World Forum for Democracy 2013

From Metagovernment - Government of, by, and for all the people
Revision as of 14:47, 16 March 2013 by Ed Pastore (talk | contribs) (Beginnings of a first draft. None of this has even been reviewed: just stream-of-consciousness so far. And at this time, it is only half complete.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Following is a proposal for Metagovernment to participate in the Council of Europe's World Forum for Democracy to be held in Strasbourg, France in November, 2013. The submission is due by March 31, 2013.

Brief description of the initiative or idea (max. 200 words): goals, actions, scope, participants, partners.

The Metagovernment project is building online tools that will enable citizens not to influence decision-making, but to control it. These tools fulfil the ultimate promise of democracy: where government is of, by, and for the people.

The advent of new technologies allows us to expand beyond the limitations and drawbacks of traditional direct democracy. Our tools support consensus-building, deliberative decision-making, and at-will participation.

Instead of trying to incrementally open and improve archaic forms of governance by increasing citizen involvement in outmoded institutions, this project creates new institutions that enable any kind of community to freely discuss, deliberate, and come to a decision without necessarily vesting authority in any individual(s).

Metagovernment is an umbrella group of numerous projects that are taking many different approaches to building software for deliberation and decision-making. In addition to advocating for and facilitating these projects, we also support a “free-range voting” initiative, which enables these disparate systems to be aggregated. This initiative not only frees individuals to participate in any way they please, but also helps democracy take hold in communities by removing platform lock-in.

By creating new democratic institutions at a community level, we expect to gradually transform human governance from the ground up.

Since when the initiative has been implemented (in case you are presenting an idea which has not been implemented yet, please state the origin, sources of inspiration, relevant academic debate etc.)?

The Metagovernment project started in 2007, though some member projects had started earlier and some more recently. The concept of free-range voting began work in 2009.

The primary work of the initiative and its member projects has been in concept formation, advocacy, and most importantly software coding. We have used various aspects of the project within our own community and on our website, but are not quite ready to expand out much beyond limited trials in external communities.

How is this initiative/idea contributing to broaden and deepen democratic participation?

This initiative fully intends to radically transform democratic participation from one where citizens interact with governments to one where there is no distinction between citizen and government.

Further, the initiative is not limited to political governance (nor is that an initial focus of the project). Our initiative supports tools that allow members of any community to fully participate in governance of that community. Our intention is to vastly expand the democratic nature of any participatory organization.

What have been the results so far?

Member initiatives are in various stages of development of their software solutions. Software development is continually influenced by learning from real-world experiments, and by new developments in our own philosophies.

Most deployment of our tools has been on small test groups; particularly on the community of people participating in the Metagovernment project. Using several different tools at different times, we have repeatedly demonstrated the ability for our community to reach consensus using those tools. Many times, the agreements we have reached have varied substantially from any ideas originally proposed; thus demonstrating the efficacy of our tools and processes to create synthesis.

How have results been assessed?

Almost all of our assessment has been internal. We would appreciate external assessment and critique in this lab environment.

What challenges have been encountered?

What lessons have been learnt?

Has this initiative been replicated by others? To what extent it may be transferable to other places and countries, other levels of governance?

Any additional relevant information/references

Please indicate who will present the initiative (Mr/Ms, name, position, city, country, e-mail): it is KEY TO ENSURE GENDER BALANCE IN THE LAB TEAM