2. Designing Peace & Peace Technology
Mark Nelson & Margarita Quihuis
April 21, 2015
Stanford Peace Innovation Lab Bogotá launch talk
AN OVERVIEW
3. 3
Margarita Quihuis
CO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LAB
RESEARCHER, STANFORD BEHAVIOR DESIGN LAB
A social entrepreneur and mentor capitalist, Margarita Quihuis’s career has focused on
innovation, technology incubation, access to capital and entrepreneurship. Her
accomplishments include being the first director of Astia (formerly known as the Women’s
Technology Cluster), a business incubator where her portfolio companies raised $67
million in venture funding, venture capitalist, Reuters Fellow at Stanford, and Director of RI
Labs for Ricoh Innovations. She is currently a member of the research team at Stanford
Design Lab, and directs the Stanford Peace Innovation Lab where she conducts research
on innovation, mass collaboration, persuasive technology & the potential of social
networks to change society for the better. Her projects have included the study of
collaboration and citizen engagement to foster government innovation – Manor Labs, the
application of mass interpersonal persuasion to foster social movements – Social-M,
bottoms-up post-disaster response and recovery – Relief 2.0 and citizen psy-op efforts
such as the the Israel Loves Iran and Romancing the Border social media campaigns.
She is a recognized thought leader in the areas of innovation, emergent social behavior
and technology and has been part of Deloitte’s On Social Roundtable and Aspen
Institute’s Dialogue on Open Innovation and Dialogue on Diplomacy and Technology.
As Director of R I Labs for Ricoh Innovations she created a consumer focused innovation
lab that focused on new market opportunities from generational behavior (Millennials),
cloud and mobile computing, emerging social technologies, crowdsourcing and open
innovation.
4. 4
Mark Nelson
FOUNDER, CO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LAB
Former relief-worker, investment banker, and social entrepreneur, Mark
Nelson founded and co-directs Stanford Peace Innovation Lab, where
he researches mass collaboration and mass interpersonal persuasion.
Mark focuses on designing, catalyzing, incentivizing, and generating
resources to scale up collective positive human behavior change. He
has described a functional, quantitative definition of peace, in terms of
engagement quantity and quality across social difference lines; he has
identified innovative, automated ways to measure peace, both at the
neighborhood and global level; and he has developed a formal
structural description for Peace Data. He leads the Social Energy Map
project, and designs technology interventions to measurably increase
positive, mutually beneficial engagement across conflict boundaries.
Mark’s mission is to create an entire new, profitable industry, where
positive peace is delivered as a service. Other projects include EPIC
Global Challenge and Peace Markets. Mark is also a researcher and
practitioner at Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab, and a member of
Stanford’s Kozmetsky Global Collaboratory.
5. Overview
1. What is Peace Innovation?
2. Peace Tech Overview
3. Peace for Profit
4. Designing Peace Technology
5. Examples from the Wild
6. Part 1. What is Peace Innovation? The Academic view
“At Stanford Peace Innovation Lab, we develop quantitative, predictive,
computational methods and systems to sense engagement levels and
interaction quality across group boundaries. We then provide design
frameworks, principles, and methodologies for Behavior Design and
Persuasive Technology interventions, to measurably increase positive
engagement, at scale.
This approach to global risk management is primarily preventive,
positive, and generative, rather than remedial or punitive. In addition it
can be rapidly scaled and optimized. Most important, it is fundamentally
profitable to both sides of potential conflicts, enabling global capital
markets to reallocate assets towards the solutions we develop.”
7. Put more simply? Peace Innovation is…
“Designing technology that
increases people’s ability
to be good to each other.”
8. So what is peace technology?
“Mediating technology that
measurably augments
people’s ability to positively
engage with each other.”
9. Is there a relationship between Peace and Innovation? Yes.
PEACE
enables
better
collaboration,
improving…
INNOVATION
creates new
value and
mutual
benefit,
generating
more…
Because specialization
(and therefore diversity)
are vital inputs into
innovation…
10. So…why Peace Technology? The big problem:
FIVE DEEP HUMAN TRENDS. THE FUTURE WILL BE:
1. Urban…
2. Dense…
3. Coastal…
4. Networked.
Result?
5. Most human conflict will be with irregular, non-state actors, in these urban
environments (Kilcullen, 2012)
10
11. Implications: Urgent Learning Needs
In the next three decades
Between 3 and 5 billion more of us must learn to
get along with each other much better
in these dense environments.
11
12. Why Peace Technology? Solutions that weren’t
previously possible
For the first time in human history we are measuring and
recording inter-personal (and inter-group) engagement,
at very high resolution, in real-time.
Social software and mobile devices passively record
more social behavior every day.
Now that we can measure social behavior, we can begin
to design technology to increase and augment the
behaviors we want.
12
14. The Quanta of Peace
Individual episodes of human engagement
1. Episodes we can observe and record (for the first time in history!)
2. Episodes we can’t see--the known unknown
3. Episodes we don’t even know we don’t know—Bastiat and the
paradox of unseen value vs. visible cost.
15. Engagement Episode Model of Peace
(see whiteboard diagrams)
1. OLD ENGAGEMENT CHARACTERISTICS
• PHYSICALLY PRESENT
• FULLY EMBODIED
• ALL FIVE SENSES (ONLY)
• LIMITED IN TIME
• LIMITED IN SPACE
• LIMITED RECORD & MEMORY
• LIMITED COMPUTATION
• BASIC GROUP ID VISIBILITY
2. NEW ENGAGEMENT CHARACTERISTICS
• TECHNOLOGY MEDIATED
• MAY BE FAR APART
• AUGMENTED—EITHER:
• Improved ability, or
• Previously impossible
• DETAILED RECORD
• INCREASING SENSOR ACUITY
• COMPUTABLE
• REACH ACROSS TIME AND SPACE
• DEEP GROUP ID KNOWLEDGE
17. Peace Data in the context of Big Data
Peace Data
Social Behavior Data
Behavior Data
Human Data
Machine-to-machine
18. 3. Peace for Profit?
Why?
M E A S U R A B L Y I N C R E A S I N G
P O S I T I V E E N G A G E M E N T
A C R O S S
D I F F E R E N C E B O U N D A R I E S
19. The Deep Structural Problem of Resourcing Peace
Our two traditional approaches: Policy & Diplomacy, or Philanthropy &
Charity
1. First Problem: scale of resources to problem
2. Second Problem: where are the resources? Global capital markets
3. Third Problem: no effective resource bridge to either traditional path
› Why? No price signal
4. Result? Fourth Problem: perverse investments
5. Solution? A for-profit peace service industry that creates a price/value
signal for positive pro-social behavior
20. 4. Designing Peace Tech
M E A S U R A B L Y I N C R E A S I N G
P O S I T I V E E N G A G E M E N T
21. Peace Innovation Design: the Rapid Prototyping Loop
Choose target
communities
Observe/choose
tech they use
Pick a Positive
Engagement
Behavior
Create Fast
Prototype
Interventions
Measure Impact
Optimize (or
Pivot) & Repeat
22. Peace Innovation Design: the Rapid Prototyping Loop
What target
communities?
What tech (do
they use)?
What Behavior?
What will we
build to test?
How many
behaviors?
Optimize (or
Pivot) & Repeat
23. Peace Innovation Design: Rapid Prototyping Example
Communities: Copts &
Salafis in Cairo
Tech they use:
Facebook
Positive Behavior:
Take photos together
to show they can get
along
Fast Prototype
Intervention: FB Page
and campaign
Measure Impact: How
many photos posted in
half an hour?
Optimize (or pivot) &
Repeat
24. 24
Behavior Design vs Persuasive Technology
• Observable measurable action
• Move people to do something (not
about changing attitudes or
beliefs)
• One time or repeated behaviors
• Ability through simplicity
• Triggers
• Habits
Web, mobile, social technologies &
devices:
• Give/increase ability
• Act as Triggers
• Are Sensors
• Measure if behavior occurred
• Deliver instant rewards to
reinforce positive behavior
BEHAVIOR DESIGN
PROCESS
PERSUASIVE TECHNOLOGY
DELIVERY MECHANISM
28. 28
Four quick examples of peace technologies, and their
economic impact
Increasing positive engagement across difference boundaries:
City Level:
Citizen Engagement
City Level:
Citizen Engagement
Neighborhood level:
Civility Engagement
National Level:
Citizen Diplomacy
30. Manor Labs – Experiment in Citizen Engagement
Can a town use persuasive technology frameworks and
applications to increase positive behaviors in communities?
Can we increase positive engagement between citizens and
government?
Can we create new behaviors for citizen participation?
30
31. Manor Labs - Impact
The City of Manor received input from over
800 citizens, out of a population of 5,325, on
their ideation platform, evaluated 80 ideas
and implemented 5.
Recognized by the White House, Manor
Labs was one of the first municipal innovation
labs in the Gov 2.0 Movement.
Manor Lab’s QR Codes design has been
adapted to 5 other projects across the US.
Ideation Platform has been used in 8 other
projects, including those done by New York
City, Bogota, Columbia, and the Cabinet
Office in the UK.
32. 32
Behavior Design for Civility: Uber
Meta behavior: Collaborative Consumption
Targeted Behavior: Get People to Share Rides
Secondary Behavior: Driver & Passenger are
Considerate
Behavior Goal:
How do we get people to make Ride Sharing a Pleasant
Experience?
Possible Motivations:
Save /Make Money
Behavior Trigger:
Rating Screen
Persuasive Technologies:
• Mobile App
33. 33
Social & Economic Impact of Uber
As of May 2014 the Uber platform
generates:
20,000 new driver jobs every
month
$90,766 median small business
annual income in New York City
and $74,191 in San Francisco
$2.8 billion per year for the US
economy (and growing)
Average pickup time of less
than 10 minutes for
137,451,768 Americans (43%
of the US covered in less than 4
years)
Reducing drunk driving i.e.
more than 10% reduction in DUI
arrests since launching in
Seattle
Current Valuation in June 2014:
$17.4 billion dollars. The
world’s most valuable startup
35. 35
Social & Economic Impact of AirBnB
87 percent of Airbnb hosts rent
out the home they live in and the
typical host earns $7,530 per year.
62 percent of Airbnb hosts say
Airbnb helped them stay in their
homes and more than 50 percent of
hosts are non-traditional workers
(freelancers, part-time workers,
students, etc.).
Airbnb visitors stay on average 6.4
nights (compared to 3.9 for hotel
guests) and spend $880 at NYC
businesses (compared to $690 for
average New York visitors).
82 percent of Airbnb listings in New
York are outside of the main tourist
hotel area of midtown Manhattan and
the average Airbnb guest spends $740
in the neighborhood where she stays.
In one year, Airbnb generated $104
million in economic activity outside
of Manhattan.
Lyft, AirBnB, Uber are all part of an emerging category of collaborative consumption applications. Of particular note is that they codify trust mechanisms and also act as a social organizing tool.
Lyft, AirBnB, Uber are all part of an emerging category of collaborative consumption applications. Of particular note is that they codify trust mechanisms and also act as a social organizing tool.
