12. The iPolis

This idea is an extension of the very elegant idea, put forward by Tim O'Reilly, that government can be understood as a platform.

I found this idea (like many others) through the very well informed Dave Briggs.

I have called this version of local democracy the iPolis (Ok - I know, but bear with me) as it uses the iPhone/iPad as a metaphor for government.

Tim O'Reilly argues that government can be seen in a similar way.  A basic platform is provided on top of which different applications can be run.  O'Reilly makes a number of fascinating points:

• Whilst the whole Gov 2.0 thing (i.e. 'government as a platform') is borne out of web 2.0 technologies, the concept should be applied to government as a whole - not just the techy bits
• Think of of the original U.S. constitution as a platform which was developed and improved and onto which states ran their different 'applications' (although this was, of course, Gov 1.0)
• Once the basic platform  is provided (in the right way) then the market will innovate and provide applications - just in the same way that Apple provided a small number of applications for the iPhone but the market soon came up with many, many, many more
• The Apple example also highlights the importance of being willing to strip away anything that isn't working or relevant.  The basic government platform should, in the same way, be simple, well designed, functional and appealing.

So that is the broad approach.  The idea of the iPolis develops this a little further and applies it to local government and democracy. It revolves around three core concepts:

• Central government provides the operating system / platform.  It provides the core constitution for each local democratic unit.  It sets out how the core processes will work (the same in every area) and it employs the people that support the core functions (legal, finance, ICT, etc etc).  Central government is just like Apple. 
• The applications are provided mainly by the market.   Delib provides an example of the sort of company that might do this from a web 2.0 perspective - I'm sure there are many others.  Budget consultation and online participation are the sort of 'software' apps we are talking about here but any democratic innovation whether representative or participative, whether online or off could be on the menu.  One advantage is that highly specialised companies could develop these tools in national markets in a way that local governments acting alone never could. 
• The user is the elected government of the local area.  The user is not (as you might expect) the citizen.  For the metaphor to work the iPolis (like the iPad/iPhone) can only really have one user - the local government.  The accountability of that government to the citizens can work in any way and ultimately the citizens are the beneficiaries.  But the user is the final decision maker about which apps to use and what apps can be afforded - hence it is the local government.

What I like about this is that it provides an interesting angle on the age old debate between those who argue for local autonomy and those who believe that services should be provided fairly across the country (this normally comes with a call to dispense with post code lotteries).  For the iPolis, central government could determine and run the core elements of democracy and service provision and this would be paid for through tax.  These core elements might also extend to essential services such as child protection and waste collection.  Local government would then determine which 'apps' to run on top of the basic operating system and this would be paid for through local taxation. So museums, leisure centres, recycling centres, welfare benefits advice teams might all be apps.  A national apps procurement system would provide a regulated environment though which apps could be 'downloaded'.

The iPolis also provides an angle on the debates in the UK about the Big Society.  Apps could also be provided by the third sector or the community.  They might or might not be supported financially but by adding them to their platform local governments would be providing basic support, sponsorship and recognition.

Update:  About the same time I wrote this, David Wilcox blogged about a recent open night for the Big Society Network:

Last night Steve Moore asked me to speak briefly about ideas for a Big Society Commons or Store, which I wrote about here, and here. I said we need space with different levels … information, conversation, exchange, products and services. Maybe it is a mall plus a market, some high tech, some low. It is absolutely not created by government, but by those with something to offer.


Then I started to wonder about the role of the skilled, creative, passionate people at the Open Night. Perhaps one analogy for part of the store is an Apps store, where you can download smart ways of doing things to your mobile phone. Some are free, some you pay for. The fee goes to the developer, with a percentage to the store owner.

It works because there is a framework for the way apps are developed – tight in the case of Apple, more flexible in open sources stores.

So perhaps some of the people at the Open Night were potential developers for the Social Apps Store. If the Network can help to create the store, it will provide a much bigger market for those with social action products and services to sell – or offer free.

The Apps Store offers one metaphor to help us think how we bring good stuff together, what’s in it for the different interests involved, what rules and frameworks we need to make sure things work together.

David suggested that the two ideas dovetail together rather nicely and I agree.  Hopefully a case of great minds think alike or maybe a case of when metaphors collide...

10. The New Civic Arena

Like Real Representation, the New Civic Arena is a summary of some ideas put forward by Gerry Stoker in his book Why Politics Matters.

The 'civic arena' refers to the space between the formal institutions of government and the private lives of citizens. It includes the voluntary sector, the media, public debate, popular campaigns and anything else that forms the environment where citizens experience their citizenship.

Stoker suggests a range of reforms that will strengthen this civic arena and create something new.  The aim is to create the right conditions for what Stoker calls a 'politics for amateurs' to take place.

Stoker’s suggestions come in three parts:

1.  New forms of Citizen Engagement

 There are a wealth of innovative ways that citizens can be engaged. The point is not to advocate any in particular but to promote their use more generally.  Ultimately citizens will decide which innovations will come to the fore by supporting those which they perceive will make a difference and those which can fit easily into busy modern lives. 

In his book Stoker does discuss different types of innovations which he breaks down into:

• Consultative innovations
• Deliberative innovations
• Co-Governance Innovations
• Direct Democracy Innovations
• E-Democracy Innovations

2.  Encouraging ‘Civicness’ and Voluntary Activity

Citizenship can be built in a whole range of ways that do not involve dealing directly with government and other public bodies.  In the New Civic Arena, therefore it is important to encourage 'citizen to citizen' activity through community projects and schemes such as time banks.  These types of initiatives have immediate practical benefits for citizens but they also act as a stepping stone to other forms of more political engagement.

3.  Information Flow and Understanding: Citizen Education and the Media

Reform also needs to extend to the institutions that 'frame' citizenship.  In this case both education for citizenship (for all not just the young) and the way in which the media reports politics.  For the latter Stoker highlights the need for a civic journalism which takes more of an explanatory and public interest approach to the issues.

---------------------------

The idea of the New Civic Arena has a clear resonance with the concept of the Big Society currently being promoted by the UK Government (See David Wilcox's blog for a proper discussion of the Big Society).  However, whilst the problem that the Big Society seems to be aimed at solving is social needs, the New Civic Arena aims to address political disenchantment.  Nevertheless, the overlap between the two ideas is obvious.