Fulcra

→ Targeted Universalism Oct 28, 2018 highlights Originally developed by professor and critical race scholar john a. powell, targeted universalism (TU) is an inclusive approach for implementing population-level interventions. It focuses on elevating the disparate experiences of marginalized populations as an essential step in the development of contextually relevant strategies for achieving universal goals. As such, it’s a middle ground between a targeted and a universalist approach. — https://www.fsg.org/blog/creating-consensus-targeted-universalism

→ A collaborative effort, driven by a diverse group of stakeholders united behind a common goal, can serve as a catalyst for addressing inequities at a systems level Oct 28, 2018 highlights A collaborative effort, driven by a diverse group of stakeholders united behind a common goal, can serve as a catalyst for addressing inequities at a systems level. But beneath the unity of purpose, initial disagreement can arise when stakeholders have to decide how to invest in those with the greatest need without sacrificing community-level goals or appearing to favor one group over another.When we recently faced this challenge within one community-based initiative, we turned to “targeted universalism,” an approach to change management that simultaneously aims for a universal goal while also addressing disparities in opportunities among sub-groups. — https://www.fsg.org/blog/creating-consensus-targeted-universalism

→ A meme is a social virus Oct 27, 2018 highlights A meme is a social virus. Each spreads through a population according to its peculiar viral dynamics — some ricochet through a population and then burn out, while others come and go with the seasons. Every meme is similarly mindlessly replicative. The point of a virus is to replicate, and the point of a meme is to convey a unit of meaning, one that can be easily remixed by anyone.
On the forums and message boards that cater to people who lean politically conservative, though, memes also function as metonyms: Pepe the Frog, a character created by the cartoonist Matt Furie, was claimed by 4chan and has, over the years, gradually morphed into a stand-in for “Trump supporter.” In these spaces, memes also indicate belonging. — https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/26/18029700/cesar-sayoc-democrat-bombs-trump-tank-meme-joke

→ American leaders have always been mythologized; throughout the country’s history, there’s been a concerted effort by supporters to whitewash political leaders — presidents especially — and minimize the worst actions they took in the course of their stewardship of the country Oct 27, 2018 highlights & leadership & People American leaders have always been mythologized; throughout the country’s history, there’s been a concerted effort by supporters to whitewash political leaders — presidents especially — and minimize the worst actions they took in the course of their stewardship of the country.
This goes back as far as George Washington, who is lionized more for winning the Revolutionary War than for his ownership of human beings, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose leadership through the Second World War overshadows his creation of internment camps for Japanese people living in America. Today, George W. Bush, the architect of the disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which claimed the lives of millions of innocent people, is a jolly, elderly painter. On social media, he’s retweeted by liberals when he poses for pictures with Michelle Obama. — https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/26/18029700/cesar-sayoc-democrat-bombs-trump-tank-meme-joke

→ Without questions, the data rambles on and on and on… — https://flowingdata.com/2018/10/17/ask-the-question-visualize-the-answer/ Oct 18, 2018 highlights

→ By now, it should be easy to see how different questions about your data can lead to different visualization types. Oct 18, 2018 highlights

By now, it should be easy to see how different questions about your data can lead to different visualization types. This accomplishes a few things:

A question can give you a place to start when presented with a dataset, which can lead to more questions.
It provides focus, because a graphic is made to answer something specific.
Filters out what you do not need to show.

— https://flowingdata.com/2018/10/17/ask-the-question-visualize-the-answer/

→ Paradoxically, the marginalized are largely missing from a conversation that uses them as a justification Oct 14, 2018 highlights Paradoxically, the marginalized are largely missing from a conversation that uses them as a justification. Thus far, the approach has been to gather experts to discuss and strategize ways to better implement inclusion in the AI ecosystem without consulting the so-called marginalized groups they seek to protect. In that sense, we must be wary of replicating the exclusionary practices in the international cooperation model and instead, move towards a paradigm that sees technology design, transfer, and debate as an act of solidarity.We need to guard against the creation of an artificial intelligentsia that discusses inclusion without including the other. — https://points.datasociety.net/lets-avoid-an-artificial-intelligentsia-inclusion-artificial-intelligence-and-human-rights-3905d708e7ed?source=rss—-2488f66d2e39—4

→ In the past five years, multiple spaces have emerged to facilitate discussions about AI, from new multi-stakeholder organizations like the Partnership for AI to research centers like AI Now and projects like the Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence Initiative Oct 13, 2018 highlights & Society In the past five years, multiple spaces have emerged to facilitate discussions about AI, from new multi-stakeholder organizations like the Partnership for AI to research centers like AI Now and projects like the Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence Initiative. These diverse actors are researching how AI will impact society and exploring ways to reshape this ecosystem.Others are introducing public interest concerns into the conversation. Academics and public intellectuals like Virginia Eubanks and Cathy O’Neil have raised awareness around the role AI can play in the exacerbation of social inequalities. The work of these and other vanguards has had significant reach among academia and civil society, culminating in events like the AI for Good Global Summit and Data & Society’s Artificial Intelligence & Human Rights workshop. These debates have rapidly moved toward collective agreements and calls for governance like the participatory Toronto Declaration on “protecting the right to equality and non-discrimination in machine learning systems.” — https://points.datasociety.net/lets-avoid-an-artificial-intelligentsia-inclusion-artificial-intelligence-and-human-rights-3905d708e7ed?source=rss—-2488f66d2e39—4

→ Complex adaptive systems thinking is an exciting approach, and the popularity of the theory in the policy literature is testimony to this Oct 13, 2018 highlights & Science & Systems Complex adaptive systems thinking is an exciting approach, and the popularity of the theory in the policy literature is testimony to this. But a number of issues are yet to be resolved. There needs to be clearer indication of the practical changes that it implies (if any) for policy research and practice. What are we saying that is different from “we need to take the wider context into account”, and “it’s hard to predict all possible consequences of any given action”? A widely accepted definition of complexity in the context of policy would add weight to evidence found to support the theory. We also need to clarify whether there is good cause to apply a natural science theory to political science. Most importantly, we should be wary of accepting the approach first and then looking for evidence to support it, rather than following the normal social science method of evaluating whether there is evidence in favour or against a given hypothesis. — http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/10/12/what-are-the-implications-of-complex-systems-thinking-for-policymaking/

→ Frequent mention is made in the academic literature to the need to clarify the way that this approach can be put into practice empirically, or as Holmes and Noel put it, move from “systems thinking-talking to systems thinking-action” Oct 13, 2018 highlights & Systems Frequent mention is made in the academic literature to the need to clarify the way that this approach can be put into practice empirically, or as Holmes and Noel put it, move from “systems thinking-talking to systems thinking-action”. — http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/10/12/what-are-the-implications-of-complex-systems-thinking-for-policymaking/

→ Klijn suggests that some elements of this approach, specifically non-linearity and behaviour that is not dependent on central control, can be found in existing policy theories Oct 12, 2018 highlights Klijn suggests that some elements of this approach, specifically non-linearity and behaviour that is not dependent on central control, can be found in existing policy theories. For example, the garbage can model (from 1972) conceives of organisations as organised anarchies where decisions are made by chaotically mixing problems and solutions together like rubbish in a bin, rather than being the result of a single rational decision-maker. Similarly, Kingdon’s multiple stream analysis (1984) suggests that decisions are made only when three “streams” – policy problems, solutions, and political events – happen to coincide, and when there is a “policy entrepreneur” on hand to take advantage of this. Lindblom’s advice from the late 1950s and early 1960s that, given the uncertainty of the policy environment (or non-linearity), changes are, and should always be, incremental, also seems to be a pragmatic response to some concerns raised by complexity theory. — http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/10/12/what-are-the-implications-of-complex-systems-thinking-for-policymaking/

→ Perhaps due to the variety of definitions of complex systems, there is a lot of variation amongst the claims made for their application to policy Oct 12, 2018 highlights & Systems Perhaps due to the variety of definitions of complex systems, there is a lot of variation amongst the claims made for their application to policy. At one end of the spectrum, this approach is being offered as a “new scientific paradigm” for studying the social world. Others see it more as a “complementary analytical tool” to be used in conjunction with established policy concepts such as game theory. Links are also being made to wicked problems, and there is the suggestion that complex systems thinking might be the most appropriate way to approach these issues that seem to frustrate traditional policy methods. — http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/10/12/what-are-the-implications-of-complex-systems-thinking-for-policymaking/

→ Complex systems thinking is experiencing a moment of popularity within the worlds of policy research and practice Oct 12, 2018 highlights & Systems Complex systems thinking is experiencing a moment of popularity within the worlds of policy research and practice. It’s an intuitively exciting approach that seems to capture some fundamental truth about our experience of policy: it suggests that policymaking takes place in a system that operates somewhere on the spectrum between “complicated” and “chaos”, making the results of policy interventions difficult to predict. Those who have attempted to study or shape policy might attest to this understanding. — http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/10/12/what-are-the-implications-of-complex-systems-thinking-for-policymaking/

→ Last week, Nicholson wrote a stem-winder of a piece for IRPP. Oct 9, 2018 highlights & Innovation Last week, Nicholson wrote a stem-winder of a piece for IRPP. You should read it in full, but let me give you the Coles notes version: Canada is not very good at innovation (defined here as: “new or better ways of creating value”). One result of this is that Canadian productivity growth has been below the OECD average for most of the last 20 years. Canadians do not often realize this because our economic performance overall has been better than the OECD average. How is that possible? Because our employment growth has been solid (resource economies get to coast that way). Unfortunately, with a now-declining labour force, that avenue for growth is now over and we must rely more and more on productivity and innovation for growth.

—

→ For the sake of illustration, I will highlight a possible combination of social and policy labs, transformative scenario planning, deliberative polling, civic tech, and creativity techniques that together increase impact, convergence between stakeholders, and public acceptance of outcomes. Oct 9, 2018 highlights

For the sake of illustration, I will highlight a possible combination of social and policy labs, transformative scenario planning, deliberative polling, civic tech, and creativity techniques that together increase impact, convergence between stakeholders, and public acceptance of outcomes.
Imagine that, as a government official, you are required to define the policy and regulatory reforms required to address an issue with system-wide implications, complex ethical dilemmas, and long-term impacts (all characteristics that our current governance mechanisms struggle with). This challenge could be the transformation of healthcare through the digital and genomics revolutions, the repercussions on our economies and societies of autonomous vehicles, or the impact on jobs of artificial intelligence. We would recommend that someone in this position follow this sequence of actions:

You partner with other government departments to design a process, ensure their buy-in, and secure initial funding.
You then bring together 30-40 key players from industry, civil society, academia, and public administration with relevant expertise, the ability to act, and diverging viewpoints. You may want to leverage this diversity of perspectives to enroll additional funding. You ask this group to agree on the three or four likely scenarios for your issue for the medium term, that is, where it will be in 10-20 years, depending on the investment and regulatory choices that could be made today. They will not agree on what scenario they would like to see emerge, but they’ll concur that these three or four scenarios are highly plausible if certain decisions are made. Reos Partners has pioneered this approach with policy labs and Transformative Scenario Planning (TSP).
You then bring together a representative group of citizens to examine the 3-4 possible scenarios. Using the deliberative polling methodology, you survey the participants for their “top-of-the-head” opinion on the topic before bringing them together to thoroughly examine the different scenarios. In the process, you elicit what scenario they favor, taking into account the options, trade-offs, and ethical dilemmas.
You may then want to leverage the diversity of views present to conduct ideation sessions for possible new policy/regulatory approaches to overcome some of the trade-offs the group identified.
At this point, you have convergence among the relevant stakeholders around the potential options, a rich set of data from citizens showing the direction of their preference, and practical ideas for implementing the vision that’s emerging. In this way, the approach provides a rich and practical template for more creative, effective, efficient, and timely policy-making.

Throughout the process, you can involve a wider set of players and citizens online, integrating their input with in-person discussions. Such an approach thus combines the breadth of perspectives that a variety of citizens and stakeholders bring (you can use deliberative polling and civic tech tools here), while allowing for the depth of expertise needed to ground the process in an informed consideration of options and trade-offs (TSP and Policy Labs are useful at this point). Importantly, you involve key people to make things happen with more people in order to enrich the vision of possible futures and legitimacy of the choices made to implement this vision.

— http://reospartners.com/augmented-democracy/

→ Experiments in participatory and deliberative democracy, creativity, and collective intelligence show that high-quality deliberation requires at least the following seven ingredients: Oct 8, 2018 highlights

Experiments in participatory and deliberative democracy, creativity, and collective intelligence show that high-quality deliberation requires at least the following seven ingredients:

Participants should be engaged through a “T-shaped” approach that combines deep technical expertise with a wide range of user perspectives.
Relevant public authorities should be closely involved and make a clear commitment as to how they treat the outputs of the process. The higher up they go on Sherry Arnstein’s participation ladder, the more likely they are to generate interest and a positive outcome.
Participants need to be given access to reasonably accurate information that they believe to be relevant to the issue.
Participants should represent the diversity of positions in the public. The benefits of cognitive diversity and the legitimacy of the process are best ensured by a sufficiently large — and, if possible, truly representative — sample of a given population.
Arguments offered by one side should be answered by considerations offered by those who hold other perspectives.
Participants should be allowed to sincerely weigh the merits of the arguments, and arguments offered by all participants should be considered on the merits, regardless of which participants offer them.
The process should be transparent, through the media and on- and offline interaction with a wider public, in order to increase the legitimacy of the solutions proposed and to tap into wider cognitive diversity.

— http://reospartners.com/augmented-democracy/

→ Policy makers readily admit that they are not equipped to communicate with their constituents, as a recent survey of government communications leaders conducted by communications firm WPP revealed Oct 8, 2018 highlights Policy makers readily admit that they are not equipped to communicate with their constituents, as a recent survey of government communications leaders conducted by communications firm WPP revealed. Spanning 40 countries, it indicates that only half of respondents believe they have the right tools and resources to do their jobs. Only 14% have had any training in public engagement. — http://reospartners.com/augmented-democracy/

→ Such initiatives are welcome supplements in the diet of a poorly nourished political body Oct 8, 2018 highlights & People Such initiatives are welcome supplements in the diet of a poorly nourished political body. The good news is that by bringing people together, they strengthen civic education, engagement, and public conversation. But even as these efforts grow in importance, they remain relatively marginal. The conversation is too often unbalanced and ill informed, and the resulting decisions remain (or at least are perceived as) sub-optimal. Such initiatives are also insufficient in the face of growing challenges and opportunities: Demagogues prosper while people become more frustrated; new digital tools enhance citizens’ expectation to have more say but also unleash disinformation; and new social movements and innovative experiments continue to grow in number and impact.
To ensure more legitimate and effective policies, we need a structurally healthy diet of democracy that incorporates sustained dialogue. As Hélène Landemore comments, “For most political problems and under conditions conducive to proper deliberation and proper use of majority rule, a democratic decision procedure is likely to be a better decision procedure than any nondemocratic decision procedures.”
Fortunately, we know from many experiments the conditions that allow a group of diverse people to solve societal issues with creative, efficient, effective, and timely solutions. Building on such practices and insights, now is the time for what I call “Augmented Democracy.” — http://reospartners.com/augmented-democracy/

→ The good news is that by bringing people together, they strengthen civic education, engagement, and public conversation Oct 7, 2018 highlights & People The good news is that by bringing people together, they strengthen civic education, engagement, and public conversation. But even as these efforts grow in importance, they remain relatively marginal. The conversation is too often unbalanced and ill informed, and the resulting decisions remain (or at least are perceived as) sub-optimal. Such initiatives are also insufficient in the face of growing challenges and opportunities: Demagogues prosper while people become more frustrated; new digital tools enhance citizens’ expectation to have more say but also unleash disinformation; and new social movements and innovative experiments continue to grow in number and impact.
To ensure more legitimate and effective policies, we need a structurally healthy diet of democracy that incorporates sustained dialogue. As Hélène Landemore comments, “For most political problems and under conditions conducive to proper deliberation and proper use of majority rule, a democratic decision procedure is likely to be a better decision procedure than any nondemocratic decision procedures.” — http://reospartners.com/augmented-democracy/

→ Yet, in the past few years, deliberate experiments in new forms of public collaboration around the world have proven that such skepticism may be overblown Oct 7, 2018 highlights & People Yet, in the past few years, deliberate experiments in new forms of public collaboration around the world have proven that such skepticism may be overblown. National issues forums, democracy festivals, consensus conferences, participatory budgeting, and unusual approaches such as the Forum Theater are building a more fruitful relationship between citizens and public authorities. For example, in India, following the jan sunwai public hearings approach, officials and people that have been affected by a particular action or decision of the administration settle legal disputes in front of a public that laughs, applauds, or boos. In Grenoble and Charleroi in France, through Parlons-en events, people who are homeless are invited to discuss their difficulties with their fellow citizens. In Chile, the Consensus Table offers indigenous peoples a unique opportunity to talk with government agents. — http://reospartners.com/augmented-democracy/