#4 Crowdlaw as Augmented Problem-Solving: The Five Stages of Policymaking

Beth Simone Noveck in Analyse & Kritik (2018)

Read #3 The Maturing Field of Online Citizen Engagement: From Process Norms to Policy Effectiveness

One challenge to maturing our practices for democratic engagement in gover- nance, rather than only improving turnout on Election Day, is the recognition that at each stage of the law and policymaking process, there are distinct informational needs. That is to say, the arc of the law and policymaking cycle begins, first, with the identification of problems, which can benefit from diverse and large-scale in- put from those with lived experience and situational awareness of issues just as much as from those with credentialed expertise. In fact, it is an optimal time to learn about the problems as experienced by diverse members of society, especially those who are the most disadvantaged and may otherwise lack ways to inform the lawmaking process.

But, at the next step, namely solving those problems once identified, requires a different form of know-how. It demands innovative and creative and workable solutions. Here credentialed expertise from diverse sources might come more into play (as well as the value judgment about which solutions to prioritize).

If the process calls for a drafting stage to produce a bill or a party platform or a policy proposal, this, in turns demands a different skill set and those with talent for, interest in and ability to write, which need not necessarily be the same people as those who want to spot problems or imagine solutions.

Furthermore, at each stage, from problem-identification to solution identification to drafting to implementation and evaluation, improving outcomes may call for gauging opinions in addition to obtaining information and ideas. Both are important but require different designs to accomplish.

Thus, to be successful, crowdlaw projects need to be conscious of their aims and designed to accomplish them. An online process that yields opinions about the severity of a problem is highly undesirable when what is sought are innovative and data-driven solutions. If the desired outcome is a consensual draft of a bill, a process that results merely in complaints about the problem does not help. Crowdlaw also requires an honest assessment of the time commitment required to participate. Developing implementable approaches potentially requires more commitment from those participating or at least a more collaborative process to get enough people working on turning an idea into the design for a policy or service in practice than does naming a problem. And then there are the designs for processes that have not yet been tried or envisioned.

Read the next part- #4.1 Problem Identification