Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

YourView aspires to give Australians a stronger democratic voice. It has the unique ambition to present what we really think about major public issues, and giving that collective wisdom a role in the national political discourse. By "what we really think" we mean the considered collective viewpoint - ideally what Australians as a whole would think if they were better informed about major public issues and if they had more time to reflect and deliberate about those issues. YourView's aims are thus consistent with those of the deliberative democracy movement.

Reasonwell helps people to engage in productive, structured policy debate by making it easy to map out arguments, assumptions and evidence.

A mattermap is a diagram of a news story, discussion or event. Our software helps journalists to collect and organize citations and sources around a central question.

WikiRendum aims to facilitate regular and constructive dialogue between citizens and their elected representatives.

ManaBalss.lv is a web-based tool for citizen involvement in legislative change in Latvia. 15% of Latvians are reported to have used the tool and two new laws have been passed as a result.

The Workshop on Argumentation Technology for Policy Deliberations will present the results of the European FP7 IMPACT Project, along with invited talks by leading developers and users of argumentation tools for supporting public participation in policy deliberations on the World-Wide-Web.

Summary visualization of various open, demograpic data sets about the inhabitants of Rennes Métropolis.

An anthology of essays from the McKinsey Center for Government (written by political leaders, civil servants, economists and policy experts) exploring the approaches that governments around the world are taking to common, emerging problems.

If the goal is to accelerate societal learning, the interplay between scientists, policymakers and the wider public will be critical. However, the existing patterns of interaction leave much to be desired. First, the science-policy relationship is often difficult and dysfunctional. Second, the international governance infrastructure - the United Nations, World Bank, WTO and others - was designed to meet the needs of the post-WW2 era and is ill-adapted to the interconnected and transdisciplinary challenges it now faces. And finally, our main public communication channels seem better attuned to the linear and polarised narrative of crisis than to the nuanced, detailed, anticipatory work of crisis avoidance or minimisation.

We present a novel platform for supporting public deliberation on difficult decisions. ConsiderIt guides people to reflect on tradeoffs and the perspectives of others by framing interactions around pro/con points that participants create, adopt, and share. ConsiderIt surfaces the most salient pros and cons overall, while also enabling users to drill down into the key points for different groups. We deployed ConsiderIt in a contentious U.S. state election, inviting residents to deliberate on nine ballot measures. We discuss ConsiderIt's affordances and limitations, enriched with empirical data from this deployment. We show that users often engaged in normatively desirable activities, such as crafting positions that recognize both pros and cons, as well as points written by people who do not agree with them.

A Tool for Civil Engagement

Welcome to Opinion Space, a new approach to generating and exchanging insightful ideas about issues and policies. Click the glowing point to begin...

The Political Innovation project is asking "why does politics still need to be done this way?" Starting with a series of 'Translation Layer' events in early 2012, we will be looking at the future of policymaking in general and think-tanks in particular.

The need for policy makers to understand science and for scientists to understand policy processes is widely recognised. However, the science-policy relationship is sometimes difficult and occasionally dysfunctional; it is also increasingly visible, because it must deal with contentious issues, or itself becomes a matter of public controversy, or both. We suggest that identifying key unanswered questions on the relationship between science and policy will catalyse and focus research in this field. To identify these questions, a collaborative procedure was employed with 52 participants selected to cover a wide range of experience in both science and policy, including people from government, non-governmental organisations, academia and industry.

The summit brings together 250 attendees to collaborate and share knowledge through panel discussions and workshops covering sustainable business models, technologies, and policy - and includes sessions on big data and collaborative brainstorming using MIT's Climate CoLab.

"The Data Journalism Handbook is a free, open source reference book for anyone interested in the emerging field of data journalism." Includes sections on visualization, sourcing and analysis of large data sets, and various public policy related case studies.