programs. They connect patients with rare diseases which clinicians may never have seen before. In the case of PhenomeCentral, however, clinicians do not have to have a genetic culprit and can search only for other patients with similar traits or symptoms.
In the summer of 2015, it got much easier for clinicians all over the world to use these programs, when a clearinghouse site called Matchmaker Exchange was launched. They can now enter the patient information one time and search all three databases….(More)
“
The 4 Types of Cities and How to Prepare Them for the Future
John D. Macomber at Harvard Business Review: “The prospect of urban innovation excites the imagination. But dreaming up what a “smart city” will look like in some gleaming future is, by its nature, a utopian exercise. The messy truth is that cities are not the same, and even the most innovative approach can never achieve universal impact. What’s appealing for intellectuals in Copenhagen or Amsterdam is unlikely to help millions of workers in Jakarta or Lagos. To really make a difference, private entrepreneurs and civic entrepreneurs need to match projects to specific circumstances. An effective starting point is to break cities into four segments across two distinctions: legacy vs. new cities, and developed vs. emerging economies. The opportunities to innovate will differ greatly by segment.
Segment 1: Developed Economy, Legacy City
Examples: London, Detroit, Tokyo, Singapore
Characteristics: Any intervention in a legacy city has to dismantle something that existed before — a road or building, or even a regulatory authority or an entrenched service business. Slow demographic growth in developed economies creates a zero-sum situation (which is part of why the licensed cabs vs Uber/Lyft contest is so heated). Elites live in these cities, so solutions arise that primarily help users spend their excess cash. Yelp, Zillow, and Trip Advisor are examples of innovations in this context.
Implications for city leaders: Leaders should try to establish a setting where entrepreneurs can create solutions that improve quality of life — without added government expense. …
Implications for entrepreneurs: Denizens of developed legacy cities have discretionary income. …
Segment 2: Emerging Economy, Legacy City
Examples: Mumbai, São Paolo, Jakarta
Characteristics: Most physical and institutional structures are already in place in these megacities, but with fast-growing populations and severe congestion, there is an opportunity to create value by improving efficiency and livability, and there is a market of customers with cash to pay for these benefits.
Implications for city leaders: Leaders should loosen restrictions so that private finance can invest in improvements to physical infrastructure, to better use what already exists. …
Implications for entrepreneurs: Focus on public-private partnerships (PPP). …
Segment 3: Emerging Economy, New City
Examples: Phu My Hung, Vietnam; Suzhou, China; Astana, Kazakhstan; Singapore (historically)
Characteristics: These cities tend to have high population growth and high growth rates in GDP per capita, demographic and economic tailwinds that help to boost returns. The urban areas have few existing physical or social structures to dismantle as they grow, hence fewer entrenched obstacles to new offerings. There is also immediate ROI for investments in basic services as population moves in, because they capture new revenues from new users. Finally, in these cities there is an important chance to build it right the first time, notably with respect to the roads, bridges, water, and power that will determine both economic competitiveness and quality of life for decades. The downside? If this chance is missed, new urban agglomerations will be characterized by informal sprawl and new settlements will be hard to reach after the fact with power, roads, and sanitation.
Implications for city leaders: Leaders should first focus on building hard infrastructure that will support services such as schools, hospitals, and parks. …
Implications for entrepreneurs: In these cities, it’s too soon to think about optimizing existing infrastructure or establishing amusing ways for wealthy people to spend their disposable income. …
Segment 4: Developed Economy, New City
Examples and characteristics: Such cities are very rare. All the moment, almost all self-proclaimed “new cities” in the developed world are in fact large, integrated real-estate developments with an urban theme, usually in close proximity to a true municipality. Examples of these initiatives include New Songdo City in South Korea, Masdar City in Abu Dhabi, and Hafen City Hamburg in Germany.
Implications for city leaders: These satellites of existing metropolises compete for jobs and to attract talented participants in the creative economy. ….
Implications for entrepreneurs: Align with city leaders on services that are important to knowledge workers, and help build the cities’ brand. ….
Cities are different. So are solutions….(More)
Drones better than human rescuers at following mountain pathways
Springwise: “Every year in Switzerland, emergency centers respond to around 1,000 call outs for lost and injured hikers. It can often take hours and significant manpower to locate lost mountaineers, but new software for quadcopter drones is making the hunt quicker and easier, and has the potential to help find human survivors in disaster zones around the world.
The drone uses a computer algorithm called a Deep Neural Network. The program was developed by researchers at the University of Zurich and the Dalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence. The drone uses the algorithm to learn trails and paths through a pair of small cameras, interpreting the images and recognizing man-made pathways. Even when working on a previously unseen trail, it was able to guess the correct direction in 85 percent of the cases. The drones’ speed and accuracy make them more effective than human trackers.
The researchers hope that eventually multiple small drones could be combined with human search and rescue missions, to cover more terrain and find people faster. The drones can cover terrain quickly and check hazardous areas to minimize risk to human workers, and its AI can identify paths and avoid crashing without any human involvement….(More)”
Counting down to ‘Evaluating Digital Citizen Engagement: A practical guide’
Matt Haikin at Aptiva: “Last year, Aptivate led a consortium of researchers and practitioners to explore the role of technology in citizen-engagement and participation in the development sector, and how to evaluate the success of such activities…
The guide was researched, developed and written by the multidisciplinary team of Matt Haikin (Aptivate), Savita Bailur (now at Caribou Digital), Evangelia Berdou (IDS), Claudia Lopes (now at Africa’s Voices), Jonathan Dudding (ICA:UK) and Martin Belcher (now at Palladium Group).
The result – ‘Evaluating Digital Citizen Engagement: A practical guide’ will be published in electronic form on the World Bank’s Open Knowledge Repository any day now.
The Guide forms part of the recommended reading for the World Bank’s high profile Coursera course Citizen Engagement : A game changer for development? …So what can you expect to find in the Guide…
- Practical tools and guidelines for use in evaluating or designing activities in the expanding field of digital citizen engagement
- Resources for anyone seeking to better understand the role of digital technology in citizen engagement.
- Five ‘lenses’ you can use to explore different perspectives through which digital citizen engagement might be viewed (Objective, Control, Participation, Technology, Effects)Detailed advice and tips specific to technology and citizen engagement through every stage of a typical evaluation lifecycle (Scoping, Designing, Planning & Implementing, Analysing, Sharing, Reflecting & Learning)
- Toolkits to help you design your own research questions and evaluation designs …(More)”
Letting the people decide … but will government listen?
David Donaldson in The Mandarin: “If we now have the technology to allow citizens to vote directly on all issues, what job remains for public servants?
While new technology may provide new options to contribute, the really important thing is governmental willingness to actually listen, says Maria Katsonis, the Victorian Department of Premier and Cabinet’s director of equality.
The balance between citizen consultation and public service expertise in decision-making remains a hot debate, with South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill warning last year that while expertise in policy is important, overzealous bureaucrats and politicians can disenfranchise citizens.
The internet is assisting government to attain opinions from people more easily than ever before. SA, for example, has embraced the use of citizen juries in policy formation through its youSAy portal — though as yet on only some issues. Finland has experimented with digitally crowdsourcing input into the policymaking process.
The Victorian government, meanwhile, has received blowback around claims its recent announcement for a “skyrail” in Melbourne’s south-eastern suburbs went ahead with very little consultation…
Indeed, even a direct vote doesn’t mean the government is really listening to the people. A notable example of a government using a poorly designed popular vote to rubber stamp its own intentions was an online poll in Queensland on whether to cut public transport fares which was worded to suit the government’s own predilections.
Giving citizens the tools to contribute
Katsonis said she didn’t want to “diss crowdsourcing”; governments should think about where using it might be appropriate, and where it might not. Directly crowdsourcing legislation is perhaps not the best way to use the “wisdom of the crowd”, she suggested….The use of people’s panels to inform policy and budgeting — for example at the City of Melbourne — shows some promise as one tool to improve engagement. Participants of people’s panels — which see groups of ordinary citizens being given background information about the task at hand and then asked to come up with a proposal for what to do — tend to report a higher trust in governmental processes after they’ve gained some experience of the difficulty of making those decisions.
One of the benefits of that system is the chance to give participants the tools to understand those processes for themselves, rather than going in cold, as some other direct participation tools do….
Despite the risks, processes such as citizens’ panels are still a more nuanced approach than calls for frequent referenda or the new breed of internet-based political parties, such as Australia’s Online Direct Democracy, that promise their members of parliament will vote however a majority of voters tell them to….(More)”
Zika Emergency Puts Open Data Policies to the Test
and at PLOS: “The spreading epidemic of Zika virus, with its putative and alarming associations with Guillain-Barre syndrome and infant microcephaly, has arrived just as several initiatives have come into place to minimize delays in sharing the results of scientific research.
In September 2015, in response to concerns that research publishing practices had delayed access tocrucial information in the Ebola crisis, the World Health Organization convened a consultation “[i]nrecognition of the need to streamline mechanisms of data dissemination—globally and in as close toreal-time as possible” in the context of public health emergencies.
Participating medical journal editors, representing PLOS,BMJ and Nature journals and NEJM, provided a statement that journals should not act to delay access to data in a public health emergency: “In such scenarios,journals should not penalize, and, indeed, shouldencourage or mandate public sharing of relevant data…”
In a subsequent Comment in The Lancet, authors frommajor research funding organizations expressed supportfor data sharing in public health emergencies. TheInternational Committee of Medical Journal Editors(ICMJE), meeting in November 2015, lent further support to the principles of the WHO consultation byamending ICMJE “Recommendations” to endorse data sharing for public health emergencies of anygeographic scope.
Now that WHO has declared Zika to be a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, responses from these groups in recent days appear consistent with their recent declarations.
The ICMJE has announced that “In light of the need to rapidly understand and respond to the globalemergency caused by the Zika virus, content in ICMJE journals related to Zika virus is being made freeto access. We urge other journals to do the same. Further, as stated in our Recommendations, in theevent of a public health emergency (as defined by public health officials), information with immediateimplications for public health should be disseminated without concern that this will preclude subsequentconsideration for publication in a journal.”(www.icmje.org, accessed 9 Feburary 2016)
WHO has implemented special provisions for research manuscripts relevant to the Zika epidemic thatare submitted to WHO Bulletin; such papers “will be assigned a digital object identifier and posted onlinein the “Zika Open” collection within 24 hours while undergoing peer review. The data in these papers willthus be attributed to the authors while being freely available for reader scrutiny and unrestricted use”under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY IGO 3.0).
At PLOS, where open access and data sharing apply as matter of course, all PLOS journals aim toexpedite peer review evaluation, pre-publication posting, and data sharing from research relevant to theZika outbreak. PLOS Currents Outbreaks offers an online platform for rapid publication of preliminaryresults, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases has committed to provide priority handling of Zika reports ingeneral, and other PLOS journals will prioritize submissions within their respective scopes. The PLOSZika Collection page provides central access to relevant and continually updated content from acrossthe PLOS journals, blogs, and collaborating organizations.
Today, the Wellcome Trust has issued a statement urging journals to commit to “make all content concerning the Zika virus free to access,” and funders to “require researchers undertaking work relevant to public health emergencies to set in place mechanisms to share quality-assured interim and final data as rapidly and widely as possible, including with public health and research communities and the World Health Organisation.” Among 31 initial signatories are such journals and publishers as PLOS, Springer Nature, Science journals, The JAMA Network, eLife, the Lancet, and New England Journal ofMedicine; and funding organizations including Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical ResearchCouncil, US National Institutes of Health, Wellcome Trust, and other major national and internationalresearch funders.
This policy shift prompts reconsideration of how we publish urgently needed data during a public health emergency….(More)”
Hoaxmap: Debunking false rumours about refugee ‘crimes’
“The stories seemed to be [orchestrated] by far-right parties and organisations and I wanted to try to find some way to help organise this – maybe find patterns and give people a tool to look up these stories [when] they were being confronted with new ones.”
And so she did.
Along with 35-year-old developer Lutz Helm, Schwarz launched last week Hoaxmap, an online platform that allows people to separate fact from fiction by debunking false rumours about supposed crimes committed by refugees.
Using an interactive system of popping dots, the map documents and categorises where those “crimes” allegedly took place. It then counters that false information with official statements from the police and local authorities, as well as news reports in which the allegations have been disproved. The debunked cases marked on the map range from thefts and assaults to manslaughter – but one of the most common topics is rape, Schwarz said….(More)”