RE-IMAGINING GOVERNMENTWe all have a choice

Christopher WilsonCentre on Governance, University of Ottawa

OUTLINE OF THE ARGUMENTIn 2017 we have a system of collective governance that was designed and built for 1867That system of governance is now broken, out of sync with the needs and realities of today

• Its original design assumptions no longer exist• The monopoly governments once had on social coordination has ended – alternatives increasingly exist• The traditional model has been hollowed out and has become little more than a ceremonial husk• The legitimacy of both governments and their leaders is being seriously questioned and continuously undermined

There are significant policy challenges that demand governments operate in a more open, collaborative way• In the press these concerns involve quality health care, poverty reduction, indigenous people, climate change, privacy & security, affordable education, infrastructure deficit, &

management of the economy• But there are also more fundamental and often existential concerns that are receiving much less attention, such as perpetual economic growth, the future of work, the impact of

technology, unconstrained population growth, access to basic resources (water, food, housing, security), the equitable distribution of society’s wealth, mass migration, & the continued solvency of governments

• What these concerns have in common is both increasing diversity and complexity, as well as the fact that they are shared problems • Governments can no longer lay claim to all the knowledge, resources, or power they need to accomplish their work on behalf of citizens• Governance has become distributed requiring many people and organizations in and out of government to cooperate

These challenges are generating significant uncertainty and discomfort among many citizens who, when faced with them, feel unable to deal with the change. They look for someone to relieve them of their burden and to reassure them they can return to certainty and predictabilityHowever, among the young and tech savvy, the declining confidence in government is encouraging an emigration to a virtual world that is coordinated by technology not governmentMore hopefully, the chronic inability of governments to meet their citizens concerns is giving rise to creative new behaviours in government, involving:

• The recognition that no one is in charge• A re-emphasis on the social coordination role of government rather than simple redistribution• A focus on scalable learning rather than scalable efficiency• A shift from leadership to stewardship • The re-design of government around co-creative collaboration rather than hierarchical control• A willingness to become a trusted platform for others to work together• Designing process governance

The above shifts to more collaborative governance are already taking place at the margins (illustrative cases of the Toronto Waterfront Trust, BC PHSA and CPAC)A practitioner’s guide to effective collaborationConclusion: How can we help? The future is a possibility we must choose -- to avoid it being thrust upon us

TODAY’S GOVERNMENTS ARE OUT OF SYNC

Governments no longer have the knowledge, resources or power to accomplish their intents Governments can no longer claim special insight into the shared values, culture or interests of an entire citizenry (too much diversity)

The abdication by governments of their traditional role in social coordination, plus advances in technology mean the monopoly of governments on social coordination has ended

Leadership has become antithetical to much needed coordination and collaboration Governments tend to be learning impaired they already have answers & want to impose them on others

The legitimacy of governments is being seriously questioned and continuously undermined What real value do they add?

The original rationales for the design of representative government no longer exist i.e. uneducated citizenry, uninformed citizenry, unconnected citizenry, citizens unable to share resources, citizens

unable to cooperate around shared issues Current governments not designed for the 21st century Not designed to be transparent, to learn with others, to co-create, to collaborate, to experiment, to share power, to

facilitate or steward the actions of others, or to be mutually accountable to others. “our governments were designed for a time when issues had clear boundaries and good solutions had clear,

unambiguous pathways” - Morris Rosenberg, former federal DM

NEW ASSUMPTIONS FOR DESIGNING GOVERNMENTCurrent Assumptions ImplicationsUniversal educationUniversal access to informationUniversal connectedness to any one, any time, any where

Less need for experts to represent views of constituents or decide for them. Citizens can connect, coordinate, collaborate and work together on issues of importance to them but need help

There are no shared values, perspectives or culture and that no one has all the answers

Governments must work to ascertain relevant values, perspectives or cultures

A necessary default to transparency Letting citizens in expands the pool of knowledge and resources and builds mutual accountability

Incomplete knowledge is taken for granted leading to a need to develop effective learning capacities

Focus on experimentation, prototyping & learning while doing leads government to create platforms for people to work together

Every initiative will initially fail, so fail fast and learn faster

Government must be designed to catch failures quickly, to learn as you go, and to move quickly to redesign solutions

No one is in charge (or can be) and therefore governance must be widely distributed

The need is to foster effective collaboration across government, between levels of governments, with businesses and NFPs, and with citizens

THE CHALLENGES TO OUR EXISTING INSTITUTIONS Governments continue to fail at addressing major issues of importance to Canadians health care, poverty, indigenous people, climate, privacy & security, education, infrastructure deficit, management of the economy, etc.

Government’s persistent ineffectiveness stems largely from social coordination failures, resulting in increased redistribution costs that are used to mitigate the impacts of these failures

Governments are avoiding big, complex issues that will have fundamental or existential ramifications in the future perpetual economic growth, unconstrained population growth, access to basic resources (water, food, housing, security), equitable distribution of wealth, mass migration, technology, solvency of government, etc.

these shared problems require shared solutions, but with no clear way of appropriating political benefits for today, governments are putting off these issues to future generations to deal with

Public trust in governments continues its decades old decline “Parliament is a sham” – Maclean’s; Canada’s Parliament “close to a point of no return” – Ottawa Citizen

Trust in government leaders has declined even more Leaders seen as ineffective – “Public policy making is now only a shadow of good government” – Elizabeth May

Leaders seen as unethical - “nobody is inclined to believe any of them any more, the honest politicians along with the dirty liars.” – National Post

THE CHALLENGES POSED BY AN EVOLVING CULTURE An increasingly polarized economy based on non-human contributions (eg. robots, blockchain, big data, and artificial intelligence) and a growing human workforce in need of meaningful work

Increased social diversity (global mixing of peoples, languages, beliefs, ideas, & practices) Huge potential for both social conflict and social innovation

Increased connectedness Citizens can organize among themselves & don’t need or want government involvement

Exponential growth of both knowledge and technology Government no longer has the capacity to have all the expertise it needs in-house Its use of technology usually lags popular usage, often reflecting simple automation The democratization of knowledge is creating both huge benefits and new threats that are uncontrollable by

government Citizens want in No longer deferent to government or willing to wait As co-creators, they increasingly want bigger share of decision making

Collaboration is absolutely essential No one is in charge. Shared problems require shared solutions … However, governments were designed with the idea that some one is always in charge

Technology advances suggest governments may becoming irrelevant … but, technology is also permitting a fundamental redesign of government

WHAT MIGHT A RE-IMAGINED GOVERNMENT LOOK LIKE? Largely participatory democracy (‘open source’ style not referendum style) civic responsibility to participate in governing is ingrained through education no political parties, or at least no financial incentives for parties elected representatives are once again ‘free agents’ and animateurs, their status restored as representatives of their

constituencies- elected reps act both as facilitators of local conversations on issues, and as contributors to a national dialogue- their role: to detect reason in conflicting claims, to recognize the legitimacy of each, to sense where agreement might be reached, and to bring

opponents into harmony through co-learning and shared innovation

Government seen as a steward and platform for citizen collaboration Developed capacities for convening, collecting data, angel investing, fostering experimentation & prototyping, conflict

resolution, etc. Extensive use of government wikis for public dialogue and collective decision making (‘open source’ style) Participatory budgeting

Government designed primarily for effective, collective learning Collecting and sharing of information, coupled with extensive opportunities for ‘meaning making’ Provision for developmental evaluation of experiments and prototyping Transparency of collaborator contributions

In the short term, technology is used to deliver, routine and standardized tasks, while elected representatives, stakeholders and citizens focus on collective learning & long term guidance

Radically reduced public service (50-80%) technology used to replace routine and expert tasks

3 FUTURE SCENARIOS (OUR FUTURE TO CHOOSE) The Good - living system governance Government has become the principal vehicle to bring people together, to give voice to those without voices and to encourage collective learning and the sharing of innovation.

Governments have become platforms for human cooperation and for the enhancement of human well-being at all levels -- individual, collective and planetary.

Governments have evolved into immense mechanisms for homeostasis, which continually monitor all human interactions, as well as their interactions with the other co-inhabitants of the planet, in order to inform everyone and foster self-organization.

The uniqueness of each and every human is greatly valued for the different perspectives and experiences they might hold and contribute, while humanity itself has become the ultimate whole that is so much more than the sum of its parts.

Since technology produces all the goods and services needed by people, the work of humanity has ceased to be about survival and become about co-creation and innovation, about mining the infinite possibilities inherent in the fundamental nature of life itself for the benefit of the entire planet. 

Humanity has evolved into a new, collective species. It has applied its massive collective intelligence to resolving the major issues of today and tomorrow – hunger, climate change, inter-group conflicts, resource shortages, environmental degradation over population, its relationship with other species, as well as self-actualization and fulfillment.

3 FUTURE SCENARIOS (CONT’D) The Bad - technological network governance Human cooperation is facilitated by ‘smart’ technologies rather than by governments and the people within them. Government institutions have become museums;

The functions of governments have been usurped by computer algorithms, robots, blockchain software, the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence and ID chips embedded in every human;

Human actions and outputs are coordinated by the Internet of Things and by a mesh network of electronically enabled humans;

Humans behaviour is guided by artificial intelligences programmed to minimize conflicts, ensure stability and maximize the efficient use of resources;

Humanity is largely free of overt diversity, dissent, and innovation as these were identified as sources of conflict. People become more rational and less emotional and easily perform the tasks assigned to them; and

All humans are seen as equal, interchangeable, and lacking any sense of uniqueness because it has been groomed out of them in order to discourage conflict.

3 FUTURE SCENARIOS (CONT’D) The Ugly - leader-centric governance Governments everywhere reorganize themselves around security due to irrational fears of the ‘other’, inspired by

exponential increases in knowledge and connectivity, and the broad distribution of power, that is compounded by unpredictable, multi-dimensional threats;

While governments promise stability they cannot deliver, and complex issues around jobs, healthcare, education, safety, social equity, government solvency are managed only superficially. Most governments settle for trying to “keep a lid on things. Naturally, the issues spiral ‘out of control’.

As the rate of knowledge and technological change increases, public confidence in governments declines precipitously, leading to a radical erosion of government legitimacy and citizen compliance. Citizens stop paying taxes and following laws. Public services are drastically curtailed.

Jobs become increasingly scarce as more reliable technologies and robotics take over. Those perpetually out of work form gangs to take what they need to survive and to protect themselves from others, even as public policing is cut back (except for elites) to cut costs. Economic polarization in society becomes extreme.

Into this chaos, come leaders claiming that you can’t have everyone making decisions. The answer to complexity is simple - more decisive leaders and fewer voices in order to provide people with reliability and certainty.

Strongman leaders proliferate everywhere, trying to impose their competing visions of what society should be like. Governments become extensions of these charismatic or forceful leaders.

Since no single leader can speak for everyone, these ‘leaders’ begin using technology to attack each other, first with words and then with physical violence until only a powerful few remain.

The surviving leaders then turn their attention to controlling their own citizens using the power of technology to monitor their every thought and action, controlling them for any signs of unique or critical opinions, in order to eliminate possible threats to their ‘heroic’ leadership. Voices other than those which are leader-sanctioned are silenced, and groups not supporting the leader are demonized and eliminated. 

Society becomes fractured: Elysium for a few, life-long servitude for all the rest.

THE CURRENT POPULISM Populism seems to be the trend in many countries these days, even as democracy seems to be in decline

One can’t entirely blame Trump supporters, for instance. Many are feeling left out and left behind by a system they have no influence or power over. So when someone points out someone who is different, “they are different (because of color, or race, or language, or religion, or dress, or history), they are the problem”, it’s easy to accept because the difference is right there in front of you.

What is not so easy to see is that the system has failed them. Their leaders are frauds, and their public institutions have become captivated by positioning and the appearances of doing something over actual problem solving, all the while resolutely avoiding the community building that could make a real difference. And throughout, people are encouraged to feel powerless, isolated, poor, and ignorant -- so much less human than their ‘white knight’ leaders. “Just trust us”, they are told, but the trust is never warranted. It’s no wonder people lash out.

Their leaders have failed to demonstrate why differences do matter. Not in the sense of hiding behind walls, but just the opposite. Differences allow us to be ever more innovative and creative. Differences help us be more accountable to each other. Differences help us see more of the complete picture and to bring more and different resources to bear on any problem. Differences help us to learn together and to be more the people we’d often say we’d like to be. Differences make us better – that is, when we can properly design how we are together in order to maximize our shared learning and innovation and minimize the conflicts that inevitably take place.

In failing to show people how they can build together, leaders strip away the co-ownership citizens have in their society. Their capacity to connect in communities to make real change is undermined. Their immense shared knowledge can be ignored. Their small individual contributions but immense collective resources are eclipsed. And the promise of “yes we can”, is drowned out by “no I can’t”. Any wonder they want to tear it all down?

GETTING FROM HERE TO A ‘GOOD’ FUTURE

The governance culture and collective consciousness are shifted Growing popular frustration with governments’ inability to solve problems that are important to citizens (citizen compliance is at

stake) Increasing awareness of alternatives to government Catalytic shift from a catastrophic failure associated with poor collaboration

Organizational culture change Government departments identify cases that are successful at dealing with complex issues These stories from the margins reflect a paradigm shift that retold and popularized The mechanisms that work and those that don’t are identified and shared widely

Organizational paradigm shift With their legitimacy at stake, governments demonstrate a willingness to re-think and re-imagine their role in society (unfreezing) From hierarchical, someone’s in charge, leadership-driven governance to networked, distributed, no one’s in charge, stewardship From “you must do this” to “how can we help”

Designing government as a learning organization Those in government assume ignorance and design government to foster learning, experimentation and continuous prototyping They assume failure from the outset & so they design mechanisms to catch failure quickly Their design of governmental institutions is intentionally inclusive of different perspectives and processes to use this to learn

Government as a platform for social collaboration The drivers of public policy & programs are recognized as ‘communities of practice’ or collaborations of citizens, businesses, NFPs,

other levels of government Governments seen as conveners, brokers, facilitators, angel investors, educators, data collectors, conflict mediators, progress

monitors (refreezing)

WE NEED TO REIMAGINE GOVERNMENT & MAKE A CHOICE “We can choose to press forward with a better model of cooperation and integration. Or we can retreat into a world sharply divided, and ultimately in conflict, along age-old lines of nation and tribe and race and religion.”

Safeguarding free societies “requires a course correction”, one that involves addressing inequality and the weaknesses of international institutions. Failing to do so would lead down the path towards “strongman” leaders, who can never live up to the expectations they stir up.

“History shows that strongmen are then left with two paths – permanent crackdown, which sparks strife at home, or scapegoating enemies abroad, which can lead to war.”

- Barack Obama in his final address to the United Nations, September 2016

THANK YOU Christopher Wilson

Senior Research Fellow, Centre on Government, University of Ottawa

Email: chris@christopherwilson.ca URL: www.christopherwilson.ca