Building Sustainable e-Participation Strategies using Living Labs

Stream B: Mini track on e-Participation ECEG-2012 Copyright 2012, Maurice Mulvenna

Building Sustainable e-Participation Strategies using Living Labs

Maurice MulvennaTRAIL Living Lab, University of Ulster

Authors: Brian Cleland, Maurice Mulvenna, Brendan Galbraith, Jonathan Wallace, Suzanne Martin


Outline

• Living Labs• eParticipation• PARTERRE• Case Study Characteristics• Findings• Conclusions


Outline



Living Labs

Mulvenna, M.D., Bergvall-Kareborn, B., Galbraith, B., Wallace, J.G., Martin, S., Living Labs are Innovation Catalysts, In: Howlett, R.J., (Ed.) Innovation through Knowledge Transfer 2010, Springer, pp.253-264, 2011.


Living Labs

Mulvenna, M.D., Martin, S., McDade, D., Beamish, E., de Oliveira, A., Kivilehto, A., (2011) TRAIL Living Labs Survey 2011: A Survey of the ENOLL Living Labs, University of Ulster, 40 pages.


Living Labs

Mulvenna, M.D., Martin, S., Living Labs: Framework and Engagement, Innovation through Knowledge Transfer (InnovateKT-2012), 19-20 April, 2012, Bournemouth, UK. Springer


What are Living Labs?

"This non-profit network is the first of its kind. It brings together innovation professionals with large

groups of citizens/users - across geographical administrative organisational and cultural borders - in

joint innovation actions to address people's every day needs and desires as well as major global

challenges.” Mikael Börjeson,

CEO CDT Sweden, Botnia Living Lab (Sweden) ENoLL Council member, Founding member of ENoLL



Why Bother?

• Living labs:– Embody triple helix partnerships (public, private, academic)– Bring user-centred perspectives to triple-helix– Co-creation– Service / product innovation


Living Labs


Survey 2011


Survey 2011


Survey 2011


Survey 2011: Lost in Translation

• “it can be hard to get constructive and instructive comments from users that are not used to giving feedback and analysing a service working with small numbers in focus groups gives rich data but what if those statements are not reflected by the survey majority technical developers have own ideas and feasibility of request might not be given within a project timeframe and budget”,

• “End user and engineers are not talking the same ‘language’ i.e., it is not always easy to understand what end user means and vice versa”,

• “there is a need of translation, the language used is different when discussing with an expert or a layman”,

• “Translation from end user to specialists” and • “End users and developers are not speaking the ‘same language’”.


Outline



eParticipation

“involves the extension and transformation of participation in societal democratic and consultative processes, mediated by information and communication technologies”

- Sanford, C. and Rose, J. (2007) Characterizing eParticipation, International Journal of Information Management, Volume 27, Issue 6, December 2007, Pages 406-421




Outline



TRAIL

• Based at University of Ulster• First Living Lab in Northern Ireland (2007)• Engaging with local communities and enterprises to

design co-creative solutions• From linear model to networked model• Cycles of innovation activity• “Triple Helix” partnerships


PARTERRE

• The overarching objective of the PARTERRE project (funded by EU CIP support) is to deploy ICT to enhance the direct participation of citizens, stakeholders and civil society in democratic decision-making processes using Electronic Town Meeting (eTM) software and methods

• Town Meeting is a form of structured participation in local government practised in the New England region of the United States since colonial times, and in some Western States since at least the late 19th century, where an entire community was invited by government officials to gather in a public place to formulate suggestions or provide feedback on specific policy issues.


PARTERRE Process

• Setting the scene• Polling• Topic of discussion: 1,...n• Polling• Reflection• Delivery


PARTERRE Process

• Setting the scene• Polling• Topic of discussion: 1,...n• Polling• Reflection• Delivery


PARTERRE


PARTERRE


PARTERRE


PARTERRE


Outline



Case Studies

• Engaging with over 400 people• Broad range of topics


Case Studies

• Strategy for Allied Health Professionals in Northern Ireland - August 2011 (90 people)– Promoting Person-Centred Care– Delivering Safe and Effective Care– Maximising Resources for Success– Supporting and Developing the AHP Workforce

• Open Government – Making Open Data Real - September 2011 (50 people)– An enhanced right to data– Setting transparency standards– Corporate and personal responsibility– Meaningful Open Data– Government sets the example – Innovation with Open Data


Case Studies

• Partnerships for Business Innovation – Engaging for Growth - November 2011 (60 people)– Awareness and Identifying Need– Meeting the Need and Identifying Gaps in Current Provision– Identifying Inhibitors for Businesses Seeking to Innovate– Overcoming Barriers to Ensure that Engagement Benefits Everyone

• Worklessness Within North Belfast - November 2011 (80 people)– Reflections on Mid-term Review for North Belfast– What Works, What Doesn’t – What Now?– The Impact of Work on Family Life– Moving Beyond Generational Worklessness


Case Studies

• Maximising Social Value Through Public Sector Procurement - February 2012 (65 people)– Development and the Commissioning Process– Measuring Social Value– Compulsory Competitive Tendering and Social Enterprise

• Innovation in Sustainable Construction and Energy Management - March 2012 (75 people)– Drivers for Sustainable Construction – “Fabric First” design and retro-fit – Effective Energy Management


Outline



Findings

• “Enjoyed this new approach. Excellent for drawing out views and getting all voices put forward.”

• “First time I have witnessed the method. It is good in that after discussion an individual can still "vote" for their preference / instincts.”

• “Very enjoyable. A new approach to give everyone an opportunity to speak.”

• “There were various methods used in relation to the workshop, the eTM was useful to see how others viewed the topics discussed and how the majority voted. The statistics given were very relevant to the discussion.”


Findings

• Cultural issues• Technology• Organisational factors• Sensitivities


Outline



Conclusions

• Living labs can do service innovation• Enabling characteristics

– Certitude/Trust– Transparency– Capability– Capacity


…THANKS!

Education

Building Sustainable e-Participation Strategies using Living Labs