Icegov2011 2

1

Lawmaking in Democracy 2.0 Paradigm. The Shift for the New Forms of Lawmaking

WikiVote! 2011

Vasiliy Burov, Evgeny Patarakin, Boris Yarmakhov

WikiVote! 2011 2

WikiVote approach: It is not Social Media, it is Participation

3

Lawmaking in Democracy 2.0 framework

• Development of social services has led to emergence of such phenomena as the Wisdom of crowds, Crowdsourcing, Wikinomics, Groundswell and Participatory culture.

• Technological capabilities of the Internet provide the basis for the transition from the contemporary society of representative democracy to the Internet society of direct democracy, Democracy 2.0

• All politically active and educated citizens have Internet access today. Therefore, all of them can directly, without mediation from parliaments, contribute to the lawmaking.

• This creates the basis for the new practices of public expertise and law enhancement, which may be referred to as Lawmaking 2.0

WikiVote! 2011

WikiVote! 2011 4

The Role of Public Support in a State

The need: Effective development of up-to-date state legislation

We offer: The use of the potential of the civic society for development of legislative and regulative documents by the government - Lawmaking 2.0

Government

LawSociety

Why collaboration of government and society is important?Support and advancement of the civic society and government collaboration channels is the basis for Lawmaking 2.0

WikiVote! 2011 5

Leading Online Lawmaking Practices worldwideLawCommenting• Since 2004 the service https://www.osale.ee/, is

supported in Estonia. Every citizen can comment on any law, discussed in the parliament and suggest his own initiative.

• The service http://commentonthis.com allows to comment on any governmental documents (U.K.) broken into blocks for the easiness of commenting.

• In 2005 the U.S. Federal Government launched a service allowing to traces the status of any federal regulations and make comment and suggestions - http://www.regulation.gov

• Discussion of the draft Russian federal law on police (Aug, 7 2010) - http://zakonoproekt2010.ru/

LawMaking• Public expertise of a

chapter of the law on education, supported by the department on state politics of the Russian Ministry of Education and Science started on June 1, 2010

http://edu.crowdexpert.ru/

Similarity and Difference

Similarities•Internet community participation•The document is broken into articles and items•Articles of the law can be used by all registered participants

Differences of LawMaking

•Co-authoring opportunities for participants•The result is a new version of the document•The most productive authors are selected for the next projects

6WikiVote! 2011

Similarities and differences of online lawmaking practices LawCommenting and LawMaking

WikiVote! 2011 7

ResultsLawCommenting

Stream of comments

Emotional outburst

LawMaking

Document

Human capital

Society loyalty

The result of discussion is ranking according to mass preferences set of comments from everybody who wanted to comment.

The result of lawmaking:• An improved version of the initial document• An expert community that can participate in future projects• Society loyalty, as the participants co-author the document and feel responsibility for their choices

WikiVote! 2011 8

Lawmaking 2.0: Selection of participants

• The expert participants are not just any crowd. They are knowledgeable people, motivated in their professional area.

• Search and selection of such participants are fulfilled in professional communities among those who showed activity in the field.

• This approach provides wide representation and gives broader outlook and complex approach to the issue.

• Participation in a online expert community is a stimulus for qualified professionals who can later work in government and administration.

WikiVote! 2011 9

How Lawmaking 2.0 Project is Implemented

A platform for discussion is created and the draft law is published.

A representative number of participants from different interested groups is invited.

The infrastructure for suggesting, commenting, discussing, editing and voting is offered.

Participants are motivated by career and recognition goals.

A new version of the document based on the suggestions is created.

The experts are rated based on their contribution. The “elite” of public experts is formed.

WikiVote! 2011 10

The generalized scheme of collaborative document drafting

Ranking and Evaluation

Initial Document Document Decomposition

Block Evaluation

The Document is Split into Blocks

Crowd Expert Community

Own Versions

Negative

Block Ranking

Positive

The Document is Composed of the Graduated

Blocks

Collaborative Editing

Final Version of Document

Conclusion on the ProcessConclusion

Preparation

Active ParticipantsTogether with the

Client

All Blocks can be Evaluated and Ranked

WikiVote! 2011 11

Blocks evaluation: Crowdwriting scheme

WikiVote! 2011 12

Ranking of blocks & Rating of users

• Block Rank depends on the number of votes and rating of users who votes

• User Rating depends on his creative activities and how his/her versions of blocks are evaluated by other users

• Users with high rating votes with a lot of weight

WikiVote! 2011 13

Cases of WikiVote Lawmaking

• Chapter about general education in the preliminary draft of State Law of Education (Summer 2010, Federal Ministry of Education)

• State law on recreational fisheries (July – Sep 2011, Russian Federal Government)

• State law of Social Maintenance (Sep 2011 – in progress, Russian Federal Government)

• State Law of Education (Aug 2011 – in progress, Federal Ministry of Education)

WikiVote! 2011 14

State law on recreational fisheries

Users Versions Objects Comments5362 287 67 1787

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!WikiVote! Wiki solution for wicked problem

WikiVote! 2011 15

[email protected]@wikivote.ru