Seems that crowdsourcing has become a “third” pillar of the UN-led multi-stakeholder process, with Global Pulse apparently playing a pivotal role. A draft proposal has been prepared (it is here: http://undpegov.org/~raul/egov/post2015/CrowdsourcedPost-MDGideageneration-4.doc. Here are the initial comments that I shared with GP and UNMC, which were addressed to the communications officer of GP.
1. I think we all agree that crowdsourcing tools and analytics are necessary to capture the input of the various stakeholders.
2. I also like the three-layer approach presented in the note. One important thing to highlight within the discovery and feedback layers is what politicians, policymakers, legislators, etc., are officially saying on behalf of their countries and/or institutions on different fora, the UN included and on various topics.
3. I am aware that data analytics can gather all this info. Still, I also think it is essential to introduce this distinction as it can allow the production of not only a crowdsourced report but also additional issues, such as the gap between policymakers and stakeholders within a given country of the topic. This can undoubtedly enrich the official discussions, etc., as usually there is no single voice for any issue or country
4. As mentioned at the meeting, we also need to include here the 50 or so national post-2015 consultations that will take place in developing countries and the 9 global thematic conferences.
5. As I understand from you, Global Pulse does not have the data mining tools and analytics to do this at this very moment. Indeed, you confirmed that you are looking for partners in the private sector (IBM was mentioned) to secure this capacity. Let me know if we can help here.
6. Being that as it may, I am still trying to see the link between the first part of the note and the proposed workshop. Something seems to be missing in between. The note does say that GP has done similar stuff in the past. If that is the case, we should hear from you about the experiences, good practices, lessons learned, and failures and outfalls while doing this fascinating work. I am unsure if GP has any reports/presentations/ evaluations/ etc. on this. I would love to hear about this. Only after examining this evidence could we think about meetings or workshops to share experiences and address the challenges head-on.
I know you are busy, but ideally, we should have a follow-up meeting. I also hope you have had time to read the concept note on the platform.
Hope this helps.
Cheers, Raúl
