CTT / SHARITORIES

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
CTT / SHARITORIES by Mind Map: CTT / SHARITORIES

1. Ways to Group Stakeholders

1.1. Clusters

1.2. Roundtables

2. Personas (1 to 1 mapping with Stakeholders?)

2.1. Politician and Policymaker

2.2. Civil Servant

2.3. Citizen

2.4. Company representatives

2.5. ....

3. Stakeholders

3.1. ACTIVE TARGETS OF THE CTT

3.1.1. Local government

3.1.1.1. We don't have many links (See answers from the questionnaire)

3.1.2. Active citizens and Associations/Socent/Etc

3.1.2.1. Ciudadano Productor

3.1.2.2. Active Citizen / Cittadinanza attiva

3.1.2.3. Fab/makers

3.2. Other territorial stakeholders

3.2.1. (all) Citizenship - Larger Audience

3.2.1.1. Kids

3.2.1.2. ?

3.2.2. Industry/Businesses

3.2.2.1. Global

3.2.2.2. Local

3.2.2.3. Challenged

3.2.2.4. upstarts

3.2.3. Research

3.2.3.1. Independent

3.2.3.2. Academic

3.2.4. Institutions

3.2.4.1. Trade Unions

3.2.4.2. Consumer Groups

3.2.5. The Education System

3.2.5.1. Schools

3.2.6. marginalized groups?

3.2.7. Investors - Private Capital

4. Local Governments Positions/Stages of Development

4.1. Passive (better call it Learning PHASE?)

4.1.1. LEARN

4.1.1.1. EXTERNAL

4.1.1.1.1. trends

4.1.1.1.2. tools

4.1.1.1.3. taxonomies

4.1.1.2. INTERNAL

4.1.1.2.1. local specificities

4.1.1.2.2. local ecosystem

4.1.1.2.3. local actors

4.1.2. i.e. let organizations and citizens do their thing

4.1.3. Understand and assess the maturity of the regulating laws

4.1.4. collecting data

4.1.5. How this maps with existing objectives / development agenda?

4.2. Facilitator

4.2.1. FACILITATE

4.2.1.1. CONNECT

4.2.1.2. ENABLE

4.2.2. i.e. making it easier for them (funding, policies, communication)

4.2.3. Adopting or clarify existing policy applicability

4.2.4. Grow awareness into citizens

4.2.5. Link with stakeholders

4.3. Proactive/builder

4.3.1. BUILD

4.3.1.1. DESIGN

4.3.1.2. IMPLEMENT

4.3.2. Building new collaborative offering themselves

4.3.2.1. in partnership with existing players

4.3.2.2. more institutional

4.3.3. Engage with the community in co-creation

4.3.4. Create a new law/policy?

4.3.5. Transform the institution itself in a collaborative platform or asset

5. Topics?

5.1. CG92 Vision

5.1.1. Productive territories

5.1.2. Sharing territories

5.1.3. Territories as Commons

6. GOVERNMENT Actions

6.1. - call for projects (ex: Region Ile-De-France for coworking, makerspaces, local currencies, sharing economy)

6.2. - research / research-action (ex: Brittany, Nord-pas-de-calais)

6.3. MAPS - mapping the ecosystem (ex: Barcelona for the maker ecosystem)

6.4. - communicating about the projects (advertising them on their website?)

6.5. - communication booklet (ex: Sidney Sharing City)

6.6. - overall territorial marketing strategy (ex: Seoul, soon Amsterdam + maybe Barcelona ?)

6.7. - citizen participation / commons (Bologna + see Naples for water, Capannori for waste, etc)

6.8. PROCUREMENT POLICIES FAVORING THE COLLECO

6.9. Challenge Prizes

6.10. PROGRAMS to share/unlock IDLE Assets

6.10.1. Spaces

6.10.2. cars

6.10.3. knowledge

7. Basics

7.1. Why

7.1.1. Just avoid being Too Technical

7.1.2. Should be good for anyone: not only for the ones which know the topic

7.1.3. Tools Are available: would be stupid not to use

7.2. How

7.2.1. Engagement is key

7.2.1.1. Participation

7.2.1.2. Transparency

7.2.2. Learning by doing?

7.2.2.1. Experiment in a given direction

8. NARRATIVE

8.1. Solution to Existing Problem

8.1.1. Not a new THING

8.1.2. a new TOOL to do things and achieve existing objectives

8.1.3. AVOID THE FEELING OF CHANGE

8.1.4. Existing long term committmenrs

8.1.4.1. CO2 reduction

8.1.4.2. energy efficiency

8.2. Goverment as a Platform - Enabling

8.2.1. Govs can Experiment by enabling others to take Risk (eg: companies/associations) push risk at the boundaries

8.3. Economic Interests

8.3.1. Saving Money - Doing More with Less

8.3.1.1. Coproduction of public functions and services

8.3.1.2. Example: cost of Wikipedia vs Cost of something local

8.3.2. Extract money from informal economy / hidden economy

8.4. Enabling new sources of income for citizens

8.4.1. Monetizing assets and Skills

8.4.2. Save Money from cheaper/shared services + access over ownership

8.4.3. More opportunities for entrepreneurship, personal business

8.5. METAPHORES

8.5.1. Using Collaborative Glasses metaphore

8.5.1.1. Don't build new roads, squeeze more people in the same car

8.6. IMPORTANCE OF EXAMPLES

8.6.1. Everything should be attached with examples

8.7. BET ON THE "ME TOO" APPROACH

8.7.1. Frame it as something which is a MUST PARTICIPATE:

8.7.1.1. for example as they did with "smart" cities (what's the alternative?>>> being a "dumb city"

9. KEY ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT - TO BE CLARIFIED

9.1. OPENNESS AND LICENSING

9.1.1. Clarify that this is going to be released in Creative Commons

9.2. COMMUNITY

9.2.1. We must create a community around the project

9.2.2. We already have a lot of people (between registered ones and followers )

9.3. REPLICABILITY

9.3.1. We want this project to be replicable

10. HOW TO PARTICIPATE NEXt

10.1. Adopters

11. Resistance in Governments

11.1. Resistance to change as "if you change something you need to adapt everything else"

11.2. Limited inclination to Risk Taking

11.2.1. Lacking Sandboxes

11.2.2. No Zona Franca

11.2.3. No Laboratories

11.3. Scared of losing / sharing Power

11.3.1. Threat is to become irrelevant

11.3.1.1. counter argument >> PLATFORMS ARE RESILIENT AND IF YOU ENABLE YOU BECOME "MORE IMPORTANT"

11.4. Problems due to "horizontality" of the topic: having many departments involved

12. Tools

12.1. Create connection with Local Governments

12.1.1. Cup of Coffee :)

12.1.2. Put the energy were there's energy already

12.1.2.1. Passionate persons or teams

12.1.2.2. empowering them

12.2. Dissemination and Awareness

12.2.1. Fact Sheet

12.2.2. Booklet

12.2.3. 40 hours guides

12.2.4. Big Fair - OS Village

12.2.5. Awareness must be built in both sides (administration and citizenship)

12.3. Tools to understand the impact and the data

12.4. Understand who can do what

12.4.1. Stakeholder mapping / internal social network

12.4.2. Iit is important to look appropriately at the various layers of responsibility that exist in the national policy landscape ....local and national authorities may well work together, but there will always be one layer of decision-making ultimately responsible for the final decision.

13. POLICYMAKING

13.1. Assess the maturity/applicability of the law

13.1.1. See NESTA UK

13.2. Don't Change the Law if it's not needed

13.2.1. First step: see if the law can be interpreted in an “evolved way” Second step: can the regulation/law be “stretched”? Third step: push to change the law (slow and difficult)

13.3. Regulations are important for driving investments

13.4. Data to back decision is still lacking

14. What will be the deliverables in the TOOLKIT

14.1. Booklet for dissemination?

14.1.1. Narrative

14.1.2. Not a new thing! -- Solve existing

14.2. Reference to best practices

14.3. Process abstraction and guidelines

14.3.1. for each step of the process provide link to existing tools

14.4. Training

14.4.1. training addressed to local policy-makers and citizens

14.4.2. TRAIN THE TRAINERS (Scalable)

14.4.3. Awareness must be built in both sides (administration and citizenship)

15. Properties of the Toolkit

15.1. Should be "modular", made of smaller pieces / sub processes / etc...

16. REVIEWED TOOLKITS and referenceable resources

16.1. FROG CTT

16.1.1. Good for practical tools to use once a goal is set. It requires a “higher level” commitment to implement a sharing/collaborative initiative.

16.2. Waag make the future Toolkit

16.2.1. Train the trainers is a good format I think, especially when wanting to implement change in a whole organisation. This mean for us to train someone to be able to use the toolkit him or herself. Rapid Prototyping could maybe also be a good way for approaching problems in specific areas, like transport or waste management. In that case you could set it up as to invite actors from the collaborative economy to a workshop together with public administrators. It is a bit more advanced than only awareness raising, but more in a step-by-step process.

16.3. IDEO

16.3.1. IDEO DESIGN KIT

16.3.1.1. Mindsets

16.3.1.1.1. A cool idea to explain you need new mindset to embrace change

16.3.1.2. Methods

16.3.1.2.1. Inspiration

16.3.1.2.2. Ideation

16.3.1.2.3. Implementation

16.3.2. IDEO HCD

16.3.2.1. Ideo HCD Toolkit We are free to use and remix the contents of this toolkit. Great feature to have “Scenarios of use”: depending on what time and resources are available, different parts can be applied. EX. if the commitment is one week, that could involve awareness raising tools but nothing strategic. If the commitment is 3 months, maybe one small project could be implemented.

17. PROJECT SCALE

17.1. Nationawide

17.2. Region

17.3. City

17.4. Neighborhood

18. Cool Ideas to track

18.1. Erasmus program for Administration Workers:

18.1.1. OBJ: Enhancing Skillsharing

18.1.2. Enhancing communication

18.2. City Home Swapping

18.2.1. make people experience the sharing economy

19. TOOLS AND PROCESSES which are considered useful

19.1. Participative events

19.2. Co-creative session including citizens

19.3. Participative processes

20. Sensitive Problems

20.1. Platform Misuse (mossly citizens)

20.2. Over regulation (mostly entrepreneurs)