Phase 2 Results

Version One: Principles/Data/Autopoll/FLOSS

For the first time in modern industrial society, governments have the chance to realise the potential embodied in Bill Joy’s observation that there will always be more smart people outside government than within it. And, in view of the scale and complexity of the challenges faced in the early 21st century, there has never been a more urgent time to realise this latent, distributed potential.  The openness to iterative and collaborative experimentation and improvement that is characteristic of many Web 2.0 initiatives is one of the web’s deep lessons and, potentially, contains the means to transform our understanding and experience of governance. We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We want to be able to give input on and monitor government activities as they being designed, deliberated upon, implemented, and reviewed; for all types of activity, from legislation, where law proposals should be published at an early stage, to government spending where each spending decision should be published with clear and open rationale.

Public institutions should seek out the contribution of citizens not only to provide feedback and accountability, but to assist in deliberating, delivering, monitoring and accessing policy, because harnessing the salient knowledge and experience of individuals dispersed through the community will strengthen policy outcomes.

Also each deliberation should automatically produce a poll that asks the citizens how much do they agree on this activity of the government. We now have the tools to produce polls that are both produced automatically and statistically representatives.  This will produce a constant feedback that will show to everybody the distance between the representatives and the represented.

Against this background, we commend, and ask Member States and the Commission to adopt, the principles of Transparency, Openness, Collaborativeness, Privacy and Responsibility:

Transparency Principle:  all public sector organisations should be required to make a commitment to transparency and should provide the public with a live stream of information on all aspects of their operations and decision-making processes. This should include a robust mechanism for citizens to highlight areas where they would like to see further transparency.

Openness Principle: We expect that the whole spectrum of government information, from draft legislation to budget data, should be made simple for citizens to discover, access, understand, reuse, and remix; releasing data swiftly, in open standard- and machine-readable format, thereby allowing third parties to monitor government and provide services more in line with users needs, and ensuring that the data is continuously available and continuously up to date.

Collaborative Principle: As citizens we expect to be able to share feedback and insight on public services publicly with other fellow citizens, civil servants, and governors in fluid peer-to-peer conversations, and to help each other in making the most of these services. All public sector organisations should have open and clearly-defined feedback mechanisms, so citizens can submit feedback and ideas and can see, comment and rate the feedback and suggestions of others.

Privacy Principle: Although Privacy and Openness superficially seem to be in contrast with each other we recognise that the honesty of feedback is sometimes only possible if the citizen is sure their input cannot be tracked back. As such we want government to ensure that the minimum amount of personal information is used and retained in providing those services to citizens.

Responsibility Principle: Every person should have the tools to trackback every decision taken by members of the government.

And we expect and demand those principles to be applied to the following data

1) Government data: All information created by public institutions, must be public and easily accessible by citizenship. All information released by public sector organisations should be released in machine searchable ways to ensure maximum public value is gained from it.

2) Government legislation: all legislation and all planned legislation should be released electronically in web-accessible formats that make it easy for citizens to refer to, comment on, and link to particular paragraphs within proposals.

3) Government Spending: All government spending, at every level of the Government should be available for monitor and discussion in a paragraph based format.

4) Publicly-held data sets: except where there are genuine and insurmountable privacy issues, governments should look to share publicly-held data sets wherever possible and there should be a robust mechanism for citizens to request that additional data sets be made available.

From a technical point of view the way this is done is strongly correlated with the success of such initiative.

All the data and software provided must be non platform dependent, that means every citizen can use it from any Operating System or device with Internet access. Governments must deploy Free/Open Source Software solutions unless there aren’t any other open source solution that works. Because taxes are better used in software whose license is open, proprietary solutions should be allowed only if there’s no alternative. Paying for equivalent solutions that are free should be considered unfair with citizens.

Feedback and commenting from citizens should be done in a tree commenting structure to permit focusing of the conversation to particular elements. And there should be ways for citizens that car commenting to be able to contact each other to permit the structuring of groups of citizens working on an issue.

Comments: Five

Jeremym
2009-09-20 10:21:20
Comments on principles

1) To transparency principle: Should add caveat: However, in practice in the very early phases of open policy making, civil servants and politicians may need a confidential space for some issues to think out of the box and speculate without everything being automatically open to public scrutiny.

2) To collaborative principle: I would rename this collaboration and participation, and thus extend the principle not just to public services (which is of course important) but also to public policy. Or make a separate principle, on participation and engagement which does this. (But in the interests of keeping the number of principles to a minimum, these could be combined.)

3) To responsibility principle: Rename this: responsibility and accountability, and could add that it is not just members of the government but also citizens and all other collaborating actors which should show responsibility and accountability.

4) I would also add a sixth principle: Porosity Principle: government should pro-actively exploit ICT to provide a democratically accountable framework and platform to engage and enable all legitimate societal actors (private, civil and public sector) to provide the most appropriate knowledge, resources and content for addressing all and any public issues. This should be done with reference to the good governance principles as set out in the 2001 European Governance White Paper.

5) There would also be a good case for a seventh principle on innovation?!
======
Pietrosperoni
2009-09-21 15:52:17
Agreed. Post your version and I will support it
RE: Comments on principles

Hi Jeremym, I agree on all that you said. Unfortunately there is no edit button. Also because you shouldn’t be allowed to edit things after people voted for them. I am not sure if we are still in time to make other proposals, but if we are please make the edits you described, and I will support you.

Pietro
======
Osimod
2009-09-21 17:43:05
Yes go on
RE: Agreed. Post your version and I will support it

Yes the exercise is open one more week so feel free to propose new versions
======
Pietrosperoni
2009-09-22 02:23:25
Only for rating
RE: Yes go on

actually it is only open for rating.

Now we should read all the versions and rate them.

Les jeux sont faits😉

Pietro
======
LinusdP
2009-09-23 13:28:33
Too much detail

I think that the following paragraphs is way too much into detail.

‘Feedback and commenting from citizens should be done in a tree commenting structure to permit focusing of the conversation to particular elements. And there should be ways for citizens that car commenting to be able to contact each other to permit the structuring of groups of citizens working on an issue.’

‘Also each deliberation should automatically produce a poll that asks the citizens how much do they agree on this activity of the government. We now have the tools to produce polls that are both produced automatically and statistically representatives.  This will produce a constant feedback that will show to everybody the distance between the representatives and the represented.’

How the citizens feedback is handled and how commenting is structured is dependent on the context, application and target groups and cannot be detailed here. I also agree with earlier comments from Jeremym to change and include more principles.

I also think that the technical point of view should be left out and the part about platform independence and FLOSS instead be integrated with the principles. Those too are issues concerning the principles and not related to technology itself.

Version Two European Manifesto-Web2.0

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We urge Member States and the Commission to adopt the following five principles:

1) Transparency:  all public sector organisations should be required to make a commitment to transparency and should provide the public with regularly updated information on all aspects of their operations and decision-making processes. This should include a robust mechanism for citizens to highlight areas where they would like to see further transparency. Using Open Standards and Free/Open Source Software in any government solutions is part of this commitment;

2) Government data: All information created by public institutions, must be public and easily accessible by citizenship. all information released by public sector organisations should be released in machine readable and searchable ways to ensure maximum public value is gained from it;

3) Government legislation: all legislation and all planned legislation should be released electronically in web-accessible formats that make it easy for citizens to refer to, comment on and link to particular paragraphs within the proposals;

4) Publically-held and supported software and data sets: except where there are genuine and insurmountable privacy issues, governments should look to share publically-held data sets wherever possible and there should be a robust mechanism for citizens to request that additional data sets be made available. All the data and software provided must be non platform dependent, that means every citizen can use it from any Operating System or device with Internet access. Governments must deploy Free/Open Source Software solutions unless there aren’t any other open source solution that works. Because taxes are better used in software whose license is open, proprietary solutions should be allowed only if there’s no alternative. Paying for equivalent solutions that are free should be considered unfair with citizens;

5) Citizen Input – all public sector organisations should have well-published feedback mechanisms, so citizens can submit feedback and suggestions and can see (and comment on) the feedback and suggestions of others.

Many European governments have already taken steps in the direction of these principles, but there is huge scope for further action in every country. In the detailed annex to this declaration (see https://eups20.wordpress.com/, we explain the benefits of adopting each of these principles and give examples of concrete actions governments could and should take in relation to each. We recognise that implementing these principles will take time, but we believe they should be at the heart of efforts to transform government.

We call on European governments and the European Commission to draw up a concrete action plan that will accelerate the adoption of these principles throughout the European Union and ensure that Europe’s citizens enjoy the benefits of more open and transparent government as soon as possible.

Comments: None

Version Three 1st September Version

We are living through important times in the history of public services. Traditional e-government policies have delivered some benefits in terms of a more efficient, effective and user-oriented public administration, but Web 2.0 has the potential for a much greater and deeper impact.

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We call for governments to fully embrace Web 2.0 values in delivering public services and in particular to adopt the following five principles:

1) Transparency:  all public sector organisations should be required to make a commitment to transparency and should provide the public with regularly updated information on all aspects of their operations and decision-making processes. This should include a robust mechanism for citizens to highlight areas where they would like to see further transparency.

2) Public Sector Information: all information released by public sector organisations should be released in  machine searchable ways to ensure maximum public value is gained from it.

3) Publically-held data sets: except where there are genuine and insurmountable privacy issues, governments should look to share publically-held data sets wherever possible and should encourage and facilitate use of these data sets by non-public sector bodies. There should also be a robust mechanism for citizens to request that additional data sets be made available.

4) Government legislation: all legislation – and all planned legislation – should be released electronically in web-accessible formats that make it easy for citizens to refer to, comment on and link to particular paragraphs within the proposals.

5) Citizen Input – all public sector organisations should maximise the opportunities for citizens individually and collectively to contribute to their work. At a minimum, they should have well-published feedback mechanisms, so citizens can submit feedback and suggestions and can see (and comment on) the feedback and suggestions of others.

Many European governments have already taken steps in the direction of these principles, but there is huge scope for further action in every country. In the detailed annex to this declaration (see https://eups20.wordpress.com/, we explain the benefits of adopting each of these principles and give examples of concrete actions governments could and should take in relation to each. We recognise that implementing these principles will take time, but we believe they should be at the heart of efforts to transform the public sector in Europe.

We call on European governments and the European Commission to draw up a concrete action plan that will accelerate the adoption of these principles throughout the European Union and ensure that Europe’s citizens enjoy the benefits of more open and transparent government as soon as possible.

Comments: 3

PaulJohnston
2009-09-02 05:25:42
Main changes

I added some material from David contribution (second version); on 3) added that the public sector should encourage use of data in citizen applications; beefed up 5) so it is not just feedback but citizen contributions in general.
======
Osimod
2009-09-02 12:51:40
too much on transparency

I like this but feels it focuses too much on transparency. 4 out of 5 points make it a bit redundant. I think public input and feedback is a key part, and also the skills/digital divide issue.
======
Josema
2009-09-04 02:20:23
on PSI, open formats and citizen input

We are mixing concepts here. What’s the difference between government datasets, government information, legislation?… everything is PSI. If we want to highlight bits like legislation because they are important, fine, but we might want to state that under a PSI section. I’m also missing the concept of open formats. For me, this is crucial. Added it already. Besides, I agree with David on that there’s much on transparency but not on public input and involvement of citizens in the democratic process. What about a version with those two as main points (PSI and citizen input) and then a few sub-points (legislation, etc.)?

Version Four: Focusing Open Standards rather than FLOSS

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We urge Member States and the Commission to adopt the following these principles:

1) Transparency: government data and services should be by default open and reusable, in machine readable format, using open standard for interoperability. This includes internal monitoring systems and workflow management systems. This will allow third parties to monitor government and to provide value-added services, more in line with users needs. Non-disclosure of data is allowed on the ground of privacy and sensitivity of data, provided public explanation is given. E-government projects in particular should provide the example of transparency.

2) Participatory approach: all individuals have specific knowledge which can help solve public issues. Government should systematically and actively seek open advice when dealing with complex matters, through crowdsourcing and similar approaches. Furthermore, government should host connections between users of public services, in order to let users help each other. All public sector organisations should have well-published feedback mechanisms, so Government should proactively seek public feedback, possibly through independent third parties, and allowing anonymous contributions as well as bottom-up initiatives should be proactively stimulated through procurement and prizes.

3) Subsidiarity: Governments are not the only providers of public services. Citizens-led self-help groups have a greater role to play, thanks to the dramatic reduction in costs. Government should proactively encourage peer-to-peer production of public services, and act only when the impact is sub-optimal.

4) Upscaling: current bottom up initiative require organisational and technological innovation in order to become mainstream. Research and innovation programmes should be promoted to accompany the upscaling of such initiative.

Finally, we dont simply ask government to do this. We are ready to make our part in innovating public services, and we will hold government accountable in implementing the principles presented here, by launching a crowdsourced mo

Comments:  3

Josema
2009-09-04 02:29:02
going in the right direction

this one goes along the line I mentioned in my comment on Sept 1 version, a section on transparency, a section on participation. I think the language needs tweaking though. I liked the language of the other version a bit more. Not ready to do it myself, but if someone takes this one as basis and use language close to the other one, we should be almost there🙂
======
PaulJohnston
2009-09-04 04:37:04
Points 3) and 4)

I think it may be confusing to use the term Subsidiarity for the third point – citizen-led self help or something more catchy would be good. I don’t particularly like 4) – it looks just like a request for money!!
======
Haiku66
2009-09-04 05:16:26
Yup
RE: Points 3) and 4)

I agree with Paul on everything
======
Magda
2009-09-08 05:41:07
‘third parties’

I would suggest to replace ‘third parties’ by everyone which sounds more friendly. Moreover, third parties associates with third sector, ngos/

Version Five: New Version with Small Change in #2

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We urge Member States and the Commission to adopt the following five principles:

1) Transparency:  all public sector organisations should be required to make a commitment to transparency and should provide the public with regularly updated information on all aspects of their operations and decision-making processes. This should include a robust mechanism for citizens to highlight areas where they would like to see further transparency.;

2) Government data: All information created by public institutions, must be public and easily accessible by citizenship. all information released by public sector organisations should be released in  machine searchable ways to ensure maximum public value is gained from it.

3) Government legislation: all legislation and all planned legislation should be released electronically in web-accessible formats that make it easy for citizens to refer to, comment on and link to particular paragraphs within the proposals.

4) Publically-held data sets: except where there are genuine and insurmountable privacy issues, governments should look to share publically-held data sets wherever possible and there should be a robust mechanism for citizens to request that additional data sets be made available.

5) Citizen Input – all public sector organisations should have well-published feedback mechanisms, so citizens can submit feedback and suggestions and can see (and comment on) the feedback and suggestions of others.

Many European governments have already taken steps in the direction of these principles, but there is huge scope for further action in every country. In the detailed annex to this declaration (see https://eups20.wordpress.com/, we explain the benefits of adopting each of these principles and give examples of concrete actions governments could and should take in relation to each. We recognise that implementing these principles will take time, but we believe they should be at the heart of efforts to transform government.

We call on European governments and the European Commission to draw up a concrete action plan that will accelerate the adoption of these principles throughout the European Union and ensure that Europe’s citizens enjoy the benefits of more open and transparent government as soon as possible.

Comments:  3

Haiku66
2009-09-04 05:23:24
Asymmetry

I don’t think your five items qualify as principles (‘Government data’ is not a principle in the same sense that transparency is). I am sure 2 and 3 don’t, 1 and 5 do, not so sure about 4. Number 2 could be called ‘Open access’; number 3, by symmetry, ‘Open debate’. Other hand that I think this proposal is really good.
======
Giovani
2009-09-19 10:53:56
MixedInk – draft merge
RE: Asymmetry

I think you should merge with proposal ‘Principles/Data; AutoPoll; Floss’, which brings more ideas. MixedInk makes  it hard to merge drafts, it creates many versions starting with zero votes, hard to make a better remixed draft evolve from the ground up…

Version 6 – A slightly more funky version

As citizens empowered by information technology and new media call more and more into question what their governments do, the time has come to acknowledge that a new deal of mutual trust must be established between them. This new deal should make more room for citizens to be the driving force behind public policy. We have the people, the technology, the value system; we have the tools and the examples to inspire us and guide our path. We can and should make Europe the region with the most open public institutions on the planet. With this goal in mind, we call on European governments and the European Commission to embrace the following principles: 1. Transparency – the information age version. The whole spectrum of government information, from discussed legislation to budget data, should be made simple for citizens to find, access, understand, reuse and remix. This means releasing them swiftly, in open standard- and machine-readable format, thereby allowing third parties to monitor government and provide services more in line with users needs.

2. Participation. Public institutions should consistently seek out the contribution of citizens not only to provide feedback, but to help out in deliberating, delivering, monitoring and accessing policy.

3. Respect. Whoever you are, most of the smartest people don’t work for your institution. Governments and public agencies should try to get knowledgeable, smart and dedicated citizens on board not simply out of a need to be accountable, but because their involvement will actually make the policy better.

4. Innovation bias. However well it is done, chances are it could be done better. Public institutions should actively encourage attempts at innovating in policy and provide sandboxes where experiments can be carried out at little or no risk. E-government policies should take the lead in embracing all of these principles right from the early design stage. We encourage Ministers to take immediate action in this direction, so as to ensure that Europe’s citizens enjoy the benefits of more open and transparent government as soon as possible.

Comments: None

Version 7 – Initial Launch Draft

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We urge Member States and the Commission to adopt the following five principles:

1) Transparency:  all public sector organisations should be required to make a commitment to transparency and should provide the public with regularly updated information on all aspects of their operations and decision-making processes. This should include a robust mechanism for citizens to highlight areas where they would like to see further transparency.;

2) Government data: all information released by public sector organisations should be released in  machine searchable ways to ensure maximum public value is gained from it.

3) Government legislation: all legislation and all planned legislation should be released electronically in web-accessible formats that make it easy for citizens to refer to, comment on and link to particular paragraphs within the proposals.

4) Publically-held data sets: except where there are genuine and insurmountable privacy issues, governments should look to share publically-held data sets wherever possible and there should be a robust mechanism for citizens to request that additional data sets be made available.

5) Citizen Input – all public sector organisations should have well-published feedback mechanisms, so citizens can submit feedback and suggestions and can see (and comment on) the feedback and suggestions of others.

Many European governments have already taken steps in the direction of these principles, but there is huge scope for further action in every country. In the detailed annex to this declaration (see https://eups20.wordpress.com/, we explain the benefits of adopting each of these principles and give examples of concrete actions governments could and should take in relation to each. We recognise that implementing these principles will take time, but we believe they should be at the heart of efforts to transform government.

We call on European governments and the European Commission to draw up a concrete action plan that will accelerate the adoption of these principles throughout the European Union and ensure that Europe’s citizens enjoy the benefits of more open and transparent government as soon as possible.

Comments: Two

Osimod
2009-08-19 06:32:46
redundancies?

It seems to me point 2 3 and 4 are similar and all could be under the heading of transparency. What is the difference between government data and publicly held data sets?
======
CesarCalderon
2009-08-23 13:07:50
Agreed with David
RE: redundancies?

We must build a comprehensive text, so, let’s avoid redundancies

Version 8 – 15 Sept Mix

For the first time in modern industrial society, governments have the chance to realise the potential embodied in Bill Joy’s observation that there will always be more smart people outside government than within it. And, in view of the scale and complexity of the challenges faced in the early 21st century, there has never been a more urgent time to realise this latent, distributed potential.

The openness to iterative and collaborative experimentation and improvement that is characteristic of many Web 2.0 initiatives is one of the web’s deep lessons and, potentially, contains the means to transform our understanding and experience of governance.

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making

As citizens we expect to be able to share feedback and insight on public services publicly with other fellow citizens, civil servants, and governors in fluid peer-to-peer conversations, and to help each other in making the most of these services.

We want to be able to give input on and monitor government activities as they being designed, deliberated upon, implemented, and reviewed; for all types of activity, from legislation, where law proposals should be published at an early stage, to government spending where each spending decision should be published with clear and open rationale.

We expect that the whole spectrum of government information, from draft legislation to budget data, should be made simple for citizens to discover, access, understand, reuse, and remix; releasing data swiftly, in open standard- and machine-readable format, thereby allowing third parties to monitor government and provide services more in line with users needs, and ensuring that the data is continuously available and continuously up to date.

We want government to lead the way by example in ensuring that the minimum amount of personal information is used in providing services to citizens.

Public institutions should seek out the contribution of citizens not only to provide feedback and accountability, but to assist in deliberating, delivering, monitoring and accessing policy, because harnessing the salient knowledge and experience of individuals dispersed through the community will strengthen policy outcomes .

Against this background, we commend, and ask Member States and the Commission to adopt, the following five principles:

1) Transparency:  all public sector organisations should be required to make a commitment to transparency and should provide the public with a live stream of information on all aspects of their operations and decision-making processes. This should include a robust mechanism for citizens to highlight areas where they would like to see further transparency.

2) Government data: All information created by public institutions, must be public and easily accessible by citizenship. all information released by public sector organisations should be released in  machine searchable ways to ensure maximum public value is gained from it.

3) Government legislation: all legislation and all planned legislation should be released electronically in web-accessible formats that make it easy for citizens to refer to, comment on, and link to particular paragraphs within proposals.

4) Publicly-held data sets: except where there are genuine and insurmountable privacy issues, governments should look to share publicly-held data sets wherever possible and there should be a robust mechanism for citizens to request that additional data sets be made available.

5) Citizen Input – all public sector organisations should have open and clearly-defined feedback mechanisms, so citizens can submit feedback and ideas and can see (and comment on) the feedback and suggestions of others.

Comments: None

Version 9 – A draft Remix

We believe that the European Union has a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the relationship between citizens and the state by opening up public institutions and by empowering citizens to take a more active role in public services and in public decision-making.

We expect to be able to share feedback and insight on public services publicly with other fellow citizens, and to help each other in using them, just as we do for market services.

We want government to facilitate this peer-to-peer conversation and mutual help between citizens, by supporting user-driven initiatives and/or by implementing such facilities on all government websites. We want government to allow civil servants to engage in direct open conversations with citizens through blogs and social networks.

We expect respect: government should recognize that each citizen has specific knowledge, and should try to get knowledgeable, smart and dedicated citizens on board not simply out of a need to be accountable, but because their involvement will actually make the policy better. In the same spirit, we want government not to set up parallel services when there are already similar citizens-led initiatives.

We want to be able to give input and monitor government activities while they are designed and implemented. This applies to all types of activity, from legislation, where law proposals have to be published at an early stage, to government spending where each spending decision have to be published.

We expect to be able to reuse public data in order to make them more meaningful and useful. The whole spectrum of government information, from discussed legislation to budget data, should be made simple for citizens to find, access, understand, reuse and remix. This means releasing them swiftly, in open standard- and machine-readable format, thereby allowing third parties to monitor government and provide services more in line with users needs. Obviously, this should not apply personal and sensitive data: we are concerned about privacy and security of our own data. We want government to lead the way by example in ensuring that the minimum amount of personal information is used in providing services to citizens.

Respect. Whoever you are, most of the smartest people don’t work for your institution. Governments and public agencies should try to get knowledgeable, smart and dedicated citizens on board not simply out of a need to be accountable, but because their involvement will actually make the policy better.

Participation. Public institutions should consistently seek out the contribution of citizens not only to provide feedback, but to help out in deliberating, delivering, monitoring and accessing policy.

As citizens empowered by information technology and new media call more and more into question what their governments do, the time has come to acknowledge that a new deal of mutual trust must be established between them. This new deal should make more room for citizens to be the driving force behind public policy. We have the people, the technology, the value system; we have the tools and the examples to inspire us and guide our path. We can and should make Europe the region with the most open public institutions on the planet.

With this goal in mind, we call on European governments and the European Commission to embrace the following principles:

1. Transparency – the information age version. The whole spectrum of government information, from discussed legislation to budget data, should be made simple for citizens to find, access, understand, reuse and remix. This means releasing them swiftly, in open standard- and machine-readable format, thereby allowing third parties to monitor government and provide services more in line with users needs.

2. Participation. Public institutions should consistently seek out the contribution of citizens not only to provide feedback, but to help out in deliberating, delivering, monitoring and accessing policy.

3. Respect. Whoever you are, most of the smartest people don’t work for your institution. Governments and public agencies should try to get knowledgeable, smart and dedicated citizens on board not simply out of a need to be accountable, but because their involvement will actually make the policy better.

4. Innovation bias. However well it is done, chances are it could be done better. Public institutions should actively encourage attempts at innovating in policy and provide sandboxes where experiments can be carried out at little or no risk. E-government policies should take the lead in embracing all of these principles right from the early design stage. We encourage Ministers to take immediate action in this direction, so as to ensure that Europe’s citizens enjoy the benefits of more open and transparent government as soon as possible.

Comments: None

Version 10 – What we expect from public services

As citizens empowered by information technology and new media call more and more into question what their governments do, the time has come to acknowledge that a new deal of mutual trust must be established between them. This new deal should make more room for citizens to be the driving force behind public policy. We have the people, the technology, the value system; we have the tools and the examples to inspire us and guide our path. We can and should make Europe the region with the most open public institutions on the planet.

Yet this does not mean to substitute government with spontaneous, private, bottom-up initiatives: we need government more than ever to ensure stability, growth and equal opportunities for all. It is not a zero-sum game of public versus private action, nor a matter of large versus small government.

We, the signatories of this declaration, want to help e-government policies improve public service through web-based collaboration. We therefore advance a set of priority action points for the next 3 years:

1) We expect to be able to reuse public data in order to make them more meaningful and useful. The whole spectrum of government information, from discussed legislation to budget data, should be made simple for citizens to find, access, understand, reuse and remix. This means releasing them swiftly, in open standard- and machine-readable format, thereby allowing third parties to monitor government and provide services more in line with users needs. Obviously, this should not apply personal and sensitive data: we are concerned about privacy and security of our own data. We want government to lead the way by example in ensuring that the minimum amount of personal information is used in providing services to citizens.

2) We want to be able to give input and monitor government activities while they are designed and implemented. This applies to all types of activity, from legislation, where law proposals have to be published at an early stage, to government spending where each spending decision have to be published. E-government projects in particular should provide the example of transparent data on investment, implementation and results.

3) We expect respect: government should recognize that each citizen has specific knowledge, and should try to get knowledgeable, smart and dedicated citizens on board not simply out of a need to be accountable, but because their involvement will actually make the policy better. In the same spirit, we want government not to set up parallel services when there are already similar citizens-led initiatives.

4) We expect to be able to share feedback and insight on public services publicly with other fellow citizens, and to help each other in using them, just as we do for market services. We want government to facilitate this peer-to-peer conversation and mutual help between citizens, by supporting user-driven initiatives and/or by implementing such facilities on all government websites. We want government to allow civil servants to engage in direct open conversations with citizens through blogs and social networks.

5) We want to be empowered. All citizens have the right to help themselves solve their problems by collaborating with other citizens: we need government to ensure the universal availability of skills and resources to citiz

Comments: 1

Haiku66
2009-09-16 03:01:33
Getting there

Well done, David. Couple of not-so-minor things:

1. the second paragraph does not read like a declaration, it’s more like you’re thinking aloud. No math (zero-sum game) is to be allowed into a declaration until civilization evolves and we all evolve into pure energy. I know it’s hard, sorry🙂 I’d just kill that paragraph altogether

2. in the third paragraph you propose that ‘we, the signatories’ and gov folks collaborate. I think the declaration would stand better if it were ‘we, the people’, or actually ‘we, some people’ – that’s the spirit of your opening paragraph, which you took from my funky version. Also, that (your third paragraph) sounds like a business proposal to me.

3. typo on 2 (desisgned). In 2 you lack a comma after ‘spending’

4. the privacy point is not elegant. A declaration is for principles, not exception. The constitution says we have the right to live; ordinary legislation introduces the death penalty for the dangerous convict on the basis of other people’s right to live. Kill it, or make in to a clause: ‘… needs, while safeguarding citizen’s rights to privacy.’

5. of course, point 5 is unfinished… so it mixedink’s visualization when you write comments?
======

Version 11 – Second Version

We live through important times in the short history of public services.  Traditional e-government policies have not delivered the promised benefits in terms of a more efficient, effective and user-oriented public administration. Web2.0 proved to be more than yet another hype, and it is having a disruptive impact on the service sector. Public services are a particularly active field, where a huge amount of bottom-up initiatives have been launched.

Public services 2.0 is NOT:

-a purely technological issue

-another priority to be added on top of existing e-government priorities

-relevant only for participation activities

Instead, public services 2.0 is a radical cultural change in the way public services are delivered across sectors and levels of government.

We call for government to fully embrace the principles of web2.0 in delivering public services:

– Transparency: government data and services should be by default open and reusable, in machine readable format. This includes internal monitoring systems and workflow management systems. This will allow third parties to monitor government and to provide value-added services, more in line with users needs. Non-disclosure of data is allowed on the ground of privacy and sensitivity of data, provided public explanation is given. E-government projects in particular should provide the example of transparency.

-collective intelligence: all individuals have specific knowledge which can help solve public issues. Government should systematically and actively seek open advice when dealing with complex matters, through crowdsourcing and similar approaches. Furthermore, government should host connections between users of public services, in order to let users help each other.

-public feedback: in an often non-competitive market such as public services, users voice has to be openly collected and published for all public services, in order to better understand users needs and to publicly expose government performance. Government should proactively seek public feedback, possibly through independent third parties, and allowing anonymous contributions.

-new innovation model: experimentation and failure have to be accepted as organic part of the innovation process. Bottom-up initiatives should be proactively stimulated through procurement and prizes.

-Subsidiarity: Governments are not the only providers of public services. Citizens-led self-help groups have a greater role to play, thanks to the dramatic reduction in costs. Government should proactively encourage peer-to-peer production of public services, and act only when the impact is sub-optimal.

The benefits can be huge, in terms of better quality of services and citizens engagement. But there are challenges which need to be addressed:

-skills and divide: public services 2.0 require educated citizenship, in terms of basic media literacy and advanced programming skills. Government should ensure that such skills are widely available to individuals and organisations, by promoting training or access to advanced IT skills for all social groups

-upscaling: current bottom up initiative require organisational and technological innovation in order to become mainstream. Research and innovation programmes should be promoted to accompany the upscaling of such initiative.

These are important times. Opportunities are huge, but proactive action is needed! Change will take time, institutional settings have to be adjusted, but a clear radical change has to be visible now.

Finally, we dont simply ask government to do this. We are ready to make our part in innovating public services, and we will hold government accountable in implementing the principles presented here, by launching a crowdsourced mo

Comments: 1

Osimod
2009-09-02 12:40:06
missing letters at the end

it should read a ‘crowdsourced monitoring system

Version 12 –  add standard and open source

We live through important times in the short history of public services.  Traditional e-government policies have not delivered the promised benefits in terms of a more efficient, effective and user-oriented public administration. Web2.0 proved to be more than yet another hype, and it is having a disruptive impact on the service sector. Public services are a particularly active field, where a huge amount of bottom-up initiatives have been launched.

Public services 2.0 is NOT:

-a purely technological issue

-another priority to be added on top of existing e-government priorities

-relevant only for participation activities

Instead, public services 2.0 is a radical cultural change in the way public services are delivered across sectors and levels of government.

We call for government to fully embrace the principles of web2.0 in delivering public services:

– Transparency: government data and services should be by default open and reusable, in machine readable format. This includes internal monitoring systems and workflow management systems. This will allow third parties to monitor government and to provide value-added services, more in line with users needs. Non-disclosure of data is allowed on the ground of privacy and sensitivity of data, provided public explanation is given. E-government projects in particular should provide the example of transparency.

– Standard. the Open Source software must be able to use all the data and to access all the public sites. Although if the administration make software, it must be open source and, of course multiplatform.

All the data and software provided must be non platform dependent, that minds every citizen can use it from any kind of Operating System or device with Internet access. Non proprietary solution must be allowed to buy from administration if there are any other open source solution that works. Because taxes are better used in open source software and operating systems, proprietary solutions must be only allowed if there are no alternative. paying for what is free with tax money should become forbidden.

-collective intelligence: all individuals have specific knowledge which can help solve public issues. Government should systematically and actively seek open advice when dealing with complex matters, through crowdsourcing and similar approaches. Furthermore, government should host connections between users of public services, in order to let users help each other.

-public feedback: in an often non-competitive market such as public services, users voice has to be openly collected and published for all public services, in order to better understand users needs and to publicly expose government performance. Government should proactively seek public feedback, possibly through independent third parties, and allowing anonymous contributions.

-new innovation model: experimentation and failure have to be accepted as organic part of the innovation process. Bottom-up initiatives should be proactively stimulated through procurement and prizes.

-Subsidiarity: Governments are not the only providers of public services. Citizens-led self-help groups have a greater role to play, thanks to the dramatic reduction in costs. Government should proactively encourage peer-to-peer production of public services, and act only when the impact is sub-optimal.

The benefits can be huge, in terms of better quality of services and citizens engagement. But there are challenges which need to be addressed:

-skills and divide: public services 2.0 require educated citizenship, in terms of basic media literacy and advanced programming skills. Government should ensure that such skills are widely available to individuals and organisations, by promoting training or access to advanced IT skills for all social groups

-upscaling: current bottom up initiative require organisational and technological innovation in order to become mainstream. Research and innovation programmes should be promoted to accompany the upscaling of such initiative.

These are important times. Opportunities are huge, but proactive action is needed! Change will take time, institutional settings have to be adjusted, but a clear radical change has to be visible now.

Finally, we dont simply ask government to do this. We are ready to make our part in innovating public services, and we will hold government accountable in implementing the principles presented here, by launching a crowdsourced mo

Comments – 1

Pverhoest
2009-08-26 04:38:50
Positive

To be more effective, the last addition should be formulated more positively
======
Osimod
2009-09-02 12:38:03
open source creates noise

I think adding the open source argument will probably become the centre of the discussion and I  prefer to avoid it. I dont want to go back to focusing the discussion on this. I think there are more important issues, like open data and citizens feedback. We risk that the overall discussion will focus on this point. Moreover, in Malmo there will already be a declaration of the open software foundation so this risk being redundant
======
Haiku66
2009-09-04 08:11:28
Too negative?

I don’t like too much opening with what eups20 is NOT. It seems like assuming that everybody got it wrong! Is it not a bit too negative?

Version 13 – Standard

Standard. the Open Source software must be able to use all the data and to access all the webs. Although if the administration make software, it must be open source and, of course multiplatform.

All the data and software provided must be non platform-dependent – that means every citizen can use it from any kind of Operating System or device with internet access. No proprietary solution must be allowed to buy for administration if there is any other open source solution that works.

PaulJohnston
2009-08-24 05:50:08
Please clarify!

I am not exactly sure what point is being made here, please can you clarify? Is this version suggesting that the public sector should only ever use open source software (which would seem an unrealistic request and a constraint/burden on the public sector)? Or just that the public sector should look to use open source as much as possible (but if they don’t do this at the moment, why don’t they if it offers better value for money)?

7 Responses

  1. Excellent challenges altogether, you simply been given some sort of company logo new readers. What could you highly recommend regarding offered which you built at times back? Just about any certain?

  2. I constantly spent my half an hour to read this blog’s articles all the time along with a cup of coffee.

  3. Hey! This is my first visit to your blog!

    We are a group of volunteers and starting a new initiative
    in a community in the same niche. Your blog provided us useful information to work
    on. You have done a extraordinary job!

  4. Good write-up אולמות אירועים בצפון. I used to be reviewing consistently this site that i’m encouraged! Very beneficial information and facts particularly the closing sections🙂 My partner and i manage such information lots. I’d been looking for this specific info for a long time. Thanks a lot plus best of luck.

  5. Greetings, I believe your blog could possibly be having browser compatibility problems.
    When I look at your website in Safari, it looks
    fine however, when opening in Internet Explorer, it’s got some overlapping issues.
    I simply wanted to give you a quick heads up!
    Besides that, wonderful website!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: