(This is a draft of a paper that I'm developing that might be of interest
in this context. Contents, criticisms, "hacking" is welcomed.
Distribution (with attribution) is encouraged.)
From a "A Cathedral" of Public Policy to a Public Policy "Bazaar"
Michael Gurstein, Ph.D.
ECBC/NSERC/SSHRC Associate Chair Management of Technological Change
Director: Centre for Community and Enterprise Networking (C\CEN)
University College of Cape Breton, POBox 5300, Sydney, NS, CANADA B1P 6L2
Tel. 902-563-1369 (o) 902-562-1055 (h)902-562-0119 (fax)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ccen.uccb.ns.ca ICQ: 7388855
I've been travelling for much of the last three weeks at meetings and
conferences concerning a range of issues including "innovation", "regional
development", "digital knowledge", "access", "telehealth" among others.
Also I only now getting back to reading the postings to UA-C over the last
few weeks.
I'm struck by the convergence that I see in the meetings/conferences and
on-line discussions around the issue of the linkage between a concerned
and informed public and those with the responsibility for the formulation
and execution of public policies.
What seems to be emerging is a major discontinuity between the
expectations and experiences of an Internet "bazaar" i.e. an "open
(information) source" enabled "concerned public", and the representatives
of the public sector who are attempting to proceed within a more
traditional "Cathedral" approach to policy formulation, consultation, and
implementation.
This discontinuity takes the form on the one hand of:
Public consultation processes which consist of the public being invited
to send comments on pre-circulated documents to a public Internet forum
with no indication of how (or even) whether the comments will be
read/responded to /used/integrated and so on.
The development by the range of Government Departments of elaborate and
sophisticated Internet delivered web-sites with little or no interactive
component and no indications of how the degree of interactivity which is
allowed will be assimilated or used.
The development of elaborate internal (within government) policy
Intranets, with formal mechanisms for scanning and assimilating public
comment and the broad range of Internet enabled communication but with no
interactive linkages (or participation) into any of the forums or on-line
policy discussions from which they are drawing sustenance.
E-mail addresses included in Government sponsored websites which are
either completely unresponsive or which have only a form letter response
often by means of a "bot".
Publicly supported networks of researchers in a variety of areas of
public policy interest as for example "Innovation Systems" and "Regional
Development", all evidently developed and funded with a concern by policy
makers to have access to the best research and thinking on these issue
areas but with no formal linkage or responsibility concerning public
policy discussion or evaluation in these sectoral areas and little or no
public contribution to the discussion.
Policy processes as for example, those concerning areas such as "Smart
Communities", "The Canada Health Infoway", and "The Knowledge Based
Economy" which are almost completely non-transparent to the broader
concerned public and which operate by means of closed groups of "experts"
consulting at the discretion of the policy apparatus and with little
accountability or even non-formal communication with the broader concerned
communities of interest.
On the other hand:
The development of on-line public forums including web-boards, e-lists,
and chat facilities discussing the broad range of public policy issues
The participation by many with a very broad range of expert and
experience based knowledge and understanding of areas of policy concern,
in many cases with considerable expenditures of time and effort in
researching and formulating positions and comments often of very high
quality.
A deepening frustration at the lack of participation, consultation and
real engagement on the part of those concerned with public policy either
as politicians or as public servants in this dialogue.
The development by researchers of publicly funded research networks in
areas of considerable public interest concern but with no formal linkages
into policy making processes.
Where in the current practise of democratic governance is there the degree
of:
transparency
flexibility
interactivity
immediacy
multi-nodality and
network interoperability
which leading organizations are increasingly developing with their leading
client/supplier/stakeholder groups? While these may be developing in
certain parts of government internal communication and in its interactions
with certain private sector "stakeholders", little if any of this is
emerging as part of government's relationship with it's ultimate
"stakeholder", the democratic citizenry.
What is of particular interest in the above i
