Getting the Public on Side: How to Make Reforms Acceptable by Design

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

OECD Report: “Public acceptability is a crucial condition for the successful implementation of reforms. The challenges raised by the green, digital and demographic transitions call for urgent and ambitious policy action. Despite this, governments often struggle to build sufficiently broad public support for the reforms needed to promote change. Better information and effective public communication have a key role to play. But policymakers cannot get the public to choose the side of reform without a proper understanding of people’s views and how they can help strengthen the policy process.

Perceptual and behavioural data provide an important source of insights on the perceptions, attitudes and preferences that constitute the “demand-side” of reform. The interdisciplinary OECD Expert Group on New Measures of the Public Acceptability of Reforms was set up in 2021 to take stock of these insights and explore their potential for improving policy. This report reflects the outcomes of the Expert Group’s work. It looks at and assesses (i) the available data and what they can tell policymakers about people’s views; (ii) the analytical frameworks through which these data are interpreted; and (iii) the policy tools through which considerations of public acceptability are integrated into the reform process…(More)”.

Should AGI-preppers embrace DOGE?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog by Henry Farrell: “…AGI-prepping is reshaping our politics. Wildly ambitious claims for AGI have not only shaped America’s grand strategy, but are plausibly among the justifying reasons for DOGE.

After the announcement of DOGE, but before it properly got going, I talked to someone who was not formally affiliated, but was very definitely DOGE adjacent. I put it to this individual that tearing out the decision making capacities of government would not be good for America’s ability to do things in the world. Their response (paraphrased slightly) was: so what? We’ll have AGI by late 2026. And indeed, one of DOGE’s major ambitions, as described in a new article in WIRED, appears to have been to pull as much government information as possible into a large model that could then provide useful information across the totality of government.

The point – which I don’t think is understood nearly widely enough – is that radical institutional revolutions such as DOGE follow naturally from the AGI-prepper framework. If AGI is right around the corner, we don’t need to have a massive federal government apparatus, organizing funding for science via the National Science Foundation and the National Institute for Health. After all, in Amodei and Pottinger’s prediction:

By 2027, AI developed by frontier labs will likely be smarter than Nobel Prize winners across most fields of science and engineering. … It will be able to … complete complex tasks that would take people months or years, such as designing new weapons or curing diseases.

Who needs expensive and cumbersome bureaucratic institutions for organizing funding scientists in a near future where a “country of geniuses [will be] contained in a data center,” ready to solve whatever problems we ask them to? Indeed, if these bottled geniuses are cognitively superior to humans across most or all tasks, why do we need human expertise at all, beyond describing and explaining human wants? From this perspective, most human based institutions are obsolescing assets that need to be ripped out, and DOGE is only the barest of beginnings…(More)”.

On Democratic Organizing and Organization Theory

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Julie Battilana, Christine M. Beckman, and Julie Yen: “As threats to democracy endanger the rights and freedoms of people around the world, scholars are increasingly interrogating the role that organizations play in shaping democratic and authoritarian societies. Just as societies can be more or less democratic, so, too, can organizations. This essay, in honor of ASQ’s 70th volume, argues for a deeper focus in organizational research on the extent to which organizations themselves are democratic and the outcomes associated with these varied models of organizing. First, we provide a framework for considering the extent to which organizations are democratically organized, accounting for the varied ways in which workers can participate in their organizations. Second, we call for research on the outcomes associated with democratic organizing at both the organizational and societal levels. We build from research arguing that the extent to which workers participate in organizational decision making can spill over to impact their expectations of and participation in civic life. Moving forward, we argue it is critical to recognize that questions of democracy and authoritarianism concern not only the political contexts in which organizations are embedded but also how organizations themselves are structured and contribute to society…(More)”

Panels giving scientific advice to Census Bureau disbanded by Trump administration

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Jeffrey Mervis: “…U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has disbanded five outside panels that provide scientific and community advice to the U.S. Census Bureau and other federal statistical agencies just as preparations are ramping up for the country’s next decennial census, in 2030.

The dozens of demographers, statisticians, and public members on the five panels received nearly identical letters this week telling them that “the Secretary of Commerce has determined that the purposes for which the [committee] was established have been fulfilled, and the committee has been terminated effective February 28, 2025. Thank you for your service.”

Statistician Robert Santos, who last month resigned as Census Bureau director 3 years into his 5-year term, says he’s “terribly disappointed but not surprised” by the move, noting how a recent directive by President Donald Trump on gender identity has disrupted data collection for a host of federal surveys…(More)”.

Government data is disappearing before our eyes

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Anna Massoglia: “A battle is being waged in the quiet corners of government websites and data repositories. Essential public records are disappearing and, with them, Americans’ ability to hold those in power accountable.

Take the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk’s federal cost-cutting initiative. Touted as “maximally transparent,” DOGE is supposed to make government spending more efficient. But when journalists and researchers exposed major errors — from double-counting contracts to conflating caps with actual spending — DOGE didn’t fix the mistakes. Instead, it made them harder to detect.

Many Americans hoped DOGE’s work would be a step toward cutting costs and restoring trust in government. But trust must be earned. If our leaders truly want to restore faith in our institutions, they must ensure that facts remain available to everyone, not just when convenient.

Since Jan. 20, public records across the federal government have been erased. Economic indicators that guide investments, scientific datasets that drive medical breakthroughs, federal health guidelines and historical archives that inform policy decisions have all been put on the chopping block. Some missing datasets have been restored but are incomplete or have unexplained changes, rendering them unreliable.

Both Republican and Democratic administrations have played a role in limiting public access to government records. But the scale and speed of the Trump administration’s data manipulation — combined with buyouts, resignations and other restructuring across federal agencies — signal a new phase in the war on public information. This is not just about deleting files, it’s about controlling what the public sees, shaping the narrative and limiting accountability.

The Trump administration is accelerating this trend with revisions to official records. Unelected advisors are overseeing a sweeping reorganization of federal data, granting entities like DOGE unprecedented access to taxpayer records with little oversight. This is not just a bureaucratic reshuffle — it is a fundamental reshaping of the public record.

The consequences of data manipulation extend far beyond politics. When those in power control the flow of information, they can dictate collective truth. Governments that manipulate information are not just rewriting statistics — they are rewriting history.

From authoritarian regimes that have erased dissent to leaders who have fabricated economic numbers to maintain their grip on power, the dangers of suppressing and distorting data are well-documented.

Misleading or inconsistent data can be just as dangerous as opacity. When hard facts are replaced with political spin, conspiracy theories take root and misinformation fills the void.

The fact that data suppression and manipulation has occurred before does not lessen the danger, but underscores the urgency of taking proactive measures to safeguard transparency. A missing statistic today can become a missing historical fact tomorrow. Over time, that can reshape our reality…(More)”.

Beyond Answers Presented by AI: Unlocking Innovation and Problem Solving Through A New Science of Questions

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Stefaan Verhulst and Hannah Chafetz: “Today’s global crises–from climate change to inequality–have demonstrated the need for a broader conceptual transformation in how to approach societal issues. Focusing on the questions can transform our understanding of today’s problems and unlock new discoveries and innovations that make a meaningful difference. Yet, how decision-makers go about asking questions remains an underexplored topic. 

Much of our recent work has focused on advancing a new science of questions that uses participatory approaches to define and prioritize the questions that matter most. As part of this work, we convened an Interdisciplinary Committee on Establishing and Democratizing the Science of Questions to discuss why questions matter for society and the actions needed to build a movement around this new science. 

In this article, we provide the main findings from these gatherings. First we outline several roles that questions can play in shaping policy, research innovation. Supported by real-world examples, we discuss how questions are a critical device for setting agendas, increasing public participation, improving coordination, and more. We then provide five key challenges in developing a systematic approach to questions raised by the Committee and potential solutions to address those challenges. Existing challenges include weak recognition of questions, lack of skills and lack of consensus on what makes a good question. 

In the latter part of this piece, we propose the concept of The QLab–a global center dedicated to the research and practice of asking questions. Co-developed with the Committee, the QLab would include five core functions: Thought Leadership, Architecting the Discovery of Questions, Field Building, Institutionalization and Practice, and Research on Questioning. By focusing on these core functions, The QLab can make significant progress towards establishing a field dedicated to the art and science of asking questions…(More)”.

What is a fair exchange for access to public data?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog and policy brief by Jeni Tennison: “The most obvious approach to get companies to share value back to the public sector in return for access to data is to charge them. However, there are a number of challenges with a “pay to access” approach: it’s hard to set the right price; it creates access barriers, particularly for cash-poor start-ups; and it creates a public perception that the government is willing to sell their data, and might be tempted to loosen privacy-protecting governance controls in exchange for cash.

Are there other options? The policy brief explores a range of other approaches and assesses these against five goals that a value-sharing framework should ideally meet, to:

  • Encourage use of public data, including by being easy for organisations to understand and administer.
  • Provide a return on investment for the public sector, offsetting at least some of the costs of supporting the NDL infrastructure and minimising administrative costs.
  • Promote equitable innovation and economic growth in the UK, which might mean particularly encouraging smaller, home-grown businesses.
  • Create social value, particularly towards this Government’s other missions, such as achieving Net Zero or unlocking opportunity for all.
  • Build public trust by being easily explainable, avoiding misaligned incentives that encourage the breaking of governance guardrails, and feeling like a fair exchange.

In brief, alternatives to a pay-to-access model that still provide direct financial returns include:

  • Discounts: the public sector could secure discounts on products and services created using public data. However, this could be difficult to administer and enforce.
  • Royalties: taking a percentage of charges for products and services created using public data might be similarly hard to administer and enforce, but applies to more companies.
  • Equity: taking equity in startups can provide long-term returns and align with public investment goals.
  • Levies: targeted taxes on businesses that use public data can provide predictable revenue and encourage data use.
  • General taxation: general taxation can fund data infrastructure, but it may lack the targeted approach and public visibility of other methods.

It’s also useful to consider non-financial conditions that could be put on organisations accessing public data..(More)”.

Activated Citizenship: The Transformative Power of Citizens’ Assemblies

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Marjan H. Ehsassi: “To counter pervasive levels of citizen disengagement from political institutions, this book examines democratic innovations that meaningfully engage with citizens to address some of the deficits of Western representative democracies.

Citizens’ assemblies provide one such innovation, offering opportunities for more consistent participation between elections, more meaningful input in government decision making, and more impactful platforms for participation. This cutting-edge book introduces a new definition for an Activated Citizen, along with a methodology to measure civic and political engagement. Relying on a mixed-methods approach and field research conducted in Paris, Brussels, Ottawa, and Petaluma (California), as well as participant observations, over 180 surveys, 61 in-depth interviews and storytelling, the book provides case studies and in-depth analysis of hotbutton topics including climate change, unhoused populations, democratic expression, assisted suicide and euthanasia. Each chapter weaves quantitative results with rich qualitative testimonies from participants, government representatives, and observers. Based on empirical evidence, the book explores the ways in which government-led citizens’ assemblies can promote a more Activated Citizen. To fully realize the transformative potential of deliberative platforms, a final chapter offers a blueprint for impact, outlining concrete measures along with recommendations for the design and implementation of future government-initiated deliberative platforms…(More)”.

Climate Assemblies and the Law: A Research Roadmap

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Leslie Anne and Duvic Paoli: “The article is interested in the relationship between citizens’ assemblies on climate change (‘climate assemblies’) and the law. It offers a research roadmap on the legal dimensions of climate assemblies with the view to advancing our knowledge of deliberative climate governance. The article explores six fundamental areas of inquiry on which legal scholarship can offer relevant insights. They relate to: i) understanding the outcomes of climate assemblies; ii) clarifying their role in the public law relationship between individuals and government; iii) gaining insights into the making of climate legislation and other rules; iv) exploring the societal authority of norms; v) illustrating the transnational governance of climate change, including the diffusion of its norms and vi) offering a testing ground for the design of legal systems that are more ecologically and socially just. The aim is to nudge legal scholars into exploring the richness of the questions raised by the emergence of climate assemblies and, in turn, to encourage other social science scholars to reflect on how the legal perspective might contribute to better understanding their object of study…(More)”.

How data can transform government in Latin America and the Caribbean

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by William Maloney, Daniel Rogger, and Christian Schuster: ” Governments across Latin America and the Caribbean are grappling with deep governance challenges that threaten progress and stability, including the need to improve efficiency, accountability and transparency.

Amid these obstacles, however, the region possesses a powerful, often underutilized asset: the administrative data it collects as a part of its everyday operations.

When harnessed effectively using data analytics, this data has the potential to drive transformative change, unlock new opportunities for growth and help address some of the most pressing issues facing the region. It’s time to tap into this potential and use data to chart a path forward. To help governments make the most of the opportunities that this data presents, the World Bank has embarked on a decade-long project to synthesize the latest knowledge on how to measure and improve government performance. We have found that governments already have a lot of the data they need to dramatically improve public services while conserving scarce resources.

But it’s not enough to collect data. It must also be put to good use to improve decision making, design better public policy and strengthen public sector functioning. We call these tools and practices for repurposing government data government analytics…(More)”.