Government 2.0 Taskforce » Social http://gov2.net.au Design by Ben Crothers of Catch Media Tue, 04 May 2010 23:55:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 en hourly 1 Lots of Gov 2.0 learning still to do… http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/10/09/lots-of-gov-2-0-learning-still-to-do%e2%80%a6/ http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/10/09/lots-of-gov-2-0-learning-still-to-do%e2%80%a6/#comments Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:31:40 +0000 Anna York http://gov2.net.au/?p=1155 Anna York is a second year Masters in Public Policy candidate at the Harvard Kennedy School, where she is co-Chair of the Government 2.0 Professional Interest Council and Executive Editor of the Kennedy School Review. Before enrolling in her Masters, Anna worked in the NSW Government, and she is looking forward to returning to Sydney after her graduation in May 2010.

As a Masters student at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, I have been very surprised at the relatively limited discussion about the principles, challenges and opportunities of Government 2.0 on my campus.

It seems that for many of my classmates and faculty, the idea that technology might revolutionise the way government works is a strange and distant concept. Or perhaps the underlying principles often touted as the foundation of Government 2.0 – openness, transparency, democracy, and engagement – are a little threatening to students being trained in traditional forms of bureaucratic management.

In an effort to broaden the discussion about Gov 2.0 and expose more faculty and students to these ideas, my classmate Yasmin Fodil and I have started the Government 2.0 Professional Interest Council at the Harvard Kennedy School. We have been working over the last few months to invite Gov 2.0 experts and practitioners to campus, facilitate debate and discussion and help students develop the skills they will need to be able public servants in the context of a growing innovation culture in government.

As more citizens seek their news, information and access to government services online, it will be increasingly important for public service leaders of the future to be well equipped to respond to – and take full advantage of – the challenges and opportunities new technologies present.

Indeed, I recently had the opportunity to meet the former Australian Public Service Commissioner (and now head of Medicare) Lynelle Briggs, who articulated this view forcefully in a speech about the future of the Australian Public Service:

The modern day world is requiring some new styles of leadership to be blended with those that have often been the norm in the public service. Leaders will have to become more innovative, actively seeking, encouraging and leveraging ideas from all quarters.

I hope these are issues that the Government 2.0 Taskforce can address. If Harvard is any measure, these are questions US educational institutions are just starting to grapple with.

Don’t get me wrong – I am not a technology evangelist who believes that social networking tools and multi-purpose databases are a panacea for every ill experienced or perpetuated by each one of the world’s governments.

But I do agree with the US General Service Administration’s Darlene Meskell’s argument (PDF):

The arrival of the Internet created new opportunities for citizen engagement through its powerful ability to organize. Online town meetings, social media, chat rooms, bulletin boards, deliberative processes for e-rulemaking, and feedback mechanisms for soliciting citizen input. All of these tools have a positive impact on public policy development because when people get involved everyone learns from each other, relationships are built, trust is established and the final outcome is improved.

I also believe that as new technologies are developed that can help make government services and administration more efficient and less costly, there will continue to be large scale investment in these new tools. We might as well get on board and exert influence to ensure these investments support enhanced democracy and improved citizen engagement – in addition to the eternal promise of cost savings and efficiency.

In the meantime, there is much that countries who are starting to take the less travelled Government 2.0 road can learn from each other.

As part of our Masters requirements, my classmate Yasmin and I are working with the US Federal Communications Commission to support their research and recommendations regarding how the national roll-out of broadband infrastructure can support improved civic engagement.

Many of the questions being raised by the Australian Government 2.0 Taskforce are simultaneously being considered by the FCC’s National Broadband Taskforce. In particular, we will be looking to international examples of national level governments have successfully deploying social media tools to enhance citizen engagement and participation. (If you have any interesting leads along these lines, please don’t hesitate to contact me!) I also hope that our work might be of use to the Australian Taskforce as it develops its final report.

While there are countless exciting prospects and many daunting challenges ahead as we work to improve the quality of our governments and strength of our democracies through the deployment of Government 2.0 principles, there are also opportunities to collaborate in learning across boundaries, borders and jurisdictions.

It is also important that we properly equip our public service leaders of the future with the skills and experiences they will need to harness the potential of true innovation and engagement in government.

Now that our Gov 2.0 group is up and running at the Kennedy School, we would love to make contact with other faculty, student and university groups in Australia and around the world working on these issues.

Do you know of tertiary institutions – courses, clubs, curricula – that are dealing with Gov 2.0 issues? Are there other opportunities for research students, faculty and government to work together on shaping the future of government? Do you agree that future leaders in public service will need different skill sets – and if so, what are the educational models we can look at to prepare them? We’d love to hear your thoughts!

]]>
http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/10/09/lots-of-gov-2-0-learning-still-to-do%e2%80%a6/feed/ 7
What I know to be true http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/07/04/what-i-know-to-be-true/ http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/07/04/what-i-know-to-be-true/#comments Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:44:11 +0000 Alan Noble http://gov2.net.au/?p=241 What I know to be true and what I hope for the taskforce

I’m Alan Noble, serial entrepreneur, technology junkie, and head of engineering at Google Australia/NZ. I’m delighted to be on the Gov2.0 taskforce in a personal capacity. After 25 years living and breathing technology, here’s what I know to be true and here’s what I hope to drive forward on the Gov2.0 taskforce.

Information is more powerful when it’s set free

Information is becoming a pervasive and free resource, driving the growth of the digital economy worldwide. And yet very useful, publicly funded, non-confidential public sector information, such as public transport data, is still locked up either behind Government firewalls or encumbered with onerous copyright restrictions, of little use to anyone. I want to see this PSI freely available to all. This will promote great social benefits, not least the immense potential for innovative new products and services to be developed here.  Google’s Victorian bushfires map is a great example, and was only possible because the Victorian Country Fire Authority had the foresight to put an RSS feed on their site.

Transparency promotes democracy and demands accountability

Australians want answers to questions like “How are you spending my money?” Government can do much more to promote a culture of pro-disclosure and transparency. Making government information more accessible online has the power to make Government more accountable and to increase participation from Australian citizens. This will go a long way in restoring trust in Government.

Change begins at home

In promoting the digital economy and fostering a culture of transparency and information sharing, Government must walk the walk and get with the digital program. The vast majority of computing  and information will be in the cloud and a younger generation will not know any differently. Our leaders today should embrace online communication and collaboration tools to be active participants in the community and open up a dialogue with citizens.

]]>
http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/07/04/what-i-know-to-be-true/feed/ 8
Layered Participation http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/06/25/layered-participation/ http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/06/25/layered-participation/#comments Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:30:04 +0000 Nicholas Gruen http://gov2.net.au/?p=55  

If you click on this link you’ll find an interesting Vox Pop tool for public deliberation on what should be the “Top [policy] priorities for Australia”. Now although public discussion of this kind is by definition useful or at least wholly in the spirit of democracy, there’s a problem. Or rather a number of problems. One is that it’s a kind of Vox Pop approach to policy – which is to say that as people swim through the issues on the list and vote for or against various propositions, their views may be almost completely uninformed. Since we don’t require people to prove their informed to vote, this isn’t a show stopper. But nor are they representative. Not only are they not representative, but the moment such a site began to have any direct significance it would immediately be a potential target for various political campaigns. IIRC when Barack Obama asked citizens to nominate their top priorities in a similar kind of exercise, a group seeking to liberalise marijuana laws got going and registered thousands of votes to push their issue up the agenda.

Anyway Paul Roberts offers this gloss on the new tool (comment 10 in this discussion thread).

After some more thought I feel that I have a germ of an idea. I’d call it ”layered participation”. It just occurred to me this evening so I’m floating this as an idea without much critical analysis. I’ll see what the crowd reaction is.

The citizens priority tool would be broadly in line with as is developed. It would be used by the digital literati for the most part. I would call this the underlying layer. I’m suggesting an additional layer – an overarching one in terms of participation rate – drawing on the contributions from the underlying layer. The “overarching layer” would have an incredibly easy UI and would invite/attract many more citizens to share their view of priorities by polling them. Like, “Here are the top 5 priorities from the underlying layer, what do you think? Make your selection here”.

In summary, the concept is one of layered influence. Those willing and able to identify and describe a priority, and to make a judgment on a mass of other priorities, can do so. Those that are either not willing or able, through circumstance or whatever, can still participate at another level. Tick the box. As I say this is just the germ of an idea. It may be a silly idea. But I offer it for consideration.

No Paul, it’s not a silly idea – or at least I don’t think it is.  It is the beginning of building a bridge between the simple vox pop and something which is offering some tentative possibilities of finding a way ofordering preferences. To do so it imposes opportunity costs on voting for one thing – because voting for one thing means not voting for something else – just as it does in a ballot box. Another thing I think is important is finding ways of building reputation on the net.  Of course e-Bay has been doing it for a long time, as has www.ratemyprofessors.com.  Slashdot has a protocol through which people can qualify to be unusually worthy commenters.  We need to build those kinds of mechanisms to add depth to the discussion, rather than just have a cacophony of voices full of sound and fury and signifying nothing (well at least less than it might).

]]>
http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/06/25/layered-participation/feed/ 8