With COP15 very much in the frame, I thought I’d share 5 useful web resources (linked to the environment and living green) that make smart uses of the web:

WalkIt.com- Walking in and around town is the smart choice – no timetables, no delays, no jams, healthy, green, free, with easy access to services en route. WalkIt provides a route map between any two points, including your journey time, calorie burn, step count and carbon saving. WalkIt covers over 20 cities; I’ve used it in Edinburgh, Glasgow and London and it is brilliant. Good blog too.

MunroMagic.com – If you want to experience the scale and power of the environment, then take a train to Scotland and go climb a Munro, Corbett or Graham. All 283 Munros, 221 Corbetts and 224 Grahams are covered in detail including descriptions, pictures, location maps, walking routes, weather reports. Much of which is generated by the people who do the climbing.

PrintFriendly.com

I use this site all the time because, let’s face it, people still need to print on occasion. PrintFriendly makes printing from the web better. Their algorithm removes ads, navigation, and all the junk you don’t want to print. They use ‘best practices’ in print typography to format your document for great readability. You can also use to create PDF docs.

EdenBee.com

I’m not a member of this hive of climate change activists but I’ve been watching this community for a couple of years and have been impressed by the scale and frequency of activity. There’s lots to like about this issue-based network – from the Rails platform to the goals-based interaction between members.

EdenProject.com

The whole story of the Eden Project – then and now – is inspiring. I think every area in the UK should have an Eden Project but until that happens the website is the best [but one] place to be part of it. It’s a great point to start on a journey of greater appreciation for the environment and the way humans can live sustainably. Start with the site, radiate out to the YouTube channel and then who knows where.

'A Noisy Alphabet' by Tom Gauld

Tom Gauld! Tom Gauld! Tom Gauld!

He’s got the ideas and he’s got the monsters.

His website is www.tomgauld.com.

'typo' by robert samuel hanson

Robert Samuel Hanson likes to illustrate. I like illustration.

He’s done this vector illustration. I think the colours and character are ace.

Get your fill at www.robertsamuelhanson.com.

Governments can no longer rely on the traditional behaviour change tools of regulatory and economic instruments to shape civic actions. But should they turn to choice architecture or deliberative participation as an alternative? Both are very in vogue, but can real shifts be achieved by appealing to perceptions of cost-benefit or by changing values?

In their fantastic discussion paper Nudge nudge, think think, Peter John, Graham Smith and Gerry Stoker walk us through the emergence of ‘Nudging’ and of ‘Deliberation’ as competing strategies available to policy makers seeking to change the behaviour of citizens. The authors discuss the strengths and weaknesses of both strategies and provide a handy comparative analysis, which is neatly summarised in this table:

In the coda, the authors explore how the two strategies can learn from each other and be brought together in a coherent manner. Although they accept that coherence is very difficult in practice because both strategies hold different understandings of human behaviour and theories of change, they both share a fundamental driving principle:

Governments accept they cannot rely on issuing commands or creating incentives: they must deal directly and engage with the citizen, whose participation helps to co-produce public outcomes.

Ultimately, as the authors conclude, to be a successful practitioner of nudge it you need to understand what makes deliberation work and to be an effective practitioner of think you need to understand the dynamics of nudge.

The paper discusses at length the design of Nudging and Deliberative processes, but does not spend enough time – to my mind – considering how they are communicated to the public, even though both strategies are highly reliant on effective marketing of intriguingly differing styles.

Room for improvement aside, this is a very accessible article containing learning and challenges for functions across government.

Another paper from the same ESRC-funded research programme that is also worth a read is Can the internet overcome the logic of collective action? which takes an experimental approach to investigating the impact of social pressure on political participation. This paper tests the hypothesis that social information provided by the internet makes it possible in large groups to exert social pressure that was previously only considered viable for smaller groups.

We are all localists now.

So starts a new research report by IPPR exploring the political consensus around decentralisation and the barriers to achieving it in practice – Who’s accountable? The challenge of giving power away in a centralised political culture.

The researchers asked a representative sample who they regarded as accountable for the performance of public services. Across a range of services – health and policing, for example – no matter who is charge, the public placed responsibility firmly at the feet of government. However, in other cases – such as education and transport – accountability is more diffuse. Why?

The report considers a number of factors, but of particular importance seems to be good communication. When power is devolved, the lines of accountability must be made clear. The examples of devolution in Scotland and public transport make for interesting case studies in this respect.

However, in the report the authors write:

… ministers may be more inclined to give up powers where lines of accountability are clear and when they can be reassured that once they’ve let go, the public, the media and the oppoistion will accedpt that responsibility rests at the local level.

I do think the authors should have spent longer considering the important influence of party politics and media representation, alongside that of public attitudes and perceptions, in order to get the full picture.

Otherwise, it is an interesting and well set out piece of original research.

In the course of this week I have come across three things that so impressed me that I tweeted them.

Chances are, if you know my blog, then you also know my tweets, but if not:

• Introducing the ‘voicebot’

An installation in Parliament from Vinspired.com. Part of the Voicebox initiative – ‘a data visualisation project, curating young people’s views on issues that matter, visualising the findings, and then setting the data free for you to do the same.’

• Innovation and evaluation are inseparable

GOOD Magazine is hosting a blog-based conversation for participants from across the globe to explore innovative approaches to evaluation. Not surprisingly, it is good – very good.

• How to sell me stuff

Steph Gray is a digital specialist in the Civil Service and a patient man. But even he has his limits. Tired of cold calls and clumsy pitches, @lesteph has posted eight tips on how to sell him right. I’m ditto on all 8.

'Hidden Forms' by Hans Hansen

This photo is going to catch the eye of a blogger who calls his site ‘BasicCraft’.

It was taken by Hans Hansen for a book, Hidden Forms, by Franco Clivio.

I don’t know Clivio but his book is about anonymous designed objects: simple, functional, yet elegant and astoundingly. For Clivio the complexity of the design process is best demonstrated, not by design objects, but on the basis of things from everyday life.

My sentiments exactly.

Found via Creative and Live.

'Little voice inside' by Christoph Niemann

Sometimes you know you shouldn’t look but you’ve got to take a peek.

This and so many other fantastic illustrations are available on Christoph’s site – www.christophniemann.com.

* I gave it this title; I don’t know what Christoph actually titled it.

Phases of technology adoption in organisations

In 2004 – in Lithuania, of all places – Professor Stephen Coleman introduced me to a four-phase model for understanding how new technologies are adopted and influenced by organisations.

Don’t know if he came up with it directly but finding it beautifully simple and functional, I’ve used it countless times since to make sense of how technology use is developing in organisations I have worked for or with.

I was discussing it with Neil Williams over a cerveza recently, and decided to add a fifth phase that I’d like to share here.

Coleman’s four phases (note – I’ve tweaked the names, but not their essence) ran as follows:

hyperbole > resistance > institutionalisation > transformation
Here’s an explanation of each and an example drawn from the world of digital engagement:

1. Hyperbole… a new technology emerges and wows early adopters, whose interest generates intense speculation about what it could go on to achieve. Needless to say that achievement will be nothing short of revolutionary. Augmented reality and location-based services might be good examples.

2. Resistance… Cometh the hype, cometh the backlash. All the problems, bugs and costs come out and the risks mount up. Conservatism kicks in and the mission becomes defending against the technology or its implications. Crowdsourcing springs to mind.

3. Institutionalisation… The technology probably emerged on the basis of a genuine need and, during all the talk of the previous two phases, it has been debugged and improved. Either way, in the third phase the technology is picked up by the mainstream. But – this is crucial – the technology is put to use perpetuating an existing function. For me, data visualisation and commentable documents are currently at this phase.

4. Transformation… Despite being put to a defined, traditional use, once that technology is inside the organisation and being applied to core business, it begins to have a catalytic affect and creates wholly new dynamics. It changes interactions between staff, and staff and ‘customers’; it changes processes and base functions. Ultimately, new technology changes business. Microblogging is a very current example.

I don’t think it finishes there though. For me there is potentially a fifth phase:

hyperbole > resistance > institutionalisation > transformation > normalisation

5. Normalisation… Transformation builds and builds, hits a crescendo and then there is a segue into normalisation. Yesterday’s transformative technology becomes today’s standard, solid, conventional tool. Think email; think blogging.

Naturally, the transitions between these phases are blurs rather than snaps. And, much depends on a range of external factors. Nonetheless, I think that this is a handy model for routine [non-academic] mapping and analysis.

Any thoughts on its validity? Does it chime with you?

Any thoughts where particular applications, types of tools or organisations are on the spectrum?

'Ceci n'est pas une pipe'* by Kevin Van Aelst

Spotted this on the NYT site and it made me chuckle.

It’s a great example of the photographic art of Kevin Van Aelst.

Go check out his site; he’s got great vision.

* I gave it this title; I don’t know what Kevin actually titled it.