This document discusses more sustainable public policies and how policy-making 2.0 tools and approaches may help address challenges. It identifies key challenges such as gaining shared understanding of problems, designing creative solutions, ensuring recognition and implementation by governments, and inducing behavioral change. It then outlines how tools like open data, social networks, and simulation can help, as well as values like openness and collaboration. Several examples are provided, such as using open data visualization for shared understanding, creative solutions from ideascale, open policy review platforms, and apps or crowdfunding for behavioral change.
The document discusses research on using ICT tools to improve governance and policy modeling. It proposes:
1) Developing advanced tools and new governance models to engage citizens and groups in policymaking through mass collaboration platforms.
2) Creating real-time opinion visualization and policy modeling based on simulating people's behavior and wishes to develop next-generation public services.
3) Building a participatory roadmap on ICT for governance and policy modeling through discussion.
This document discusses Science 2.0 and the shift towards more open and collaborative ways of conducting science. It provides three examples of Science 2.0 projects: Galaxyzoo, which had over 150,000 volunteers classify galaxies; Synaptic Leap, which published all data and experiments online to collaborate on finding new drug treatments; and a study on government debt that was found to have coding errors after others accessed the original data. The document argues that Science 2.0 involves more than just open access, and includes data-intensive science, citizen science, open code, and open lab books/workflows. It discusses how different Science 2.0 practices are growing at different rates and the implications this shift has for scientific outputs, methods,
This document summarizes a talk on policy 2.0 and lessons learned from experiences with these tools and processes. It describes the emergence of policy 2.0 since 2005 based on earlier movements in web 2.0, government 2.0, and e-rulemaking. Key tools of policy 2.0 include open data, social networks, and crowdsourcing. While promising, there are still open questions around whether policy 2.0 truly leads to more participation beyond "usual suspects" or new policy ideas. Ongoing work aims to develop frameworks to better evaluate these initiatives.
Savvy Chavvy is a social network for young Gypsies and Travellers in the UK, with 2,800 members. It provides a safe space for discussions between members of this community, who often face racism on other social media sites. The network allows users to find family members, make friends, and organize events. It is important that leadership within the Gypsy and Traveller community understands and supports the social network, but does not necessarily lead it, so that the community's needs can shape the objectives. Sustainability is achieved through low-cost technology that is owned and maintained by the community itself.
The document discusses the Power of Information review from 2007 and the government's response. It argues that the government has been too slow to make use of information to increase transparency and give citizens more power over public services. It outlines four key themes of open discussion, feedback, information, and innovation and argues that government should join online conversations, publish more data, and experiment with new approaches to better engage with citizens.
This document discusses more sustainable public policies and how policy-making 2.0 tools and approaches may help address challenges. It identifies key challenges such as gaining shared understanding of problems, designing creative solutions, ensuring recognition and implementation by governments, and inducing behavioral change. It then outlines how tools like open data, social networks, and simulation can help, as well as values like openness and collaboration. Several examples are provided, such as using open data visualization for shared understanding, creative solutions from ideascale, open policy review platforms, and apps or crowdfunding for behavioral change.
The document discusses research on using ICT tools to improve governance and policy modeling. It proposes:
1) Developing advanced tools and new governance models to engage citizens and groups in policymaking through mass collaboration platforms.
2) Creating real-time opinion visualization and policy modeling based on simulating people's behavior and wishes to develop next-generation public services.
3) Building a participatory roadmap on ICT for governance and policy modeling through discussion.
This document discusses Science 2.0 and the shift towards more open and collaborative ways of conducting science. It provides three examples of Science 2.0 projects: Galaxyzoo, which had over 150,000 volunteers classify galaxies; Synaptic Leap, which published all data and experiments online to collaborate on finding new drug treatments; and a study on government debt that was found to have coding errors after others accessed the original data. The document argues that Science 2.0 involves more than just open access, and includes data-intensive science, citizen science, open code, and open lab books/workflows. It discusses how different Science 2.0 practices are growing at different rates and the implications this shift has for scientific outputs, methods,
This document summarizes a talk on policy 2.0 and lessons learned from experiences with these tools and processes. It describes the emergence of policy 2.0 since 2005 based on earlier movements in web 2.0, government 2.0, and e-rulemaking. Key tools of policy 2.0 include open data, social networks, and crowdsourcing. While promising, there are still open questions around whether policy 2.0 truly leads to more participation beyond "usual suspects" or new policy ideas. Ongoing work aims to develop frameworks to better evaluate these initiatives.
Savvy Chavvy is a social network for young Gypsies and Travellers in the UK, with 2,800 members. It provides a safe space for discussions between members of this community, who often face racism on other social media sites. The network allows users to find family members, make friends, and organize events. It is important that leadership within the Gypsy and Traveller community understands and supports the social network, but does not necessarily lead it, so that the community's needs can shape the objectives. Sustainability is achieved through low-cost technology that is owned and maintained by the community itself.
The document discusses the Power of Information review from 2007 and the government's response. It argues that the government has been too slow to make use of information to increase transparency and give citizens more power over public services. It outlines four key themes of open discussion, feedback, information, and innovation and argues that government should join online conversations, publish more data, and experiment with new approaches to better engage with citizens.
My presentation at https://openaire.eu/research-policy-monitoring-in-the-era-of-open-science-and-big-data-the-what-indicators-and-the-how-infrastructures
Methodological note of the Open Science Monitor second version for publicationosimod
This document provides an updated methodology for the Open Science Monitor. It outlines the objectives to provide metrics on open science trends, assess drivers and barriers of open science adoption, and identify impacts. Key trends that will be monitored include open access to publications, open research data, and open collaboration. The methodology describes conceptual models for analyzing trends along the dimensions of supply, uptake, and reuse, and for examining the drivers, barriers, and impacts. Feedback is sought to improve the indicators, data sources, and analysis of open science.
This document summarizes a workshop agenda for validating indicators for an Open Science Monitor. The workshop objectives are to validate the methodology for determining indicators on open access, open research data, and open collaboration. The methodology will be refined based on feedback to provide an evidence-based view of open science trends. While the community provides feedback, the consortium leading the project is ultimately responsible for the indicators. Unpaywall is proposed as an additional data source to help identify open access publications beyond what is currently found in Scopus and Web of Science.
This document summarizes an EU-funded project involving multiple partners to provide consultancy services supporting EU policy activities. The project involves Open Evidence, University of the Arts London, TheGovLab, Uscreates, Futuregov, Equals, and Bloc de Ideas. It lists the expertise of each partner organization and team member in areas like policy evaluation, online engagement, communication design, and more. The management structure involves a scientific steering committee led by representatives from each partner organization.
This document summarizes an expert consortium providing consultancy services to support EU policy activities. The consortium consists of Open Evidence, University of Arts London, TheGovLab, Futuregov, Uscreates, Equals, and Bloc de Ideas. It lists the institutions, country leads, and areas of expertise for policy evaluation, web tools, crowdsourcing, design, research, and more. The management structure includes a scientific steering committee and roles like coordinator and project manager to oversee the core team's work.
Evidence-based and open policy-making approaches have failed to meet expectations due to unrealistic assumptions about their ability to substitute for political decision-making and an overemphasis on data-driven solutions. Both approaches work best when they are integrated and support rather than replace the policy process and roles of policymakers. A more realistic perspective is needed that accounts for the complexity of decision-making and considers the full policy cycle, not just decisions. Evaluation frameworks should also assess how open and evidence-based initiatives impact different stakeholders and whether they truly benefit the public interest.
The document discusses the development of the online platform for the Global Internet Policy Observatory (GIPO) project, which is supported by the European Commission. It outlines the goals of engaging the community to help identify solutions and address synergies between initiatives to help design the GIPO platform. A workshop is described that will include presentations on the GIPO project status and synergies with other mapping initiatives, as well as working sessions to discuss challenges and solutions for developing the technological aspects of the GIPO platform.
El documento habla sobre los conceptos de gobierno abierto, datos abiertos y ciencia abierta como objetivos y herramientas. Explica que la apertura debe aplicarse a todo el proceso de políticas públicas y ciencia, no solo a los resultados finales. También señala que la apertura requiere equilibrar la participación ciudadana con la toma de decisiones del gobierno y gestionar adecuadamente las expectativas sobre sus beneficios.
Presentation of science 2.0 at European Astronomical Societyosimod
The document discusses Science 2.0 and the emerging open science ecosystem. It provides three examples of open science projects: Galaxy Zoo, which had volunteers classify galaxies; Synaptic Leap, which published all data and experiments online to identify a new drug; and a paper on debt and growth that was found to have errors after its data and methods were shared. It then outlines various aspects of open science like open data, citizen science, and mass collaboration.
UNDP - Open Evidence infographic: How to build an open gov projectosimod
This document outlines 5 steps for developing an open government project:
1) Define the problem statement by making it specific, important, concrete, and evidence-based.
2) Analyze how citizens can help by engaging specific citizens with relevant skills, knowledge, or experience.
3) Engage citizens by telling them the project details, acting on their input, and letting citizens provide feedback.
4) Do something with the input by making any technology intuitive and reusing existing solutions.
5) Evaluate the project by assessing participation levels and quality of ideas and determining if ideas were used in policies.
This document presents an international research roadmap for ICT tools for governance and policy modelling. It discusses the need for such a roadmap due to challenges facing policymakers. These include detecting emerging issues, generating citizen involvement, identifying innovative solutions, reducing uncertainty about policy impacts, and understanding policy effectiveness.
The document reviews traditional policymaking tools and outlines a vision of "Policymaking 2.0" in 2030 enabled by new ICT tools. These could facilitate agenda-setting using big data, collaborative policy design with citizens, simulation-supported implementation, and data-driven evaluation.
The roadmap then examines the current status of relevant ICT research challenges, including policy modelling, big data analysis, opinion mining, visual
This document discusses policy 2.0, which aims to make policymaking more open, evidence-based, and collaborative. It argues that policy 2.0 utilizes open data and crowdsourcing to better understand problems, generate policy ideas, and evaluate policies. The document outlines challenges in governance that policy 2.0 seeks to address and provides examples of tools and design principles to facilitate more emergent, peer-to-peer policymaking. It also acknowledges potential issues like spam, conflicts, and ensuring ideas are implemented.
This document summarizes a conference on Policy Making 2.0. It discusses the challenges of modern policy making, such as dealing with unknown unknowns and distributed governance. It outlines the goals of developing a research roadmap to strengthen the policy making community. The proposed method is open and recursive. The document envisions a third way of policy making that is open, evidence-based, and addresses the full policy cycle from anticipating issues to evaluation. It acknowledges challenges in ensuring technology leads to real policy impacts and cultural changes. Next steps include collaboratively curating examples and continuing discussion through online groups.
Making eu innovation policies fit for the web defosimod
This document discusses making EU innovation policies better suited for web-based innovation. It argues that current policies, like the Framework Programme, were designed for 20th century capital-intensive R&D and do not attract innovative SMEs or translate research to marketable products. "Light and fast" funding that is open, bottom-up, and rewards achievement rather than paperwork could help. The document examines cases like inducement prizes in the US and Europe that use these principles successfully. It concludes that options like open funding, prizes, and procurement of innovation should be adopted to address gaps and make EU policy fit for web-based innovation challenges.
The document discusses Policy Making 2.0, a new approach to policy making that incorporates social media and crowdsourcing. It covers using social media to solicit public input on draft policies, having civil servants participate in online discussions, and focusing on evidence and examples rather than direct democracy. The approach aims to let good ideas emerge through many-to-many participation in a more open and continuous process that brings policy making earlier to more granular levels. It is not meant to be totally open or representative of all citizens now, but can provide insights beyond traditional government consultation.
My presentation at https://openaire.eu/research-policy-monitoring-in-the-era-of-open-science-and-big-data-the-what-indicators-and-the-how-infrastructures
Methodological note of the Open Science Monitor second version for publicationosimod
This document provides an updated methodology for the Open Science Monitor. It outlines the objectives to provide metrics on open science trends, assess drivers and barriers of open science adoption, and identify impacts. Key trends that will be monitored include open access to publications, open research data, and open collaboration. The methodology describes conceptual models for analyzing trends along the dimensions of supply, uptake, and reuse, and for examining the drivers, barriers, and impacts. Feedback is sought to improve the indicators, data sources, and analysis of open science.
This document summarizes a workshop agenda for validating indicators for an Open Science Monitor. The workshop objectives are to validate the methodology for determining indicators on open access, open research data, and open collaboration. The methodology will be refined based on feedback to provide an evidence-based view of open science trends. While the community provides feedback, the consortium leading the project is ultimately responsible for the indicators. Unpaywall is proposed as an additional data source to help identify open access publications beyond what is currently found in Scopus and Web of Science.
This document summarizes an EU-funded project involving multiple partners to provide consultancy services supporting EU policy activities. The project involves Open Evidence, University of the Arts London, TheGovLab, Uscreates, Futuregov, Equals, and Bloc de Ideas. It lists the expertise of each partner organization and team member in areas like policy evaluation, online engagement, communication design, and more. The management structure involves a scientific steering committee led by representatives from each partner organization.
This document summarizes an expert consortium providing consultancy services to support EU policy activities. The consortium consists of Open Evidence, University of Arts London, TheGovLab, Futuregov, Uscreates, Equals, and Bloc de Ideas. It lists the institutions, country leads, and areas of expertise for policy evaluation, web tools, crowdsourcing, design, research, and more. The management structure includes a scientific steering committee and roles like coordinator and project manager to oversee the core team's work.
Evidence-based and open policy-making approaches have failed to meet expectations due to unrealistic assumptions about their ability to substitute for political decision-making and an overemphasis on data-driven solutions. Both approaches work best when they are integrated and support rather than replace the policy process and roles of policymakers. A more realistic perspective is needed that accounts for the complexity of decision-making and considers the full policy cycle, not just decisions. Evaluation frameworks should also assess how open and evidence-based initiatives impact different stakeholders and whether they truly benefit the public interest.
The document discusses the development of the online platform for the Global Internet Policy Observatory (GIPO) project, which is supported by the European Commission. It outlines the goals of engaging the community to help identify solutions and address synergies between initiatives to help design the GIPO platform. A workshop is described that will include presentations on the GIPO project status and synergies with other mapping initiatives, as well as working sessions to discuss challenges and solutions for developing the technological aspects of the GIPO platform.
El documento habla sobre los conceptos de gobierno abierto, datos abiertos y ciencia abierta como objetivos y herramientas. Explica que la apertura debe aplicarse a todo el proceso de políticas públicas y ciencia, no solo a los resultados finales. También señala que la apertura requiere equilibrar la participación ciudadana con la toma de decisiones del gobierno y gestionar adecuadamente las expectativas sobre sus beneficios.
Presentation of science 2.0 at European Astronomical Societyosimod
The document discusses Science 2.0 and the emerging open science ecosystem. It provides three examples of open science projects: Galaxy Zoo, which had volunteers classify galaxies; Synaptic Leap, which published all data and experiments online to identify a new drug; and a paper on debt and growth that was found to have errors after its data and methods were shared. It then outlines various aspects of open science like open data, citizen science, and mass collaboration.
UNDP - Open Evidence infographic: How to build an open gov projectosimod
This document outlines 5 steps for developing an open government project:
1) Define the problem statement by making it specific, important, concrete, and evidence-based.
2) Analyze how citizens can help by engaging specific citizens with relevant skills, knowledge, or experience.
3) Engage citizens by telling them the project details, acting on their input, and letting citizens provide feedback.
4) Do something with the input by making any technology intuitive and reusing existing solutions.
5) Evaluate the project by assessing participation levels and quality of ideas and determining if ideas were used in policies.
This document presents an international research roadmap for ICT tools for governance and policy modelling. It discusses the need for such a roadmap due to challenges facing policymakers. These include detecting emerging issues, generating citizen involvement, identifying innovative solutions, reducing uncertainty about policy impacts, and understanding policy effectiveness.
The document reviews traditional policymaking tools and outlines a vision of "Policymaking 2.0" in 2030 enabled by new ICT tools. These could facilitate agenda-setting using big data, collaborative policy design with citizens, simulation-supported implementation, and data-driven evaluation.
The roadmap then examines the current status of relevant ICT research challenges, including policy modelling, big data analysis, opinion mining, visual
This document discusses policy 2.0, which aims to make policymaking more open, evidence-based, and collaborative. It argues that policy 2.0 utilizes open data and crowdsourcing to better understand problems, generate policy ideas, and evaluate policies. The document outlines challenges in governance that policy 2.0 seeks to address and provides examples of tools and design principles to facilitate more emergent, peer-to-peer policymaking. It also acknowledges potential issues like spam, conflicts, and ensuring ideas are implemented.
This document summarizes a conference on Policy Making 2.0. It discusses the challenges of modern policy making, such as dealing with unknown unknowns and distributed governance. It outlines the goals of developing a research roadmap to strengthen the policy making community. The proposed method is open and recursive. The document envisions a third way of policy making that is open, evidence-based, and addresses the full policy cycle from anticipating issues to evaluation. It acknowledges challenges in ensuring technology leads to real policy impacts and cultural changes. Next steps include collaboratively curating examples and continuing discussion through online groups.
Making eu innovation policies fit for the web defosimod
This document discusses making EU innovation policies better suited for web-based innovation. It argues that current policies, like the Framework Programme, were designed for 20th century capital-intensive R&D and do not attract innovative SMEs or translate research to marketable products. "Light and fast" funding that is open, bottom-up, and rewards achievement rather than paperwork could help. The document examines cases like inducement prizes in the US and Europe that use these principles successfully. It concludes that options like open funding, prizes, and procurement of innovation should be adopted to address gaps and make EU policy fit for web-based innovation challenges.
The document discusses Policy Making 2.0, a new approach to policy making that incorporates social media and crowdsourcing. It covers using social media to solicit public input on draft policies, having civil servants participate in online discussions, and focusing on evidence and examples rather than direct democracy. The approach aims to let good ideas emerge through many-to-many participation in a more open and continuous process that brings policy making earlier to more granular levels. It is not meant to be totally open or representative of all citizens now, but can provide insights beyond traditional government consultation.