// you’re reading...

All items

Opening up the policy process

The UK faces some big issues: climate change, an aging population, changing demographics, global competition, etc. Increasingly, these issues are defying the conventional mechanisms we have for developing and delivering the policy to address them. Policy-making roles within government entities tend to conform to rigid structures and internal cultural norms (i.e who can speak to whom, who can say what to the public, who needs to approve new ideas, etc.). Any others who might wish to participate in the process must first learn to conform to those norms and the oft-hidden pathways into the system.

Tackling, together

These problems can’t be solved with one particular skillset or within one particular department. They require interdisciplinary skills, and the combined efforts of many people working across government, the economy, and society. Those with knowledge might be in a national government agency, or in a local council. They might be experts in a think-tank, or practitioner with years of experience delivering key services in their community. They might live in a city, a rural town, or even another country altogether. And all of them might have a key piece to the larger puzzle. Only with all of the pieces will we see the puzzle solved.

This is where Web 2.0, or the social web, comes in. Frequently, when we think of Web 2.0, we think of blogs, wikis, and social networks — and this is certainly the case. But Web 2.0 is more than than a collection of internet tools. It is a philosophy. One of collaboration and user-involvement. The idea that through the efforts and knowledge of many, we can tackle issues which far exceed the capacity of one.

Bottom-up and Top-down

In the policy and social arena, this philosophy is being born out in grassroots activity and experiments across society. mySociety.org has been building sites for public engagement since 2003. Involve is an exceptional organisation conducting research and experiments on public participation. Social Innovation Camp 2008 brought together dozens of social media mavens, social entrepreneurs, and practitioners to explore different uses of new tools to address social challenges.

Within the government, there are also signs of change. Minister and MP blogs, ePetititions, and community fora — while perhaps not prolific — are no longer unusual. In the beginning of the year, Jeremy Gould of the Ministry of Justice convened the UK’s first UKGovWeb BarCamp, drawing an impressive array of those within government eager to explore tools for engagement and collaboration. Dominic Campbell of FutureGov has recently been appointed [what is believed to be] the first Social Media Manager for a local council. Tom Watson, the West Bromwich MP and a political blogging pioneer, has recently taken up the post of Cabient Office minister for bringing more web 2.0 principles into government. Within the opposition, George Osborne has long spoken of the potential for ‘open-source policy’, with the Tories using wiki-like tools to facilitate the collaborative development of the party’s numerous substantive white-papers. In the Americas, a term has even been coined to refer to all of this activity: Government 2.0.

A long hill to climb

However, despite these impressive and rapid developments, much remains to be done. Within the halls of government, a long-standing perception that “information is power” stands as a serious obstacle to collaboration and sharing of information. While the tools may exist to facilitate debate and discussion between masses of people, such debate is often seen to lack meaningful deliberation and balanced participation. Even when great ideas and content do emerge, it can be difficult to present these to policy-makers in a manner which is seen as credible and usable.

This is where you come in. At 2gether08 we’re looking to take on some of these big questions, and do something about them. So please comment, propose, challenge, collaborate, debate, because at 2gether08 we’re going to break the status quo.

Discussion

Comments are disallowed for this post.

  1. Fine words, but my heart sinks when I see the cost of this thing. “the efforts and knowledge of many” get priced out of it don’t they?

    Posted by Phil Green | May 29, 2008, 9:51 am
  2. Phil at £100 per day the ticket price does not seem unreasonable. We are aware that there are many people for whom price will be a barrier and we are looking at developing a bursary of sorts for people who can bring in great ideas but are unable to pay. Will let you know when we have more

    Posted by stevemoore | May 30, 2008, 9:49 am
  3. agree with phil

    over-priced and in london ; two things that are like bacon and eggs

    these things should be free

    if government and channel 4 were serious then they would be

    it will be guardianistas, not real people

    Posted by alex | June 8, 2008, 4:11 am
  4. “a government’s future is less about the nature of its issues, and more about its capacity to invent social structures able to solve them.” It’s that simple.

    However, to get a government (or company) to shift to this way of problem solving will take the same processes used to drug addicts off heroin. It’s that hard!

    Posted by Leon Benjamin | June 11, 2008, 6:51 am
  5. I agree these things should be free, £100 is much too much, especially as the real innovators are also giving their time whereas the paid people who attend from the agencies etc have their salary covered.
    There should be a rate of £25 for social and micro businesses
    peter

    Posted by peter ramsden | June 17, 2008, 12:59 pm
  6. I am paying for myself as I think this is an important event. My organisation won’t pay for my as they say they have run out of dosh! At the end of the day the people organising this thing (and I think they’re doing a brilliant job) need to get paid. That’s capitalism folks! £25 would be a barrier to plenty of people…

    Posted by Lucy Johnson | June 27, 2008, 11:21 am