[open-government] [CrisisMappers] Benghazi

Thu Mar 17 14:29:26 UTC 2011

Sara, I completely agree. I'm very keen to learn more about Kajoo
following your initial email thread previously as well. Specifically
on the issue of enabling a sustained discourse within an environment
beyond the initial crisis mapper surge, this is something I have a bit
of experience with, most recently deploying a tool FortiusOne put
together for us called the Digital Gazette (it's on GitHub) fusing
Crabgrass and GeoCommons in Pakistan's Swat Valley (others doing it in
Afghanistan now as well).

Importantly, these tools need to have online-offline sync capability
and opensource is keenly preferred (enabling communities to adapt
themselves). They cannot be designed for use by 'us' they need to be
of direct utility for communities (defined not necessarily as the
broad population, but relevant local networks/institutions/adopters)
first and foremost.

Second, I'm increasingly of the view that the ecosystem approach is
the most sensible way to do it --rather than an 'all on one platform'
approach. Too many relevant people, too many reasons not to cooperate.
This is best when fused where possible with an open governance
approach. (Note: I say governance here, not government because
governance involves far more than the government itself --and in some
conflict affected environments non-government players are actually
more relevant for governance than those in government.) Data as
infrastructure.

Third, deployment of tech is (obviously) exceedingly challenging for
non-technical reasons. In Pakistan's Swat Valley for example where we
deployed our effort, there are cultural norms for computer usage that
turned into an entirely unanticipated barrier. To be successful, one
must be aware of the context (political, security, cultural, etc).
That said, this is absolutely doable.

In short though, with adaptations, I agree that the space between
crisismappers and gov 2.0 is where transition happens.

Matt

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 3:52 AM, Sara Farmer <sara.farmer at btinternet.com> wrote:
> Might have an idea for that...  have been working on gov2.0 tools for
> developing countries (some of you may have noticed Kajoo recently - huge
> thanks to everyone who sent in examples of what bothered them about their
> cities) and how to migrate the 2-way conversations that start with
> crisismapping into gov2.0-style technology-supported community discussions.
>
> The ink is still wet on this one, but the basic idea is this: there is
> likely a need for technology-assisted community reporting and discussion
> after the crisismappers have left. That sounds awfully like gov2.0 to me.
> Similar types of setup, community and handover are needed for both
> crisismapping and gov2.0 in new states, and the technology-community
> dynamics are similar too.  And I've been wondering (as I do) whether it's
> possible and sensible, and in that case how, to use a similar volunteer
> structure to the SBTF's UN Volunteer community to help with transition
> between them.
>
> Note that this is not about putting in alternative government systems, but
> more about giving people a way to continue to report and be heard by each
> other after the crisismapping teams have left.
>
> So. Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Sara.
>
> On 03/17/2011 01:40 AM, Matt McNabb wrote:
>
> Might I suggest that we revisit the discourse on how we define crisis, to
> include the slow burn beyond the immediate need? That is to say,
> difficulties in Libya will be real and vast beyond the present flash in
> violence. What can we do as technically capable people, as humanitarians, to
> help 2 months from now, 6 months from now? How do we prepare for it, get it
> right, and enable the Libyan people to recover, stabilize, and rebuild anew?
> What are the big issues that will be there, and how can we be sure to we
> have the capacity, patience, and bandwidth to help?
>
> That is, at least, my focus now. And I would be very keen to engage with
> others onboard with addressing those challenges. We have the specialists in
> stabilization and the appropriate policy connectivity, but would value
> considerably a new and focused discourse across the technical community.
>
> Cheers
> Matt
>
>
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> ________________________________
> From: jerri husch <jerrihusch at gmail.com>
> Sender: crisismappers at googlegroups.com
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:28:57 -0400
> To: <crisismappers at googlegroups.com>
> ReplyTo: crisismappers at googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [CrisisMappers] Benghazi
> I think all Crisismappers can do now is to keep sending as much data and
> evidence of imminent violence to the press---to blogs, to the public at
> large, etc----as possible.  Overload them with the data.  Ask them to keep
> making the data visible to show that people know what is happening.
> It is clear from the international response that there will be no
> "intervention"----atleast not at the level of international governance
> organizations.  The UN apprears to be completely ineffectual, with weak
> chastisements.  It appears that there are far too many intricate politics at
> play----and this can continue to be debated as a "sovereign state" issue as
> it is internal conflict.
> It is a very, very tragic state of affairs-----and perhaps rather than
> fighting the "individual" national battles that we see along the various
> Arab States, perhaps there needs to be some kind of unifying message for
> people to respond to....so that the sense of isolation that this is a
> "different' issue in each country is not promoted.  This is about a new
> generation of people want to get out from the oppression of their (mostly)
> grandfathers, whose interests are focussed on maintaining their power and
> control---not about the wellbeing of their (ever growing, unemployed and
> mostly young and frustrated) populations....
> best, Jer
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Jen Ziemke <jen at crisismappers.net> wrote:
>>
>> I'm really worried about Benghazi, folks. Early reports are coming out
>> now that make something pretty awful look rather imminent. If anyone has any
>> ears to bend that might lead to shifts in governmental policy toward
>> actively protecting people on the ground, now would be the time. Anything we
>> can do?
>>
>> --
>> Jen Ziemke, Ph.D.
>> Co-Founder & Co-Director
>> http://www.CrisisMappers.net
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "CrisisMappers" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to crisismappers at googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> crisismappers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/crisismappers?hl=en.
>
>
>
> --
> Jerri Ann Husch, PhD
> 2Collaborate Consulting
> Washington, DC., Geneva
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CrisisMappers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to crisismappers at googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> crisismappers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/crisismappers?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CrisisMappers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to crisismappers at googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> crisismappers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/crisismappers?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CrisisMappers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to crisismappers at googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> crisismappers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/crisismappers?hl=en.
>