Mukelani Dimba: The beauty of the northern Italian town of Bellagio on Lake Como transcends all natural elements. It is beautiful when the temperature drops and white snow caps the early Alps and fog is suspended between the quiet lake and the mountains. It is also beautiful when warm sun rays that blanket the entire Larian triangle bringing out the mallard ducks to come out and frolic on the lake. Bellagio provided the backdrop last week (sometimes literally, see picture) for a global meeting of data scientists, political theorists, academics and open governance practitioners to consider risks, benefits and opportunities for CrowdLaw, a cutting-edge idea for using technology to enhance public participation in urban law making. CrowdLaw is about informing, consulting involving, collaborating with, and empowering the public in the work of lawmaking bodies at local government levels. It is a technology-enabled participatory lawmaking mechanism.

Democracy is whole lot like Bellagio. Throughout the vicissitudes of democratic practice, the highs and lows, democracy remains the best form of governance (of all the ones that have hitherto been tried, to paraphrase Churchill). But democracy is a lot more than voting for public representatives every four or five years. Real democracy is about people’s participation in decision making about matters that affect their daily lives. Participation is the currency we use to enjoy the benefits of democracy. Without participation, we lose democracy.

However, that which does not transform with the changes in the environment is bound to become extinct. This is true for living organisms and ideas alike. Technological advancement is influencing every aspect of our lives, from how we interact with those around us to how we work, how we play, how we perceive the world and events around us. Likewise, technological advancement is transforming entire industries, professions and areas of knowledge. However the one area that seems still unsure about how to respond to change brought about by technological innovation, is the governance field.

I use the term “governance field” as the broad rubric that encompasses fields such as democratic practice, policy formulation and law making. While mobile banking, artificial intelligence (AI)-supported infrastructure design and usage of virtual reality in medical procedures have become standard features of modern life, there is still only minimal uptake of electronic or online voting during national elections, to give one example. While there are hundreds of examples and recorded best practice on how governments are using online and offline mechanisms to promote participation in policy formulation, the incorporation of new technologies into the entire law-making circle (problem identification, options identification, drafting, decision, implementation and review) at local levels of government are few and far in between but there are good examples (that will be elaborated on in subsequent blogs in this series). In some instances, existing legal frameworks have often been slow to respond to swift and sudden technological changes, rendering them — at least in part — unable to fully accommodate the areas they are meant to regulate.

There are strong arguments that technology is not the only (or even preferred) medium for enhancing public participation in law making. However, it is also true that traditional, mostly offline, mechanisms for public participation tend to favour those “in the know” and those that have access to information and resources to enable them to send their positions to legislative authorities or travel to seats of government to engage with lawmakers. The rapid growth of the rates of penetration of mobile phones globally,¹ means there are now greater opportunities to enable broad-based participation in law-making processes using technology. In instances of inequality technology can be a great leveler and can have a democratising effect and thus enabling more inclusive lawmaking.

If the governance area of knowledge and practice fails to adopt technological change, might it also fray, wither and become extinct? The concept itself cannot be said to be vulnerable to extinction but different approaches to governance could become irrelevant over time if they are not modernised. I believe that this is the case with the practice of democracy.

Fortunately there are many individuals, organisations and governments that are working together to experiment with how technology can be used to enhance the practice of democracy. These experiments are coming at the right time as the world experiences a sharp decline in public trust of governments. Multi-stakeholder initiatives such the the Open Government Partnership (OGP) working with governments, civil society groups and civic tech proponents are creating exciting new platforms that seek to enable deeper and more impactful engagement between the public and their governments on the conduct of public affairs and management of shrinking public resources. Governments across the globe are piloting new forms of engagement and feedback mechanisms to better understand and meet the needs of citizens, be it through online consultations, community score cards or e-services, to name a few.

The group convened at Bellagio by Professor Beth Noveck, head of The Governance Lab considered ways of nurturing a movement that will drive this important work through global project mapping, research into the effectiveness of these initiatives and development of norms and standards for implementing CrowdLaw. According to Prof. Noveck,²

“Technology offers the promise of opening how lawmaking bodies work and making lawmakers accountable to the public more than just on Election Day. CrowdLaw offers an alternative to the traditional method of lawmaking, which is typically done by professional staff and politicians working behind closed doors and with little direct input from the people legislation affects. Instead, we start from the hypothesis that, designed right, with the aim of improving the quality of outputs, there are opportunities at each stage of the lawmaking process, including problem definition, solution identification, research and drafting, subsequent crafting of implementing regulations, and monitoring of outcomes, to introduce greater expertise into the legislative process efficiently. At the same time, we acknowledge that, designed wrong, without regard for outcomes, engagement may only hamstring decision-making and deepen distrust of government.”

Prof. Noveck’s warning about some of the potential pitfalls of CrowdLaw is important. Implementing CrowdLaw comes at a cost in time, resources and, most importantly, ordinary people’s wishes and expectations. The value proposition for implementing and participating in CrowdLaw initiatives for both governments and the public has to be well articulated and based on evidence from pioneering initiatives.

While the case for the benefits of CrowdLaw for the public is easily made, more work needs to be done to demonstrate how CrowdLaw can strengthen existing public participation processes and how it can help governments graduate up the continuum of public participation by moving from informing, consulting and involving the public to collaboration with, and empowerment of, the public. The position of CrowdLaw within the broader ecosystem of governance-enhancement concepts, for example participatory budgeting and legislative openness, will also require more analysis. CrowdLaw champions will further need to grapple with the question of limitation of access (to information and participation) as a legally recognised provision in public law. While the CrowdLaw ideal is to place the public throughout the vein of legislative process, the contours of the limitations to public participation will need to be articulated and guidelines must be offered to CrowdLaw implementers on the government side.

With 76 Open Government Partnership (OGP) countries and subnational entities (municipal, provincial, state or devolved governments) currently drafting their action plans, OGP is an ideal incubator for CrowdLaw — especially with a view to curating knowledge and early lessons on “how technology can facilitate more participatory lawmaking in cities, and the benefits potential, risks and metrics”, as Prof. Noveck puts it.

There are clear synergies between the intentions of CrowdLaw and OGP’s stated agenda of promoting parliamentary/legislative openness. The CrowdLaw concept presents OGP participating countries and subnational entities with a tool to test the possibilities of innovation in making legislative process more open and collaborative.

It could well be that an idea hatched in a quiet little corner of Lake Como will resound around the world and fundamentally transform law-making processes forever. This is a good thing — perhaps a fundamental shake up is what is needed to restore the public’s faith in democracy and government.

*Mukelani Dimba is the civil society co-chair of the Open Government Partnership

Lead image: A breakout session at the three-day CrowdLaw conference hosted at the Rockefeller Foundation Bellagio Center in Italy. Picture by Beth Simone Noveck

FOOTNOTES:

The post CrowdLaw as a tool for open governance appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Here’s a preview of the program of three days that will be like no other.

Donald Trump’s announcement this June 1st that the United States will be withdrawing from the Paris Accord has caused indignation around the world. On their side of the Atlantic, the fightback was launched by a handful of mayors of big cities, gathered together in an organization called Mayors National Climate Action Agenda. Whatever the mistakes of the White House, they declared, they will work to ensure that within city limits, the fight against global warming will remain a priority. It is city halls, therefore, that will be fulfilling a treaty concluded between nations.

An inconsistent situation some may say. Or could this be a sign of a decisive change to come? Big cities, which already hold substantial demographic, cultural and economic powers, might not be condemned to remain the second order of political actors that they are today. Conversely, in a context of democratic crisis, blurred frontiers, and crumbling Nation-States, our future could well be formed of networked cities that have risen up to the challenge.

THREE DAYS LIKE NO OTHER

As crazy as it may seem, the idea that networks of cities will shape our future is at the heart of the 5th edition of OuiShare Fest Paris. Taking place at the renovated Magasins Généraux in Pantin, this year the event will go far beyond your usual talks, workshops, participative formats and immersive experiences.

Novelties on the menu:

• the Tribunal of Future Generations: can we let robots keep destroying jobs? Should we write the right to laziness in the Constitution? This decision will lay in the hands of the members of the jury, chosen by lottery for this mock trial run by the Magazine Usbek & Rica (Wed, July 5th).
• Masterclasses: in the mornings of the 6th and 7th of July experts from 13 countries will hold 4-hour masterclasses.  Participants can sign up to take a storytelling course with the American publishing consultant Ariane Conrad, learn the A to Z of sharing cities with our Dutch colleagues from ShareNL, or even learn to manage a company without bosses with our New Zealander friends from the Enspiral network. And in the background? Each day is dedicated to a particular dimension of globalized cities
• 3 festive evening events (in comparison to one!)for more opportunities to connect.

DAY 1: REGAINING COLLECTIVE POWER FROM THE BOTTOM-UP

Today, it appears ever more difficult to build consensus at the national level; political identities are fragmenting; politicians are going through a grave crisis of legitimacy. It is at this point that the city can emerge as the stage for a renewal of collective action. From this perspective, it is noteworthy that from New York to Madrid, social movements symbolic of the last few years, have occupied public spaces. Because of its size, among other factors, the city is suitable for experimentation with new forms of participative democracy, fueled by the civic tech revolution.

OuiShare Fest will also welcome two pioneers of citizen technologies: Pia Mancini, co-founder of the platforms DemocracyOS and Open Collective, as well as the Argentine political party Partido de la Red, and Jeremy Heimans, Australian activist and entrepreneur, co-founder of the online petition platform Avaaz and of Purpose, which seeks an in-depth transformation of the very idea of power in connected societies. Alastair Parvin, the creator of the WikiHouse Foundation, which applies the organization methods of the famous online encyclopedia to architecture and design, will be discussing the reinvention of cities by citizens themselves.

And, because it is important to articulate the local and the global, this first day will be concluded with an unusual football match; Pantin vs. the rest of the world!

DAY 2: RETHINKING OUR CITIES AS PLATFORMS

How do we shift from a mass of lonely individuals to an organized and lively ecosystem? Will cities be reborn as platforms for the benefit of their inhabitants? Every local government in the world dreams of replicating Silicon Valley’s success story. But aren’t there other relevant examples to look for, other paths to follow? This topic will be debated between Nicolas Colin (The Family), Jennifer Clamp (Techweek NZ) and Rui Quinta (With Company). Professor and renowned management thinker Anil Gupta (Indian Institute of Management of Ahmedabad) will deliver a talk on what corporate innovators can learn from grassroots movements.

Juan Pablo Ortega (Innotegia, the city of Medellin) and Malik Yakini (Detroit Black Community Food Security Network) will share their stories, which attest to the fact that it is often in cities which went through the worst crises that the drive to innovate is the strongest.

During a “fishbowl” discussion – a OuiShare-favorite hybrid format, somewhere between a business-as-usual conference and a participatory workshop – participants will be invited to reflect on how local authorities can efficiently regulate global collaborative platforms.

DAY 3: BUILDING GLOBAL URBAN NETWORKS

Cities with more power and autonomy should by no mean be mistaken for a temptation to retreat. There is no point arguing with the fact that there is already a chasm between globalized metropolitan and peripheral areas. But how do we prevent it from widening?

To echo Mark Watts’ (Executive Director of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group) opening talk, day 3 will be all about global urban networks. Founder of the Fab City Global Initiative Tomas Diez will share his vision for a future of locally productive and globally connected self-sufficient cities. Dylan Hendricks (Ten-Year Forecast) will talk about the Internet of cities and the future of borders in the post-Brexit Europe. Another must-attend session: a discussion with the creators of the Darwin Ecosystem and Ateliers La Mouche about the role of alternative spaces in urban revitalization.

And to conclude this Fest in due form, you are warmly invited to a genuine Brazilian Festival on the banks of the Canal de l’Ourcq!

Don’t miss out on this one and explore the full program

Get your ticket at http://paris.ouisharefest.com

The post OuiShare Fest Paris: Cities of the World, Unite! appeared first on P2P Foundation.