Spaces for Deliberation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Gustav Kjær Vad Nielsen & James MacDonald-Nelson: “As citizens’ assemblies and other forms of citizen deliberation are increasingly implemented in many parts of the world, it is becoming more relevant to explore and question the role of the physical spaces in which these processes take place.

This paper builds on existing literature that considers the relationships between space and democracy. In the literature, this relationship has been studied with a focus on the architecture of parliament buildings, and on the role of urban public spaces and architecture for political culture, both largely within the context of representative democracy and with little or no attention given to spaces for facilitated citizen deliberation. With very limited considerations of the spaces for deliberative assemblies in the literature, in this paper, we argue that the spatial qualities for citizen deliberation demand more critical attention.

Through a series of interviews with leading practitioners of citizens’ assemblies from six different countries, we explore what spatial qualities are typically considered in the planning and implementation of these assemblies, what are the recurring challenges related to the physical spaces where they take place, and the opportunities and limitations for a more intentional spatial design. In this paper, we synthesise our findings and formulate a series of considerations for the spatial qualities of citizens’ assemblies aimed at informing future practice and further research…(More)”.

Democratic Resilience: Moving from Theoretical Frameworks to a Practical Measurement Agenda

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Nicholas Biddle, Alexander Fischer, Simon D. Angus, Selen Ercan, Max Grömping, andMatthew Gray: “Global indices and media narratives indicate a decline in democratic institutions, values, and practices. Simultaneously, democratic innovators are experimenting with new ways to strengthen democracy at local and national levels. These both suggest democracies are not static; they evolve as society, technology and the environment change.

This paper examines democracy as a resilient system, emphasizing the role of applied analysis in shaping effective policy and programs, particularly in Australia. Grounded in adaptive processes, democratic resilience is the capacity of a democracy to identify problems, and collectively respond to changing conditions, balancing institutional stability with transformative. It outlines the ambition of a national network of scholars, civil society leaders, and policymakers to equip democratic innovators with practical insights and foresight underpinning new ideas. These insights are essential for strengthening both public institutions, public narratives and community programs.

We review current literature on resilient democracies and highlight a critical gap: current measurement efforts focus heavily on composite indices—especially trust—while neglecting dynamic flows and causal drivers. They focus on the descriptive features and identify weaknesses, they do not focus on the diagnostics or evidence to what strengths democracies. This is reflected in the lack of cross-sector networked, living evidence systems to track what works and why across the intersecting dynamics of democratic practices. To address this, we propose a practical agenda centred on three core strengthening flows of democratic resilience: trusted institutions, credible information, and social inclusion.

The paper reviews six key data sources and several analytic methods for continuously monitoring democratic institutions, diagnosing causal drivers, and building an adaptive evidence system to inform innovation and reform. By integrating resilience frameworks and policy analysis, we demonstrate how real-time monitoring and analysis can enable innovation, experimentation and cross-sector ingenuity.

This article presents a practical research agenda connecting a national network of scholars and civil society leaders. We suggest this agenda be problem-driven, facilitated by participatory approaches to asking and prioritising the questions that matter most. We propose a connected approach to collectively posing key questions that matter most, expanding data sources, and fostering applied ideation between communities, civil society, government, and academia—ensuring democracy remains resilient in an evolving global and national context…(More)”.

‘We are flying blind’: RFK Jr.’s cuts halt data collection on abortion, cancer, HIV and more

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Alice Miranda Ollstein: “The federal teams that count public health problems are disappearing — putting efforts to solve those problems in jeopardy.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s purge of tens of thousands of federal workers has halted efforts to collect data on everything from cancer rates in firefighters to mother-to-baby transmission of HIV and syphilis to outbreaks of drug-resistant gonorrhea to cases of carbon monoxide poisoning.

The cuts threaten to obscure the severity of pressing health threats and whether they’re getting better or worse, leaving officials clueless on how to respond. They could also make it difficult, if not impossible, to assess the impact of the administration’s spending and policies. Both outside experts and impacted employees argue the layoffs will cost the government more money in the long run by eliminating information on whether programs are effective or wasteful, and by allowing preventable problems to fester.

“Surveillance capabilities are crucial for identifying emerging health issues, directing resources efficiently, and evaluating the effectiveness of existing policies,” said Jerome Adams, who served as surgeon general in the first Trump’s administration. “Without robust data and surveillance systems, we cannot accurately assess whether we are truly making America healthier.”..(More)”.

Statistical methods in public policy research

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Chapter by Andrew Heiss: “This essay provides an overview of statistical methods in public policy, focused primarily on the United States. I trace the historical development of quantitative approaches in policy research, from early ad hoc applications through the 19th and early 20th centuries, to the full institutionalization of statistical analysis in federal, state, local, and nonprofit agencies by the late 20th century.

I then outline three core methodological approaches to policy-centered statistical research across social science disciplines: description, explanation, and prediction, framing each in terms of the focus of the analysis. In descriptive work, researchers explore what exists and examine any variable of interest to understand their different distributions and relationships. In explanatory work, researchers ask why does it exist and how can it be influenced. The focus of the analysis is on explanatory variables (X) to either (1) accurately estimate their relationship with an outcome variable (Y), or (2) causally attribute the effect of specific explanatory variables on outcomes. In predictive work, researchers as what will happen next and focus on the outcome variable (Y) and on generating accurate forecasts, classifications, and predictions from new data. For each approach, I examine key techniques, their applications in policy contexts, and important methodological considerations.

I then consider critical perspectives on quantitative policy analysis framed around issues related to a three-part “data imperative” where governments are driven to count, gather, and learn from data. Each of these imperatives entail substantial issues related to privacy, accountability, democratic participation, and epistemic inequalities—issues at odds with public sector values of transparency and openness. I conclude by identifying some emerging trends in public sector-focused data science, inclusive ethical guidelines, open research practices, and future directions for the field…(More)”.

So You Want to Be a Dissident?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Julia Angwin and Ami Fields-Meyer: “…Heimans points to an increasingly hostile digital landscape as one barrier to effective grassroots campaigns. At the dawn of the digital era, in the two-thousands, e-mail transformed the field of political organizing, enabling groups like MoveOn.org to mobilize huge campaigns against the Iraq War, and allowing upstart candidates like Howard Dean and Barack Obama to raise money directly from people instead of relying on Party infrastructure. But now everyone’s e-mail inboxes are overflowing. The tech oligarchs who control the social-media platforms are less willing to support progressive activism. Globally, autocrats have more tools to surveil and disrupt digital campaigns. And regular people are burned out on actions that have failed to remedy fundamental problems in society.

It’s not clear what comes next. Heimans hopes that new tactics will be developed, such as, perhaps, a new online platform that would help organizing, or the strengthening of a progressive-media ecosystem that will engage new participants. “Something will emerge that kind of revitalizes the space.”

There’s an oft-told story about Andrei Sakharov, the celebrated twentieth-century Soviet activist. Sakharov made his name working as a physicist on the development of the U.S.S.R.’s hydrogen bomb, at the height of the Cold War, but shot to global prominence after Leonid Brezhnev’s regime punished him for speaking publicly about the dangers of those weapons, and also about Soviet repression.

When an American friend was visiting Sakharov and his wife, the activist Yelena Bonner, in Moscow, the friend referred to Sakharov as a dissident. Bonner corrected him: “My husband is a physicist, not a dissident.”

This is a fundamental tension of building a principled dissident culture—it risks wrapping people up in a kind of negative identity, a cloak of what they are not. The Soviet dissidents understood their work as a struggle to uphold the laws and rights that were enshrined in the Soviet constitution, not as a fight against a regime.

“They were fastidious about everything they did being consistent with Soviet law,” Benjamin Nathans, a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania and the author of a book on Soviet dissidents, said. “I call it radical civil obedience.”

An affirmative vision of what the world should be is the inspiration for many of those who, in these tempestuous early months of Trump 2.0, have taken meaningful risks—acts of American dissent.

Consider Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop who used her pulpit before Trump on Inauguration Day to ask the President’s “mercy” for two vulnerable groups for whom he has reserved his most visceral disdain. For her sins, a congressional ally of the President called for the pastor to be “added to the deportation list.”..(More)”.

Community Data: Creative Approaches to Empowering People with Information

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Rahul Bhargava: “…new toolkit for data storytelling in community settings, one purpose-built for goals like inclusion, empowerment, and impact. Data science and visualization has spread into new domains it was designed for – community organizing, education, journalism, civic governance, and more. The dominant computational methods and processes, which have not changed in response, are causing significant discriminatory and harmful impacts, documented by leading scholars across a variety of populations. Informed by 15 years of collaborations in academic and professional settings with nonprofits and marginalized populations, the book articulates a new approach for aligning the processes and media of data work with social good outcomes, learning from the practices of newspapers, museums, community groups, artists, and libraries.

This book introduces a community-driven framework as a response to the urgent need to realign data theories and methods around justice and empowerment to avoid further replicating harmful power dynamics and ensure everyone has a seat at the table in data-centered community processes. It offers a broader toolbox for working with data and presenting it, pushing beyond the limited vocabulary of surveys, spreadsheets, charts and graphs…(More)”.

Trump Wants to Merge Government Data. Here Are 314 Things It Might Know About You.

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Emily Badger and Sheera Frenkel: “The federal government knows your mother’s maiden name and your bank account number. The student debt you hold. Your disability status. The company that employs you and the wages you earn there. And that’s just a start. It may also know your …and at least 263 more categories of data.These intimate details about the personal lives of people who live in the United States are held in disconnected data systems across the federal government — some at the Treasury, some at the Social Security Administration and some at the Department of Education, among other agencies.

The Trump administration is now trying to connect the dots of that disparate information. Last month, President Trump signed an executive order calling for the “consolidation” of these segregated records, raising the prospect of creating a kind of data trove about Americans that the government has never had before, and that members of the president’s own party have historically opposed.

The effort is being driven by Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, and his lieutenants with the Department of Government Efficiency, who have sought access to dozens of databases as they have swept through agencies across the federal government. Along the way, they have elbowed past the objections of career staff, data security protocols, national security experts and legal privacy protections…(More)”.

The Social Biome: How Everyday Communication Connects and Shapes Us

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Andy J. Merolla and Jeffrey A. Hall: “We spend much of our waking lives communicating with others. How does each moment of interaction shape not only our relationships but also our worldviews? And how can we create moments of connection that improve our health and well-being, particularly in a world in which people are feeling increasingly isolated?
 
Drawing from their extensive research, Andy J. Merolla and Jeffrey A. Hall establish a new way to think about our relational life: as existing within “social biomes”—complex ecosystems of moments of interaction with others. Each interaction we have, no matter how unimportant or mundane it might seem, is a building block of our identities and beliefs. Consequently, the choices we make about how we interact and who we interact with—and whether we interact at all—matter more than we might know. Merolla and Hall offer a sympathetic, practical guide to our vital yet complicated social lives and propose realistic ways to embrace and enhance connection and hope…(More)”.

Data Localization: A Global Threat to Human Rights Online

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Freedom House: “From Pakistan to Zambia, governments around the world are increasingly proposing and passing data localization legislation. These laws, which refer to the rules governing the storage and transfer of electronic data across jurisdictions, are often justified as addressing concerns such as user privacy, cybersecurity, national security, and monopolistic market practices. Notwithstanding these laudable goals, data localization initiatives cause more harm than good, especially in legal environments with poor rule of law.

Data localization requirements can take many different forms. A government may require all companies collecting and processing certain types of data about local users to store the data on servers located in the country. Authorities may also restrict the foreign transfer of certain types of data or allow it only under narrow circumstances, such as after obtaining the explicit consent of users, receiving a license or permit from a public authority, or conducting a privacy assessment of the country to which the data will be transferred.

While data localization can have significant economic and security implications, the focus of this piece—inline with that of the Global Network Initiative and Freedom House—is on its potential human rights impacts, which are varied. Freedom House’s research shows that the rise in data localization policies worldwide is contributing to the global decline of internet freedom. Without robust transparency and accountability frameworks embedded into these provisions, digital rights are often put on the line. As these types of legislation continue to pop up globally, the need for rights-respecting solutions and norms for cross-border data flows is greater than ever…(More)”.

Why more AI researchers should collaborate with governments

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Mohamed Ibrahim: “Artificial intelligence (AI) is beginning to transform many industries, yet its use to improve public services remains limited globally. AI-based tools could streamline access to government benefits through online chatbots or automate systems by which citizens report problems such as potholes.

Currently, scholarly advances in AI are mostly confined to academic papers and conferences, rarely translating into actionable government policies or products. This means that the expertise at universities is not used to solve real-world problems. As a No10 Innovation Fellow with the UK government and a lecturer in spatial data science, I have explored the potential of AI-driven rapid prototyping in public policy.

Take Street.AI, a prototype smartphone app that I developed, which lets citizens report issues including potholes, street violence or illegal litter dumping by simply taking a picture through the app. The AI model classifies the problem automatically and alerts the relevant local authority, passing on the location and details of the issue. A key feature of the app is its on-device processing, which ensures privacy and reduces operational costs. Similar tools were tested as an early-warning system during the riots that swept the United Kingdom in July and August 2024.

AI models can also aid complex decision-making — for instance, that involved in determining where to build houses. The UK government plans to construct 1.5 million homes in the next 5 years, but planning laws require that several parameters be considered — such as proximity to schools, noise levels, the neighbourhoods’ built-up ratio and flood risk. The current strategy is to compile voluminous academic reports on viable locations, but an online dashboard powered by AI that can optimize across parameters would be much more useful to policymakers…(More)”.