Presentation used for a seminar at the Jagiellonian University of Cracow (PL). It provided an introduction to the field of Technopolitics and eParticipation as a research domain. Presentation included several videos and a lot of animations. It is therefore recommended to download it.

1. Hacking for positive
social change
Techno-Politics
Wydział Fizyki, Astronomii i Informatyki Stosowanej, 2013.11.12

2. Seminar Objectives
“Techno-Politics:
hacking for positive social change”
1.- How can we use informatics to improve
our cities and our democratic systems?
2.- Why it is interesting for the Jagiellonian
University to get involved in this area?

3. Outline
1. The context for Techno-Politics
2. Techno-Politics as a Research
Domain
3. Why do Techno-Politics?
4. Discussion

4. Researcher profile
Kraków (PL)
Education:
93-98 Universidad Complutense
MSc. Computer Science
Sololá (GT)
Alcalá
/ Madrid
Tübingen (DE)
Barcelona
96-00: Universidad de Alcalá
Bach. Business Admin. (Hons)
00-02: Univ. Autónoma de Madrid
~ 1st Degree Bach. Philosophy
02-04: Univ. Oberta de Catalunya
Master Sociology of Information Society
07-12: Universidad de Alcalá
PhD. Computer Science (e-Democracy)
Foreign stays:
Fortaleza (BR)
Work experience:
00-06: Hewlett-Packard (DE)
Technical Lead – Develop. Team
02-03: Universität Tübingen (DE)
05: Universidade Estadual do Ceará (BR)
05: Prefeitura Fortaleza (BR)
07: Deutscher Entwicklungsdienst (DE)
06-12: Asoc. KyoPol (ES)
11: Uniwersytet Jagielloński (PL)
09-10: Mun. Sololá (GT)
08-10: NGO Lagun Artean

5. Outline
1. The context for Techno-Politics
2. Techno-Politics as a Research
Domain
3. Why do Techno-Politics?
4. Discussion

6. Troubled Democracies
527.443
56.125
47.929
Real Democracy
NOW!

7. Troubled Democracies
46,14%
+
22,03%
2001-2011 Parl. elections
Average (valid votes /
voting age population
(valid votes /
voting age population)

8. What is democracy?
President
Lincoln
1863 - “Democracy is the government of the people,
by the people and for the people”
Democracy is the government of the people,
by (some) people and for the (benefit of some) people
Douglas
North
Extractive Institutions &
Democratic development
Institutional Change
GOVERNING
ELITES
GOVERNING
ELITESβ
GOVERNING
ELITESβ
SOCIETY
SOCIETY
SOCIETY
Acemoglu &
Robinson

9. Democratic Rhetoric & Reality
Claims of
democracy
Ideal of influence in
liberal democracies
Reality of influence
in liberal democracies

10. The reality of Civic engagement
Dave Meslin, TED Toronto, 2010.10
The antidote to apathy

11. The reality of Civic engagement
Incompatibilities
- Political
- Legal
- Cultural
- Socioeconomic
- Organizational
Intrinsic Problems
Complex
Expensive
Non-representative
Non-inclusive
Less informed
Conflict prone
Non-deliberative
Difficult to scale
...
Vicious Cycle of
Participation
Extrinsic Problems
Motivation =
f (effort, usefulness)
Arbitrary
Manipulability
Risk of capture
Irrelevant subjects
Non-effective
Not self-sustainable
Inefficient
Civic exhaustion
...
Administrative Monopoly
of participation

12. Can we improve democracy?
Vicious Cycle of
Participation
Virtuous Circle of
Techno-participation
“Long Tail”
?
models
Peer-to-peer
recognition
Cognitive
Surplus
Reduction in
power and
knowledge
assimetries
Motivation =
f (effort, usefulness)
Reduction cost
of collective
action
Change
in expectations

13. Can we improve democracy?
Ashwin Mahesh, São Paulo, 2013.06
Urban Development Challenges and University

14. Outline
1. The context for Techno-Politics
2. Techno-Politics as a Research
Domain
3. Why do Techno-Politics?
4. Discussion

15. What is techno-politics?
“The tactical and strategic practice of designing and/or using
technological devices to constitute, embody, or enact political
goals, especially by means of organizing, communicating and
producing collective actions”
(Hecht 1998, Arnau, 2013)

16. What is techno-politics?
1.- Analytical approach

17. What is techno-politics?
2.- Creative approach
Objective: Devise methodologies for the collaborative design,
construction and operation of techno-participation systems which
are adapted to the interests, needs and skills of social and
political actors involved in (local) governance.
Provisional conclusions
•
What
for?
Requires a trans-disciplinary, holistic and
critical perspective.
•
Projects’ designs and their evaluation
Why?
What?
Who?
strategies need to be closely linked with
How?
their context of application.
•
Techno-participation systems need to be
created using Agile, participatory, iterative
and user-centric development models.
Where?
When?

18. Understanding Techno-Participation
Democratic
Institutions
Citizens
Technology

19. What a messy research domain!
Informatics
Issues:
• Silos &
Interdisciplinary
failures
Political
Science
Development
Studies
…
Public
Policy
Social
Movements
Techno-Participation
Participation
Web
Science
Community
Informatics
CSCW
…
Social
Machines
Participatory
Design
…
Software
Development
Models
Software
Engineering
HCI

20. What a messy research domain!
Academia
Issues:
Practitioners
• Silos &
Interdisciplinary
failures
• Trans-disciplinary
failures
• Focus:
• Power:
Context

21. Software engineering
a. Development models, techniques, tools:
(Boehm 1986, Dennis et al. 2005)
 Objectives
 Prototypes
 Validation
 Iterative process

22. Software engineering
b. Empirical methods for software engineering research:
(Myers & Avison 2002; Easterbrook et al. 2007; Cruz Neto 2008)
• Controlled experiments
• Case studies
• Ethnographies
• Action research
• Grounded Theory
Technoparticipation
• Survey research
c. People-Centered Design:
(Sanders et al. 2010)

23. Community Informatics
• From User-centric to Communitycentric design
• Communities as lead users
• Digital habitats
• Tools for communities
• Methods for Software development
(Wenger et al. 2009, De Cindio et al. 2007,
2012, Brandtzæg et al. 2010, People 2012)

24. Social Machines
More machines
cyberinfrastructure
Semantic Grid
Big Data
Big Compute
Social
The Future!
Machines
Conventional
Computation
Social
Networking
More people
Online R&D
Science 2.0

25. Social Machines

26. Social Machines
Sir Berners-Lee, 2013.10

27. Outline
1. The context for Techno-Politics
2. Techno-Politics as a Research
Domain
3. Why do Techno-Politics?
4. Discussion

28. Why do Techno-Politics?
1. Intrinsic motivation
- Contributing to positive social change
- Fulfilling special role of universities

29. Failures, failures, failures…
I. PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
+C (an)
- W (ant)
- k (now)
IV. HACKERS &
BUSINESS
+w -k+k -c
II. ACADEMIA
+c -k -w
III. CIVIL SOC.
+W +k-s -c

30. Why do Techno-Politics?
1. Intrinsic motivation
- Contributing to positive social change
- Fulfilling special role of universities
2. Meaningful for students
- They could be involved in useful projects
(eg: Code for America)
3. There will be funding
- eGovernance
- Social Machines/CAPs
- Smart Cities  Smart Citizens
- Open Government

31. Open Government & Open Data
2009.01.21:
Memorandum on Transparency
and Open Government
…
Government should be
TRANSPARENT
Government should be
PARTICIPATORY
Government should be
COLLABORATIVE
Collaboration
Participation
Transparency

32. Open Government & Open Data

33. Open Government & Open Data

34. Why do Techno-Politics?
1. Intrinsic motivation
- Contributing to positive social change
- Fulfilling special role of universities
2. Meaningful for students
- They could be involved in useful projects
(eg: Code for America)
3. There will be funding
- eGovernance, Social Machines/CAPs, Open Government,
Smart Cities  Smart Citizens
4. Synergies with current areas
- Game technologies  Gamification, Smart Cities, Web
Development

35. Outline
1. The context for Techno-Politics
2. Techno-Politics as a Research
Domain
3. Why do Techno-Politics?
4. Discussion
Dziękuje bardzo!!