e practicemidterm osimo
DESCRIPTION
presentation on the future of epractice, 19th may 2008. see www.epractice.euTRANSCRIPT
ePractice midterm workshop 1
Open, mashed-up eGovernment needs an open, mashed-up ePractice
David OsimoIPTSEC Joint Research Centre
ePractice midterm workshop 2
Content
• Trends towards open, mashed-up government• Examples and implications for eGovernment• Implications for ePractice
ePractice midterm workshop 3Government on a learning curve
• Government face new needs, new challenges, new fields of regulation
• Public services provided by a plurality of actors and providers• Public data can be re-used to deliver added-value services (e.g.
gTransit, planningalerts.com)• IT trends: data and services re-usable and available across
websites (from portal to web services - Gartner)
-> move from portal-centred towards a user-centred, open, mashed-up government
ePractice midterm workshop 4
Examples of user centred, mashed-up government
ePractice midterm workshop 5
Government-generated one-stop-shop
ePractice midterm workshop 6
User-generated one stop shop
ePractice midterm workshop 7
Intermediary geo-one-stop-shop
ePractice midterm workshop 8Difficult to control
• Users have the tools and the attitude to act and “go public”.
• Public engagement happen mostly outside government websites.
• If public data are not made available (XML, open API), they can be taken (web scraping)
-> Reaching out, engaging with web2.0 is not only an opportunity for user-oriented services, but a risk management strategy
ePractice midterm workshop 9Beyond the “cool” effect
• How many people can use RSS and web services beyond web2.0 early adopters?
• Intermediaries can act as channel for non-web2 adopters but we still miss: – Clear business model; – Solid accountability model; – Guarantee of universality of service
• E-subsidiarity approach: government provides channel if market/civil society fail
• What is the acceptable mix of channels for: public information, sensitive information, or transactions?
ePractice midterm workshop 10
Lessons learnt from eGov 2.0 projects
• Public data/services available for re-use opens unexpected possibilities• Public services are provided by a plurality of actors: proprietary
platforms are not always necessary and may be damaging; collaboration happens across platform
• Users co-build services around their needs• Usability is key: short feedback loop, listen to users and react
No ready recipes: necessary to experiment, learn-by-doing, exchange experience…
Source: IPTS report “web2.0 for government: why and how?”
ePractice midterm workshop 11
Implications for ePractice
ePractice midterm workshop 12Tag-based knowledge exchange
ePractice midterm workshop 13Lessons for ePractice 2.0
• Yet another platform? Hard to compete with high-quality free services (Ning, LinkedIn, Wordpress, del.icio.us…) and existing discussions in the blogosphere
• But with key asset:– content– large audience, mostly not web2.0-savvy– data (is the Intel inside)
• Participation is hard to get– Connect to discussion/collaboration outside ePractice (blog RSS feeds out and in;
data portability, micro-formats…)– Exploit attention data to enable weak engagement– Extreme usability requires fast response, shorter feedback loops > work-intensive
ePractice can become the bridge for web2.0 non users, but is it feasible and sustainable?
Openness is useful in all scenarios
ePractice midterm workshop 14Conclusions for eGov and ePractice
• User, not government, is the centre• Attention is scarce• Services and knowledge exchange are not platform-centric• Difficult competition with commercial free services … standards are
high• Open, reusable data and services are key enablers• But don’t assume services will be created (subsidiarity)• Learning-by-doing is necessary
ePractice midterm workshop 16
Back-up
ePractice midterm workshop 17
Source: IPTS estimation based on Eurostat, IPSOS-MORI, Forrester
4.Providing attention, taste data
3.Using user-generated content
2.Providing ratings, reviews
1.Producing content
40% 100%3% of Internet users (50% of EU population)10%
Different kinds of users’ involvement in web 2.0
ePractice midterm workshop 18Building on users intelligence
1- producing content• User-generated public services
(e.g. planningalerts.com)• Sharing tips “how-to”
2. ratings, reviews• Public feedback / suggestions for
improvement• “Was this information useful for
you?”
4. Passive contributions (Attention data)
• “People who used this service also looked at”
• Users most searched terms as tag cloud on the homepage