Presentation at ENISA summer school
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Presentation at ENISA summer school





Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



3 Embeds 185 183 1 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Presentation at ENISA summer school Presentation at ENISA summer school Presentation Transcript

  • Clash of cultures: openness and safety in government 1.0 and 2.0 NIS 09, ENISA, 14th sept 09 David Osimo - Tech4i2 ltd.
  • Structure of the talk 1. the background: towards e-gov 2.0 2. cases 3. lessons learnt 4. conclusions 2
  • So far ICT has not fundamentally changed government • 1990s: ICT expected to make government more transparent, efficient and user Supply Demand oriented • 2005+: disillusion as burocracy not much different from Max Weber’s description 3
  • Many projects of web2.0 in public services, but not by government Source: own elaboration of IPTS PS20 project
  • Opportunities and challenges of government 2.0 • transparency ❖ privacy • openness ❖ security • user-generated conflict and NIMBY services ❖ • reduced information ❖ representativeness asymmetry ❖ universal service and digital divide 5
  • web2.0 in key government activities Back office Front office Regulation Service delivery Cross-agency collaboration eParticipation Knowledge management Law enforcement Interoperability Public sector information Human resources mgmt Public communication Public procurement Transparency and accountability source: “Web 2.0 in Government: Why and How? 6
  • Regulation case: Peer-to-patent 7
  • Peer-to-patent: an inside look Governance Usage: Started June 07. 1000 users, 32 submission in first • Partnership of US Patent Office with business and month. academia (NY Law school) Benefits • Self-appointed experts, but participants ensure relevance • Faster processes, backlog reduction and quality by tagging, ranking prior art, ranking other reviewers • Better informed decisions Other applications: • Desire of recognition as participation driver • Functions where • Weak authentication: blog style governments have “to make complex decisions without the benefit of adequate information”.
  • Cross agency collaboration case: Intellipedia • Based on Wikipedia software: Usage: fast take-up, two thirds of collaborative drafting of joint analysts use it to co-produce reports reports Benefits Governance • Avoiding silos effects (post 9-11) • Used by 16 US security agencies – on a super-secure intranet (not public) • Better decisions by reducing information bottlenecks • Flat, informal cooperation. Other applications: • Risks: too much information sharing. BUT it’s “worth it”: "the • Social services for homeless key is risk management, not risk (Canada, Alaska) avoidance.“ • Inter-agency consultation
  • Knowledge management case: Allen and Overy Answering key questions… …by using “Enterprise 2.0” tools: • Which articles do managers think • Blogs and wikis for discussion and are important this morning? collaboration • Collaborative filtering of information, • Which newsfeeds do my favorite recommendation systems, colleagues use? bookmarks sharing (tags, RSS feeds) • What discussion topics are hot in • On top of this: algorithms applied to a project team (things you can’t users’ attention data and behaviour anticipate)? • Who is expert/working on this specific topic/tag? 10
  • Allen and Overy: an inside look Governance • Pilot launched on small collaborative groups – then upscaled • Fast, iterative delivery (not big IT project approach) • Strong authentication (integrated with company SSO) • Kept the wiki spirit, low control (non sensitive content) Usage: became internal standard for collaboration and sharing Benefits • Increased awareness of what others are doing – less duplication of effort • Reduction in internal e-mail sent • Better learning and knowledge creation Other applications • All knowledge-intensive areas of government 11
  • Service delivery case: Patient Opinion 12
  • Patient Opinion: an inside look Governance • Launched by a GP as a social enterprise: third party between government and citizen • Start-up funded by NHS, now revenues from health providers subscribing to the service • Strong moderation (but also from senior patient) • Weak authentication (blog-style) to enhance ease-of-use Usage: 3000 comments in 9 months, 38 health providers subscribed Benefits of ratings/reviews • Enabling informed choices (for citizens) • Understanding users needs (for government) • Monitoring quality compliance for service improvement 13
  • Reminder: citizens and employees do it anyway 14
  • eParticipation case: e-petitions in UK 15
  • E-Petitions: an inside look Governance • Hosted in the PM website, run by NGO (,, etc.) • Ex-post moderation (nearly all petitions are listed) • Weak authentication (blog-style) • Launched as beta, 15 major changes in first 48 hours Usage: 2.1M individuals signed petitions in 6 months Benefits • Stimulates citizen participation • Real impact on current legislative process • Especially effective in agenda-setting 16
  • Law enforcement case: MyBikeLane 17
  • Lessons learnt
  • Web 2.0 approach • usability is paramount and anonimity is a value • weak authentication and ex-post moderation outside the firewall • strong authentication and no moderation inside the firewall • soft governance tools rather than control: trasnparent guidelines and decisions, self-regulation • more collaboration than conflict in open platforms • multiple federated identities across websites (openID, Facebook connect etc.) 19
  • The government way Governance and participation toolbox: • “The toolbox must include security, identity and access controls to ensure privacy and, where appropriate, the delineation of constituency domains according to the specific needs of government applications” source: FP7 ICT WP 2009-10 20
  • Gartner future: no government? Dropout Market intermediaries Digital Reluctant Government Potential climbers Users back data and infrastruct office authentic web channel interface usage ure interopera ation services bility Basics Trendy and mobile Digital Natives 21
  • Tech4i2 future: Tao government Dropout Digital Reluctant Government Potential climbers Users back data and infrastruct office authentic web channel interface usage ure interopera ation services bility Market/non Basics market Trendy and mobile intermediaries Digital Natives 22
  • Possible future scenario !"#$"%& 9566%(*$/#:;%2%(/0%2& '%()$*%'& %8.&'%()$*%'& !"#$"%& +,-#$*& '%()$*%'& ./0/1 '%"'$0$)%& '%()$*%'& .%#$)%(%2&-3& 75)%("6%"0& 45)%("6%"0& %8.&'%()$*%'& 23
  • Conclusions • there is a strong gap between web 2.0 and government thinking on security, privacy, identity • web 2.0 approach proved effective so far but there are challenges in upscaling • high media literacy is needed for effective participation - a minority of the population has them • government approach to become more user-centric, federated • we have to start bridging this gap ... 24
  • 25
  • Thank you Further information: Osimo, 2008. Web2.0 in government: why and how? Osimo, 2008. Benchmarking e-government in the web 2.0 era: what to measure, and how. European Journal of ePractice, August 2008. 26
  • Back-up slides 27
  • Before citizen Government 28
  • After citizen information, trust, attention Government friends friends of friends public 29
  • Web-oriented government architecture !"# $%& UK Cabinet, “Power of information task force report” '()*+,--.*/0)-*1-231*)+456*3-7489-(*):0-;<*=>-?@30-ABBCD Robinson et al.: “Government Data and the Invisible Hand “ Gartner: “The Real Future of E-Government: From Joined-Up to Mashed-Up” 30
  • 1 - DO NO HARM • don’t hyper-protect public data from re-use • don’t launch large scale “facade” web2.0 project • don’t forbid web 2.0 in the workplace • let bottom-up initiatives flourish as barriers to entry are very low 31
  • 2. ENABLE • blogging and social networking guidelines for civil servants • publish reusable and machine readable data (XML, RSS, RDFa) > see W3C work • adopt web-oriented architecture • create a public data catalogue > see Washington DC 32
  • 3. ACTIVELY PROMOTE • ensure pervasive broadband ✴create e-skills in and outside government: digital literacy, media literacy, web2.0 literacy, programming skills ✴fund bottom-up initiatives through public procurement, awards • reach out trough key intermediaries trusted by the community • listen, experiment and learn-by-doing 33
  • Promoting e-skills • Old IT competences: ECDL • New competences: 1. digital literacy: making sense of text and audiovisual 2. media literacy: produce web content using free tools (ning, facebook, youtube, wordpress...) 3. running a server: capacity to install free tools on own server - you own the data 4. coding skills: you can create cool website for “stuff that matters to you” ★ Do we need “computational thinking”? 34
  • Not only spontaneous: INCA awards • Context in Flanders: very few government 2.0 project • INCA prize: 1 month, 20K euros for new applications “socially useful” • results: 35 brand new applications on: family, mobility, culture, environment • double dividend: ICT innovation and social impact 35
  • 36
  • Obama administration • memo on transparency as first act: transparency by default • as flagship for reusable data • agreement with social networks • appointment of best web2.0 people in WhiteHouse staff • catalogue ★what about Europe? 37
  • A new vision starting to take shape To sum up, transparency, which enhances accountability and choice, can be a powerful driver, a catalyst and a flagship for “transformational government”, rather than for “eGovernment” only. 6 What is new? 38
  • Common mistakes • “Build it and they will come”: beta testing, trial and error necessary • Launching “your own” large scale web 2.0 flagship project • Opening up without soft governance of key challenges: - privacy - individual vs institutional role - destructive participation • Adopting only the technology with traditional top- down attitude 39
  • Web 2.0 is about values, not technology: and it’s the hacker’s values User as producer, Collective intelligence, Values Long tail, Perpetual beta, Extreme ease of use Blog, Wiki, Podcast, RSS, Tagging, Social Applications networks, Search engine, MPOGames Ajax, XML, Open API, Microformats, REST, Technologies Flash/Flex, Peer-to-Peer Source: Author’s elaboration based on Forrester 40
  • Is there a visible impact? Yes, more than the usage: • in the back office: evidence used by US Patent Office, used to detect Iraqi insurgents • in the front office, making government really accountable and helping other citizens • but there is risk of negative impact as well 41