How should people organise themselves to improve conditions in the world?
Democracy has the potential to support optimal conditions in the world. The increasing gap between rich and poor shows that there is potential to improve how well the democratic process is being applied. Assessing how well government, Non Government Organisations and private enterprise are responding to the needs of the majority would improve accountability to the people they serve. Identifying areas of weakness allows the wider community to take greater ownership of how to more accurately identify issues and take appropriate actions. This level of empowerment would help to decentralise decision making and encourage people to live to their fullest potential.
POWER
Western democracy is built on the foundation that everyone is equal. It can be challenging to apply this value when creating or amending social policy. Capturing the breadth of perspectives from people affected and their corresponding degree of importance requires strong channels of communication. The reliance on traditional media to fill this role assumes that people who are inadequately supported have the confidence to take part in a conversation using this medium.
The call for less government involvement in addressing social issues may reflect the current inability to meet the needs of the majority of a constituency. It may also reflect a general poor understanding of the impact of social disadvantage when voices from these groups are drowned out by more empowered voices for whom a libertarian approach to managing issues is a more viable option.
The increasing power of the minority is best reflected in growing income disparity. A joint study from NASA has highlighted this issue as the biggest threat to industrial civilisation [1]. Improving the capacity by the majority of people affected by a decision to critically analyse and engage with policy makers would assist to respond to this problem.
PRINCIPLES
The strength of a democracy lies not in the ability to support free speech, but how well government is able to listen to the majority of opinions being expressed. Even where there is a genuine political value of being responsive to the needs of a community, often there is insufficient capacity within government, advocacy groups or the general community to translate this into reality.
A lack of information leads to ambiguity in media representation of how well the definition of a problem reflects the experience of people affected by it. The gap in robust data on an issue is then filled with selective case studies from either side of an argument which rouses emotion and makes a more objective approach to finding and implementing the best solutions more difficult.
The 2014 Gates Foundation Annual Letter highlighted the importance of clear data capture before and after change is made to support benchmarking outcomes achieved. A more pragmatic approach to improving living conditions for people could save time devoted to peer reviewed research by people who may be far removed from the problem.
ADVOCACY
The empowerment of communities to understand the degree of equity in a proposed change would address the inability of traditional media to hold democratic government to account. Greater involvement of non-partisan organisations are needed to advocate on behalf of a community. This level of empowerment would support improved understanding of the democratic process, and how well it is being applied when addressing an issue.
Elements to assess include the ability of those in power to:
1) Loosen up. Elements which can be changed as a result of feedback from the community are often ambiguous. This means that there is often poor clarity about why engagement is needed. Listing clearly what is available for negotiation, and to what extent, will make it easy to use appropriate tools and listen more effectively.
2) Listen. The International Association of Public Participation has outlined a clear structure for selecting appropriate channels to gather feedback from a community depending on the degree of flexibility available to influence the final outcome. The community then has the ability to ask why a more robust process of collecting feedback was not used, and partnering with government to improve information gathering in future.
3) Let them know. Providing feedback on exactly how suggestions from the community were used to assess an issue and sculpt a solution will improve understanding of the democratic process. It will also highlight where values are being applied more heavily to compensate iin areas that dont have clear economic outcomes forecasted.
Calculating an expected Return On Investment will support better comparison of options available to address an issue. This is being used to good effect by the Copenhagen Consensus Centre [2] who are critiquing how effectively the United Nations is spending billions of dollars in international aid.
Applying this same approach at a local level would address a layer of government which is most at risk of corruption, and also stands to have the greatest impact on individuals.
CONCLUSION
It is easy to be swept up in the emotional impact of managing finite resources however this detracts from a more rational analysis of what an issue is, and the expected outcomes from different options which are available to address it.
Providing an independent assessment of how well the democratic process has been applied will improve political literacy and ownership of issues and actions taken to improve conditions in the world.
How would you like to be more involved in changing conditions in the world?
REFERENCES
[1] The Guardian, March 2014. Nasa-funded study: industrial civilisation headed for 'irreversible collapse'?
[2] Copenhagen Consensus Centre
http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are welcome, politeness is expected, creative feedback is greatly appreciated!