Towards Policy- making 2.0:

Transcription

1 ICT Seventh Framework Programme (ICT FP7) Grant Agreement No: Bridging Communities for Next Generation Policy- Making Towards Policy- making 2.0: The International Research Roadmap on ICT for Governance and Policy Modelling Internal Deliverable Form Project Reference No. Deliverable No. Relevant Workpackage: Nature: Dissemination Level: Document version: Date: Authors: Reviewers: Document description: ICT FP D2.2.2 WP2 Report Public FINAL /09/2013 David Osimo & Francesco Mureddu (T4I2), Riccardo Onori & Stefano Armenia (CATTID), Gianluca Carlo Misuraca (IPTS) Eva Jaho (ATC), Andrea Bassi (MI) This deliverable describes the final version of the new International Research Roadmap on ICT Tools for Governance and Policy

2 Modelling History Version Date Reason Revised by /06/ st draft T4I /07/ /07/ /08/ /09/ nd draft sent for peer review Peer review and feedback 3 rd draft sent for final confirmation 06/09/2013 Partners approval Final version sent to the PO and reviewers T4I2 ATC, MI T4I2 ATC, DIAG, W3C, IPTS, MI ATC 2 P age

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND: WHY A ROADMAP? The rationale of the roadmap: what is the problem? An open and recursive methodology Scope and definition Policy: Between politics and services NOT JUST ANOTHER HYPE: THE DEMAND SIDE OF POLICY- MAKING The typical tasks of policy- makers: the policy cycle The traditional tools of policy- making The key challenges of policy- makers Detect and understand problems before they become unsolvable Generate high involvement of citizens in policy- making Identify good ideas and innovative solutions to long- standing problems Reduce uncertainty on the possible impacts of policies Ensure long - term thinking Encourage behavioural change and uptake Manage crisis and the unknown unknown Moving from conversations to action Detect non- compliance and mis- spending through better transparency Understand the impact of policies When policy- making 2.0 becomes a reality: a tentative vision for Agenda setting phase: recognizing the problem Policy design Implementation Evaluation The key challenges for policy makers and the corresponding phases in the policy cycle THE SUPPLY SIDE: CURRENT STATUS AND THE RESEARCH CHALLENGES Policy Modelling Systems of Atomized Models Collaborative Modelling Easy Access to Information and Knowledge Creation Model Validation Immersive Simulation Output Analysis and Knowledge Synthesis Data- powered Collaborative Governance Big Data Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis Visual Analytics for collaborative governance: the opportunities and the research challenges Serious Gaming for Behavioural Change Linked Open Government Data Collaborative Governance Participatory Sensing Identity Management Global Systems Science THE CASE FOR POLICY- MAKING 2.0: EVALUATING THE IMPACT Cross analysis of case studies Global Epidemic and Mobility Model Impact of Gleam UrbanSim P age

4 Opinion Space Pathways Analysis Cross analysis of the case studies Survey of Users needs results Analysis of the prize winners Lessons learnt from cases and prize An additional research challenge: counterfactual impact evaluation of Policy Making CONCLUSIONS: POLICY- MAKING 2.0 BETWEEN HYPE AND REALITY REFERENCES LIST OF ACRONYMS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: the fragmentation of policy- making Figure 2 Outline of the participatory process Figure 3: Policy Cycle and Related Activities Figure 4: Total Disasters Reported Figure 5: Agricultural Production and Externalities Simulator (APES) Figure 6: Conversational Modelling Interface Figure 7: the PADGET Framework Figure 8: the Time- Space Matrix Figure 9: COMA, COllaborative Modelling Architecture Figure 10: OCOPOMO eparticipation Platform Figure 11: Twitrratr Figure 12: Wordclouds Figure 13: UserVoice Figure 14 Open Data Business Model (source: Istituto Superiore Mario Boella) Figure 15 - LOD providers and their linkages Figure 16 Rating other opinions' in Opinion Space Figure 17 Playing the My2050 game for the demand side Figure 18 Adoption of ICT Tools and Methodologies for policy- making (source: CROSSOVER Survey of Users Needs 2012) Figure 19 Needs and Challenges in the Policy Making Process (source: CROSSOVER Survey of Users Needs 2012) Figure 20: a proposed evaluation framework for policy- making Figure 21: Relation Between Policy- Making Needs and Research Challenges P age

5 Executive Summary This deliverable introduces and describes the interim version of the new International Research Roadmap on ICT tools for Governance and Policy Modelling, renamed by the project team as Policy- Making 2.0, one of the core outputs of the Crossover project, which is developed under WP2 Content Production. The roadmap aims to establish the scientific and political basis for long- lasting interest and commitment to next generation policy- making by researchers and policy- makers. In doing so, it contains an analysis of what technologies are currently available, for what concrete purposes, and what could become available in the future. The main rationale for such a document is the current fragmentation of the landscape between different stakeholders, disciplines, policy domains and geographical areas. The document is the result of a highly participative process undergone between the first draft and the final roadmap, with the involvement of hundreds of people through 11 different input methods, from live workshops to online discussion. 5 P age

6 After a brief introduction of the background, the document analyses the demand side: the current status of policy- making, with the key tasks (illustrated by the traditional policy cycle) and existing challenges: a. Detect and understand problems before they become unsolvable b. Generate high involvement of citizens in policy- making c. Identify good ideas and innovative solutions to long- standing problems d. Reduce uncertainty on the possible impacts of policies e. Ensure long - term thinking f. Encourage behavioural change and uptake g. Manage crisis and the unknown unknown h. Moving from conversations to action i. Detect non- compliance and mis- spending through better transparency j. Understand the impact of policies It then presents a concrete tentative vision of how policy- making could look in 2030, if these challenges were overcome. Section 3 represents the core of the roadmap and presents the key research challenges to be addressed to achieve this vision, updating the original version based on the input of the consultation. For each research challenge, it presents the current status, the existing gaps, and short and long term research perspectives. The key research challenges are: 1. Policy Modelling 1.1. Systems of Atomized Models 1.2. Collaborative Modelling 1.3. Easy Access to Information and Knowledge Creation 1.4. Model Validation 1.5. Immersive Simulation 1.6. Output Analysis and Knowledge Synthesis 2. Data- powered Collaborative Governance 2.1. Big Data 2.2. Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis 2.3. Visual Analytics for collaborative governance: the opportunities and the research challenges 2.4. Serious Gaming for Behavioural Change 2.5. Linked Open Government Data 2.6. Collaborative Governance 2.7. Participatory Sensing 2.8. Identity Management 2.9. Global Systems Science But to what extent policy- making 2.0 can be said to genuinely improve policy- making? Section 4 looks at the available evidence about the impact of policy- making 2.0, across case studies, the survey and the prize. As it emerges that no robust impact evaluation is available, we propose an additional 6 P age

7 research challenge on impact evaluation of policy- making accompanied by a proposed evaluation framework. Finally, we summarize the findings of the document bringing together the different sections, suggesting that policy- making 2.0 cannot be considered the panacea for all issues related to bad public policies, but that at the same time it is more than just a neutral set of disparate tools. It provides an integrated and mutually reinforcing set of methods that share a similar vision of policy- making and that should be addressed in an integrated and strategic way; and it provides opportunities to improve the checks and balances systems behind decision making in government, and as such it should be further pursued. and as such it should be further pursued. 7 P age

8 1. BACKGROUND: WHY A ROADMAP? 1.1. The rationale of the roadmap: what is the problem? The CROSSOVER project aims to consolidate and expand the existing community on ICT for Governance and Policy Modelling (built largely within FP7) by: - Bringing together and reinforcing the links between the different global communities of researchers and experts: it will create directories of experts and solutions, and animate knowledge exchange across communities of practice both offline and online; - Reaching out and raising the awareness of non- experts and potential users, with special regard to high- level policy- makers and policy advisors: it will produce multimedia content, a practical handbook and high- level policy conferences with competition for prizes; - Establishing the scientific and political basis for long- lasting interest and commitment to next generation policy- making, beyond the mere availability of FP7 funding: it will focus on use cases and a demand- driven approach, involving policy- makers and advisors. The CROSSOVER project pursues this goal through a combination of content production, ad hoc and well- designed online and offline animation; as well as strong links with existing communities outside the CROSSOVER project and outside the realm of e- Government. The present deliverable is one of the core outputs of the project: the International Research Roadmap on ICT Tools for Governance and Policy Modelling. It aims to create a common platform between actors fragmented in different disciplines, policy domains, organisations and geographical areas, as illustrated in the figure below. Figure 1: the fragmentation of policy- making 2.0 But most of all, it aims to provide a clear outline of what technologies are available now for policy- makers to improve their work, and what could become available tomorrow. 8 P age

9 CROSSOVER builds on the results of the CROSSROAD project 1, which elaborated a research roadmap on the same topic along the whole of With respect to the previous roadmap, this document is firstly a revised and updated version. Beside this, it contains some fundamental novelties: - A demand- driven approach: rather than focussing on the technology, the present roadmap starts from the needs and the activities of policy- making and then links the research challenges to them. - An additional emphasis on cases and applications: for each research challenge, we indicate relevant cases and practical solutions - A clearer thematic focus on ICT for Governance and Policy- Modelling, by dropping more peripheral grand challenges of Government Service Utility and Scientific Base for ICT- enabled Governance - A global coverage: while CROSSROAD focussed on Europe, CROSSOVER includes cases and experiences from all over the world - A living roadmap: the present deliverable is accompanied by an online repositories of tools, people and applications 1.2. An open and recursive methodology The present Research Roadmap on Policy- Making 2.0 is developed with a sequential approach based on the existing research roadmap developed by the CROSSROAD project. In order to achieve the goals of overcoming the fragmentation, an open and inclusive approach was necessary. In the initial phase of the project, up to M6 (March 2012), the consortium started a collection of literature, information about software tools and applications cases. In addition to this desk- based review, the document has benefited from the informal discussions being held on the LinkedIn group of the project (Policy- making 2.0), where more than 800 practitioners and researchers are discussing the practices and the challenges of policy- making. The first draft of the roadmap was then released in M9 (June 2012) of the project, for public feedback. The publication of the deliverable kicked off the engagement activities of the project, designed to provide further input and to improve the roadmap: As soon as it was released, the preliminary version of the roadmap was published in commentable format on the project website project.eu/. Animators stimulated discussion about it and generated comments by researchers and practitioners alike. This participatory process helped enriching the roadmap, which was then published in its final version after validation by the community/ies of practitioners and policy makers Two workshops organised by the project aimed at gathering input on the research challenges and feedback on the proposed roadmap An online survey, as well as several focus groups and meetings with practitioners from civil society and government helped to focus the roadmap on the actual needs P age

10 Figure 2 Outline of the participatory process The process for updating the roadmap included therefore a wide set of contributions. Firstly, the Crossroad roadmap was enriched with desk- based research: 202 cases collected in the platform + 4 cases collected and described in the case studies performed by the National Technical University of Athens (NTUA), and the 50 applications to the prize. This first draft was then published for comments by some of the 800 members of the LinkedIn group who also provided relevant cases. An additional survey of users needs provides provided insights from 240 respondents and over 200 people presents presented at focus groups. Additional discussions with Global Systems Science community, third party workshops and the US Policy Informatics Network helped in refine refining further the roadmap. The two workshops provided high- quality insight that enriched the roadmap with specific contributions. In the table below we outline in detail the specific contribution of each section of the roadmap, that is described in full in the following section. 10 P age

11 Type of contribution Extent of the contribution Contribution to the roadmap 1) Comments to the roadmap 40 comments 9 different experts 2) Presentations in the PMOD workshop 3) Presentations in the Transatlantic workshop 4) Survey of User s Needs Papers received: 42 Registered participants: 70 No. Countries citizens present: presentations 30 participants 236 respondents 33% engaged in policy design 27% engaged in monitoring and evaluation 22% engaged in agenda setting 18% engaged in policy implementation 5) Focus groups 139 attendants - Forum PA, the Italian leading conference on e- government Visual Analytics Systems of Atomized Models Model Validation Serious Gaming Linked Open Government Data Collaborative Modelling Systems of Atomized Models Opinion Mining Impact of policy making 2.0 Roadmap methodology Linked Open Government Data Opinion Mining Collaborative Governance Impact of policy making 2.0 Roadmap methodology 35 attendants- INSITE event on sustainability 40 attendants - Webinar for the United Nations Development Programme 6) Case studies Collection of 202 tools and practices Elicitation of 20 best practices Further elicitation of 4 best practices for in- depth case study 7) Analysis of the prize 47 submission received 10 short listed 3 winners Impact of policy making 2.0 Roadmap methodology Annex with a repository of cases Analysis of the prize process on the Impact Chapter 8) LinkedIn group 840 participants Comments to the roadmap Increased attendance to the workshops Collection of practices and tools Table 1 Contributions to the roadmap 1) Comments to the Roadmap The roadmap has been published in commentable format in two different versions: a short one on Makingspeechtalk 2, and a full version (downloadable after answering the survey on the needs of P age

12 policy- makers) available in the CROSSOVER website 3. Everybody was able to comment on single parts of the roadmap or to propose new topics, application cases and research challenges. The aim of publishing the document in commentable format was to get the input from experts for co- creating the roadmap. More specifically we were interested in knowing if the current formulation of the research challenge was acceptable, and we wanted to collect best practices and application cases from the community of experts and practitioners at large. As already mentioned, the roadmap received over 40 useful and detailed comments from a number of experts in the different domains. 2) PMOD Workshop The June 2012 workshop was the first of three to be organised under the CROSSOVER project. Formally titled "Using Open Data: policy modelling, citizen empowerment, data journalism" but generally referred to by the term PMOD (policy modelling), it set out to explore whether advocates' claims of the huge potential for open data as an engine for a new economy, as an aid to transparency and, of particular relevance to CROSSOVER, as an aid to evidence- based policy modelling, were justified. In terms of organization, the event was run as a W3C/CROSSOVER workshop and held at the European Commission's Albert Borschette Conference Centre in the two days immediately prior to the Digital Agenda Assembly. That combination helped to secure good support from a high calibre audience. 42 papers were received and the majority was accepted by the programme committee for full presentation. Authors of several other papers plus members of the programme committee, the CROSSOVER animators and a small number of invited guests comprised the 70 registered attendees of which 67 turned up. The event reached a larger audience through organising a networking event on the evening following the workshop to which attendees of the data workshop at the Digital Agenda Assembly were invited. Furthermore, through the live IRC channel and Tweets using the #pmod hashtag, others were able to monitor proceedings. The agenda, attendee list and final report are all available on the W3C Web site which provides a high profile for the workshop and the project. Most of the results of the workshop were used to improve the research challenge on Linked Open Government Data. 3) Transatlantic Workshop The Transatlantic Research on Policy Modelling Workshop that was held in Washington, DC on January 28 th and 29 th, It was organized by the Millennium Institute and the New America Foundation (NAF), Washington, DC, USA. NAF is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy institute that invests in new thinkers and new ideas to address the next generation of challenges facing the United States. This event brought together speakers and attendees working and/or interested in improving ICT tools for education and policy makers. The speakers and attendees came from a diverse background, both technical and non- technical to share experiences and knowledge and discuss ways to make the current state of modelling and ICT more accessible and attractive for decision makers on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. The models presented in the workshop have been integrated in the Collaborative Modelling, Systems of Atomized Models and Opinion Mining research challenges. 4) Survey of User s Needs 3 project.eu/researchroadmap.aspx 12 P age

13 The Survey of Users Needs performed within the scope of the CROSSOVER project aimed at collecting the views and the requirements of policy- making stakeholders. More in particular the survey intended to stimulate actual and potential practitioners, such as decision makers (government official involved in the policy- making process) or policy advisors (technical expert advising decision- makers from outside government) to provide input, feedback and validation to the new research roadmap on ICT tools for Governance and Policy Modelling under development (CROSSOVER, 2012b). About 450 people took part in the overall exercise, combining live meetings (214) and online survey (240+ answers), providing concrete elements to improve the CROSSOVER roadmap and the other activities to be carried out by the project. 5) Focus groups In addition to the survey, Tech4i2 ran a series of dedicated meetings where the roadmap was presented and followed up by intense dedicated discussion. These events where all high- profile, attended by policy- makers in the broad sense: not only government officials, but also policy advisors and civil society organisations. More precisely three events have been run: On the 17th of May 2012 CROSSOVER was invited to give a keynote speech to ForumPA on the CROSSOVER Research Roadmap. FORUM PA is a leading European exhibition exploring innovation in Public Administration and local systems. For 22 years, FORUM PA has attracted thousands of visitors and hundreds of exhibitors (public authorities, private companies and citizens) to come together and learn and the participation of important leaders: ministers, Nobel prize winners (Amartya Sen, Edward Prescott), industry leaders (Luca Cordero di Montezemolo) and hundreds of speakers. On May 24 th 2012, CROSSOVER was invited to attend the HUB/Insite project meeting of sustainability practitioners from all over Europe. The Hub and the INSITE Project brought together more than 25 sustainability practitioners working at the cutting edge of innovation within industry, urban development, energy, technology and policy across Europe. This includes people tackling today s key challenges in carbon reduction, smart cities, governance and behavioural change across all these areas. Tech4i2 presented the Research Roadmap, and facilitated a dedicated session CROSSOVER was invited to attend the HUB/Insite project meeting of sustainability practitioners from all over Europe. On March 22nd 2012, CROSSOVER was invited to present the policy- making 2.0 model to the practitioners of the governance network of UNDP Europe and CIS, which included about 40 people from Central and Eastern Europe. Webinar for the United Nations Development Programme Europe and CIS 6) Case Studies Within the scope of the CROSSOVER project, the European Commission's Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC- IPTS), in collaboration with a team of experts of the National Technical University of Athens (NTUA) carried out the activity of mapping and identification of Case Studies on ICT solutions for governance and policy modelling (CROSSOVER, 2013). The research design envisaged a set of macro phases. The initial phase consisted in the creation of a case study repository through the identification and prioritization of potential sources of information, an open invitation for proposal of cases through web2.0 channels, followed by the definition of the 1st- round criteria for selecting at least twenty practices and the information- oriented selection of the corresponding case studies on applications of ICT solutions for governance and policy modelling. In the second phase, case studies have been elicited through the definition of the 2nd- round criteria for selecting eight promising practices and the application of a multi- criteria method, followed by further elaboration on the eight case studies that have been selected by the 13 P age

14 multi- criteria method based on desk research. In the third phase the final four cases have been selected and subjected to an in- depth analysis carried out through meticulous study of the available public documentation and the conduction of interviews with key involved stakeholders. After the final selection of cases and the in depth analysis, the findings have been synthesized through the analysis of the emerging trends from applications of ICT solutions for governance and policy modelling as well as the development of key considerations for the CROSSOVER roadmap for the themes that refer to its scope. Finally the key findings of the analysis of the four cases have been shared with the CROSSOVER partners and the community that follows closely the Policy Making 2.0 domain over various Web 2.0 channels, to provide feedback and validation. The key results of the case studies are described later in the impact section. 7) Analysis of the Prize This prize was given to the best policy- making 2.0 applications, that is are for the best use of technology to improve the design, delivery and evaluation of Government policy. The focus of the jury has been on implementations that can show a real impact on policy making, either in terms of better policy or wider participation. These technologies included, but are not limited to: Visual analytics Open and big data Modelling and simulation (beyond general equilibrium models) Collaborative governance and crowdsourcing Serious gaming Opinion mining An important condition for participating to the selection has been the real- life implementation of technology to policy issues. Out of 50 applications, the jury selected the best 12 and eventually the 3 winners, which received an IPAD mini. The principal domains of the applications were as follow: 23 in the Collaborative Governance and Crowd- sourcing domain 13 in the Open and Big Data domain 4 in the Visual Analytics domain 2 in the Modelling and Simulation (beyond general equilibrium models) domain 2 in the Serious Gaming domain 1 in each of the following domains: Open Source Governance, Opinion Mining, Participatory Policy Making All the relevant applications received have been integrated in the roadmap. The criteria for judging the applications were: Impact on the quality of policies Openness, scalability and replicability Extensiveness of public and policymakers take up Technological innovativeness To this respect, the applicants to the prize were required to provide the following information: Name of the application 14 P age

15 Year of launch Short description of the technological domain Link to the application Describe the impact of the application on the quality of policies Describe the public and policymaker take up of the application Describe to what extent the application was technologically innovative Contact details of the applicant 8) LinkedIn Group Policy- Making 2.0 A crucial element in the engagement of stakeholders is given by the creation of a group on LinkedIn called Policy Making 2.0 4, which is a virtual place where actual and potential practitioners of advanced ICT tools for policy- making can exchange experiences. The group displays a high selected pool of high level members (over 840) engaging in discussions and exchange of views. In order to foster debate in the group, the CROSSOVER consortium posts on a regular base info about the new cases and tools to be integrated in the knowledge repository. Some other discussion topics relate to the best ways to engage the government in online policy making, the posting of third parties content and info about incoming CROSSOVER workshops. In particular the group is being used for disseminating the Survey on the ICT Needs of Policy Makers, as well as the roadmap in commentable format. The Policy Making 2.0 group also serves as a liaison channel with similar projects such as egvopolinet and OCOPOMO. As agreed the egovpolinet LinkedIn group has merged with the CROSSOVER Policy Making 2.0 group, and after the end of the CROSSOVER project the interaction will continue led by the egovpolinet consortium. Moreover as we are approaching the end of the project we decided to shift from a closed LinkedIn group to an open one P age

16 1.3. Scope and definition Policy- making 2.0 refers to a set of methodologies and technological solutions aimed at innovating policy- making. As we will describe in section 2.1, the scope goes well beyond the focus on Decision- making notion typical of eparticipation, and encompasses all phases of the policy cycle. The main goal is limited to improving the quality of policies, not of making them more consensual or representative. Policy- making 2.0 is a new term that we have coined to express in more understandable terms the somehow technical notion of ICT for governance and policy modelling. Its usage in the course of the project proved more effective than the latter when discussing with stakeholders. Thereby from now on we will refer to the roadmap as the Research Roadmap on Policy- Making 2.0. The full set of methodologies and tools has been spelled out in the taxonomy in WP1 5 : 1.1. Open government information & intelligence for transparency Open & Transparent Information Management Open data policy Open data licence Open data portal Code list Vocabulary/ontology Reference data Data cleaning and reconciliation tool Data published on the Web under an open licence Human- readable data Machine readable data in proprietary format Machine- readable data published in a non- proprietary format Data published in RDF SPARQL endpoint for querying RDF data RDF data linked to other data sets Visual Analytics Visualisation of a single, static, embedded data set Visualisation of multiple static data sets Visualisation of a single live data feed or updating data set Visualisation of multiple data points, including live feeds or updates 1.2. Social computing, citizen engagement and inclusion Social Computing Collaborative writing and annotation Content syndication Feedback and reputation management systems Social Network Analysis Participatory sensing Citizen Engagement 5 The taxonomy presented here builds on CROSSROAD taxonomy, which has been expanded, reviewed and updated by the members of the Consortium 16 P age

17 Online deliberation Argumentation support Petition, Polling and voting Serious games Opinion mining Public Opinion- Mining & Sentiment Analysis Opinion tracking Multi- lingual and Multi- Cultural opinion extraction and filtering Real- time opinion visualisation Collective Wisdom Analysis and Exploitation 1.3. Policy Assessment Policy Context Analysis Forecasting Foresight Back- Casting Now- Casting Early Warning Systems Technology Road- Mapping (TRM) Policy Modelling Group Model Building Systems Thinking & Behavioural Modelling System Dynamics Agent- Based Modelling Stochastic Modelling Cellular Automata Policy Simulation Multi- level & micro- simulation models Discrete Event Simulation Autonomous Agents, ABM Simulation, Multi- Agent Systems (MAS) Virtual Worlds, Virtual Reality & Gaming Simulation Model Integration Model Calibration & Validation Policy Evaluation Impact Assessment Scenarios Model Quality Evaluation Multi- Criteria Decision Analysis 1.4. Identity, privacy and trust in governance Identity Management Federated Identity Management Systems User centric, self managed and lightweight credentials Legal- social aspects of eidentity management Mobile Identity (Portability) Privacy Privacy and Data Protection Privacy Enhancing Technologies Anonymity and Pseudonymity Open data management (including Citizen Profiling, 'digital shadow' tracing and tracking Trust 17 P age

18 Legal Informatics Digital Rights Management Digital Citizenship Rights and feedback loops Intellectual Property in the digital era Trust- building Services (including data processing and profiling by private actors for public services) 1.5. Future internet for collaborative governance Cloud Computing Cloud service level requirements Business models in the cloud Cloud interoperability Security and authentication in the cloud Data confidentiality and auditability Cloud legal implications Pervasive Computing & Internet of Things in Public Services Ambient intelligence Exploiting smart objects Standardization Business models for pervasive technologies Privacy implications and risks Provision of next generation public e- services Fixed and mobile network access technologies Mobile web Models for information dissemination Management of scarce network capacity and congestion problems Large- scale resource sharing Interworking of different technologies for seamless connectivity of users Future Human/Computer Interaction Applications & Systems Web accessibility User- centered design Augmented cognition Human senses recognition Policy- making 2.0 encompasses clearly a wide set of methodologies and tools. At first sight, it might appear unclear what the common denominator is. In our view, what they share is that they are designed to use technology in order to inform the formulation of more effective public policies. In particular, these technologies share a common approach in taking into account and dealing with the full complexity of human nature. As spelled out originally in the CROSSOVER project proposal: traditional policy- making tools are limited insofar they assume an abstract and unrealistic human being: rational (utility maximizing), consistent (not heterogeneous), atomised (not connected), wise (thinking long- term) and politically committed (as Lisa Simpson). Policy- making 2.0 thus accounts for this diversity. Its methodologies and tools are designed not to impose change and artificial structures, rather to interact with this diversity. Agent- based models account for the interaction between agents that are different in nature and values; systems thinking accounts for long- term interacting impacts; social network analysis deals with the mutual influences between people rather than fully rational choices; big data analyses observed behaviour rather than theoretical models; persuasive technologies deal with the complex psychology of individuals and introduces gaming values to involve more casual participants. Moreover, policy- making 2.0 tools allow all stakeholders to participate to the decision- making process. 18 P age

19 1.4. Policy: Between politics and services The application of technology to governmental issues is not a new topic. Indeed e- government and the new buzzword of government 2.0, have become mainstream in recent years: how and why a future looking research agenda could still refer to the 2.0 paradigm as innovative? The novelty lies in the policy part of the definition. So far, the application of "2.0" technologies to governmental processes has focussed mainly on the usage of social media for political communication, best exemplified by the Obama campaign. The typical narrative is that in the age of social media, traditional communication campaigns and political parties are unsuited to generate commitment and action by citizens, which instead want to take active part in the campaign and self- organize via social media: ""A candidate who can master the Internet will not only level the playing field; he will level the opposition." RightClick Strategies' Larry Purpuro. A second area of strong focus proved to be the collaborative provision of public services based on peer- to- peer support and open data, best exemplified by the widely spread "appsfordemocracy" contests. The narrative here is that government should act as a platform and enable third parties (and citizens themselves) to co- create and deliver public services based on open government data. This is what Goldsmith and Eggers (2004) call "governing by network". Indeed, the Obama administration clearly shows these priorities, moving from state- of- the- art campaigning in order to be elected, and then implementing a strong open data policy with crowdsourcing initiatives to let citizens create services based on these data. Between "politics" and "public services co- delivery", much less attention has been devoted to the usage of social technology to improve public policy. While politics deal with the legislative branch, the Parliament, policy- making is mainly the realm of the executive branch. Typically, the job of policy- making involves a great deal of socio- economic analysis as well as consultation with stakeholders. This roadmap aims to fill this gap, by providing a complete picture of how technology can improve policy- making. 19 P age

20 2. Not just another hype: the Demand side of policy- making 2.0 In the context of new technologies, we are periodically informed about the emerging wave that will change everything, only to see it quickly forgotten after years or even month in what Gartner calls trough of disillusionment. While some of this emphasis is certainly driven by commercial interests, in many other cases it reflects a genuine optimism of its proponents, who tend to underestimate the real- life bottlenecks to adoption by less enthusiast people. Movzorov critically calls this cyber- utopianism or technological solutionism (Morozov 2013); on a similar note, many years of egovernment policy have revealed the fundamental importance of non- technological factors, such as organisational change, skills, incentives and culture. One way to prevent policy- making 2.0 to become yet another hype in the Gartner curve, is to precisely spell out the challenges that these new technologies help to address. Indeed, the importance of this demand- driven approach based on grand challenges is fully embraced by the new Horizon2020 research programme of the European Union. 6 Furthermore, a demand- driven approach helps us to frame the technological opportunities in a language understandable to policy- makers, thereby supporting the awareness- raising objective of the CROSSOVER project. When analysing the demand side, our first consideration is that policy- making is more important and complex than ever. The role of government has substantially changed over the last twenty years. Governments have to re- design their role in areas where they were directly involved in service provision, such as utilities but also education and health. This is not simply a matter of privatisation, or of a linear trend towards smaller government. Indeed, even before the recent financial turmoil and nationalisation of parts of the financial system, government role in the European societies was not simply diminishing, but rather being transformed. At the same time, it is increasingly recognized that the emergence of new and complex problems requires government to increasingly collaborate with non- governmental actors in the understanding and in the addressing of these challenges 7. As an OECD report states the following: Government has a larger role in the OECD countries than two decades ago. But the nature of public policy problems and the methods to deal with them are still undergoing deep change. Governments are moving away from the direct provision of services towards a greater role for private and non- profit entities and increased regulation of markets. Government regulatory reach is also extending in new socio- economic areas. This expansion of regulation reflects the increasing complexity of societies. At the same time, through technological advances, government s ability to accumulate information in these areas has increased significantly. As government face more new and complex problems that cannot be dealt with easily by direct public service provision, more ambitious policies require more complex interventions and collaboration with non- governmental parties This is particularly challenging in our "complex" societies. Complex systems are those where the behaviour of the system as a whole cannot be determined by partitioning it and understanding the behaviour of each of the parts separately, which is the classic strategy of the reductionist physical sciences. The present challenges governments must face, as described by the OECD, are complex as they are characterised by many non- linear interactions between agents; they emerge from these interactions and are therefore difficult to predict. The financial crisis is probably the foremost example of a complex problem, which proved impossible to predict with traditional decision- making tools See Ostrom: lecture.html 20 P age