 So this is a territory where you can find that the Union First Nations, the Seneca, it was recently in the Mississauga, it was a state record. And the territory was the subject of the fish with one spoon, and as I found out, I moved here not too long ago. The fish with one spoon is used to refer to the stewardship of shared territories and hunting grounds and collective responsibility to ensure that there is always enough game and fish to eat for all. So it was a collective agreement on resources as well, which I think is generally relevant to the context of this conversation. So today we need a place, Toronto has belonged to Indigenous people from across the continent, and we're grateful to have the opportunity to be here on this territory. With that, I'll hand over to Imshan, who's going to do some awesome mapping for us. Hi, I'm Imshan, welcome to a meeting with you all. So if you are not here on the first day, this is the current code you can scan to ask any questions following hours of the day or any suggestions. We want to suggest a general like what should we discuss or something. And our district minister, Audrey, will answer the questions later in the afternoon. So you can scan either through the QR code or go to slino.com and enter the code 1106, Toronto. And you can up here find a hack folder that looks like this where you can help to type the password of our journey and all the yesterday's documentation and today's materials in this hack folder you can use later. So now I want to take us... Just to add, so we are having some of you going by limitations. I've temporarily put on my hotspot is Alex and lowercase civic tech is the password. If we can have at least one person on the table to sort of take a little bit of an initiative or an initiative to file search notes, I think it'd be helpful for everybody. So if we can make sure that somebody is connected if you additionally need hotspots, if people are able to jump in, we would be really grateful for that. I'm very happy to read your first writing post. Okay, so some of you are not here yesterday. I'll go back to see the things we do yesterday. You can see all the posts that we have. So it's for hd mapping and this tool is a tool I'm developing to help to bring the postings discussion online so that we can see what we're doing. So you can see right here. This is based on the group I'm participating in. So yesterday first we collected a lot of problems that we think Uber has or Uber is trying to solve and then we categorize it. So like in this tool I can I can group I can group several problems into one box and like right-sharing is too expensive which means it's changing public transit quality. You can see there's this congestion issue emerging from urban transit system and new ability model and driver working conditions and the safety issue those are the five problems that after we categorize our discussion and then based on the problems we found we started how might we challenge so my group like we have around three how might we challenge so I'm just going to introduce one of these so I can add the line here so this is how might we how might we address transportation needs from a system-wide perspective so when we see a Uber issue and then yesterday we found access to to throw up here are some possible solutions so we throw up some solutions like for congestion enhance public transportation and business strategy and all these solutions we all add some risk and risk on the like tough to shift behavior key and need political well and then we go continue to go on to have the final three solutions we come together by mapping this you can see this solution actually come from nowhere from the from the left so when you actually do the mapping you can see the relationship why are we talking about bike sharing system and suddenly this part just turn out as a motorbike we need to change the insurance of the motorbike and then found right ask people to write the responsible bodies so actually if you can do it in more detail you can link the responsible bodies to a solution like this solution those are the final three solutions we want and by increasing basement public services and infrastructure need about three levels of government to all work together and then finally found right has asked people what a major success in the method so this is my group listing like that so by using some digital like this is called sense.tw we want to make sense.tw and the interface is English so if you are interested in using our tool you can approach to me or you can try it out to document your discussion online so if you take a larger picture like this so you can see how come from the original problems and go through the solution we have and the stress and the final solution with the responsible body and you can definitely see that there is a problem and challenge statements and no solutions over here because we don't have time yesterday so using online tool allows you to add more comments after an offline meeting and this is the tool I'm developing and you are welcome to use other online tools like ManMap or RealTime Board to save your offline discussion so that's the quick reflection of what we did yesterday and next is okay so just to clarify this is what you're showing us here this is a tool you're developing yeah and it's open source so if you want to make that modification you can just work it that's really cool okay thank you does that tool if you want to generate any kind of report or spreadsheet that has all of the information that you've typed in does it produce anything that you might be able to reduce it or like peaceful as in CSP final yeah so far if you want to run it through so far no but we're using our product at home so are we going to do this today? yeah any other questions those are you using them no so since the TW seems to have no counter product also did you yeah the mobile version is very poor right now we are working on a mobile version so if you are opening for you sell more in all so you find it and it sends to you yeah it sends to you and the mobile version just stops that's it's open source it's paid out so we are working on that so you can give me some feedback so I can work on the mobile version that's my team on developing this spring so I'm ready for here to gather user feedback okay thank you also we have additional hotspot setup it should be PEDAS workshop and the password is workshop and we are going to proceed to some presentations because PEDAS is doing all these like super cool things but also in the local context Toronto and see Toronto and also the Ontario government up to initiatives to go to school and thought it would be a good opportunity to hear more about it we are going to start with let's see if you guys can hear so Tess I should start over to everyone if we didn't get a chance to meet yesterday my name is Tess I'm a member for active transportation and I'm going to share with you today a little bit about the program which is called Active Neighborhoods Canada and it is a participatory urban planning program so we work really in physical spaces in the built environment to engage people in creative ways of solving built environment challenges oops so T-CAT is a project of the Registered Charity Queen Air Partnership and our mission is to advance knowledge and evidence to build support for safe and inclusive streets for walking and cycling the program that I work on specifically is called Active Neighborhoods Canada and as I mentioned it's a participatory urban planning program so this program is federally funded it's public health agency of Canada funded and to give you a little bit of background or history and it started with our partner in Quebec the Montreal Urban Ecology Center and they developed this participatory planning approach that works really well to engage citizens in the planning process in Montreal but Montreal if you know anything about that city that's a very specific municipal context as a borough structure and so they were curious to see how this approach would play out across Canada in different political and social geographic contexts so I think maybe 2011 they brought on board T-CAT as well as another organization in Calgary the Sustainable Calgary Society to try out this approach in 12 different communities across Canada over the course of four years after that pilot approach we received an additional face of funding to focus more intensively in one community each for the next three years and we're actually working in Peterborough with an organization called 3UP and that was a result of one of the pilot projects so what is our approach? what does it look like? it starts with some principles of co-design the first principle is that residents are experts people that are moving through traveling and working and living in these spaces really do know what works best for them and that expertise is very valuable the second kind of principle of co-design is that participation builds equity the way that people are invited in to participate in planning versus as currently really leaves out certain voices and so certain populations or modes of transportation are marginalized in the process resulting in a built environment that further marginalizes those groups and helps equity specifically we also believe that planning can be fun it doesn't have to be a dry kind of like city hall consultation style event combining knowledge creates strong outcomes so residents are experts but there's also lots of disciplines that kind of interface with the built environment planning, transportation, architecture urban design, public health so bringing together all of those knowledge sets is what you need to create strong outcomes and that is key so not just having different interprofessional voices but actually collaborating across public, private, not-for-profit sector community groups and creating solid partnerships and the community plans that result from our process are living documents so they're not necessarily a plan that has a very specific schedule to implement it but it helps communities to articulate their vision for their neighborhood and come up with actions in short time to start to create changes to the built environment we do this through a three stage process the first step we call the portrait phase and this is really, we do tons of broad based resident outreach in this phase and the goal is to understand the neighborhood's assets and where there might be infrastructure gaps so we combine that resident knowledge with secondary data like census and transportation surveys to create the diagnostic kind of portrait of the neighborhood you can explore some of that in the future then we move into a vision phase which is where we start to bring in some of those professional knowledge sets to work together co-design workshops with residents to come up with a vision and then the plan stage is creating some actions to try to incrementally achieve that vision I kind of already covered this piece about combining knowledge but just recognizing that residents their expertise is just as valuable if not more than we try to build equity in the engagement process by reaching out to people that are typically not included we do lots of pop-up events we operate very much in a physical space so part of why I'm interested in this workshop in particular is how to move some of this into a digital space too so we work with lots of like children and youth, new Canadians we go to seniors homes we spend just a lot of time out on the ground in the community I don't have time so I won't go through the community's stories really but I just wanted to give you a bit of the diversity of the geographic contexts we've worked in so Thorncliffe Park and Flemington Park in Toronto the Stewart Street neighborhood in Peterborough each of our partners worked in one area so we worked in Halburton Village and Halburton County the Donovan neighborhood in Sudbury and now we're working as I said for the next couple of years in Peterborough neighborhoods we've started in a neighborhood called Jackson Park Brookdale and a neighborhood called Downtown Jackson Creek so you can learn about each of those communities and you can also learn about our tools for co-designing on our website which is participatoryplanning.ca on there we have a toolbox all the tools have that has right now is roughly 30 different engagement tools to involve citizens in discussions about built environment they can also, many of them, apply to other types of participation and engagement too and then the page called In the Field is where there's a map where you can learn about each of those communities check out the portraits and the plans if the plan exists already, some are underway and yeah feel free to ask me any questions we have some requests to leave so we'll quick present presentations and back to questions Hey, so my name is Peter Sonny I'm the Executive Director of Political Canada and one of the founders of Civic Tech Toronto I'm really happy to be here thank you for inviting me and so I guess I was asked to say a little bit about Civic Tech Toronto about how it came to be about the role that it plays in the city and also maybe a little bit of the same sort of that oh yeah thanks so I'm really happy that this workshop is happening I'm happy that there's a great group of folks from here from Taiwan sharing some of the amazing work that they've been doing there I think that part of what really stood out to me about this work in Taiwan is the way that the community there has brought together it seems like a really great mix of folks with strong technical skills but also people who have really strong foundations and principles in community organizing it's an intersection that I'd say that we're trying to foster more in Toronto and Canada through initiatives and groups in communities like Civic Tech Toronto so I'll say I guess I won't be going too long but I just want to say a little bit about how Civic Tech Toronto came to be about three and a half years ago there were a few of us who who became aware of the Civic Tech communities that were growing in the U.S. and elsewhere that were supported by nonprofits like Code for America and in particular there were some really active community groups in cities like Chicago and New York and Oakland and we were excited about around that connection between technology, design, data and community organizing bringing these folks together who often aren't in the same room to be rolling up their sleeves and working together on addressing civic issues and so we based on that and specifically inspired by the work of the community that was happening in Chicago through groups like Track Night we decided to start something similar in Toronto so we started Civic Tech Toronto running weekly Hack Nights every Tuesday evening and it's meant to be a very welcoming space for people who are not only technologists but for people who are interested in technology and design and in the roles that those methods and tools can potentially play in addressing civic issues and the format is different from other kinds of meetups in that there is a minimal amount of talking with the whole room and as much as possible we use our time for actually splitting up into smaller teams and working on specific projects so if you haven't been to a Civic Tech Toronto Hack Night I encourage you to and I think that it's been really exciting to see that community grow over the past three and a half years and I'd say that there's a really that there are a growing number of collaborations that are happening and I think that David and Raleigh and Delaney will talk about some of those collaborations that are happening now between community members and folks in government and in nonprofits because zoom out a little bit about Code for Canada and so Code for Canada is modeled on nonprofits in other countries like Code for America Code for Australia, Code for Germany, others and our role is to help promote the Civic Tech movement at a national level and so what that looks like is certainly supporting community organizers like those who are who bring together the Civic Tech programs and other similar events in other cities across the country but it also is about trying to find other deeper ways of developing those kinds of relationships and collaborations and so our biggest program at Code for Canada is called the Fellowship and it's a program where we work with government partners to identify a sort of small to mid-sized challenge that they're facing and then we hire digital experts so software developers, UX designers digital product managers and we embed them into government for nine months to work alongside their college and government to build a new digital government service so that's a way that over the course by full time for nine months that a team of three people can play an impact in both enabling a new digital service but also building the capacity of their employees and government so that they can continue to use those kinds of tools and methods on that project and others once the fellowship's over. Shea is here. You make mech who is our program manager running Civic Hall of Toronto. It's one of our newest programs that's also about connecting government innovators with the tech and design community. It's a membership based program so if you're a public servant you or your team can sign up as a member of Civic Hall of Toronto and that can be a great way of enabling some learning and collaboration with folks in the Civic Tech community. If that's something that sounds like it would be of interest to you. And maybe I'll leave it there and pass it over to Holly. Yeah, so I'm probably on the flight space which is one of the projects that has been supported a lot. It was an initial idea about a year ago, just every year ago now, which brought together both Canada, the Civic Tech community but also local government of City Hall of Toronto which there was an issue that was recognised by the cycling community but also by the city. Bike parking across was lacking in some areas that people felt that they didn't have a good dialogue with how their bike parking experience was represented and they wanted a better way to record and report these issues that didn't quite gel them to some of the options that were available. And also a request from the city that I think they wanted a new way of collecting data and insight into this, but in a way that didn't feel top down and feel like the city was just another program that they were sort of using to show that they were engaged in some form and they wanted to have a real cross-route process. And so this came up with the outcome of this is a flight space which is sort of a problem and this was a year-long process in collaboration between this key partners but driven primarily in terms of the output by community members of our civic tech to build a web app, our app.bikesabase.ca please go check it out which allows you to report bike parking issues that you find as you use bike parking across the city whether bike parking is damaged or whether there are bagged bikes in the racks that you may be able to use and this data is then recorded and we use that information and publish it publicly on a dashboard which is one of the links there and the idea is that ultimately this data is used and is impartial user generated crowdsourced data that can be used by the city but also private landowners shops if you're like a local metro or a no-frills and you're seeing lots of dens around your area there seems to be problems with the lack of parking or the lack of parking that you can use that data to make a business case to improve the school and the racks but also for the city to help them understand the prioritise where they might want to fund I think that's kind of everything about bike space but I think you know there's been lots of really interesting lessons from that project around partnership working with across the government seeing their needs seeing how you engage and get a group of volunteers really excited and committed to a project and also I think ensuring that you deliver something that is actually useful in use and kind of maintaining that energy and that push of use is also a big part of the work is that useful? It's fairly sure I'll be talking about Apple Ads which is another project that started from acidic tech and one of the the reason that this came about so Apple Ads is trying to empower people who are homeless through technology and that's the broad mission and we have several projects underneath that one of the main things that we started off doing was developing a chat pod to help people who have mobile phones and smartphones to be able to access resources in the city like finding a free meal or finding where shelters are so we actually have a prototype already just kind of see if we can get that moving so there's something that we've been working on with mobile phones with a team of developers, designers UX researchers and we've done quite a bit of UX research with clients at shelters as well as students take over interviews with service providers to develop this chat pod and this is something that is in response to kind of the static website that's currently up on the city's website there's 311, 211 that people can use to access resources they can call a helpline using their phone but we know that a lot of people have mobile phones and depend on mobile phones so this is a much more human centered way of accessing the resources that they need and unfortunately this is not connected to a GPS location so it has to manually enter it but if you were connected to if you had your GPS and you'd be able to yeah okay, just for the sake of time I'll skip this but it's quite interesting and it's maybe not not a crisis that actually did quite well so this is something that we're friendly trying to go to the city of Toronto there was a lot of interest we had an event a homeless connect event where there was a lot of city staff and service providers that took quite a lot of interest in releasing this to clients we had printed off some things with our website so that people can download the app and just wanted to showcase one of the things that we've been working on through Civic Tech so thank you I don't have an app to show anybody but that's okay so I'm from a central agency in the provincial government so this would be a little bit drier I think but I worked in an organization called the Policy Innovation Hub sorry one sec this is us not the TV show but the team so we're an in-house resource in the cabinet office we serve the entire OPS policy community in a lot of ways we help form the foundation or the backbone of the OPS policy community which is about 4,000 members strong and our 60,000 plus personal organization the vision that the Policy Innovation Hub or the hub our vision is really this OPS that creates effective policy that has a sustainable impact for the people organizations and communities in Ontario so we have a fairly inclusive definition of what it means to be in Ontario and our mission is really unique because we're a central agency in Canada and that we can seek out applying and share the best tools, skills, insights to address the policy delivery challenges that the province faces and so getting to run in the center of government we get to demonstrate that taking some risks and trying something is okay and it's okay at the center it can be okay on the periphery for ministries that are central agencies so that's the team a little bit about our mission so I mentioned we are in the cabinet office so that's the department that reports to the Premier that if you're looking for who's our minister we're in the policy delivery division so that's the division that anyone who knows what a cabinet submission is from the OPS that's where they go they go to our division and anyone who doesn't know basically like the documents that go into making decisions that turn into policy they go to the lead of our division so we work there we work in kind of this place where decisions are made and kind of long term and short term thinking gets done and that's where we find ourselves so the hub has two main areas one is knowledge and mobilization capacity building so that's an organization that's existed in the hub for a little while it's that backbone organization for the policy community the new part of the policy innovation hub is the projects and consulting team and that's the team that I lead for 2017 and so what we do is this, this is our model so we have three main kind of practice areas in our consulting model so we're at this hands on very important free support for ministries within the Ontario Public Service to really help them tackle their problems in new ways and so our our focus is on ensuring that we find the right problems, we come up with the right kinds of solutions to address those problems and to really maximize the value for taxpayers and that's kind of where we come at it and how we do that is by really focusing on this human centered design element that we talked a lot about yesterday and wrote later today and so we practice seven three main areas so first the service design so you know we have a lot of governance services and programs how do we design them for humans and the people using them and less about the organizations that are delivering them which you know is not just something that happens in the public service making any big organization often a lot of what it does is centered around what it does well as an organization and you know a lot of them are shaking into their clients or customers or users so we have a service design practice we also have a systemic design practice which is long story short just the blending of design thinking and systems thinking that helps our team zoom in and out of complex problems whether it's policy, legislation and regulation or the kind of the organizational design that's required to change the way we work to do the things that we want to accomplish better and then our last practice area is strategy and strategic force this is really about helping industries build robust strategies for the future especially given the rate of change and the uncertainty that we face so those are our practice areas I'm just going to zoom in a little bit on our service design practice so this is how we get things done we do some user research we co-design, we prototype and test sometimes that co-designing and testing is with our ministry clients sometimes we get to do that with users but for the most part it is on the ministry side and then really importantly we implement and measure impact to make sure that what we're suggesting does have that sustainable or effective impact for Ontarians and so I'll just give you one example of a service design project that we've done just to show you I'm not full shit so here is a project that we're working on the family responsibility office so the family responsibility office is responsible or it affects 380,000 Ontarians every year and it really is about making sure that people who own child support or special support have their payments connected to the people receiving it and we found that it was one of the most complained about areas of government to the Ombudsman it had this long history of people interacting with the service feeling like they weren't getting the most out of it and that's our spot for government and so what we found was a really dedicated team in that office that was committed to change they just needed a few extra tools to do it so we brought our service design practice with them I won't take a lot of credit for it I'm the lead of the team but my colleague Marie Serrano who isn't here today did the majority of the work with the ministry and a special shout out to the behavioral insights unit too in OPS and the material that we developed essentially what we did was we looked at the services that these grow or family responsibility office payers and recipients are experiencing and we tried to look at how that service might be redesigned so there's a group of concept team that put together this group of concept where they divided people entering the program into three main tiers based on their ability and willingness and sort of this mix of how well they would be able to work with the program as well as the compliance with what the program required and so we worked with them to look at the three different tiers to develop journey maps and really try to focus more on this culture and spirit of service rather than compliance which is where a lot of government programs come from and we wanted to focus more on service and kind of helping people solve problems and navigate what can sometimes be a confusing system we've worked with a team of really dedicated public services to develop lots of prototypes and that kind of exemplified the experience that people are going through but also the tools that can make that experience better really importantly we've tested a lot of the stuff of management and executive to get that high in for the kind of change management that's required and we've been working with the team to implement the pilot and do some early evaluation to look for warning signs for things that maybe aren't working as we expected or would work theoretically but not in practice so far so good and the group of concept will eventually be rolled up into something that the ministry is going to take overall for the entire program to place in the existing one with something very similar to this proof of concept which makes a huge impact to 380,000 people a year so this is just an example of some of the stuff that we've done so we've done end-to-end storyboards on the experience we work on these traditional sort of call center type materials like a call flow project not everything needs to look cool to be innovative and that's something that we really sell clients on like you can look and feel a lot like what you already do and all we need to do is just bring a different perspective to it and then the welcome package prototype so people entering the program had a lot of confusion about what the program was achieving why they might have even been in it so if you can see the documents in the front on the far right that's the welcome package prototype that the behavior of the science unit helped us develop that really tries to help the clients focus on the most ceiling information because they're small bombarded with lots of other stuff from courts and their lawyers and not to mention they're going through a pretty tumultuous period of their life because of separation or a changing kind of landscape of their family so we wanted to help them focus on what matters so they can kind of deal with other things later so this is the very, in the bottom left is the very dedicated and fun team of people who were in the ministry that got put together because they showed this great character of robotic change and being able to effect change we've done a lot of different kinds of workshops and online kind of collaboration to really get at the heart of these problems and we've used a ton of tools like storyboards, journey maps, empathy maps prototypes of pieces of paper that the government has to send people on how we can make them better and we've done a lot of really really cool work with the team to make sure that we're making a lasting impact and really trying to find that value for money in the province through taxpayers so that's one case study we have lots of other things that are on our internet that is not accessible to about half the people in the room but I think we're hoping to have more about public presence and we can share this material here. If you'd like to know more about what that does you can email our shared inbox at policyinnovationatontario.ca or me and I don't know if you can sign up for a newsletter as an external organization but we'll see what we can do if you're interested. So that's it. Thanks. Any interest of time we are going to have the questions for the great security and also as Ryan mentioned I believe we have this here from the Royal Encyclopedia as well. So if you guys have questions for any of these amazing folks, the work that they do we also have an open government office people really working on a really cool climate project from T.O. from the Royal Encyclopedia as well. Cool folks in the room so please feel free to exchange your work and projects. We're going to have us. Thank you. Great pleasure. I'm Emma. I'm a legal consultant of PD's and today is the VITAWAN day. So after we learned from the service design and the methods and the physical tools that we help facilitation but today VITAWAN is just another method of enhancing facilitation and as the subtitle I put how did democracy go from offline to un-offline and un-offline is just an HTML attribute but I didn't plan to borrow the definition of the term just like the combination of online and offline because we try to use different kinds of tools especially online tools like open source to help to make the physical and virtual space. So it's kind of like a mixed reality and just in terms of public participation and the trigger. So yesterday Audrey has asked if some of you might have heard about the VITAWAN in 2015 but I guess no, it's 100%. So now at the Sunflower Movement it is the trigger of VITAWAN and that's when a VITAWAN was born and just so you know so I'm here with some quick facts about the Sunflower Movement it's an optimized audience and it raised the awareness of communities and cities of participation so that's when public participation began like a widespread notion across the island nations of Taiwan and so this happened from March 18th to April 10th so it lasted for 23 days and in the same year then Minister of Adopt portfolio she went to join a hackathon held by Upzero and she went to the hackathon and proposed that we need a platform to allow the entire society to engage in rational discussion so that's when VITAWAN was born and as I heard because I wasn't involved with the very beginning of VITAWAN it took around two weeks to set up the website so at the end of 2014 VITAWAN was born and since 2015 there have been 25 cases discussed through VITAWAN process so that's the introduction of VITAWAN and I'm going to talk about the future and the culture of VITAWAN this is a book that has inspired me a lot written by Cass Arsoste a Harvard Law professor yes it's also one of the most cited law professors he said many people are mostly hearing more and louder echoes of their own voices so this just reminds me of what Facebook is so we use Facebook and the daily feeds that mostly it's about the page that you're subscribed to all the friends and family that you follow so the voluntary stay for a watch or a video a specific field of friends or families or other pages the more it feeds you with the similar stories so at the end you will mostly fall into like a like a virtual space that that limits your randomness to other kind of world and also as I said your judgment appears to be a product of your values and identity and this I find it quite interesting because obviously we'll have lots of chances to read other people's opinions or comments online so even if one individuals try to stay anonymous but you can still tell where or like what class or what kind of social standards or financial standards or situation that individual belongs to it's sometimes it's quite easy to tell who is the individual behind the screen just by reading the values or the comments that the individual posts online and this is like the core spirit of Taiwan autonomy and empowerment and we have several ways to exercise to realize autonomy and try to empower people by consensus-based process and participle in oriented agenda, voting correction over-format and no street rules so these are the principles that we try to stick to throughout the Taiwan process and I'll show you by following slides how we do this so the main value is to encourage people to stay anonymous and empower them to speak up for themselves and a privacy is also a main value to support the entire process it's a term that's the opposite of bureaucracy which means a system of flexible and informal organization management so this is another way we introduce we use this term to share our value and they are the critical rules that will help support throughout the pro-vita our process and just another reminder that because no one can represent we have this no body culture so nobody can represent we Taiwan and this is just my way to introduce it and there are many ways and many perceptions that you can pull to look what the Taiwan is and this is just my perception and I I think here are the three critical rules for the Taiwan to to go on and there are facilitator editors and contributors and the facilitator has to be knowledgeable about the issue so if there is a specific issue and the facilitator will take on that specific issue then he or she has to be knowledgeable about that issue and she will participate throughout the pro-vita Taiwan and at holding neutral ground and with no direct interest and from dealing with or I did that with one of the that we carry and editors have to be capable of maintaining the websites like having like the basic knowledge like ABC basic knowledge of running or using the HTML kind of coding and has to be responsible and active in the Taiwan community and have to be regular participants of many backgrounds on many states so we do this on a weekly basis and contributors, anyone could be contributors, but just some basic matters that he or she have to behave themselves and they have to be honest with themselves so these are the critical rules have to support the Taiwan process and here are the pictures of our usual main hackathon on each Wednesday as you can see here I agree is the most regular participants of the hackathon at your other and also our public PD's and sometimes the public sectors like the national development council will also join us and the process just so you know this is just my way to describe it and four stages are the consensus that we reach when we try when we want to introduce the Taiwan to the world but other people might think they are another way to to describe it so maybe there can be five stages or less than four stages but the four stages are both are mainly the consensus that most of the contributors are pretty good and so you are in the four stages proposal, opinion, reflection and legislation or regulation so as I heard yesterday on we also might call it rectification and ratification so there are just some different terms to describe these stages as I said the rough consensus is that there are four stages and two, so proposal stages for contributors to propose and to submit a topic including one that Tom had mentioned like if there is an event it includes noticing a specific controversy and then some of the contributors or one of the contributors might propose a stage and then at opinion stage we will hold online opinion collection and this is where we used by police or discourse that kind of online tools to help collect opinions from the general public and on reflection stage we hold a presentation meeting and the key feature is that we put it in the lab screen so that's where the physical and virtual space combine together and just to ensure every voice we heard so throughout the whole process we will have mini hackathons on each man state and it's on a weekly basis and also if there is an extra need for discussion then we will have occasional internal meetings for stages and here is just a visualization of the idea flows of how these ideas will diverge and converge throughout the four stages so at the start it might be quite diverge and then we somehow try to let them converge and then maybe at the opinion stage we have to collect so many ideas from the general public so it might diverge a little bit but then we try to let it converge so it's a gradual process throughout the four stages and there is another feature that's probably called rolling basis and also a term which is called recursive public and recursive public is a public that is highly concerned about the maintenance or the modification of like legal economic or technical the means of its existence so it's cited from a professor who filled but it's like an academic term and he used to specifically put it means the contributors can decide their own rules and also on a rolling basis so if we find at the reflection stage the ideas diverge too much and then we go back to the opinion stage and try to find a convergence of the ideas so it can also be repeated and so and at the end the goal is to find a rough reach among the contributors and here are some case studies and I have two cases one is Uber which is also the most popular case of Taiwan and also another case is a CII case non-consensual intimate image also known as non-consensual photography which means non-consensual leakage of someone's naked photos so it's mostly about privacy or gender and quality that's important so the first case is UberX and it's the first Italian case so it's like a landmark case or police and then we will have an exercise of police later and with the support of Chin and then UberX case gathered the highest number of votes so it's sort of like wrote the record of Taiwan and it has gathered 31 roughly 31,000 votes so that's the usual participation of the number of votes the usual let's say a CI case we will need collective 100 votes overall votes but if the number of votes is not surprising to you because Taiwan is a small nation so we don't have that many people but 31 roughly 31 1,000 is quite a what's the percentage just like what's the overall population what percentage this is when you do the math it's about 23 million people I can 31,000 kind of say that 23 million people that's the ratio so this is the timeline of UberX is someone doing the math 0-0-1 it's quite simple compared to regular government consultations what's the participation I don't have to I would have numbered but each Taiwan if it's a regular consultation process we have different types one is the public the public hearing the public hearing can be thousands of people or up to sometimes so in usual public hearing there are only less than 20 spots that people can speak because in one people's people 5 minutes is already 100 minutes passed I think you should consider less than a whole society so if we can spend 20 people to speak into 30,000 people to vote and that's a larger scale I think the biggest difference lies in the way that we hold traditional public hearing a traditional public hearing is like government official but don't really have the feedback back and then they won't have an interactive discussion or dynamic interaction but on the Taiwan we focus more on the deliberation discussion so the number might be that high because if we want to have a substantial peripheral discussion then we can also cannot have too many people in person so as for the later reflection and consultation meeting we mostly generally we have around 20-ish contributors in person but there might be over hundreds of people online posting comments at the same time so that's how we that's the emphasis or the focus of the Taiwan there's more about the deliberation and this is the timeline of Uber X pace so 2015 was when it was proposed and then we went on to online opinion collection and after around two weeks later we held a consultation meeting and over a year in 2016 we have the new rules for Uber as the result of the Taiwan based on the discussion and at the proposal stage we crowdsourced it's also as I said we used the participant oriented agenda so the contributors can decide what to discuss about so we have a topic poll and here the top one Uber case was the top one the top priority of the then contributors at the moment they want to discuss about so and plus we had a request from several government authorities at the moment Uber was quite a huge controversial it's really controversial in Taiwan and there are lots of news about its legitimacy and the taxi drivers have went on the streets so there are lots of requests from ministry of life ministry of economic affairs ministry of finance ministry of transportation and communications we all feel the strong need to have a real in discussion about Uber so that's how the topic was decided at that moment and here are the stats we have 145 statements on poll days and 925 participants and 35 31,000 votes and here is the visualization of poll is survey here you can see there are group A and group B of roughly 300 and 20 versus 880 3 so this poll is like machine learning to help to cluster people into groups and to get a clear view on how the idea should be visualized as at groups and so you can see here his screen shots and this are the majority of opinions of group A and group B and the rough consensus like 93% of the poll is in right the drivers in the passenger both matter so same things for top priority as you can see both sides group A and group B all believe that and all concern most about safety of the driver and the passengers so the poll is surveyed the report generated on the backstage will tell you the majority of the opinions of each group so here are the suggestions for the majority that we interpreted from the report of poll is survey so the government should have a fair regulation of transportation and addressing the tax issue and also so we should call the rules of taxi disclosing the license frustration information on the vehicles and should be highly regulated in the same way as screen shots or should be registered and have mandatory insurance so here are the four aspects interpreted by the facilitator of UberCase based on the reports generated on the poll is surveyed and here is the how we hold the consultation meeting in 2015 so you can see from the left hand side on the other side we have the ministries so public official will sit at the left hand side of the facilitator and at the same video we see at the bottom of the U shape and we have legal experts and professors sitting at their left side of the facilitator and the right are the contributors community contributors and those who have contributed their own opinions on the poll is surveyed because those who have contributed will receive the information later letters so they've got the tickets once they contributed their own opinions and they can be seated there at the right hand side of the facilitator and also we invited Uber company Uber Inc in Taiwan taxiing the biggest taxi company in Taiwan and also a non-profit association of Taipei taxi company so this is the seating plan and you can see here at the moment that she was not the digital minister yet she was a volunteer a regular contributor of the Taiwan so she played the role of a senior and we used the live house in a live stream platform to live stream this conservation meeting so at the special stage the Ministry of Transportation communication they took the responsibility of ratifying so this is why one of the reasons why Uber said this stage should also be called as ratification so to use the definition of ratification to describe this stage and so the amendment went into the band as follows in 2016 so because this slide is uploaded on Hackbooker so I will go through that in details and here is the second case the CI case and its key feature is that it was proposed by one of the contributors and also the proposer so if Uber case can be seen as the top down and bottom up case but the CI case is purely a place that's bottom up it's not from the Ministry it's from the need and the need and the proposer from the contributors so it's bottom up case and it's the timeline of the CI case and it hasn't come to its way to the legislation stage so it's still an ongoing process and so in 2016-17 and being one of the leading hackathons there were two statements in the proposer so this is how it was proposed in the very beginning and here are the stats of the proposer and also use police to collect the general opinion from the general public and here is the visualization of the police survey of this case so the numbers weren't that high it's group A 57 versus 55 it did have some difficulties encouraging people to try to attract online users to do the survey and here is the majority opinions of group A and group B so a group A was more conservative while the group B was more liberal by conservative and liberal I mean they tried to define the definition of intimate images in different ways there's so much in the voice word the sexual orientation can also be seen as a part of intimate images while the conservative didn't think so but the consensus over 75% of the whole participants believe that it's a crime the action of non-consensual distribution is a crime and they both believe that it doesn't happen to public only because it also happens if your computer is hacked so it's not a public only situation and here is the city map of the consultation meeting and he only had many many mysteries joining the consultation meeting national development also national Ministry of Justice Ministry of Health and Welfare I don't know E yeah, Ministry of Education and also law professor and lawyer sitting at the right on the left hand side of this little figure so in the afternoon we'll also have a demo so I believe you have all collected you have your own college on your NMTAC so you were separately categorized into these for five different groups of stakeholders the big one is the online participants since they are now sitting in here in the new shape table we will have another group as online participants so you can also post comments on the chapter as we did consultation meeting and the stakeholder should filter out those opinions that he or she think it's valuable to bring in into a physical meeting room so that the online participants can contribute to this okay so this is a great introduction of the Taiwan I think we can go to the general so I think we can sort of like go ahead with questions and are there any questions so far yes how did you do your outreach to the community just to make them aware of the best of the consultation with the online participants we have a VTaiwan Facebook fan page so we will spread the news on the Facebook fan page and also every time we we host online opinion collection we will ask them if they would like to receive a letter to VTaiwan events so we possibly have collected a list of people who are interested in VTaiwan process so every time we have a new event that we will send invitation to by Eno and also by Facebook fan page but the numbers are in pie the number of the participants and those subscribers are in pie you mentioned that you have spaces in person consultation there are spaces for online contributors I guess who participated in the previous stage how are those contributors who appear in person selected we don't really select them because based on our own experience like for example if there are 100 participants only 3 or 4 would like to join in person so here right on the other hand side those seats are for community contributors roughly there are only 3 to 5 people who are willing to be because once they join the in person consultation meeting they will show their face of why they prefer to choose to participate via internet so they can stay anonymous especially in the TI case maybe the victims and the actors will they will be more willing to join on the internet so you haven't had troubles with more people wanting to come than you were able to come in but there are actually the problem lies in those who have contributed to the previous stage but they would like to show a big presence in the consultation meeting but because our role is that you have to have contributors so that you can get a ticket to sit in the table so we will only let them sit by the wall so they will not be last trained so the only person who will now see those who haven't contributed before the two pollers examples you showed have two groupings does pollism relate more than two but they don't regroup it means specifically a case order in general speaking when it pairs some minutes is it always two groups so there are more than it depends on the idea of floor the opinion yes I mean the traditional online questionnaire focuses on the number of specific options or specific choices but in Polish the feature is that they try to emphasize on the variety of comments and opinions so as target has explained yesterday the more diverse the comments the more interesting the visualization of all this so maybe because we will have a trial on Polish later so if you guys post videos in really diverse comments then you can see where your comments will fall into so maybe we will do that exercise so if you guys need coffee break or I'll go on to this very statement one so just in answer to your question the capacity of Polish itself you can break people into 45 groups not just by the week and in some cases the group merge over the discussion so at first maybe four or five groups but when the discussion goes on sometimes I also want to respond to the address prepared question that I guess the 30,000 doesn't sound a lot compared to the whole nation but the answer I was I think special for digital regulation which means the image the regulation of drama the doctrine or the company laws something like that it's not like discuss the whole social welfare or the whole transportation system so it's focused on digital issues so far yes coffee break coffee break 10 minutes and just remember to if you guys had any questions I think I saw a couple and please pick those up thank you