 Good day. Good morning for us. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. So we have on the call Audrey. Thank you very much for joining. Much appreciated. We have Aurora as well I think. Yes, I'm here. Great. And then we have Mili Begovic from UNDP and Indy Johar from Dark Matter myself also from Dark Matter. So, yeah, like I said, thank you very much for joining. Really much appreciated. Also, of course, completely happy for, of course, use those medical transparency protocols. Phenomenal. Great. You have that. How much time do you have? Would 20, 30 minutes be okay? Well, I have maybe three hours, but we're not going to solve it. I have to get dinner at some point. Yeah. Okay, good. Well, we won't need three hours. I was going to ask if you're if you're happy with that to Mili and Indy to introduce Istanbul Innovation Days, explain a little bit about what happened last year and how we want to frame it this year and your potential role in that. Shall we do it like that? Yes, I have read some preliminary materials and also our Ministry of Economy has sent delegation also to Istanbul for the Global Entrepreneurship Network for GEN and we're doing a GC plus Taipei later this year focusing on social impact with AI plus IoT. And I was also tele-presenting in Istanbul also for the GEN. So I have some, not a lot, but familiarity with the setup. But yes, please do introduce yourself. Super. So, Indy, maybe I can jump in with a sort of brief background as to what we're trying to do from the UN and then hand it over to you for some of the big picture questions and issues that we're opening. So at the UN, obviously the brand of the UN has come under quite a bit of attack over the last two years with the work that we do. And from our perspective, part of that attack is somewhat just insofar as the work that we're doing has not really caught up with the progress that has been happening outside the UN. So one of the one of the intentions behind Istanbul Innovation Days is to be able to pick up and flag some of the big picture issues, some of the big picture risks that the governments are facing around the world that we certainly do not have answers for, but others outside the UN do. So what we would like to do is one, be able to advocate and raise them and to bring together a coalition of people who are far smarter than those who we have working within the UN to talk about their approaches, their thinking, their practical work on addressing them so we can make very practical links with the governments we work with in a hope that we can accelerate the adoption and translation of some of the emerging trends into the existing policy. So this is just a very short background to the Istanbul Innovation Days. Last year, the topic that we picked was innovation policy labs are mushrooming all over the world, but when you look at the work that they do, to a large extent, they haven't really been able to create massive amount of political support and investment that you see being driven towards military establishment or towards health care reform. Why is that? So these are, we had about 45 labs from around the world and that frustration really comes from the practitioners themselves. All of you saying labs have really become small siloed delivery units that are incapable of generating momentum and movements. So how do we need to restructure to do work differently? So this was from for last year. For this year, we're questioning how has the concept of governance changing given all the progress that we're seeing outside? And I'm going to hand it over to Indi now to sort of share some of those questions and very particular reason why we reached out here. Thank you, Mili. It's really an honor to be here and actually thank you for taking the time to join us. As Mili was saying, I think one of the big conversations that we think is really missing is kind of what does the future of governance look like? And UNDP has been very successful historically at looking at development practice in the last 40 years has been very advanced, but over the last, so perhaps last 20 years, what's been happening is we've been looking at the bottom and like trying to build the bottom up rather than actually take a more global view of what is best practice. And the innovations that we're seeing perhaps aren't necessarily driven from quasi the Anglo-Saxon economies, but actually more globally, we're seeing more advanced, advanced behaviors in innovation happening around the world, which are perhaps challenging even orthodoxies that we've seen developed and axioms that we've seen developed within global discourse. And what we wanted to do, so what we want to talk about is next generation governance and the multiple frames that we're talking about is a change of power, looking at smart legislation all the way through to the kind of not even just everyone's talking about code law, but the reality of code law is not just the act of writing law as code or regulation as code. It's what's your policy formation method? How are you going to make legitimacy around that policy formation method? How are you going to drive legibility around it? How do you drive citizen scrutiny around it? So what we're seeing is effectively a massive transformation in the needs of governments and most of our governments thinking we would informally argue as perhaps out of date to the network effects and the nature of how power is being organized in the 20th century. And it's been operating and most of the governance models have been operating on siloed models of power as about the network models of power. And as a result, not really being able to address the kind of fundamental failure we're seeing of governance in terms of whether it's climate change or whether it's inclusive growth or whether it's any of the big strategic issues that we see around it. Absolutely. All the big goals. And as a result, so that's why we're here. And actually what you'll find is all of us are practitioners including Millie, although she pretends she's not. Everyone here does crazy stuff. So when we heard your story and when we heard what you were doing, in fact, I fell in love when I saw the bottom of your footer saying we want all your videos to be openly recorded and transmitted. I was like, this is great because I think this is about personal behavior as well as it is about technical behavior and actually how we comprise and build that relationship. And then obviously your journey into this process of how you created the framework around renegotiating the relationships between platforms and actually existing drivers and how you create the new norms and thereby also actually arise to being the digital minister itself. That whole process is a fantastic experiment but also in terms of the new ways of addressing power, the new ways of negotiating, the new ways of actually driving legitimacy to that conversation. So it's the behaviors as well as the technologies. And then obviously manifest in exactly the new protocols that are emerging and the challenges to those protocols. So one of the counter challenges is obviously the UK has been in some sense is very good about driving a radical transparency of expenditure. So up to 500 pounds every government expenditure pretty much is blocked but it had zero impact in terms of trust, zero impact in terms of growing trust. So what we've seen is this mass proliferation of data and maybe some of that data is illusionary and maybe you all know the videos and the informal controlling the informal mechanisms is more significant. So we personally thought it would be great to have you in Istanbul firstly, so that would be one thing. Two, I think it would be great to have you as a keynote as we're looking to advise, bring some ministers together and perhaps even one or two prime ministers that I'll let Millie talk about. So we'd love to have you in that senior sort of conversation and then also if you'll be up for it, we'd love to have you talking about your experiment and actually talking through how you did the negotiation all the way through to the behaviors and the implications because we want this to be a kind of a workshop around the experiments. We will have many UNDP officers and country facilitators from around the world to build new networks and new discourses around this sort of leadership. So the end result which isn't public yet we are trying to negotiate is we would like we're looking to build effectively some form of capacity to be able to invest in experiments over a period of time globally around this stuff. So we would love to keep you involved in this process but it's a great first beginning. I don't think there's much more I can say other than thank you for making the time but that's really the scope of what we'd like love you to do. We'd love you to do the kind of keynote panel and as well as actually work with us in the experiments which will be one or two days because I think your story and the way you negotiate it is actually really powerful leadership for other leaders around the world who think about how they negotiate these sort of incumbency and new tech challenges and building fair equitable pathways when we have monopolistic power on one side threatening some of commodifying actually a lot of other people. So how you negotiate that is really powerful. So with that I'll stop sorry. Yeah just very briefly adding to that so when and he talks about experiments that's a particular frame that we're that we're exploring. What is the role of deliberate experimentation within government to explore the future of governance? How can we frame resource capacity build around next generation governance experiments right? So how we envisage a program to evolve is besides a short series of keynote and a keynote panel then to build to do deep dives into a series of structured policy experiments around a series of themes. So I'm not sure if you had a chance to read the blog that I sent the link to but we have outlined a series of fields of experiments such as there are about new ways of governing commons, new ways of governing ground violence and social justice issues and also new ways of governing around encouraging power dynamics and and issues around those. And so we want to make the case that framing next generation of deliberate policy experiments and reconfiguring machinery, government and community around capacity to do policy experimentation well is going to be and and the particular experiment referred to is the one that probably has to speak about a lot. So do let us know if you think that if you are sort of bored of speaking about that and want to speak about something else right they're very happy that the one that you particularly are aware of of course the is the one around people want and how that was framed. Now again, like I said that's now a few years ago. I think it still holds enormous relevance how the experiment is built up, how it was framed, how you managed to bring different tables, how you work. I think that that's the norm of tests elsewhere. But we can discuss that. Does that make sense for now? Do you have any questions for the session, the aim, etc? Yeah, that's great. So thank you for the introduction and I did read the next-gen government medium post. The zones of experiment they overlap or rather they mingle and it is far from clear just from the outline or the I guess I could call it a design brief how 3-day is going to be sufficient or like remotely begin to explore those possibilities. And so I have some like what are your focus or priorities in getting those experiments understood because a lot of these experiments that we do in Taiwan, in Piedas, we do it in a way that harnesses and mobilizes existing social movements. They could come from e-petition, they could come from the Occupy Movement, they could come from any of the self-organized movement and we basically just channel this energy into useful experiments. But the government itself, the state itself does not set the agenda and this is the core of my message really. But conversely, that means that any example that I make or any example that is shown during those days are going to be incomplete without the people actually doing the movement, you know, telling their story because I'm just a channel you see, through which their power amplifies and connects. And so I would like you to keep this in mind and I would also like to know that which of those radical experiments, I mean in Taiwan we have seen governments of all sorts that correspond to the thematic areas that you care about, would you like to focus on for this year in particular? Maybe Indy, I can take the first bit about the design of the event. So originally we didn't really plan to have an event per se. We plan to have a number of streams where on one stream we would be talking to about 10, 15 prime ministers both in the developing and developed context because these issues affect them both, create political space, identify areas where we can start investing in experiments and actually do them. But what we've realized is that at least in some of the regions where we work, which is Arab states, Africa, Caucasus, Central Asia, cabinet ministers, presidents and prime ministers are okay with flagging to us that they really do not have a single clue. What is the implication of artificial intelligence and determining the qualifications for entitlements? But being put in a room with their peers, they will not say this. Right? So it came to us that it might be a useful tactic to have a gathering whose duration is not going to give justice to the actual issues that we're addressing. It can do two things at minimum. One, be able to pull in high level peers of those who would be able to have a very frank discussion about what some of these drivers are, how are they affecting them and how are they dealing with them. And in that sense create that safe space for them to say I'm feeling the same thing. And two, generate excitement about the fact that these things are already happening by bringing in people who are doing very practical experimentation on the very edges of what we consider to be the next-gen governance. So this is my, I mean, Indie, Indie Overture, I know you have some ideas by the sort of specific examples, but this is the thinking about the event. Exactly. And I think it really is creating the space for that discourse, but also exactly what you said. A lot of people think this is a technology problem. And as you rightly pointed out, it's a channeling problem. It's how we channel and build legitimacy and create the frameworks for this conversation. So in a way, I think what you've done and how you've organized this, you've created, as I see it, you've created legitimacy models for experiments which are natural. You're not synthetically implying that. And actually what you're doing is not only building your intelligence in game building, you're building civic intelligence in game building in that process. So you're creating a symbiotic flow. And that I think is a really powerful, just even that, just even that is a very powerful thing to be described. Because I think government has a, in traditional formats, has a kind of not an enabling role, but perhaps more of a leadership role of saying this is what should be done. But actually how you're finding these edge experiments, how you're having critical discussions about where does, there is a really interesting conversation going on about the role of liquid democracy in driving more extreme right positions. So it drives a very autonomous reactionary thinking, whereas actually deep reflective thinking is a completely different model. So what are the kind of challenges that we see to kind of very individualistic thinking models versus actually deep reflective thinking models? So as we do this channeling work, how do we start to think and how do we start to build collective shared understanding? So even that social process would I think be a really powerful indication, but also for me, you know, a minister standing up saying, I want, I have every one of my videos meetings recorded and published, it's extraordinary leadership of personal behavior that I think deals with all the soft power issues that we have, the soft power issues, which are actually either literally driving some form of malpractice or literally creating the infrastructure for mistrust of government as a result of unknowns. So either way, it's negative. So this personal behavior that you bought to the table is also a great leadership perspective from my students. So these two things coming together in the role of power and the renegotiation of power and legitimacy becomes really powerful. So that's where we thought that you could take some real, show some real examples in the future. And just to answer a question around the practical example, one that seems to, as we go around traveling to different countries and talking about this to public sector colleagues, one experiment that really seems to get them to say to have an aha moment is the, is the plot, the Uber example, the ability, yes, the ability to facilitate a public discourse among the parties with very entrenched and oftentimes opposing interests and bring them around to the policy suggestions that they can come, that they can come through. Now, if I just, if I just say, oh, it's an online crowdsourcing of your opinions, people just look at me and say, well, how, we do that all the time. You don't. And here's why, in being able to take them through the motions of what is he that you guys have done that's different and how is he that you brought opposing sides around to suggest seven different policies is phenomenal. And then what has happened as a result? This is my sense. This is my pet project because I know many other things have happened. So this is the one that has made a difference. And just to add to that, your, your point very, very much taken that at one level, three days isn't enough. I think the point is, like Millie said, it's really a starting point and a rallying point where we recognize that a series of these experiments between UNDP and partner states might develop from there. And the aim of the of the of the sessions is very much to, to have a really detailed discussion around what we said around the actual practice, the craft to work around setting up these experiments so that really we can bring together people to build collective understanding of the subtleties nuances of behavior required to bring these to the next level so that when UNDP will work with partner states, for example, they will do this on their own. To craft these experiments, they will do so from a more enlightened understanding of the processes, the choices. And these are very much about today. And I think I think that I get to that where can make a difference in the minds between, we're doing that already, so not have to really do it. What you would actually be doing is X, Y and Z. And in these, I would like to say, have an open action. Allow it to be an open-ended process. Allow for the power of state, for example, for some of that to be self-proclaimed by certain groups in open discussion. Those, I think, are the things that we can do. That's what the governments and partners that we're talking to. This will be very, very interesting. So an example of a central European state where we might be working together to frame a series of examples of many. I won't frame it for you, but around environmental license. How do you do environmental licensing in a way that is quite interesting? How do you do that in a way that is open, in a way that is experience-able, et cetera? Those things might be, and very much developed by you, I think, are such a very important and a need for all of the practice around that. Just to add one thing practically, so most of the time is going to be spent on the experiments and we're going to be running them as parallel tracks. So I agree with you, three days is just not enough. We're not filling it with full of planaries and we're not filling it with full of keynotes. Actually, most of the time is separated out into actually long conversations around these themes and experimental discussions where we have two experiments, say one yourself and another one talking in detail around that stuff for a period of time, which is substantial. So what we're not doing is a series of planaries and that's just it. We're then breaking the group up into multiple streams and then having more detailed conversations to give the respect to the kind of have the discussion in detail and then facilitating the meta themes that are emerging and those experiments to be shared back with everyone else. Just in terms of person. Okay, that sounds pretty good. So how long is each this breakout sessions, like one hour or two hour? We're thinking currently about three hours. So what that hopefully enables us to do in one of these sessions is to do, apart from the training by a host, and so we'll have a series of conversation posts for each session, do a deep dive into one or two experiments, be to understand and then reflect on that of what that means for some of the people in the audience. So there'll be detailed sessions. Not nearly detailed, but we'll always do more to explore, but I think in what can be achieved in a kind of conference style setting, we'll have a lot to go on and I'm looking at Pili here. So she should confirm before, and again, if you feel it would be helpful in talking about you've done in terms of bringing trouble from key stakeholder groups to the table, if that would enrich the narrative. Maybe that's something that we can discuss, not that I think that one person can represent a whole series of different social groups stakeholder groups, but if you think that if you say that I was just channel for more people than you really may have, if some of those voices you prefer to stand was going on, then I think it should be discussed. Right, because there's the like politician minister level, which of course is very important, but there's also the career public servant level, which actually is the main stakeholder group to make such next generation governance happen. They're like the key group. And so here in Taiwan, what we have is of course a participation office or the PO network that are explicitly designed to create internal cross-ministerial network, to break down silos. I think it's my latest piece. There's a political write-up about that, about the PO network. So at least one PO from some ministry that is related to, because you know, Uber is just part of this platform economy, and platform economy touches all ministries practically. And so I think any PO would be in a much more qualified position to talk about kind of first their internal mindset change before and after engaging in this radical transparency stuff. And second, how they manage to work across silos, even within their own ministry in the agency level. And third, how after utilizing this rich-making, channel-making technologies, social technologies, they are able now then to talk truly with public in a multi-stakeholder fashion. And so a career public servant, a PO, I think it's critical if you have this three hour or so sessions because I'm not a career public servant. I was at the civil society side and now I'm in the politician side. So, but I've never been a career public servant before. And so that I think is critical to the conversation. And of course, if we can bring someone from the civil society who is currently organizing or channeling these kind of unrest turned into legitimacy collaboration, that would also be very helpful. So I would argue it's less critical because you're basically provoking the UNDP people and bureaucracy to rethink their position. And so I'm sure that they have heard from their local activists also similar messages. But I think it would be helpful to show some, you know, reports between the civil society and the career public servant here. So that that's optional, but I think still very helpful. And I think that are like the triangle that is really necessary to demonstrate a power dynamic at play of a anarchist minister. Otherwise, it's just a anarchist that happens to be a minister, if you know what I mean. I think that sounds great. I think that sounds absolutely perfect to be able to convene in that sort of way. And I think that would just be, I think those power dynamics and those relationships would be really brilliant to bring to the table. So yeah, we'll take that on board and try to make that happen. If you can find people and recommend people that you think would be great, obviously, that will rely on you to be able to identify those people. And that would be fabulous from our side. Millie? Absolutely. No, I agree. Because if we're able to have that triangle, then we have the political big picture perspective from you that's going to be incredibly influential. And then we have the mid-level career public servant. We have the civil society. So it's really, we are being the thing that we're talking about in a way through this session on power. So it's totally on board to make that happen. Okay, that's great. And so you're, I mean, I have to bring this up, but as a UN agency, you're okay to have career public servants and ministers from Taiwan participating. Yes. Okay, that's great. So let's make that happen. Yeah, okay. Are there practicalities to discuss? I mean, obviously, we're still in a stage of having conversations such as with yourself. So the program is very much something that is being developed and conversations such as these are helpful. I think you're right in pointing out that, of course, there is a degree of overlap or mingling between the experiments. A partial job is for us to frame them so that's where there's mingling, it's deliberate, and where there's just duplication, it's avoided. So that's for us. I think many of you could definitely say that the 27th of November would be a day where we have a series of keynotes, where we're inviting other prime ministerial people, but correct me if I'm wrong, Billy, and the experiments are 27th and 28th. And again, if we can have you with us and one or two of the people that you recommend, that would be wonderful. Now, what are some of the practicalities that you know from us? We can also discuss over email, of course, but maybe there are other questions that you want to bring up. No, I mean, I do have some engagements that I'll have to reschedule in order to make it in the flesh, but I, of course, assume that you want the opening day for me to be there in the flesh and answer questions instead of as a robot or something. And so, in which case, we'll make the other engagement in Taipei either reschedule it or, you know, I fly to Istanbul and then I do a conversation with artists in Taipei through telepresence. So maybe we'll have to allocate a couple hours of the schedule just for me to take a conference at Taipei. But I think all of this is still very manageable. I don't know whether Aurora has any questions or thoughts. Well, I'm not too many, but I'm really wowed because it's really a precious opportunity for us to be able to be included into a UNDP initiated project. So we feel very honored and very happy. I think the honor is really ours. It's very time to say that. But, you know, you really have no idea how excited we were when we got the initial sort of positive response from you and willingness to talk. You know, you guys are the story in a very practical demonstration of what we very much like to see in the parts of the world where we're working. So it's not blah, blah, blah. And that's all that matters. That's all that matters. So really, the honor is all ours. Can I just sort of just do some very simple things around, could you please look at the dates? Please take this as a confirmation, so there's no ambiguity about that. We would love to have you. So just in terms of that. But also, if there's any particular time slots that you have, that you were always saying a couple of hours, you could let us know as soon as possible, so we can just do the logistics behind that any well. My third request was going to be, if there's other ideas and other people that you in your networks want to recommend to us saying, Indy Millios, have a look at what's going on here, this could be really interesting to you. We are really open ears. So we would love to hear your referrals of any other experiments that you think that could be relevant to us. Please just throw them on our way. We are able to be quite agile and adaptive and be able to mix things up. So just to leave that frame open as well and the invitation for that sense. Sure, certainly. So the two hour block that I would reserve, if a teleconference happens, that would happen on the first day, on Tuesday, that's November 27th. And it would be, let's see, 2 p.m. in Taipei, which means minus five, right? So yeah, like nine. I think it's 11. No, no. Okay, right. Nine is right. You're at three plus three, yes. So maybe from nine to 11, I will have to do this teleconferencing stuff. Okay, I will be helping with these logistic issues and questions. Super. So we'll be in touch with you in terms of, we have all the names to make sure that we cover all the, you know, preserve the flights and the hotel and what have you. So we'll be in touch. Okay, that's it. Okay. Thank you so much. This was wonderful. Very efficient. And then finally, one hour. Indeed. But we will be in touch over the next couple of weeks, I think, with a more detailed outline of how we imagine we might run the session. Right. That we can then ask your response on and if you want and have time, we can do some code design around this. I mean, I think that's very much up to you in terms of how much session time input you think you want to get or are able to. But we will, we will do that aiming over the next couple of weeks. So that sort of we get a bit of creativity about what we can explore. Who else we might invite session to be present and speak and discuss, etc. So that will Right. So I would just mention one more thing, because almost all the civil society and participation officer network will be around in October five to seven in Taipei, which is the zero submit. And we also invite our international counterparts. And it's all I mean, I can send you the link and just maybe I'll just paste it to you here in this Skype group. But basically, if you have some travel budget, and you can actually make it here to Taipei, we can save a lot of time of emailing by having some face to face time and having all the right people in the same place and figure out how to make it really work. And that includes people who eventually gets invited, of course, but also people who in the civil society very much want to get their messages across and to frame the conversation in a way that feels comfortable to everyone in a truly multistakeholder way. And so I'm not like running the show of the summit or anything because it's a entirely civil society thing, but I will be presenting. And Peter's will join multiple panels as well. And so I think this is generally interesting, even just from, you know, you want experiments here are 20 experiments that's happening in Taiwan viewpoints. So we'll be following up. Yeah, that's fantastic. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you guys. We'll be in touch soon. Yes, so I'll just post this on YouTube. Okay. Yeah, thank you so much for your time. Thank you very much. Thank you.