This morning I hosted an event for the Carter School Peace Engineering Lab featuring Angela Hanson and Piret Toñurist from the OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation. I’m looking forward to seeing how Peace Engineers can participate in ore anticipatory and futures work to help prevent conflicts and avoid negative unintended consequences.
You can watch the video and raw transcript and download the slides from the OPSI team below:
Below is the automatic transcription from Zoom and likely contains some errors. Hoping it can orient you to interested segments of the video!
00:00:08.370 –> 00:00:31.710
Keil L Eggers: So good morning everybody, welcome to another piece engineering lab events at the Carter school this morning we’re very fortunate to be joined by Angela Hansen and print the newest from the OECD Observatory public sector, innovation and really excited about this event, this morning because.
00:00:32.790 –> 00:00:41.850
Keil L Eggers: The think that piece engineering has a role to play and adapting some of these anticipatory approaches and dealing with.
00:00:42.540 –> 00:00:56.610
Keil L Eggers: uncertain futures and making sure that people in the public sector have the tools and the knowledge to kind of navigate these uncertain spaces and i’ve done some work with PSI in the past.
00:00:57.840 –> 00:00:59.520
Keil L Eggers: And it’s been a.
00:01:01.230 –> 00:01:05.700
Keil L Eggers: great help to me just in terms of my own development on understanding this area so.
00:01:06.780 –> 00:01:11.190
Keil L Eggers: very much looking forward to sharing that with all eat today.
00:01:12.540 –> 00:01:18.120
Keil L Eggers: So with that I will go ahead and hand it over to Angela gets kicked off here.
00:01:19.350 –> 00:01:20.130
Angela Hanson-OECD: Thank you kyle.
00:01:21.450 –> 00:01:22.920
Angela Hanson-OECD: So it’s kyle mentioned.
00:01:23.010 –> 00:01:29.250
Angela Hanson-OECD: My name is Angela Hansen i’m here with my colleague parrots Turner us as well hi Chris.
00:01:30.450 –> 00:01:32.730
Angela Hanson-OECD: We have our very official backgrounds going today.
00:01:33.840 –> 00:01:47.280
Angela Hanson-OECD: So I think what what we can do is give a little bit of an overview of of the anticipatory innovation governance project and then have a discussion with this group about kind of what it means for.
00:01:47.940 –> 00:02:08.070
Angela Hanson-OECD: This topic of peace engineering and I realized that not everybody here is very familiar with the OECD, the observatory or the program of anticipatory innovation governance so i’m going to give a little overview of that as a bit of a prompt for our discussion.
00:02:09.450 –> 00:02:10.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: So in.
00:02:11.820 –> 00:02:14.100
Angela Hanson-OECD: i’m going to share some slides here.
00:02:16.110 –> 00:02:20.610
Angela Hanson-OECD: And kyle jump in, and let me know if he if it doesn’t look right.
00:02:21.390 –> 00:02:23.670
Angela Hanson-OECD: But this is yeah okay.
00:02:26.520 –> 00:02:39.930
Angela Hanson-OECD: So just a little bit about the well, so the OECD is a group of 37 member countries that work on shared policy areas everything from.
00:02:40.680 –> 00:02:51.390
Angela Hanson-OECD: You know oceans and space and agriculture and economic policy, taxation things of that sort, but we also collaborate on governance topics.
00:02:52.140 –> 00:03:07.230
Angela Hanson-OECD: Primarily, we work with national governments, but we also do quite a bit of work with sub national governments as well because that’s where a lot of the lot of the action is, so to speak, when when we’re talking about innovation in the public sector.
00:03:08.310 –> 00:03:13.350
Angela Hanson-OECD: And we have three main mission areas in the Observatory.
00:03:14.370 –> 00:03:23.670
Angela Hanson-OECD: One of them is uncovering what’s next so we look at trends of how how different trends are emerging.
00:03:24.270 –> 00:03:40.170
Angela Hanson-OECD: Within governments how governments are responding to external shifts in their in their context and their operating environment and looking at specifically different technology topics and doing.
00:03:41.190 –> 00:03:52.710
Angela Hanson-OECD: Quick investigations on what are they how do they work, what does it mean for civil servants on a day to day basis, as well as decision makers at the kind of policy level.
00:03:53.400 –> 00:04:05.940
Angela Hanson-OECD: And this is kind of a way of having our our eye out to the horizon and picking up on some of the signals of things that might affect governments in a very big way on the horizon.
00:04:08.580 –> 00:04:20.760
Angela Hanson-OECD: And then another thing we do is turn the new into normal so once some of these practices and patterns are established in government, we also tried to normalize.
00:04:21.630 –> 00:04:38.640
Angela Hanson-OECD: Those practices as well, so normalizing how innovation is done, innovate normalizing how innovation is managed as a portfolio, increasing the the access and capabilities to different tools and methods these kinds of things.
00:04:39.990 –> 00:04:53.400
Angela Hanson-OECD: And then another thing we we’ve done in 20 2019 was we we had 40 plus countries sign on to this declaration on public sector innovation so they’re.
00:04:53.910 –> 00:05:05.880
Angela Hanson-OECD: agreeing to basically support innovation and agreed to certain shared principles so that was a kind of a high level normalization as well at the policy level.
00:05:08.310 –> 00:05:25.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: And then we also provide trusted advice to governments on specific topics, so this is where the the anticipatory innovation governance project fits in, but we also do country reviews and scans on different topics.
00:05:26.880 –> 00:05:41.370
Angela Hanson-OECD: So things like procurement will dive into that specific topic or do kind of system level analysis of, for instance, the innovation system of the public service of Brazil and Canada.
00:05:44.670 –> 00:05:51.270
Angela Hanson-OECD: These are the, this is the team that’s working on the anticipatory innovation governance project and then we’ve been pulling in.
00:05:51.930 –> 00:06:04.620
Angela Hanson-OECD: Additional resources, as well as we’ve ramped up the number of projects that we’re working on and i’ll tell you a little bit more about that, but it’s more than just pure at and I.
00:06:05.790 –> 00:06:11.010
Angela Hanson-OECD: we’ve got a full team of very, very smart people supporting this work.
00:06:14.220 –> 00:06:33.330
Angela Hanson-OECD: And for those of you who haven’t seen this yet and a couple of you have seen this model, this is our our model of the purposes of different public sector innovation so we call it our facets model, the reason why it’s called facets and not kind of it’s not a two by two.
00:06:34.530 –> 00:06:43.620
Angela Hanson-OECD: matrix like a lot of management consulting frameworks look like is because these are not meant to be mutually exclusive purposes.
00:06:44.580 –> 00:06:52.890
Angela Hanson-OECD: But rather difference, I mean a single project, for instance, can serve all of these different purposes at once.
00:06:53.610 –> 00:07:02.370
Angela Hanson-OECD: The point is to be more intentional, about which ones which pieces of a project or which structures and an organization are serving.
00:07:03.060 –> 00:07:16.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: Which purpose, so we have two dimensions to this model direct level of directness so very top down directed versus undirected or bottom up activity.
00:07:17.640 –> 00:07:29.910
Angela Hanson-OECD: And then on left to right as as the level of certainty so it’s about kind of exploiting or incremental activities versus more exploring activities so.
00:07:30.780 –> 00:07:45.600
Angela Hanson-OECD: We get for four different facets of innovation, and this is a model that we’ve used quite extensively in our work with different with different governments at the both at the national level and sub national level.
00:07:46.770 –> 00:08:02.310
Angela Hanson-OECD: You may have heard of the kind of mission oriented innovation So these are things like getting plastic fleet free oceans by 2030 or solving climate change or transitioning in energy.
00:08:03.390 –> 00:08:19.500
Angela Hanson-OECD: grid, for instance, this is kind of and all of the sustainable development goals are great examples of missions, and this is when usually top of government says, we need to get this done.
00:08:20.850 –> 00:08:25.980
Angela Hanson-OECD: No matter what let’s all reorient ourselves around this mission and figuring out.
00:08:27.390 –> 00:08:35.820
Angela Hanson-OECD: there’s enhancement oriented innovation, which is taking finding efficiencies in existing systems and trying to.
00:08:37.680 –> 00:08:38.220
Angela Hanson-OECD: either.
00:08:39.660 –> 00:08:47.190
Angela Hanson-OECD: find a new way of delivering the same service are the same value, but in a more kind of efficient manner.
00:08:48.060 –> 00:08:58.410
Angela Hanson-OECD: adaptive innovation is focused on changing the modes of action or the types of activities based on how the environment has shifted.
00:08:59.010 –> 00:09:10.650
Angela Hanson-OECD: we’re seeing a lot of this activity around Kobe response, right now, a lot of governments are having to deliver services and entirely new ways using new channels.
00:09:11.340 –> 00:09:36.030
Angela Hanson-OECD: to adapt to that changing reality and then anticipatory innovation, which is the subject today is is situated on the far right here, this is looking into kind of the unknown and more ambiguous shifts that we we see signals of or shifts that we can intentionally help shape.
00:09:37.980 –> 00:09:47.760
Angela Hanson-OECD: So these are things like what are the effects that climate change will eventually produce the effects of aging.
00:09:49.140 –> 00:09:50.910
Angela Hanson-OECD: The effects of migration.
00:09:51.930 –> 00:10:05.310
Angela Hanson-OECD: And what can governments do to kind of step into this space and play a more proactive role, so this is what we’ll be diving into today, but just to say that this is situated in an overall.
00:10:06.960 –> 00:10:18.480
Angela Hanson-OECD: kind of a overall framework of innovation and it’s different purposes and you can’t have just one of these something really important an important distinction is.
00:10:19.950 –> 00:10:20.910
Angela Hanson-OECD: A lot of times.
00:10:22.230 –> 00:10:33.120
Angela Hanson-OECD: Governments wants clear returns on investments and ways to evaluate the impact of these different activities, the things above the line here are quite.
00:10:34.050 –> 00:10:43.830
Angela Hanson-OECD: You know, easy to to measure, a lot of the work that happens in government is is enhancement oriented so it’s being measured on you know kpis and.
00:10:44.670 –> 00:10:53.670
Angela Hanson-OECD: Tax dollars saved and things like this missions, of course, you know something like you know getting someone to the moon you either did or you didn’t.
00:10:54.900 –> 00:11:00.450
Angela Hanson-OECD: So its measured, based on the objective, whether it was achieved things like.
00:11:01.470 –> 00:11:14.130
Angela Hanson-OECD: adaptive and anticipatory are much, much more difficult to to measure that return and we’ll get into the nuances of what that means.
00:11:16.800 –> 00:11:27.780
Angela Hanson-OECD: So kind of activating question of each of these different purposes is for mission oriented is how might we achieve X for enhancement, is how might we do X better.
00:11:28.590 –> 00:11:41.220
Angela Hanson-OECD: For adaptive how might our evolve situation change how we do X and for anticipatory how might emerging possibilities fundamentally change what X could or should be.
00:11:44.670 –> 00:11:56.010
Angela Hanson-OECD: There are some different strengths these different facets, so I talked a little bit about about that, but there’s also some weaknesses so it’s also.
00:11:56.790 –> 00:12:04.740
Angela Hanson-OECD: challenge of over investing heavily in these areas as well, so you can get, for instance with missions.
00:12:05.340 –> 00:12:14.190
Angela Hanson-OECD: You can get locked in for the next 10 years into into the wrong mission, while the context around changes, for example.
00:12:14.970 –> 00:12:29.340
Angela Hanson-OECD: And for anticipatory it’s, this is a challenge that we see a lot and we’re trying to to navigate this is how do you do anticipatory work without losing sight of the immediate.
00:12:30.660 –> 00:12:48.030
Angela Hanson-OECD: Because there are always crises and things that are needed desperately by citizens and now, and so, how does a public official justify and have the legitimacy to to also operate in this area of ambiguity.
00:12:51.690 –> 00:13:04.740
Angela Hanson-OECD: Something that is has been a focus of my work is on tools and methods and there’s through the work of built this kind of understanding that certain tools have their own.
00:13:05.250 –> 00:13:17.940
Angela Hanson-OECD: Logic built in, so if an organization heavily invest in a specific tool or method, it will they will more likely result in certain kinds of.
00:13:19.200 –> 00:13:41.670
Angela Hanson-OECD: Innovation so, for instance, if an organization heavily invest in lean business process improvement service design behavioral insights they’re likely to get a lot of enhancement oriented innovation or that’s how those tools and methods have been used typically.
00:13:42.720 –> 00:13:45.030
Angela Hanson-OECD: And so, this is just to say that.
00:13:46.530 –> 00:13:55.140
Angela Hanson-OECD: The the working methods that governments spend their time on tend to also influence what they get out of it.
00:13:57.420 –> 00:14:11.370
Angela Hanson-OECD: If you want, this is a little promo for a tool that we have on our our site it’s a toolkit navigator so it includes some kind of features and foresight and anticipatory tools as well, but also.
00:14:12.300 –> 00:14:27.810
Angela Hanson-OECD: Hundreds of other toolkits based on the the topic of interest or a specific action that someone wants to take to either solve a problem design a new strategy, etc, so this is a free, a free resource on the.
00:14:30.270 –> 00:14:33.120
Angela Hanson-OECD: Excuse me, the OECD website, the Odyssey website.
00:14:36.030 –> 00:14:43.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: So something we’re exploring currently specifically related to these tools are what are the jobs to be done.
00:14:44.940 –> 00:14:57.000
Angela Hanson-OECD: Through the anticipatory innovation tool, so what needs to happen, and this is kind of a working model for how we’re thinking about different tool pathways.
00:14:57.570 –> 00:15:13.410
Angela Hanson-OECD: So there’s a need to understand kind of what’s happening having that contextual awareness and perceiving what what is going on, detecting, for instance those weak signals there’s a why it matters.
00:15:14.850 –> 00:15:23.550
Angela Hanson-OECD: and making sense of Okay, so what what does this all mean what are the patterns what what Could this mean for our values.
00:15:25.800 –> 00:15:38.520
Angela Hanson-OECD: it’s looking into the question of what we could do differently so bit of reframing of what is currently understood as the problem and defining a different approach to it.
00:15:39.690 –> 00:15:51.090
Angela Hanson-OECD: And then there’s a component of what we can do so, what is the kind of instrumental capacity, and how are we going to act.
00:15:51.690 –> 00:16:03.270
Angela Hanson-OECD: Based on this information, and what we think it means so different tools different methods are all in the anticipatory space serve these different.
00:16:03.870 –> 00:16:17.610
Angela Hanson-OECD: Jobs they’re all you know distinct but also inter interrelated so we’re trying to identify identify those in which pathways that public sector officials, really, really need the most.
00:16:20.760 –> 00:16:39.810
Angela Hanson-OECD: And, of course, this is something that I like to point out, specifically with tools and methods and at the OECD, there is a strong tendency to try to find best practices that work across contexts that have a high level of certainty that are transferable.
00:16:40.920 –> 00:16:59.610
Angela Hanson-OECD: And this is of course what we would all like in a perfect world, but as you, as we know, things change, we are dealing with complexity and uncertainty and sometimes those practices, need to be well they are emergent or novel.
00:17:00.840 –> 00:17:21.210
Angela Hanson-OECD: Where there’s high level of this ambiguity, the approach needs to be very bespoke and it’s very context dependent so we’re working a bit in this space in the anticipatory work but trying to find some repeatable patterns that are.
00:17:22.800 –> 00:17:27.240
Angela Hanson-OECD: At least principles, maybe that are helpful across different contexts.
00:17:30.270 –> 00:17:34.950
Angela Hanson-OECD: And then just another part of our work is working on a portfolio.
00:17:36.030 –> 00:17:54.540
Angela Hanson-OECD: portfolio management approaches, so we look at, not only from a project in an activity perspective, but also a support structure perspective and look at where governments are investing their time and energy and asking is that, where you want to be.
00:17:55.590 –> 00:18:00.660
Angela Hanson-OECD: Because it’s while anticipatory innovation is something that is.
00:18:01.860 –> 00:18:09.030
Angela Hanson-OECD: It it’s under under invested in across basically every every context we encounter.
00:18:10.440 –> 00:18:28.950
Angela Hanson-OECD: anticipatory is is under under resourced, but it doesn’t mean it’s it’s, the only thing and it’s all everybody should do from from here forward, so this is a work we do alongside anticipatory work is to understand what’s the whole portfolio.
00:18:31.740 –> 00:18:41.580
Angela Hanson-OECD: i’m going to hand it over to my colleague Perez to go into some of the specifics of the anticipatory innovation governance project.
00:18:42.660 –> 00:18:43.530
Angela Hanson-OECD: Over to you correct.
00:18:44.970 –> 00:18:59.790
Piret T?nurist: Thank you, Angela i’ll keep my video off because i’ve been struggling with connectivity issues at the moment, but hopefully you can hear me, or at least signal or jump in if there’s any problem in kind of hearing the.
00:19:01.170 –> 00:19:02.640
Piret T?nurist: hearing what i’m talking about.
00:19:03.660 –> 00:19:21.060
Piret T?nurist: So why did we go into this kind of anticipatory innovation space very strongly in its entirety because Angela has been talking about the portfolio approach and different strategic approaches to innovation and innovation management in the public sector, but we really saw that.
00:19:22.110 –> 00:19:31.500
Piret T?nurist: kind of anticipatory space was under developed in governments in its entirety, so we have a lot of enhancement oriented innovation activity.
00:19:32.160 –> 00:19:46.500
Piret T?nurist: We have some kind of emergence basis for adaptive inhalation to emerge in public sector and kind of political forces behind also mission oriented innovation, but the specifically.
00:19:47.550 –> 00:19:58.290
Piret T?nurist: anticipatory space was the weakest in terms of methods approaches covered for governments and they also saw the most urgent need structurally.
00:19:59.040 –> 00:20:10.320
Piret T?nurist: Because of the kind of the changes paradigm shift value shifts on the kind of the transformation that is upcoming we saw a huge need to actually deal with this issue as urgent as possible.
00:20:11.010 –> 00:20:18.570
Piret T?nurist: So two and a half, three years ago, already we started to think about these topics and also build up an hour program and.
00:20:19.530 –> 00:20:30.090
Piret T?nurist: disappear innovation governance and the really, the idea is to go from perceiving the future or thinking about the future in shaping the future and what we see.
00:20:31.050 –> 00:20:47.730
Piret T?nurist: happening currently in governments as well is none the there’s an impact gap from kind of foresight and futures activities into actually policy processes implementation experimentation.
00:20:48.420 –> 00:21:00.300
Piret T?nurist: and strategic thinking on the ground so government some governments have developed quite good foresight capacities that translating to risk assessment.
00:21:01.170 –> 00:21:13.140
Piret T?nurist: and inform risk assessment, but what we have learned, especially through the corporate crisis, as well as that doesn’t really mean that governments are shaping or taking this information into strategic action.
00:21:13.680 –> 00:21:21.120
Piret T?nurist: That the its information is using to innovative capabilities of capacities in government at all so.
00:21:22.020 –> 00:21:37.890
Piret T?nurist: Currently in different governments different capabilities already exists, but the really the value chain, from an anticipatory thinking or future and foresight thinking through strategic choices and from then on, also.
00:21:38.880 –> 00:21:53.400
Piret T?nurist: through innovation and innovation practice and experimentation and the feedback loop back doesn’t really seem to exist in a kind of structured and systemic manner, and this is something that we want to really address with the work that we do.
00:21:54.780 –> 00:22:01.410
Piret T?nurist: and doing that anticipation, the submitter innovation and anticipatory innovation governance.
00:22:02.340 –> 00:22:17.370
Piret T?nurist: The real core concept that we’re working with our are connected to creating more knowledge about the future from existing contextual factors on the line values worldviews what is upcoming and really the kind of the thinking and.
00:22:18.480 –> 00:22:29.460
Piret T?nurist: reception and features thinking in place, but not only for just having reports about scenarios of 2015 or 2035 or so forth.
00:22:30.030 –> 00:22:38.610
Piret T?nurist: But really also having the action link so having anticipatory innovation practices in place acting upon that knowledge already today.
00:22:39.120 –> 00:22:55.890
Piret T?nurist: Actually, shaped those processes, not to kind of be in a wait and see end of the pipe solution kind of a policy making process, but actually shaping by exploring and giving signals that some of these upcoming topics are important for us and we actually need.
00:22:57.000 –> 00:23:03.240
Piret T?nurist: kind of an anticipatory innovation governance system to support that that in terms of social structures and mechanisms that.
00:23:04.140 –> 00:23:07.740
Piret T?nurist: make that happen because it currently doesn’t happen governments as such.
00:23:08.280 –> 00:23:18.480
Piret T?nurist: And why does it happen in governments is because of the innovators dilemma or that is known for big corporations or public and private sector, cooperation is as well as that.
00:23:19.170 –> 00:23:28.170
Piret T?nurist: it’s actually very difficult to look at parodic magically different ideas or proposed transformative in other innovations.
00:23:28.890 –> 00:23:40.290
Piret T?nurist: In established organizations and established structures, because you have you know most of your activities are already closed strategically committed your budgets are committed.
00:23:40.800 –> 00:23:55.170
Piret T?nurist: So in our kind of board meetings or higher leadership meetings your current status quo and of tactical responses and issues get invariably more attention than any kind of anticipatory action.
00:23:56.010 –> 00:24:03.810
Piret T?nurist: Also there is kind of issues with kind of current stakeholder needs and user feedback as such as well because.
00:24:04.410 –> 00:24:19.800
Piret T?nurist: Your current users may not actually relate to new, innovative ideas services or types of activities or approaches to actually have to deal with the kind of lead users or users that actually don’t exist for new types of solutions.
00:24:20.250 –> 00:24:36.960
Piret T?nurist: So how do you have that dialogue or feedback system where your current connections networks may actually give you the wrong information about what is what will work in the future, and of course this resistance to change within the kind of a topical issue in place everywhere.
00:24:38.130 –> 00:24:49.530
Piret T?nurist: And, especially when we think about technology, then also have the issue of kind of a double blind situation for governments and we talk about the Coleman crutches dilemma.
00:24:49.980 –> 00:25:05.250
Piret T?nurist: In a sense that the evidence dilemma as well that in especially of technological issues and also some of the social economic developments, the possibility of control or during areas of prevention or early.
00:25:07.050 –> 00:25:19.470
Piret T?nurist: Intervention into debt and logical development or other development is higher, have the possibility to act and control something or not something is much higher in the beginning of the face of the development.
00:25:20.310 –> 00:25:32.670
Piret T?nurist: But at the same time, the evidence of impact or possible impacts of roads of impacts is also much, much smaller and while you have evidence later on in the process.
00:25:33.630 –> 00:25:42.030
Piret T?nurist: You it’s almost impossible to then put cats in the back of the bag or always proven to be technologically possible stats to also.
00:25:42.630 –> 00:25:48.270
Piret T?nurist: Impact kind of social economic adoption different technologies and also different processes.
00:25:48.780 –> 00:25:58.680
Piret T?nurist: So you always have to act or when you have the possibility to act, you will not actually have the evidence needed to backup those actions.
00:25:59.100 –> 00:26:05.040
Piret T?nurist: And yet, you still have to do something if you are we don’t want to be in a spectator sport of doing nothing.
00:26:05.700 –> 00:26:13.560
Piret T?nurist: So that is the kind of the position governments in and that’s why you actually need a radical experimentation pro process or experimental governance versus.
00:26:13.980 –> 00:26:18.810
Piret T?nurist: accompanying are being really a core part of anticipatory innovation governance.
00:26:19.410 –> 00:26:36.600
Piret T?nurist: Because you have to create evidence on the go and make decisions based on that dynamically rather than doing a waterfall process of meeting early with no information into strategic teams that potentially may not pan out in reality.
00:26:37.920 –> 00:26:48.330
Piret T?nurist: And all of this we look at the model of having agency and having gotten authorizing environment so in governments that we work together with in Finland and elsewhere.
00:26:48.810 –> 00:27:00.360
Piret T?nurist: We look at the ability to take up anticipatory innovation, how do you do alternative explanation which institutional structures support your ability to add.
00:27:00.750 –> 00:27:12.480
Piret T?nurist: What kind of organizational capacity, you have data measurement issues we’re working with tools and methods or even how your sense, making this structured to meeting those alternate explorations and experimentation.
00:27:13.140 –> 00:27:21.480
Piret T?nurist: And the only other hand, we really are interested in feedback system or actually what says that what you’re doing this relative and all is.
00:27:22.740 –> 00:27:31.920
Piret T?nurist: Important and taken seriously, so what kind of evidence evaluation learning loops legitimacy processes, you have in place, but also very importantly.
00:27:32.220 –> 00:27:38.580
Piret T?nurist: What, how do you actually control vested interest interest and cognitive biases in your system that feedback.
00:27:39.330 –> 00:27:57.450
Piret T?nurist: Or is pro status go pro linear thinking and some of these aspects and how you also deal with them involve public interest in participation, which is a very difficult topic in the in the public sector, because if you are actually talking about basic magic changes.
00:27:58.620 –> 00:28:11.400
Piret T?nurist: Would you also have very negative scenarios which are very motivating to start acting but which play out very badly in media, so how civil servants are public servants are actually allowed to kind of have.
00:28:12.390 –> 00:28:23.880
Piret T?nurist: Wild card testing that may be challenging to current strategic games and there was a lot of actually fear from media and and public interest to actually deal with these issues.
00:28:25.380 –> 00:28:38.010
Piret T?nurist: And how do we know what is working and what is not working, because a lot of these issues, actually exist, also in in private sector so in terms of big organizations and dealing with issues, we are not.
00:28:39.240 –> 00:28:46.650
Piret T?nurist: Having a magic solution, so we have an actually an action oriented research program around the world, with different cases.
00:28:47.280 –> 00:29:00.660
Piret T?nurist: Where we are trying to capture this practice by participating in creating those mechanisms and actually also involving or being part of anticipatory innovation processes, so we are looking at.
00:29:02.100 –> 00:29:09.810
Piret T?nurist: various topics from disappear story greenhouses and Sweden or radical experimentation, we are looking at the building.
00:29:10.830 –> 00:29:28.080
Piret T?nurist: Technology ecosystems and how to govern that with inside and outside government partners in that fear we are looking at out to align missions with anticipation and tools and methods connected to that in Norway and huge project, since in.
00:29:29.220 –> 00:29:40.200
Piret T?nurist: Finland, Slovenia and elsewhere around the kind of Ireland around the kind of the mechanisms of how to actually build those kind of value change within government and make them work in practice.
00:29:41.490 –> 00:29:51.870
Piret T?nurist: So going forwards are added activities really our method is active research but also convenient peer led learning networks that can.
00:29:52.170 –> 00:30:01.110
Piret T?nurist: Also on the go learn what works and what doesn’t work and what the contextual factors putting it to our and also disseminate those findings and.
00:30:01.650 –> 00:30:10.980
Piret T?nurist: learnings already, and what we have done so far is that we also have a policy brief and longer kind of initial working paper open these topics, so if you want to.
00:30:11.610 –> 00:30:23.550
Piret T?nurist: learn more about this than will also share the files slides afterwards as I can read more on the kind of short brief for police officers, but also longer prefer more.
00:30:24.540 –> 00:30:30.270
Piret T?nurist: dynamic and research oriented questions, and I think that the question for the today and for the betas.
00:30:30.780 –> 00:30:40.350
Piret T?nurist: What is the connection between the occipital for innovation, governance and peace engineering, I think that the kind of links are definitely there because of.
00:30:41.160 –> 00:30:52.980
Piret T?nurist: Ethical use of emerging technologies political implement implicate implications kind of systemically analyzing the changing values mapping ecosystems connected to that and.
00:30:53.610 –> 00:31:08.850
Piret T?nurist: Also, about their implications for building kind of peace and resolving conflicts and also the prevention aspects to that what may require to also have a kind of an anticipatory and anticipatory innovation approach in place to actually work in practice.
00:31:09.930 –> 00:31:15.330
Piret T?nurist: So that’s all from me and happy to have a discussion on the topic.
00:31:18.750 –> 00:31:20.790
Keil L Eggers: yeah thanks so much Angela.
00:31:22.530 –> 00:31:28.740
Keil L Eggers: Fantastic overview and looks like interior walls are really coming along to it’s been fun to see how.
00:31:30.360 –> 00:31:39.570
Keil L Eggers: The you’ve been adding to it, like some of the weaknesses of the approaches and the other things like that I think are really useful to get a grip on that.
00:31:41.730 –> 00:31:48.570
Keil L Eggers: So for anybody in attendance, I know that we’ve had a couple questions kind of come up in the chat so.
00:31:50.280 –> 00:32:05.370
Keil L Eggers: In asked business second and if you have any other questions that you want to put in the chat or you want to raise your hand feel free to do so and we’ll kind of open it up here for discussion because we’re Response Group.
00:32:07.350 –> 00:32:09.960
Keil L Eggers: But one of the things that I was really thinking about.
00:32:11.070 –> 00:32:13.320
Keil L Eggers: As you were speaking, is that.
00:32:14.460 –> 00:32:20.250
Keil L Eggers: One of the kind of common conversations that comes up a lot within the piece engineering space is how.
00:32:24.990 –> 00:32:29.160
Keil L Eggers: How engineers are lacking a little bit of that.
00:32:31.650 –> 00:32:40.080
Keil L Eggers: insight into how engineering projects like infrastructure or post conflict reconstruction or putting in.
00:32:42.000 –> 00:32:56.760
Keil L Eggers: You know, helping build local capacity and international building context, out of that can really affect, or have an impact on the development of conflicts and really that you know it’s us into a pretty.
00:32:59.250 –> 00:33:11.100
Keil L Eggers: Well, complex domain where we’re not really sure of some of that and so some of these tools of how to better map the environments we’re use that technology to.
00:33:11.580 –> 00:33:22.230
Keil L Eggers: You know, build those relationships with communities and kind of get a better sense of what’s happening that there are massive unintended consequences that.
00:33:23.490 –> 00:33:30.150
Keil L Eggers: You know, actually make the interventions of the engineers worse off.
00:33:31.530 –> 00:33:33.000
Keil L Eggers: So I think that’s.
00:33:34.080 –> 00:33:50.040
Keil L Eggers: One pretty clear connection that I see in all of this, and the way that you articulated the Agency and authorizing environment I think it’s definitely something that i’d like to engage with a little bit more as we’re thinking about.
00:33:51.510 –> 00:33:54.930
Keil L Eggers: How we’re talking about some of the experiments are going on at the piece of Chang lab.
00:34:02.280 –> 00:34:11.010
Keil L Eggers: And I guess just another conflict related question which this can be a little bit of a softball maybe for you.
00:34:12.180 –> 00:34:20.730
Keil L Eggers: But when you’re trying to get more focused on anticipation, what are some of the common conflicts that come up.
00:34:21.990 –> 00:34:34.530
Keil L Eggers: Within governments or a name mentioned between the media and the government, so what are some of those common challenges that that occur and what, how do you advise people to navigate those.
00:34:36.510 –> 00:34:42.180
Angela Hanson-OECD: yeah I can think of one of them and we’re trying to trying to understand how.
00:34:43.980 –> 00:34:46.920
Angela Hanson-OECD: How to resolve this particularly in democracies.
00:34:48.060 –> 00:35:01.530
Angela Hanson-OECD: But the first one that comes to my mind, and I know that period, probably has a couple of other that bubbled to the top with our work, so far, but one of one of them is around that legitimacy and having.
00:35:02.640 –> 00:35:14.730
Angela Hanson-OECD: You know oftentimes these decisions have to be made it a very political level, so when we’re talking about what should happen that that word should is often in the domain of.
00:35:15.960 –> 00:35:23.850
Angela Hanson-OECD: Politicians not civil servants, we often work with both but primarily with with civil servants.
00:35:25.200 –> 00:35:48.390
Angela Hanson-OECD: who also have to engage with with the political side and kind of advise them on what they should be looking out for but ultimately when when kind of those top level decisions need to be made there, often political and political cycles are short term so for five years, generally and.
00:35:49.530 –> 00:35:58.260
Angela Hanson-OECD: And of course there’s a political calculus to making any decision if results are not likely to be seen within that four to five year time frame.
00:35:59.010 –> 00:36:15.720
Angela Hanson-OECD: And of course there’s also a bias against action because anything that you do to shape a to shape a system that prevents a crisis from happening there’s something No politician will ever get credit for.
00:36:17.220 –> 00:36:23.820
Angela Hanson-OECD: But if you resolve something that’s already a problem you get to look like a hero, and you get reelected.
00:36:24.660 –> 00:36:44.160
Angela Hanson-OECD: which is more in that reactive and adaptive space or sometimes in the mission space, if you get out ahead of some of these some of these changes and things that are you know evident as problems, but you know the opportunity to act in a way that’s the lowest.
00:36:46.530 –> 00:37:02.220
Angela Hanson-OECD: The lowest cost and the ability to have the most impact is very early on, but that’s often not when politicians have the political legitimacy to act we’re seeing this This is like.
00:37:03.330 –> 00:37:10.020
Angela Hanson-OECD: I know that kyle’s familiar with the work in the in the Basque Country and give us go up in in northern Spain.
00:37:10.890 –> 00:37:21.480
Angela Hanson-OECD: You know they have a legacy of doing everything together a very consensus based system, but they also have this initiative about looking to the future.
00:37:21.960 –> 00:37:34.620
Angela Hanson-OECD: And when those problems are not evident and felt by everyone on the ground and there’s no active conflict, but maybe there’s a signal of future conflict.
00:37:35.700 –> 00:37:40.560
Angela Hanson-OECD: Do they have the legitimacy to take bold actions.
00:37:41.760 –> 00:37:44.250
Angela Hanson-OECD: In a democracy, when we see.
00:37:45.660 –> 00:37:53.190
Angela Hanson-OECD: Maybe examples elsewhere of of kind of acting toward the future where they you know you don’t have this pesky problem of democracy.
00:37:54.090 –> 00:38:10.080
Angela Hanson-OECD: But in democratic systems, you need to balance that out and find that legitimacy somewhere so that’s a big challenge that that comes to the front of my mind I don’t know if you have some others that come rise to the top as well.
00:38:19.680 –> 00:38:20.400
Piret T?nurist: yeah.
00:38:22.590 –> 00:38:23.250
Piret T?nurist: He.
00:38:24.600 –> 00:38:36.180
Piret T?nurist: Doing validation sessions well and you’ve actually proper problems connected practicing the stratosphere of nine to 10 the medic sessions around this topic delicious.
00:38:37.350 –> 00:38:38.580
Piret T?nurist: I think it also sounds quite a.
00:38:38.580 –> 00:38:43.860
Piret T?nurist: lot with like the silo issues in governments in general, the fact that the.
00:38:44.940 –> 00:38:56.040
Piret T?nurist: kind of foresight risk assessment innovation strategic planning are not actually something that happen, are very well connected and we will also organized.
00:38:56.430 –> 00:39:09.540
Piret T?nurist: In governments in its entirety so everything becomes extremely kind of clustered and not so well coordinated and, of course, in different countries as well, what we see is that.
00:39:10.260 –> 00:39:20.550
Piret T?nurist: We see assume that some of these kind of core functions in government that actually exists, but that assumption has proven also wrong in terms of.
00:39:21.360 –> 00:39:30.630
Piret T?nurist: The number of times that we have actually found that governments are not actually very good at strategic planning at all they’re good at planning, but not that strategic thinking.
00:39:31.200 –> 00:39:37.620
Piret T?nurist: And that’s why they are also very bad at sense, making or thinking about the future, because they haven’t really seen the need for that.
00:39:38.670 –> 00:39:45.990
Piret T?nurist: it’s yeah it’s quite that it’s been quite challenging connected to that, but what you especially said as well, then.
00:39:46.860 –> 00:39:55.650
Piret T?nurist: grinding those windows of opportunity really taking into account political cycles, where they actually demand for this type of work emergence.
00:39:56.310 –> 00:40:06.390
Piret T?nurist: That we are not doing now kind of systems and line to that at the moment, so we need to also do a lot of aligning action and then of course there’s a lot of kind of on the brand.
00:40:07.200 –> 00:40:18.150
Piret T?nurist: supply of anticipatory innovation governance, as well as the work on methods tools that are just a little bit foreign governments that they need to also have helped connected to that.
00:40:18.660 –> 00:40:32.280
Piret T?nurist: But this kind of supply of this type of information also has to land somewhere like you have to have a kind of a fertile soil that that takes up on these initiatives, so we tried to also work on both sides.
00:40:35.730 –> 00:40:36.270
Piret T?nurist: The.
00:40:36.630 –> 00:40:39.930
Angela Hanson-OECD: Speaking of the and I know there’s a couple of questions that are coming up.
00:40:41.160 –> 00:41:08.670
Angela Hanson-OECD: i’m waiting for some agency or government that is not working in Defense that is doing this work, because actually we do see like Defense department’s doing anticipatory innovation it’s just that, where can we find legitimacy if it’s not from kind of existential threats as.
00:41:10.050 –> 00:41:23.910
Angela Hanson-OECD: we’re looking for examples of that so I I just think it’s an interesting angle, given the the peace engineering work that you’re doing so I hope we can find some of those areas together.
00:41:25.080 –> 00:41:28.530
Keil L Eggers: yeah i’m sure we can get some other existential threats to get.
00:41:30.840 –> 00:41:36.330
Keil L Eggers: To make it happen all right, I think we have a next question from Jackie.
00:41:38.580 –> 00:41:47.070
Jackie Counts: yeah that’s Angela kind of my question and i’m thinking about the relief dollars that are coming down and.
00:41:47.640 –> 00:41:58.230
Jackie Counts: it’s really going to be buckets of money, and so, how do we really use this opportunity and to reserve a portion of that for.
00:41:58.920 –> 00:42:23.640
Jackie Counts: anticipatory and because it is coming down and it’s so vast there isn’t going to be the scarcity mindset for a window of opportunity, and so I curious if you’re working with any other and government to are thinking about how we could reserve and be intentional and.
00:42:24.810 –> 00:42:33.690
Jackie Counts: actually have a meeting on Friday and i’m talking about how we can like use the facets of innovation, how we can use some of the futures horizons for.
00:42:34.560 –> 00:42:46.830
Jackie Counts: How we can use some of trans formative innovation to be intentional and not just do all immediate responses that are just going to turn the dial up a little bit.
00:42:49.140 –> 00:42:49.560
Angela Hanson-OECD: I mean the.
00:42:49.620 –> 00:42:51.690
Angela Hanson-OECD: Relief funding from.
00:42:52.890 –> 00:42:57.240
Angela Hanson-OECD: That was just announced from federal level that’s what you’re talking about.
00:42:58.080 –> 00:43:11.100
Jackie Counts: yeah and I just think you know there’s going to be that’s going to be a common thing across the world and are we just going to rebuild the broken systems we have and.
00:43:13.050 –> 00:43:23.520
Jackie Counts: Or we, how can we collectively use the language and start building some of these like innovation labs and different systems.
00:43:24.420 –> 00:43:37.080
Jackie Counts: and have that be, I mean like one of the things I look at on the Agency slide that you have the authorizing an agency is, if you get the mindset of some of your politicians and people.
00:43:39.330 –> 00:43:48.360
Jackie Counts: On board for this there aren’t the structures to do it because that’s not the way money flows and competition is not reserved for.
00:43:50.490 –> 00:43:51.270
Jackie Counts: So.
00:43:52.620 –> 00:43:54.930
Jackie Counts: How do we start turning the ship.
00:43:57.600 –> 00:43:59.670
Angela Hanson-OECD: And Oh, this is something that also the.
00:44:01.440 –> 00:44:10.350
Angela Hanson-OECD: European Commission is starting to think about you know in they are big basically similar to the US Federal Government a big grant making.
00:44:11.400 –> 00:44:26.790
Angela Hanson-OECD: organization, but the way that those funds are given and the kind of the strings attached to those can really help shape what gets invested in so they’re also thinking during this recovery of how do you incentivize.
00:44:28.020 –> 00:44:41.850
Angela Hanson-OECD: These anticipatory capacities is alongside the actual recovery so basically how you keep poking at recovery like response recovery and anticipation, at the same time.
00:44:42.480 –> 00:44:54.960
Angela Hanson-OECD: Because a lot of the political attention is going to, of course, be on you know, did the did the money gets spent did where the problem solved by the next by the end of the political cycle.
00:44:56.310 –> 00:44:57.150
Angela Hanson-OECD: And, of course.
00:44:58.740 –> 00:45:01.860
Angela Hanson-OECD: Anything going into the exploratory area.
00:45:02.940 –> 00:45:09.450
Angela Hanson-OECD: That that yields not so tangible results when people are still suffering and feeling real needs.
00:45:10.530 –> 00:45:12.990
Angela Hanson-OECD: are often frame does wasteful spending.
00:45:14.100 –> 00:45:16.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: So there’s there’s a real risk there.
00:45:19.230 –> 00:45:33.660
Angela Hanson-OECD: And i’m trying to think of some examples of where this has already been done well, but I think, given the least in the pandemic response it’s yet to be seen, but I think those.
00:45:35.490 –> 00:45:44.490
Angela Hanson-OECD: Building some of those capabilities that are tied into the response systems so building alongside the response systems ways of learning.
00:45:46.140 –> 00:45:53.520
Angela Hanson-OECD: That are not just kind of sequestered away in a special unit that can easily be shut down.
00:45:55.650 –> 00:46:00.780
Angela Hanson-OECD: According to kind of political winds, but really integrating that thinking.
00:46:02.670 –> 00:46:13.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: As a core business so that’s another challenge that we see is oftentimes these foresight and anticipation units are they serve specific purpose for a certain length of time.
00:46:14.460 –> 00:46:27.270
Angela Hanson-OECD: or they’re doing really wild stuff off in a corner and it’s easy to kind of forget about the learnings, especially when there’s active, you know, recovery and tangible needs felt elsewhere.
00:46:29.520 –> 00:46:33.510
Angela Hanson-OECD: Any other any thoughts on on jackie’s question period.
00:46:34.650 –> 00:46:38.070
Angela Hanson-OECD: Maybe some examples that come to mind from.
00:46:39.600 –> 00:46:40.800
Angela Hanson-OECD: From the cases so far.
00:46:41.460 –> 00:46:57.060
Piret T?nurist: No, I think you covered it well, one of the areas where there’s highest legitimacy, of course, for this work is the area of Defense but especially towards the kind of scenario processes and investment, then.
00:46:58.320 –> 00:47:05.070
Piret T?nurist: It kind of traditional Defense technology and areas because they’re highly legitimising factors.
00:47:05.610 –> 00:47:14.730
Piret T?nurist: So, internal security and Defense is where we have seen kind of practices not both form systems, but practices in this area.
00:47:15.420 –> 00:47:33.000
Piret T?nurist: But they also don’t get the very well reported out on to to Of course I kind of secrecy connected to those that have relevance there and they are very specific to the context as well, and the kind of feedback system is very easy to understand, in terms of.
00:47:34.320 –> 00:47:40.770
Piret T?nurist: International threats and also kind of saving lives logic which is very, very, very.
00:47:42.390 –> 00:47:46.290
Piret T?nurist: kind of speaks volumes, as is very limited legitimizing in certain circles.
00:47:55.260 –> 00:47:57.990
Keil L Eggers: you’re a stick, we got another question from Paul.
00:47:59.700 –> 00:48:00.240
00:48:02.100 –> 00:48:12.120
Paul Ader: yeah hi thanks kyle it’s not so much a question, but just I wanted to reflect on and take forward some of the points that have been mentioned so far.
00:48:14.100 –> 00:48:28.950
Paul Ader: So there’s lots of things that have been said by Angela and appear at that resonate with me something correct said was that you need to have fertile soil for some of these anticipatory methods.
00:48:29.400 –> 00:48:30.420
Paul Ader: And I.
00:48:30.930 –> 00:48:35.430
Paul Ader: absolutely agree with that and that, for me, is probably one of the must haves.
00:48:37.620 –> 00:48:47.250
Paul Ader: it’s it links to the comments are presented during the presentation about what I refer to as the distinction between supply Bush and demand pool.
00:48:47.850 –> 00:48:51.840
Paul Ader: Supply pushes were as you were saying all this foresight work going on.
00:48:52.230 –> 00:48:59.490
Paul Ader: Maybe got even on the corner, maybe not people mainstream that they’re doing stuff that they know is important or think is important and then you’ve got all the.
00:48:59.790 –> 00:49:14.730
Paul Ader: policymakers and the leads sitting over there, getting on with their day to day work and the two are the impact gap there’s just the two aren’t connected, so it felt feels to me like it’s almost as if one needs to have.
00:49:16.350 –> 00:49:24.150
Paul Ader: As part of this reconstruction that we we say we need to go through whether actually we do need to get through it, I don’t know.
00:49:25.080 –> 00:49:39.990
Paul Ader: Because the world is is a strange place, but what we almost need is we need everyone to have the requirement in their day to day jobs to have like three emmys to say half a day of innovation.
00:49:41.010 –> 00:49:53.910
Paul Ader: Here, what we need is half a day to think outside their box to do to look what’s available in your toolkit toolkits to try them on to take to pull them into their work.
00:49:54.630 –> 00:50:08.910
Paul Ader: And so, somehow we’ve got to enable people need enabling constraints in terms that that allow people to take some of these ideas and try them on in smaller bits.
00:50:09.420 –> 00:50:22.170
Paul Ader: There is the sense, a lot of this conversation i’m hearing that anticipated governance is the big thing and it needs to happen as a thing i’m not sure I think actually smaller.
00:50:23.190 –> 00:50:33.210
Paul Ader: little bits are all we can do, because in the complex world, and I think a lot of despair, the government is in the complex well you can’t do big things not only.
00:50:34.500 –> 00:50:42.030
Paul Ader: I mean it’s just the the uncertainty, the the the energy required to to comprehend and deal with all the complexity is too difficult.
00:50:42.990 –> 00:50:52.890
Paul Ader: But not only that, but in the complex world, it is said that it becomes a big thing, people will see you coming now block you, particularly in a political world.
00:50:54.210 –> 00:50:56.220
Paul Ader: Now let’s talk about politicians.
00:50:57.510 –> 00:51:09.570
Paul Ader: And the political world that they are in, and I think you Angela said that so i’m looking at my notes here, I think you Angela said something about that.
00:51:10.200 –> 00:51:24.690
Paul Ader: Politicians only get credit for resolving problems at resolving crisis actually said that’s all they focus on yes, that is true, because of the game that politicians play it’s a it’s a completely different world.
00:51:25.350 –> 00:51:34.020
Paul Ader: Actually, the connection during the political world in the real world is so tenuous these days is i’m not quite sure who’s doing what, to whom.
00:51:35.010 –> 00:51:44.940
Paul Ader: But, but one thing I think that we could say is if we could that people are interested in to spend your governance, whether it’s in peace engineering or elsewhere.
00:51:45.390 –> 00:52:04.440
Paul Ader: If we can identify the people that are more amenable to this sort of mindset and then go to them and say Look, we know that you got to live in the political world, but how about every time you resolve a crisis, how you the way a little bit of anticipatory something in the corner.
00:52:05.580 –> 00:52:15.900
Paul Ader: So they’re actually they’re getting political cover air cover, because this is what I say about my work in tent maker, you know if I try and sell a really big sense maker project.
00:52:16.800 –> 00:52:27.210
Paul Ader: it’ll it’ll get all sorts of resistance, however, if I sell a hybrid project has a lot of standard stuff people know about and then hide a little bit of sense make in the corner.
00:52:27.720 –> 00:52:34.590
Paul Ader: It then proves it actually looks good because it proves by difference so that’s part of what I was saying, and.
00:52:35.700 –> 00:52:38.760
Paul Ader: The last thing then that i’ve got here is.
00:52:42.270 –> 00:52:50.910
Paul Ader: yeah i’ve got the word trust I don’t know where that came from doesn’t matter the kind of you were talking about engineering I think it’s hard engineering.
00:52:51.360 –> 00:52:59.730
Paul Ader: You were talking about peace, engineering terms building things I don’t know where the soft engineering and social engineering come into the peace engineering.
00:53:00.270 –> 00:53:11.850
Paul Ader: field and how do you build that in and again for me part of the argument is that if you’re doing hard engineering put a bit of software engineering on the edge.
00:53:13.050 –> 00:53:17.400
Paul Ader: You know just tack it on the edge make them incentivize each other.
00:53:18.720 –> 00:53:29.970
Paul Ader: anticipation, is, I think we in some ways we’re talking about the thing in the wrong way anticipation isn’t something you gotta do is somebody’s got to release everyone does it.
00:53:30.570 –> 00:53:41.190
Paul Ader: We all live some I was listening to the other day Nancy klein’s book she says that assumption, we all depend on assumptions every day all the time we live.
00:53:41.580 –> 00:53:51.720
Paul Ader: By making assumptions assumptions and anticipation, are very similar but cousins i’m not quite sure how they differ, but they do, they are very more similar than different.
00:53:52.200 –> 00:54:09.510
Paul Ader: And I think, then, we are all anticipating all the time, so we’re going to all go to do it’s not as easy as that, but what we need to think about is how do we release that anticipation that we are all capable of as a permission thing, rather than a.
00:54:10.740 –> 00:54:12.210
Paul Ader: push thing so.
00:54:12.270 –> 00:54:13.680
Keil L Eggers: I could go on for ages and.
00:54:14.490 –> 00:54:27.570
Paul Ader: Less ever more more time so I was just stop there, and pass some of this all of this back to you, you are recording it so you will hold me to account for things that I said and didn’t mean to say or meant to say, though.
00:54:27.840 –> 00:54:30.180
Paul Ader: Whichever way radley goes you’re welcome.
00:54:31.500 –> 00:54:32.190
Keil L Eggers: Thanks Paul.
00:54:32.610 –> 00:54:33.150
Paul Ader: and
00:54:33.450 –> 00:54:37.530
Keil L Eggers: See if Angelo bread, if you have any responses to that.
00:54:39.300 –> 00:54:41.340
Angela Hanson-OECD: yeah I think these are really good points and.
00:54:41.520 –> 00:54:42.690
Angela Hanson-OECD: You know, we see the.
00:54:43.410 –> 00:54:58.170
Angela Hanson-OECD: The resistance issue come up not only with anticipation work, but also with missions work any anytime anyone declares something needs to happen it’s a very easy focus point to also resist.
00:54:59.220 –> 00:55:01.710
Angela Hanson-OECD: So that’s certainly a challenge.
00:55:02.730 –> 00:55:16.920
Angela Hanson-OECD: The point about creating the good environments and doing kind of little things I think that’s definitely part of kind of showing what’s possible and building cultivating that different mindset.
00:55:18.150 –> 00:55:34.770
Angela Hanson-OECD: What we often see in this is for all types of innovation and government is that it’s often based on individuals so it’s left up to individual efforts versus some kind of incentivizing structures for teams or kind of.
00:55:37.500 –> 00:55:48.810
Angela Hanson-OECD: More than just one person to depend on for coming up with something brilliant and usually those people get burned out and move out of government Anyway, thank.
00:55:49.920 –> 00:56:08.820
Angela Hanson-OECD: You used to that that resistance on an individual level so something we’re you know, looking at is how, how do we build those mechanisms in the operating structures of governments in order to kind of create that fertile that fertile ground.
00:56:10.110 –> 00:56:22.770
Angela Hanson-OECD: But yeah you’re right, if any, any kind of big bold action is going to create resistance and really it’s I think it’s interesting to try to find the the projects that.
00:56:23.280 –> 00:56:39.180
Angela Hanson-OECD: The projects and then that have a narrative behind them, that have instant legitimacy, but they will require that infrastructure and mechanisms will have to be built in order to get those done, and those are the pieces of sustainable.
00:56:40.650 –> 00:56:46.110
Angela Hanson-OECD: Sustainable anticipate anticipatory work that we could rely upon.
00:56:47.130 –> 00:56:56.760
Angela Hanson-OECD: I don’t care, what do you have other I know your your audio has been cutting in and out here, I don’t know if you heard all of the question or comment, but do you have any other.
00:56:58.350 –> 00:57:00.180
Angela Hanson-OECD: reflections on what Paul mentioned.
00:57:05.520 –> 00:57:09.120
Keil L Eggers: yeah she put a little bit in the chat here i’m talking.
00:57:11.370 –> 00:57:11.970
Keil L Eggers: To.
00:57:12.660 –> 00:57:12.900
Paul Ader: But.
00:57:13.350 –> 00:57:14.040
Paul Ader: that’s the right.
00:57:14.070 –> 00:57:14.820
Paul Ader: game, or you can.
00:57:14.880 –> 00:57:25.350
Keil L Eggers: move all uncertainty like see, but we have to really be supportive of the things the overall environment, and I think definitely agree with a lot of what i’m.
00:57:26.280 –> 00:57:43.080
Keil L Eggers: always saying, but it was one of the things that I think it’s been so great about the anticipatory innovation governance project is that it also gives the language to tie it into those bigger initiatives and frame some of these problems as practical policy making questions, rather than.
00:57:44.400 –> 00:57:48.840
Keil L Eggers: As you were saying just things that should be the capability of an individual person.
00:57:49.710 –> 00:58:00.960
Paul Ader: it’s permission thing kyle by doing by setting the frame around the dispensary governance, then you are setting a frame within which people think and act.
00:58:01.470 –> 00:58:08.820
Paul Ader: As if their permission or they can get permission so, even if the your framework or he CDs framework your.
00:58:09.150 –> 00:58:24.990
Paul Ader: lps is very much can’t actually go in and do big things you can set the frame within which people, then, can do small things and then grow and so i’m very much supportive and I really do like your your facets dagger and I think it’s clear I think it’s usable.
00:58:26.700 –> 00:58:32.040
Paul Ader: I would like to think more about the industry three part because I didn’t quite follow all of that.
00:58:33.900 –> 00:58:43.140
Paul Ader: So yeah, but I can work with you carlin on that because I just want to bring this together for myself one last thing that.
00:58:44.070 –> 00:58:50.340
Keil L Eggers: Here oh hold on a second, and when I wanted to do you have a question.
00:58:51.870 –> 00:58:55.620
Wahidullah Azizi: Hello i’m really sorry I joined a bit later and.
00:58:56.640 –> 00:58:58.830
Wahidullah Azizi: Probably couldn’t follow the presentation.
00:59:00.450 –> 00:59:01.680
Wahidullah Azizi: However, i’m.
00:59:04.230 –> 00:59:06.330
Wahidullah Azizi: love to have a look to the slides.
00:59:06.330 –> 00:59:10.590
Wahidullah Azizi: And look more to get the idea of this project.
00:59:11.760 –> 00:59:17.640
Wahidullah Azizi: However, I am an engineer, and I have like practical experiences and.
00:59:20.610 –> 00:59:30.000
Wahidullah Azizi: humiliated providing humanitarian assistance lifesaving projects and refugee camps and send engineer, and then, as well as post conflict country.
00:59:31.740 –> 00:59:33.090
Wahidullah Azizi: Also, providing.
00:59:34.290 –> 00:59:44.490
Wahidullah Azizi: As an engineer working how to provide the facilities for the returnees So if I could be any help i’m happy to join the team.
00:59:45.330 –> 00:59:55.410
Wahidullah Azizi: I can’t comment on the process, because I I joined later, like, I have to look at that again and maybe if you kind of share the slides so and.
00:59:56.040 –> 01:00:11.190
Wahidullah Azizi: Like life saving operations it’s ingenious plays I think you’re very vital role they do as an engineer in a refugee camp, we used to provide the water for the refugees, I managed.
01:00:11.850 –> 01:00:13.770
Wahidullah Azizi: A couple of Li gh ag camps and.
01:00:13.800 –> 01:00:32.070
Wahidullah Azizi: Pakistan and many years ago Afghan refugee camps and as well as when you when people go back post conflict situations, then they return is they need obviously shelter, they need access to facilities, they need to.
01:00:33.240 –> 01:00:34.710
Wahidullah Azizi: have access to.
01:00:35.220 –> 01:00:37.110
Wahidullah Azizi: My children need to go to school.
01:00:38.040 –> 01:00:42.750
Wahidullah Azizi: They need access to health services so i’ve got some experience there as well.
01:00:45.570 –> 01:00:47.460
Wahidullah Azizi: can be any help i’m happy to be.
01:00:47.460 –> 01:00:48.480
Wahidullah Azizi: Part of this.
01:00:49.770 –> 01:00:50.850
Wahidullah Azizi: conversation, thank you.
01:00:52.920 –> 01:00:55.680
Keil L Eggers: yeah thanks so much, and if you want to.
01:00:56.430 –> 01:00:57.780
Keil L Eggers: Think i’ll have your email.
01:00:57.780 –> 01:01:06.660
Keil L Eggers: Address through the event bright, but also, if you want to send it to me in the chat I can follow up with you there and send this pencil on to.
01:01:08.130 –> 01:01:13.710
Keil L Eggers: And android bread just real quick because i’m conscious of the time, do you.
01:01:15.900 –> 01:01:17.790
Keil L Eggers: Are you needing to hop off soon.
01:01:19.530 –> 01:01:34.350
Angela Hanson-OECD: I will, in just a minute, but i’m also curious about what what this could mean or what anticipation looks like from the piece engineering perspective and kind of that that soft to soft side as well, so i’m curious of how.
01:01:34.980 –> 01:01:35.550
Angela Hanson-OECD: Like what.
01:01:35.640 –> 01:01:38.070
Angela Hanson-OECD: Is there anything that can be drawn from this to.
01:01:39.060 –> 01:01:42.330
Angela Hanson-OECD: Come to inform your your work, your work there.
01:01:45.030 –> 01:01:45.450
Keil L Eggers: yeah.
01:01:45.570 –> 01:01:56.520
Keil L Eggers: i’m one of the projects that we’re starting to work on, is using sense maker in peace engineering efforts to start to map.
01:01:57.300 –> 01:02:12.390
Keil L Eggers: The conflict systems or the social environment to help better support anybody who considers themselves peace engineers to you know get a grip of some context, be a way to.
01:02:14.190 –> 01:02:16.080
Keil L Eggers: start to see.
01:02:17.130 –> 01:02:22.140
Keil L Eggers: Some of the you know, the current disposition of the system and then use that to.
01:02:23.850 –> 01:02:24.960
Keil L Eggers: buy Thank you.
01:02:27.150 –> 01:02:45.780
Keil L Eggers: To start to think a little bit more from the anticipatory perspective, so I think, as you saw on what those comments there’s a lot of peace engineering that happens in a reactive way or its post crisis or post conflict or.
01:02:47.490 –> 01:02:56.820
Keil L Eggers: You know that’s that’s a big part of where the domain is so what what i’m really hoping to do is to start to bring this language in so that we can be.
01:02:58.650 –> 01:03:06.390
Keil L Eggers: changed the scope of the piece of cheering field to the proactive side and start to develop different.
01:03:07.740 –> 01:03:13.290
Keil L Eggers: You know mechanisms to see where we’re at now using technology.
01:03:14.580 –> 01:03:18.150
Keil L Eggers: and have peace in today’s be more active and saying here’s something that we can do now.
01:03:20.070 –> 01:03:32.700
Keil L Eggers: That would you know prevent a massive humanitarian crisis or help a government better react to some of these big problems so there’s also a lot of work that’s happening right now around.
01:03:35.130 –> 01:03:36.750
Keil L Eggers: You know, climate change.
01:03:38.340 –> 01:03:38.910
Keil L Eggers: or.
01:03:41.460 –> 01:03:48.960
Keil L Eggers: get it digital transformation stuff as you were saying and so they’re all problems like cross cut about engineering issues.
01:03:51.450 –> 01:03:51.690
01:03:53.070 –> 01:03:54.150
Keil L Eggers: So then.
01:03:55.200 –> 01:04:09.210
Keil L Eggers: there’s also stuff that we’re looking into on kind of data data Observatory decision making support type of realm and a lot of other Members are really interested in some of the.
01:04:10.290 –> 01:04:13.380
Keil L Eggers: Peace technology and ethics side of that too.
01:04:15.030 –> 01:04:27.450
Keil L Eggers: And so I think a lot of that because it’s not capability that currently exists is kind of sitting in that anticipatory space, because we know that we will need.
01:04:29.010 –> 01:04:34.290
Keil L Eggers: Better better tools, so that those technologies don’t cause more problems.
01:04:35.370 –> 01:04:36.480
Keil L Eggers: than good.
01:04:38.010 –> 01:04:47.280
Angela Hanson-OECD: yeah Thank you I it’s it’s gonna be really interesting to follow the the research that you do, and I think it’s interesting to kind of keep keep.
01:04:48.840 –> 01:05:02.310
Angela Hanson-OECD: keep in touch with the as the research progresses, because this is an important part of our thinking that you know it’s been good to be here today and kind of be tested on a stress test in our thinking too, and we don’t have.
01:05:03.660 –> 01:05:14.040
Angela Hanson-OECD: kind of magic formula, so this is it’s been really interesting feedback as well, for us, and I think that these this area of peace, engineering is really.
01:05:15.120 –> 01:05:21.360
Angela Hanson-OECD: going to be enlightening for for the anticipatory work that we’re doing so looking forward to.
01:05:22.200 –> 01:05:27.300
Angela Hanson-OECD: to keeping in contact and sharing notes and research and cases and.
01:05:27.300 –> 01:05:37.380
Angela Hanson-OECD: Things so yeah thanks so much kyle i’ll have to jump off here in a couple of fairly soon here but it’s been really great to chat today.
01:05:38.940 –> 01:05:43.200
Keil L Eggers: yeah thanks thanks so much Angela Robert do you have a final question or.
01:05:43.290 –> 01:05:43.890
let’s talk you.
01:05:46.230 –> 01:05:54.570
Robert Nesko: know, I was, I was looking forward to seeing the slides again and reviewing I absolutely like to how you broke down.
01:05:56.580 –> 01:06:05.910
Robert Nesko: Just the the different facets, so that I also like that the call out for Defense being those institutions that have that.
01:06:06.990 –> 01:06:10.110
Robert Nesko: You know that that sense, making so.
01:06:11.880 –> 01:06:15.990
Robert Nesko: And certainly you know I think that’s something that other agencies need.
01:06:17.010 –> 01:06:22.470
Robert Nesko: And this existential threat should not be the only reason we have any form of sense, making.
01:06:23.970 –> 01:06:28.440
Robert Nesko: So i’m i’m actually excited to see that, who I want to apply it.
01:06:28.470 –> 01:06:30.990
Robert Nesko: To how how I do things if.
01:06:31.020 –> 01:06:32.940
Robert Nesko: If possible, so thanks.
01:06:34.380 –> 01:06:34.800
Robert Nesko: Excellent.
01:06:35.070 –> 01:06:36.690
Keil L Eggers: yeah if you want to drop your email in the.
01:06:36.690 –> 01:06:40.590
Keil L Eggers: chat Robert I can follow up with the slides.
01:06:45.630 –> 01:06:51.270
Keil L Eggers: Well, I think we can in there and let Angela and read go so thanks so much for.
01:06:52.140 –> 01:07:04.380
Keil L Eggers: Coming today and sharing all of your work with us, I think there’s going to be a lot of really interesting pathways to collaborate on all this in the future, and so it’s been a great it’s going to introduce you to the Community with this event.
01:07:05.370 –> 01:07:07.260
Angela Hanson-OECD: Yes, thanks so much yeah.
01:07:07.440 –> 01:07:11.100
Angela Hanson-OECD: thanks for the invitation and look forward to seeing you all again.
01:07:13.440 –> 01:07:16.410
Keil L Eggers: we’ll see you soon alright have a good day everybody.