Joanna Roberts interviews Dirk Helbing, Professor of Computational Social Science at ETH Zurich at Horizon: “…If we want to be competitive, Europe needs to find its own way. How can we differentiate ourselves and make things better? I believe Europe should not engage in the locked data strategy that we see in all these huge IT giants. Instead, Europe should engage in open data, open innovation, and value-sensitive design, particularly approaches that support informational self-determination. So everyone can use this data, generate new kinds of data, and build applications on top. This is going to create ever more possibilities for everyone else, so in a sense that will turn a digital desert into a digital rainforest full of opportunities for everyone, with a rich information ecosystem.’…
The Internet of Things is the next big emerging information communication technology. It’s based on sensors. In smartphones there are about 15 sensors; for light, for noise, for location, for all sorts of things. You could also buy additional external sensors for humidity, for chemical substances and almost anything that comes to your mind. So basically this allows us to measure the environment and all the features of our physical, biological, economic, social and technological environment.
‘Imagine if there was one company in the world controlling all the sensors and collecting all the information. I think that might potentially be a dystopian surveillance nightmare, because you couldn’t take a single step or speak a single word without it being recorded. Therefore, if we want the Internet of Things to be consistent with a stable democracy then I believe we need to run it as a citizen web, which means to create and manage the planetary nervous system together. The citizens themselves would buy the sensors and activate them or not, would decide themselves what sensor data they would share with whom and for what purpose, so informational self-determination would be at the heart, and everyone would be in control of their own data.’….
A lot of exciting things will become possible. We would have a real-time picture of the world and we could use this data to be more aware of what the implications of our decisions and actions are. We could avoid mistakes and discover opportunities we would otherwise have missed. We will also be able to measure what’s going on in our society and economy and why. In this way, we will eventually identify the hidden forces that determine the success or failure of a company, of our economy or even our society….(More)”
Mobile customer service gives city residents a voice with government
Lauren Horwitz at TechTarget: “When social scientists James Wilson and George Kelling devised their broken windows theory during the 1980s, they couldn’t have imagined smartphones as tools to keep neighborhoods safe and clean. But for the city of Philadelphia, a new online initiative known as Philly 311 turns mobile devices into frontline tools for citizens to report problems and engage with local government.
Until just a few months ago, when Philadelphia residents wanted to report a graffiti-riddled building, they would have to call the city’s customer contact center. Some residents toted around hefty physical binders to track issues. But today, they can use mobile phones to report incidents and track them online without having to make a call or stop by the contact center.
With Philly 311, which launched in December 2014, residents can take photos of wayward trash littering a street, “geolocate” the incident with a mobile phone,…
With initiatives like Philly 311, the city has experienced changes in resident interaction with government. Between 2013 and 2014, for example, mobile phone use to report incidents to the city’s contact center exploded, with communication increasing more than 300%. Walk-in communication with the contact center decreased by 9%, by contrast, and email communications by 1%. Mobile reporting of incidents can thus promote some contact center efficiencies, in which incidents are automatically reported by phone and routed to the appropriate department. Lue said that the city has made the shift to accommodate residents’ need for more effective and scalable multichannel options….(More)”
Public Participation for 21st Century Democracy
Book by “…Public Participation for 21st Century Democracy explores the theory and practice of public participation in decision-making and problem-solving. It examines how public participation developed over time to include myriad thick, thin, and conventional opportunities, occurring in both face-to-face meetings and online settings. The book explores the use of participation in various arenas, including education, health, land use, and state and federal government. It offers a practical framework for thinking about how to engage citizens effectively, and clear explanations of participation scenarios, tactics, and designs. Finally, the book provides a sensible approach for reshaping our participation infrastructure to meet the needs of public officials and citizens.
The book is filled with illustrative examples of innovative participatory activities, and numerous sources for more information. This important text puts the spotlight on the need for long-term, cross-sector, participation planning, and provides guidance for leaders, citizens, activists, and others who are determined to improve the ways that participation and democracy function. Public Participation for 21st Century Democracy:
- Helps students and practitioners understand the history, theory, and practice of public participation
- Contains a wealth of case studies that explore the application of public participation in different settings
- Covers vital issues such as education, health, land use, and state and federal government
- Has accompanying instructor resources, such as PowerPoint slides, discussion questions, sample assignments, case studies and research from www.participedia.net, and classroom activities. …(more)”
Where is Our Polis In the 21st Century?
Hollie Russon Gilman: “If you could improve the relationship between citizens and the state, how would you do it? It’s likely that your answer would be different from mine and still different from the next five people I ask. Because rules and structures of government are constantly changing and the tools people use to communicate shift with newly available technologies, this relationship must continue to evolve…
Multiple factors shape the quality of democracy, such as the safety of free speech and reliability of public transit or secure long-term planning. Democracy, at least the glorified ancient ideal some like to lay claim to as our founding heritage, also involves the creation of a polis — specifically, a place where man is freed from the burdens of household goods, most famously articulated by Plato in The Republic.
We can’t mistake an ideal for the reality — Plato’s polis was highly constrained and available only to the most privileged of Greek men within a social system that also sanctioned slavery. However, the ideal of the polis — a place to experience democratic virtues — also holds at least theoretical promise and compelling possibilities for real change to the current state of American democracy.
We need what this ideal has to offer, because the social contract as we know it today can feel more like a series of alienating, disconnected obligations than what it could and should be: an enabler of civic creativity or power. Our current social contract does not come with a polis — or, to put it another way, room to imagine new ways of thinking.
Why is this a problem? Because in order to truly harness civic innovation, we need to embrace deeper ways of thinking about democracy.
What would a deeper democracy look like? Harvard political theorist Robert Unger describes “deepened democracy” in his recent book Democracy Realized: The Progressive Alternative as a system in which citizens “must be able to see themselves and one another as individuals capable of escaping their confined roles.” One promising way citizens can perform new roles in a “deeper democracy” is by working with public institutions, and amongst themselves, to influence policymaking.
We need tools to empower these citizens use their work to fashion a polis for the 21st century. One particularly promising innovation is Participatory Budgeting (often shortened to “PB”), which is a process whereby citizens make spending decisions on a defined public budget and operate as active participants in public decision-making like allocating local funds in their neighborhood. The Brazilian Workers’ Party first attempted PB in 1989, where its success led to the World Bank calling PB a “best practice” in democratic innovation….
Why is PB so effective as a civic engagement tool? PB is especially powerful because it engages citizens with complex political issues on the local level, where they live. PB’s strength as an intervention in our social contract lies in municipal budgets as the scale at which citizens can be experts. In other words, people who live day to day in communities know best what resources those communities need to solve problems, be successful, and thrive.
Many of our governance decisions face the dual challenges of integrating individual-level participation efforts with the scale of contemporary national U.S. politics. Part of PB’s power may be breaking down complex decisions into their manageable parts. This strategy could be applied beyond budgets to a range of decision-making such as climate adaption or addressing food deserts.
PB represents one of the best tools in a broader toolkit designed to re-engage citizens in governance, but it’s far from the only one. Look around your very block, community, and city. Examples of places that could operate as a 21st-century polis range from traditional community anchor institutions engaging in new ways to the application of digital tools for civic ends. Citizenvestor is a civic crowd-funding site that works online and with traditional brick-and-mortar organizations. In Mount Rainer, MD, Community Forklift — a “nonprofit reuse center for home improvement supplies” (or, you might say, a library for tools) — and a local bike share engage a large group of residents.
Civic and social innovation is built from the exchange of resources between government institutions and community networks. Ideally, through coming together to talk, debate, and engage in the public sphere, people can flex their civic muscle and transform their lives. The fabric of communities is woven with the threads of deeply engaged and dedicated residents. A challenge of our current moment in history is to reconcile these passions with the mechanisms, and sometimes the technologies, necessary to improve public life.
Can this all add up to a wholesale civic revolution? Time will tell. At a minimum, it suggests the potential of community networks (analog and digital) to be leveraged for a stronger, more resilience and responsive 21st century polis….(More)”
Making City Hall Leaner
How do we create services that people actually want to use?
The first change is to start thinking about these services as products. What’s the difference? Well, this is where we can learn something from startups. Products are the tools that we build to deliver value to our users.
Products are typically managed by one or more product managers that watch very carefully how users interact with the product so the startup can determine which features to keep and which to toss. We can contrast this with traditional government services which are developed at some point to solve a problem of some sort, but because they are typically not monitored in a way to understand whether these services are actually adding value, they quickly fall out of sync with the needs of people.
Consider government websites that allow people to access their benefits. These sites are typically clunky to use and hard to navigate. This isn’t a small issue. It can be the difference between people getting and not getting the resources they need to survive.
Case in point: CalFresh.
These are services.
Compare this to a site such as Balance which was designed by watching how people use the CalFresh site, talking to these users about how they would like to access their benefits and then building a tool that actually responds to their needs.This is a product.
So, we need to be thinking about not only what government is building (in terms of tools), but also how it builds them.
The approach to building high-value products used by startups (and other orgs looking to build better products) is called Agile.
There are many flavors of Agile, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. One of the more recent agile methodologies that has garnered support in the startup community is Lean developed by Eric Reiss in his book, “The Lean Startup.”
Now, a word of caution. Any methodology that is used outside of the context in which it was intended runs the risk of simply not working. However, at its core, Lean is about learning what works and what doesn’t, so I’ll focus on the central elements of Lean since they have much to teach those of us who are working to overhaul local government about how to create value….(More)”
So, we need to be thinking about not only what government is building (in terms of tools), but also how it builds them.
The approach to building high-value products used by startups (and other orgs looking to build better products) is called Agile.
There are many flavors of Agile, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. One of the more recent agile methodologies that has garnered support in the startup community is Lean developed by Eric Reiss in his book, “The Lean Startup.”
Now, a word of caution. Any methodology that is used outside of the context in which it was intended runs the risk of simply not working. However, at its core, Lean is about learning what works and what doesn’t, so I’ll focus on the central elements of Lean since they have much to teach those of us who are working to overhaul local government about how to create value….(More)”
Nudge Concept App Hopes To Point Pre-Diabetics Toward A Healthier Lifestyle
Addy Dugdale at FastCompany: “A new concept app from the London office of design and innovation consultancy Smart Design aims to improve the health of a large portion of the world’s population, a segment for whom weight loss can be a matter of life and death: diabetics.
Nudge is a concept app aimed at pre-diabetics—people with a high risk of developing type 2 diabetes—to change their eating habits. Described as a “personal nutritionist disguised as a shopping assistant,” the app keeps track of a user’s weekly grocery shopping using a phone’s camera to scan products on store shelves. The app looks for purchasing patterns that can be improved, and suggests healthy alternatives—like substituting red rice for white rice, or maybe even quinoa—to nudge the individual toward making better decisions. The idea is to help pre-diabetics make small, incremental changes.
…(More)”
One State Wants To Let You Carry Your Driver’s License On Your Phone
Tarun Wadhwa at Singularity Hub: “There’s now a technology to replace almost everything in your wallet. Your cash, credit cards, and loyalty programs are all on their way to becoming obsolete. Money can now be sent via app, text, e-mail — it can even be sent via Snapchat. But you can’t leave your wallet home just yet. That’s because there is one item that remains largely unchanged: your driver’s license.
If the Iowa Department of Motor Vehicles has its way, that may no longer be the case. According to an article in the Des Moines Register, the agency is in the early stages of developing mobile software for just this purpose. The app would store a resident’s personal information, whatever is already on the physical licenses, and also include a scannable bar code. The plans are for the app to include a two-step verification process including some type of biometric or pin code. At this time, it appears that specific implementation details are still being worked out.
The governments of the United Kingdom and United Arab Emirates had both previously announced their own attempts to experiment with the concept. It’s becoming increasingly common to see mobile versions of other documents. Over 30 states now allow motorists to show electronic proof of insurance. It only follows that the driver’s license would be next. But the considerations around that document are different — it is perhaps the most regulated and important document that a person carries….(More)”
Scenario Planning Case Studies Using Open Government Data
We present two case studies that demonstrate the utility of data integration and web mapping. As a simple proof of concept the user can explore different scenarios in each case study by indicating the relative weightings to be used for the decision making process. Both case studies are demonstrated as a publicly available interactive map-based website….(More)”
The Trouble With Disclosure: It Doesn’t Work
Jesse Eisinger at ProPublica: “Louis Brandeis was wrong. The lawyer and Supreme Court justice famously declared that sunlight is the best disinfectant, and we have unquestioningly embraced that advice ever since.
All this sunlight is blinding. As new scholarship is demonstrating, the value of all this information is unproved. Paradoxically, disclosure can be useless — and sometimes actually harmful or counterproductive.
“We are doing disclosure as a regulatory move all over the board,” says Adam J. Levitin, a law professor at Georgetown, “The funny thing is, we are doing this despite very little evidence of its efficacy.”…
Of course, some disclosure works. Professor Levitin cites two examples. The first is an olfactory disclosure. Methane doesn’t have any scent, but a foul smell is added to alert people to a gas leak. The second is ATM. fees. A study in Australia showed that once fees were disclosed, people avoided the high-fee machines and took out more when they had to go to them.
But to Omri Ben-Shahar, co-author of a recent book, ” More Than You Wanted To Know: The Failure of Mandated Disclosure,” these are cherry-picked examples in a world awash in useless disclosures. Of course, information is valuable. But disclosure as a regulatory mechanism doesn’t work nearly well enough, he argues.
First, it really works only when things are simple. As soon as transactions become complex, disclosure starts to stumble. Buying a car, for instance, turns out to be several transactions: the purchase itself, the financing, maybe the trade-in of old car and various insurance and warranty decisions. These are all subject to various disclosure rules, but making the choices clear and useful has proved nigh impossible.
In complex transactions, we then must rely on intermediaries to give us advice. Because they are often conflicted, they, too, become subject to disclosure obligations. Ah, even more boilerplate to puzzle over!
And then there’s the harm. Over the years, banks that sold complex securities often stuck impossible-to-understand clauses deep in prospectuses that “disclosed” what was really going on. When the securities blew up, as they often did, banks then fended off lawsuits by arguing they had done everything the law required and were therefore not liable.
“That’s the harm of disclosure,” Professor Ben-Shahar said. “It provides a safe harbor for practices that smell bad. It sanitizes every bad practice.”
The anti-disclosure movement is taking on the ” Nudge” school, embraced by the Obama administration and promoted most prominently by Cass R. Sunstein, a scholar at Harvard, and Richard H. Thaler, an economist at the University of Chicago. These nudgers believe that small policies will prod people to do what’s in their best interests.
The real-world evidence in favor of nudging is thin. …
The ever-alluring notion is that we are just one or two changes away from having meaningful disclosure. If we could only have annual Securities and Exchange Commission filings in plain English, we could finally understand what’s going on at corporations. A University of San Diego Law School professor, Frank Partnoy, and I called for better bank disclosure in an article in The Atlantic a few years ago.
Professor Ben-Shahar mocks it. ” ‘Plain English!’ ‘Make it simple.’ That is the deus ex machina, the god that will solve everything,” he said.
Complex things are, sadly, complex. A mortgage is not an easy transaction to understand. People are not good at predicting their future behavior and so don’t know what options are best for them. “The project of simplification is facing a very poor empirical track record and very powerful theoretical problem,” he said.
What to do instead? Hard and fast rules. If lawmakers want to end a bad practice, ban it. Having them admit it is not enough. (More)”
“We are doing disclosure as a regulatory move all over the board,” says Adam J. Levitin, a law professor at Georgetown, “The funny thing is, we are doing this despite very little evidence of its efficacy.”…
Of course, some disclosure works. Professor Levitin cites two examples. The first is an olfactory disclosure. Methane doesn’t have any scent, but a foul smell is added to alert people to a gas leak. The second is ATM. fees. A study in Australia showed that once fees were disclosed, people avoided the high-fee machines and took out more when they had to go to them.
But to Omri Ben-Shahar, co-author of a recent book, ” More Than You Wanted To Know: The Failure of Mandated Disclosure,” these are cherry-picked examples in a world awash in useless disclosures. Of course, information is valuable. But disclosure as a regulatory mechanism doesn’t work nearly well enough, he argues.
First, it really works only when things are simple. As soon as transactions become complex, disclosure starts to stumble. Buying a car, for instance, turns out to be several transactions: the purchase itself, the financing, maybe the trade-in of old car and various insurance and warranty decisions. These are all subject to various disclosure rules, but making the choices clear and useful has proved nigh impossible.
In complex transactions, we then must rely on intermediaries to give us advice. Because they are often conflicted, they, too, become subject to disclosure obligations. Ah, even more boilerplate to puzzle over!
And then there’s the harm. Over the years, banks that sold complex securities often stuck impossible-to-understand clauses deep in prospectuses that “disclosed” what was really going on. When the securities blew up, as they often did, banks then fended off lawsuits by arguing they had done everything the law required and were therefore not liable.
“That’s the harm of disclosure,” Professor Ben-Shahar said. “It provides a safe harbor for practices that smell bad. It sanitizes every bad practice.”
The anti-disclosure movement is taking on the ” Nudge” school, embraced by the Obama administration and promoted most prominently by Cass R. Sunstein, a scholar at Harvard, and Richard H. Thaler, an economist at the University of Chicago. These nudgers believe that small policies will prod people to do what’s in their best interests.
The real-world evidence in favor of nudging is thin. …
The ever-alluring notion is that we are just one or two changes away from having meaningful disclosure. If we could only have annual Securities and Exchange Commission filings in plain English, we could finally understand what’s going on at corporations. A University of San Diego Law School professor, Frank Partnoy, and I called for better bank disclosure in an article in The Atlantic a few years ago.
Professor Ben-Shahar mocks it. ” ‘Plain English!’ ‘Make it simple.’ That is the deus ex machina, the god that will solve everything,” he said.
Complex things are, sadly, complex. A mortgage is not an easy transaction to understand. People are not good at predicting their future behavior and so don’t know what options are best for them. “The project of simplification is facing a very poor empirical track record and very powerful theoretical problem,” he said.
What to do instead? Hard and fast rules. If lawmakers want to end a bad practice, ban it. Having them admit it is not enough. (More)”
Training the next generation of public leaders
Thanks to the generous support of the Knight Foundation, this term the Governance Lab Academy – a training program designed to promote civic engagement and innovation – is launching a series of online coaching programs.
Geared to the teams and individuals inside and outside of government planning to undertake a new project or trying to figure out how to make an existing project even more effective and scalable, these programs are designed to help participants working in civic engagement and innovation develop effective projects from idea to implementation.
Convened by leading experts in their fields, coaching programs meet exclusively online once a week for four weeks or every other week for eight weeks. They include frequent and constructive feedback, customized and original learning materials, peer-to-peer support, mentoring by topic experts and individualized coaching from those with policy, technology, and domain expertise.
There is no charge to participants but each program is limited to 8-10 project teams or individuals.
You can see the current roster of programs below and check out the website for more information (including FAQs), to sign up and to suggest a new program.
- Citizen Science on the Web, starting the week of March 2, 2015.
- Civic Tech for Local Legislatures and Legislators, starting the week of March 2, 2015.
- Freedom of Information and FOIA Project Coaching: Breaking Down the Walls and Opening Up Communications, starting the week of March 2, 2015.
- Citizen Engagement Projects, starting the week of March 2, 2015.
- Tech Procurement Projects: Making the Supply Chain Work, starting the week of March 16, 2015.
- Leveraging Crowds in the Public Sector, starting the week of March 23, 2015.
- Open Source Technology Practices For Civic Engagement Projects, starting the week of April 6, 2015.
- Humanitarian Innovation Project Collaborative, starting the week of April 6, 2015.
- Lab Design: Bringing Agility and Empiricism to Public Problems, starting the week of April 6, 2015.
- Open Data Data-Driven Decisions for All, starting the week of April 6, 2015.
- Data Analytics for Change, dates TBD.
- Open Contracting Projects, dates TBD.
Faculty includes:
- Brian Behlendorf, Managing Director at Mithril Capital Management and Co-Founder Apache
- Alexandra Clare, Founder of Iraq Re:Coded
- Brian Forde, Senior Former Advisor to the U.S. CTO, White House Office of Science Technology and Policy
- Francois Grey, Coordinator of the Citizen Cyberscience Centre, Geneva
- Gavin Hayman, Executive Director of the Open Contracting Partnership
- Clay Johnson, CEO of The Department for Better Technology and Former Presidential Innovation Fellow
- Benjamin Kallos, New York City Council Member and Chair of the Committee on Governmental Operations of the New York City Council
- Karim Lakhani, Lumry Family Associate Professor of Business Administration at the Harvard Business School
- Amen Ra Mashariki, Chief Analytics Officer of New York City
- Geoff Mulgan, Chief Executive of NESTA
- Miriam Nisbet, Former Director of the Office of Government Information Services
- Beth Noveck, Founder and CEO of The GovLab
- Tiago Peixoto, Open Government Specialist at The World Bank
- Arnaud Sahuguet, Chief Technology Officer of The GovLab
- Joeri van den Steenhoven, Co-Founder and Chief Research and Development Officer of MaRS Solutions Lab
- Stefaan Verhulst, Co-Founder and Chief Research and Development Officer of The GovLab