Paper by Mikko Leino and Katariina Kulha: “Deliberative mini-publics have often been considered to be a potential way to promote future-oriented thinking. Still, thinking about the future can be hard as it can evoke negative emotions such as stress and anxiety. This article establishes why a more positive outlook towards the future can benefit long-term decision-making. Then, it explores whether and to what extent deliberative mini-publics can facilitate thinking about the future by moderating negative emotions and encouraging positive emotions. We analyzed an online mini-public held in the region of Satakunta, Finland, organized to involve the public in the drafting process of a regional plan extending until the year 2050. In addition to the standard practices related to mini-publics, the Citizens’ Assembly included an imaginary time travel exercise, Future Design, carried out with half of the participants. Our analysis makes use of both survey and qualitative data. We found that democratic deliberation can promote positive emotions, like hopefulness and compassion, and lessen negative emotions, such as fear and confusion, related to the future. There were, however, differences in how emotions developed in the various small groups. Interviews with participants shed further light onto how participants felt during the event and how their sentiments concerning the future changed…(More)”
Global Citizen Deliberation on Artificial Intelligence
Report by Connected by Data: “This report explores how global citizen deliberation, particularly drawing on the concept of a global citizens’ assembly, could and should shape the future of artificial intelligence. Drawing on an extended design lab of in-depth interviews and workshops that took place in mid-2024, it presents a series of options for bringing the voices of those affected by AI development and deployment into decision-making spaces, through processes that can deliver informed and inclusive dialogue… In this report we address how established and emerging sites of global AI development and governance can integrate citizen deliberation, setting out five template options for citizens’ assemblies on AI: deliberative review of AI summits and scientific reports; an independent global assembly on AI; a series of distributed dialogues organized across the globe; a technology-enabled collective intelligence process; and commissioning the inclusion of AI topics in other deliberative processes…(More)”.
Trust in official statistics remains high but there’s still work to do
Article by Ian Diamond (UK): “..I’m excited about the potential of new data sources, and I want everyone in the UK to have the skills to understand and use the stats they allow us to create. With this in mind, we’re launching a whole host of new projects to bring our stats to the people:
How to videos
To benefit from stats, and be confident that they are reliable, we need to understand more about the data they have been derived from and how to read and use them.
Our new set of video guides are a great place to start, covering topics such as why data matters to how the ONS de-identifies them and where we get them from.
They are all available to watch on our YouTube channel.
Playground survey
During the 2023/2024 school year, we teamed up with the BBC and the Micro:bit Foundation to give children in primary schools the opportunity to take part in a nationwide playground survey.
The BBC Micro:bit Playground Survey is a wonderful way for children to learn data skills at an early age, getting to grips with data collection and analysis in a way that is relevant to their everyday lives, in a familiar and fun setting.
If children become data-literate now, they will be well prepared to navigate and take advantage of the huge amounts of data that will no doubt play an important role in their adult lives.
Keep an eye out for the results in October.
Navigating numbers – the ONS data education programme
We’ve also been busy developing a data education programme for students in further education or sixth form.
Navigating numbers: how data are used to create statistics includes a series of five classroom toolkits, exploring topics such as gender pay gaps, inflation, and health.
Created with the support of the Association of Colleges (AoC), this learning resource is free for teachers to use and available for download on the ONS website.
The ONS’s educational webinar series: Bringing data to life
If you want to learn more about measuring the cost of living or our nation’s health, then our new webinar series has you covered. These and other topics will be brought to life in this new series of online events, launching in September 2024…(More)”
Reviving the commons: A scoping review of urban and digital commoning
Report by James Henderson and Oliver Escobar: “The review aims to contribute to the growing discourse on the commons, highlighting its significance in contemporary societies and its potential as an alternative to traditional forms of socioeconomic and political organisation via the state and/or the market. Practitioners in the field argue that we are witnessing a revival of the commons in the 21st century. This report interrogates the nature of that revival and explores key concepts, examples, trends and debates in theory and practice, while outlining an emerging research agenda…(More)”.
A blueprint for better international collaboration on evidence
BIT Report: “…This report is focused on four countries: the U.S., the UK, Australia, and Canada and provides a series of practical ideas for investments to improve the quality and use of evidence in policy design, implementation, and evaluation. It highlights the opportunities and challenges ahead, as the demand for and supply of evidence continue to grow in a world with complex policy challenges.
It is a call to action for governments to collaborate more closely on evidence generation and utilisation. By pooling resources and expertise, countries can bridge the existing gaps in their evidence ecosystems, ultimately leading to more informed and effective public policies.
The main recommendation is for countries to collaborate on evidence synthesis. The most promising avenue for evidence synthesis is Living Evidence Reviews (LERs), which are systematic reviews that are continuously updated. The authors propose ‘meta’ LERs are conducted across all areas of social policy to answer the questions that really matter to policymakers…(More)”. See also: Using Living Evidence and
Visualization in the Grant Making Process
UN E-Government Survey 2024
Report by United Nations (DESA): “…provides a comprehensive assessment of the digital government landscape across all 193 Member States. The 2024 Survey highlights a significant upward trend in the development of digital government worldwide, with increased investment in resilient infrastructure and cutting-edge technologies. The global average value of the E-Government Development Index (EGDI) shows substantial improvement, with the proportion of the population lagging in digital government development decreasing from 45.0 per cent in 2022 to 22.4 per cent in 2024. Despite significant progress in digital government development, the EGDI averages for the African region, least developed countries, and small island developing States remain below the global average, underscoring the need for targeted efforts to bridge existing gaps.
At the local level, the Survey continues to assess city portals using the Local Online Services Index (LOSI). The LOSI findings reflect steady progress but also highlight persistent disparities between national and local e-government performance, pointing to the need for focused initiatives to strengthen digital government at the municipal level. This edition introduces the new Digital Government Model Framework, providing countries with a comprehensive road map for the effective planning, implementation and assessment of digital government initiatives. A short addendum explores the integration of AI in digital government development, emphasizing the importance of maximizing benefits and minimizing risks to achieve balanced governance…(More)”
Leadership as Stewardship
Book by Marian Iszatt-White: “Exploring different understandings of stewardship across a range of research domains and cultures, this insightful book examines the tensions between competing perspectives and their implications for leadership. Marian Iszatt-White proposes ‘leadership-as-stewardship’ as a new signifier for leadership research, providing practical guidance to leaders navigating the challenges and trade-offs of the Anthropocene.
Leadership as Stewardship identifies how the apparent inadequacy of modern leadership coincides with a shift in scholarship away from practical inquiry and towards a range of aspirational approaches, including authentic, sustainable, responsible and ethical. Iszatt-White proposes stewardship as an alternative to these aspirational forms of leadership and challenges the ability of Western, Enlightenment-based thinking to solve global issues created by that same thinking. The book concludes that it is time to place the more enact-able construct of stewardship at the heart of leadership aspirations and scholarly activities.
Interdisciplinary in scope, this book will be vital for scholars of leadership, management and organization studies. Highlighting the ability of stewardship to combat perceived failings in leadership as both a construct and a practice, it is also valuable to policymakers, management educators and leadership practitioners…(More)”.
Artificial Intelligence for the Internal Democracy of Political Parties
Paper by Claudio Novelli et al: “The article argues that AI can enhance the measurement and implementation of democratic processes within political parties, known as Intra-Party Democracy (IPD). It identifies the limitations of traditional methods for measuring IPD, which often rely on formal parameters, self-reported data, and tools like surveys. Such limitations lead to partial data collection, rare updates, and significant resource demands. To address these issues, the article suggests that specific data management and Machine Learning techniques, such as natural language processing and sentiment analysis, can improve the measurement and practice of IPD…(More)”.
Toward a citizen science framework for public policy evaluation
Paper by Giovanni Esposito et al: “This study pioneers the use of citizen science in evaluating Freedom of Information laws, with a focus on Belgium, where since its 1994 enactment, Freedom of Information’s effectiveness has remained largely unexamined. Utilizing participatory methods, it engages citizens in assessing transparency policies, significantly contributing to public policy evaluation methodology. The research identifies regional differences in Freedom of Information implementation across Belgian municipalities, highlighting that larger municipalities handle requests more effectively, while administrations generally show reluctance to respond to requests from perceived knowledgeable individuals. This phenomenon reflects a broader European caution toward well-informed requesters. By integrating citizen science, this study not only advances our understanding of Freedom of Information law effectiveness in Belgium but also advocates for a more inclusive, collaborative approach to policy evaluation. It addresses the gap in researchers’ experience with citizen science, showcasing its vast potential to enhance participatory governance and policy evaluation…(More)”.
Definitions, digital, and distance: on AI and policymaking
Article by Gavin Freeguard: “Our first question is less, ‘to what extent can AI improve public policymaking?’, but ‘what is currently wrong with policymaking?’, and then, ‘is AI able to help?’.
Ask those in and around policymaking about the problems and you’ll get a list likely to include:
- the practice not having changed in decades (or centuries)
- it being an opaque ‘dark art’ with little transparency
- defaulting to easily accessible stakeholders and evidence
- a separation between policy and delivery (and digital and other disciplines), and failure to recognise the need for agility and feedback as opposed to distinct stages
- the challenges in measuring or evaluating the impact of policy interventions and understanding what works, with a lack of awareness, let alone sharing, of case studies elsewhere
- difficulties in sharing data
- the siloed nature of government complicating cross-departmental working
- policy asks often being dictated by politics, with electoral cycles leading to short-termism, ministerial churn changing priorities and personal style, events prompting rushed reactions, or political priorities dictating ‘policy-based evidence making’
- a rush to answers before understanding the problem
- definitional issues about what policy actually is making it hard to get a hold of or develop professional expertise.
If we’re defining ‘policy’ and the problem, we also need to define ‘AI’, or at least acknowledge that we are not only talking about new, shiny generative AI, but a world of other techniques for automating processes and analysing data that have been used in government for years.
So is ‘AI’ able to help? It could support us to make better use of a wider range of data more quickly; but it could privilege that which is easier to measure, strip data of vital context, and embed biases and historical assumptions. It could ‘make decisions more transparent (perhaps through capturing digital records of the process behind them, or by visualising the data that underpins a decision)’; or make them more opaque with ‘black-box’ algorithms, and distract from overcoming the very human cultural problems around greater openness. It could help synthesise submissions or generate ideas to brainstorm; or fail to compensate for deficiencies in underlying government knowledge infrastructure, and generate gibberish. It could be a tempting silver bullet for better policy; or it could paper over the cracks, while underlying technical, organisational and cultural plumbing goes unfixed. It could have real value in some areas, or cause harms in others…(More)”.