 So our next speakers are Annette Cicciusca and Dr. Dr. Vega. I'm just going to bring up your presentation. Yes, of course, yes. So let's just get this slide up. Wow, it's amazing to see so many of you here, especially after lunch. Welcome. So, let's see if I get this right. Is it down? Yeah, the agenda. You don't need to see that. That's fine. Who are we? We're the Future Fox. We obviously like Foxes. We are a transport tech company for good. We specialize on community engagement, CTs, and sustainable transport. So you will not see us doing automated vehicles. We are a specialist in using new techniques like human-centered design and rapid prototyping. We're currently developing a civic tech tool, which is called Street Builder. A street builder will allow people to transform the local street. We intend to disrupt local planning. And that's us. Right, so why is this an important topic? Smart cities versus civic tech? So the majority of the global population live in cities, and that's projected to rise until 2030, and then it'll still be rising after 2030, maybe at a slower rate. And that just provides an enormous amount of data because there's so many interactions with people and services. So it's a really ripe place for a lot of civic tech focus, which I'm sure you know about. But as business people in this sector, we have to understand the market. And the smart cities market is just vast. It's where all the talking is happening, but it's also projected to be a trillion dollars quite soon. And then you compare that to the sort of what's available for civic tech, and it's a really kind of different picture. And we face this when we're trying to develop our tool as well. So smart cities are really exciting because there's loads of things that you can measure and stuff. This is a picture from, well, this is an Africa Business Insight website, which is actually DHL, so okay, fair enough, it's like a bit of a different lens. But the immediate thing for me in this picture is just where are all the people? There's no people in here. It's all about systems. And ultimately, if you're talking about cities, there's not going to be cities without people in them. So this is kind of the driver for a lot of our work. Going back to definitions, and it's great, we're new to civic tech, it's great to hear. There's not like a really clear definition of civic tech. We kind of consider civic tech as a subset of smart cities. In smart cities, you can say the end user or the consumer is the citizen. And civic tech, we consider as the key crowd participants. There's quite an active involvement. Smart cities could be for people, civic tech by people. But if you look at kind of in a skeptical way, you could say smart cities meet authority outcomes as set that's supposed to help people, but actually all of that is questionable. I think we talked about in governance and civic tech is really for people. So that's kind of what we're working from. And following on that, we were scratching our heads thinking, right, okay, now we know more or less what smart cities are, but what are they really? So we set up in this quest of looking at smart cities measures, specific measures in the number of cities. And we came across with a lot of them and we surveyed quickly, discovered that we came to this Eureka moment and we thought, oh my god, there's different generations of smart cities implementations. This is our paper and then we googled it and this guy had done it before. So that happens all the time. It's a really good definition. We really like it. So first generation is the technology is basically driven by private companies to governments and say, buy my fancy thing is going to sort out your life. And there's very little thought about what it's actually going to do. So the efficiency, the outcome is not very well defined. Second generation cities realize that they just bought something really expensive. They don't want to do it again. And so they start leaving on what they think is a smart city. They set out the agenda and then they decide how to use the technology. Third generation, co-creation is a big massive step change. It really jumps. You could almost say that it's fourth generation and it completely turns around and the city embraces its citizens and it's the citizens who decide what a smart city means. And so what we did for our analysis is... We started mapping these specific measures against two basic outcomes. System efficiency and desirable social change. So system efficiency being kind of reducing waste, reducing cost, reducing the time they spend doing things. Desirable social change, well, it is what it says. And we came up with some interesting outcomes. So a lot of open data, a lot of open data. I mean, it makes things more efficient. The desirable social change with some degrees. New Zealand was interesting because as part of their open data for the city, they started integrating, you see the typical things. Transport, air quality and a few other things. And New Zealand started looking at art, access to sports, access to sport facilities, education. So a little bit moving towards civic tech. They're not there yet. So a sort of a success that London claims to have done around smart cities is what they call tech city, which is basically getting lots of start-up communities together and talking about using data around city problems. And fair enough, this is a great thing to do, but it's not really producing the social outcomes. It's creating a business, fine, but a lot of the business outcomes of that are not really affecting social change. This is a true double act. We're practicing for Eurovision. Public Wi-Fi is one that we saw all the time. It's kind of very common. And I think the reason why it's there is not because it's weird based per se, but the decision to put in public Wi-Fi, it changes a lot. Some people do it for, some cities do it for the sake of it just to have public Wi-Fi. Some cities do it because they really want social change. So, yeah, an interesting one. I wouldn't say weird, but interesting nonetheless. Okay, it's not working. Oh, wrong button. So a smart city that's often built is sort of the holy grail of smart city, which is in construction now, Sungdo city in South Korea. It's a walkable city. It's brand new. There's just incredible internet things connected sort of thing. One of the big features there is this RFID home security system where it involves parking, access to your homes and stuff. The point of the city is to get people out and sort of living in this great city because the services are really close to them. But conversely what's happened, and fair enough it's a bit early to judge, but what's happened, people are so comfortable and they've got so much security, they feel very secure at home, so they stay at home and they're not actually interacting. And for us from sort of an urban planning perspective, it's a very successful kind of social environment for a city. Oh, so you would have heard of Cambridge Analytica. It's not really sort of a relevant category here, but similarly talking about data and security. So they set out to achieve system efficiency in politics and helping candidates work out who to target. But as we've seen, it's gone pretty weird. Singapore, you'll probably know about that from a civic tech perspective more than us and had left together at some point. One of the exciting things that they've implemented is real-time traffic control. They were really advanced in road pricing but they've put in some great data and it gives sort of citizens this kind of real understanding of why they can't drive into the city. But what you see, so the result of this is that efficiency on the road has gone up. So traffic speeds have gone up to about 27km an hour. But from again an urban planning perspective and from the way that cities need to become more sociable, that's actually taking us in the reverse direction from sort of social outcomes. You want to reduce, keep traffic speeds kind of low to make it a livable city. City Mapby, what they've heard about. Again, they set out probably just to make transport a bit more user centred. But they're actually doing quite a lot around system efficiency, so integrating with public authorities. Singapore's on demand bus services being trialled at the moment. That's a really interesting one. Uber is sort of the counter example. You're creating, Uber tends to generate new trips in cities which take you away from the desirable social change. But on demand bus services is actually kind of beneficial for the wider public. But also making this city more efficient. I'm just going to skip ahead because I don't want to run out of time. Fix My Street from My Society, which you love very much. It's kind of somewhere in the middle, so it's efficient because it's working with local authorities and helping them process data. Ordinary people more of a control over their streets to change things. And as we understand, they're going more in the system efficiency routes by integrating fully with local authority reporting. Street Bank is something that launched several years ago actually, probably ahead of its time. It's a peer-to-peer lending site, so if you've got an electric drill you only use it for one minute every year or something. So there are plenty of neighbours that could just borrow that drill from you. It means you don't have to buy that drill. And that's kind of making people more get to know their neighbours a bit more. But a colliery to that is maybe eBay where it's kind of a similar process, but it's actually driving sales and you're getting more consumption. So we started supporting a trend, so if you can see most of the activities that are measures there are first generation led by private companies. Then you start getting to the second generation once and they're still all about efficiency. And when we started looking at third generation there was a civic tech. And so if you look at Amsterdam, I just pick up one of probably 30 examples they've got. It's really truly participatory. It's absolutely overwhelming. And one of the things they've got is, which is close to our street builder, is a platform for people to design, for older people to design their street spaces. It's absolutely fascinating and they've got 30 different versions of this, so it's really fantastic. And sorry, yeah. Yes, similarly another quite interesting one, which seems quite basic, but really exciting. There was no information on local services in one of the districts called in Kibera. Citizens produced a map. It was their initiative. They generated the right information, so rather than somebody like Google coming and saying this is the information that you need, they identified what services they wanted on this map. And the interesting kind of social change element here is that it's because that's the kind of information that people thought was important, so women travelling alone have highlighted the safe routes and that's not something Google would have picked up. It leaves me with a jewel in the crown which is Medellin. Medellin used to be the most dangerous city in the planet and it's now reduced homicide rate by 80%. And partly or the vast majority of this has been reduced through participatory programs. They have an incredible platform, Civic Tech Platform, which is called where you can do participatory budgeting or you can consult, produce ideas and you have indirect communication with the mayor. It's born awards and the key thing for Medellin was the outcome for this smart city was integrating society better. So it wasn't about traffic, it wasn't about smart technology, it was about integrating society, social change. So that was quite fascinating in fact. And so, I mean, there's a lot to say about the research, one of things we found is there's a lot of data but not necessarily the right data. So the analysis is a bit qualitative because the data that there is there is quite difficult to come up with something that measures efficiency or proper outcome. But anyway the main insight we have is Civic Tech almost always produces efficiency naturally. The outcome is social impact but by doing that from the outset you become more efficient as a city. Data led smart city initiatives have indirect social outcomes but of course because it's not the main objective they're often quite weird or flawed and a lot of cities spend a lot of money on kind of crazy tech. Smart city initiatives are driven by efficiencies but defining the type of efficiency is important and often misused and this is key and it's the case of Medellin it's when the efficiency is highlighted and it's social benefit then we're talking about completely different solutions and completely different approach. And this is maybe a bit obvious but also it kind of confirms our starting point but Civic Tech has the ability to and must do more to compete with the efficiency based smart city initiatives so fix my street definitely doing that but we need to have more because there is this big market but if it's not taken then you have the very efficiency based smart city stuff with weird social outcomes taken over or maybe Civic Tech could complement those smart sort of classic smart city approaches with additional social impact outcomes I don't really know how that would work but something for you to think about. And then finally smart cities have all of this marketing stuff everyone's talking about it, loads of money's going into internet things, AI all of that is kind of and even Citizen Empowerment actually Intel we're talking about Citizen Empowerment through their smart cities work but is that really the case and yeah we could just let them do it or Civic Tech Services could sort of try and control that dialogue a bit more. Right so we have a bit of a challenge now I think we've got a few minutes yeah six minutes okay very rapid challenge so our insights into design challenge I'm just going to skip down to number three because this is kind of applies to all and it's quite easy for a post lunchtime session how might we make your Civic Tech Service more smart city friendly so the challenge is we're going to ask you to spend a minute just brainstorm me they gave you post it notes in your bag which is really helpful spend a minute thinking about your Civic Tech Service and how you can invert it into more smart friendly terms and it could be in a light way or a more fundamental way and then we're going to come back to you and build on that idea there's a few rules before we do that so it's all about quantity over quality so we want to see like five ten post it notes in a minute no idea it's a bad idea we actually want those crazy ideas be concise they can fit it on a post it note that's great and do exaggerate make it really really big okay is everyone clear so I'm going to give you one minute alone to think about how you can make your Civic Tech more smart city friendly the clock's running okay brilliant thank you everyone so we're going to go through them very quickly we cannot spend too much time with your ideas just want to say two things the outcome of this exercise it's got two main important things one it's a great tactic for us not to speak so much and prepare less so we're very clear the other one is we really think that Civic Tech can take over smart cities and that we can make a massive difference and overtake this kind of crazy idea of just selling technology for the sake of it and Civic Tech take over the smart city market without further ado where should we start who wants to have a go first this table here give us a couple of ideas come on we just need a couple of ideas from the crowd what did you come up with oh there's one over there there's an example which is not a public white house but kind of a mesh router system that is kind of decentralized like citizens who else who else wants to give us an idea a couple of ideas who else someone's volunteering somebody else and crowd sourcing if anybody would say where they have to go per day and you could then find the most effective routes to AI so people can just car share brilliant brilliant thank you thank you thank you thank you very much thank you very much to Annette and her mum for that so it was a very interesting presentation