Hi Patrizia,

I am not familiar with specific cases, but this may be close to your question https://oecd-opsi.org/innovations/ilabthon/

You may also check OPSI website more in depth, they may have other similar cases.

Hope it helps :)

Dear Patrizia,

Here in Brazil, we have "G.Nova"

GNova is the pioneering innovation laboratory of the Brazilian federal government. They act with a lot of ministries and agencies and they are located at ENAP (our government school).

The only time that a government has been able to plan a high impact collaboration across all ministries and administrative levels as well as across all sectors, was in the 1980's. The government of Singapore attempted to introduce Electronic Interactive Democracy (EID) for all the people of Singapore, but, they made the mistake of collaborating with British Telecom (BT) which alerted the British Prime Minister at the time, Mrs Thatcher, to this plan.

She was a very smart woman and realised that if it were to succeed, it would end the involvement of all party politicians in the administration of all nations, so she dissuaded the Singaporeans from pursuing such a technological innovative action, by simply pulling the plug on their collaboration with BT and ending EID, for at least the next 50 years.

Her claim, at the time, was that the technology wasn't reliable enough to be used for democracy, but, I noticed that it clearly was reliable enough for banks and for the money world, even at that time. Times are changing very fast, Patrizia, and I have described a paradigm which demonstrates that it does work now, and what's more, it can also be used to imbue new attitudes in a new idealistic society too!

Thanks a lot, Roberto, Bruno and Adrian.

@Adrian: are there any conceptual documents on EID?

Best wishes, Patrizia

@Patrizia - I first came up with the idea in the late 1980's but didn't act upon the concept until I heard that Mrs Thatcher said that EID would never work. She quickly blocked Singapore from working with British Telecom and even from trying it. Ultimately, I just left it up to others to devise and promote because to my mind, the idea was simple and ephemeral and someone else would make some capital out of pushing it through, but they just didn't.

In 1997 when the Scottish Socialists seized power in England, I realised that the electorate had been tricked into voting for them, and those people who voted Labour, had actually voted for Scottish party politicians to take over the running of England and to legislate for the abolition of England and the nation of England, yet millions of English people still existed. They nevertheless did it, and promptly abolished England and they replaced the name of the English monarch and the territory of England, with the new name of Britain accompanied by dozens of social engineering projects designed to make English people think that they were multicultural British and were never anything else previously.

From the turn of the century onwards, whoever I spoke to about EID looked at me blankly and seemed to deliberately argue with me about it in an ad hominem fashion, whereas, EID is clearly and deliberately an ab hominem concept aimed at returning power to the individual rather than extending power to groups of rich powerful international aristocrats who don't value individuals unless they are producing wealth for governments and large businesses.

The point is: I've only recently written down the concept into a demonstrable and working paradigm in conjunction with the life-long learning objective of National Virtuous Citizenship (NVC) and they work together in harmony and discipline to change the aim of humanity into a obligatory force of good for status and benefits rather than for a free for all of greed, gain, violence and a free world of asymmetric structure which puts those who are caught behind bars (so to speak) and those who are not caught or who have connections, in charge.

The book will be called The Ideal State Of Being (ISOB) with the sub title of Citizenship by the Correct Rules, and it will not be published in the usual manner, because the book contains a detailed instruction manual of how to abolish party politics, party politicians, crooked Parliaments, Senates, Assemblies etc through people power and through a reliance on the fact that most people are good and desire genuine democracy, not through military means, but by popular consent. The ISOB is not written using the usual academic features and references, because ordinary people wouldn't care about the academic scientific method of critical analysis, the quoting of authorities, formulae and evidence, but instead, the pubic defers to the logical truth, which is often a much more of powerful means of persuasion than anything else.

I will answer questions about the system of the ISOB and EID with the principles of NVC here, and post updates and further information on its functioning and it's systems and methodologies. Anyone who's interested in social fairness and justice and the return of a positive balance in society, will be able to see just how it can be achieved if certain deleterious elements can be successfully (and peacefully) removed, pro bono, and replaced with individuals and systems which support the mode of thinking which leads to goodness and virtuous individuals. In short, the aim is to turn crooked societies on their heads, and shake all the money out of their pockets so that good people can benefit from their own hard earned wealth, and those who simply collect wealth from the legalised crookedness and false promises of the corrupt, will be prevented from continuing to do so and returned to origin.

Thanks a lot, Adrian!

Hi Patrizia

You can also check this article: Tõnurist, P., Kattel, R., & Lember, V. (2017). Innovation labs in the public sector: what they are and what they do? Public Management Review, 19(10), 1455-1479.

Hi Patrizia,

We've been looking a lot at your question in regards to data governance and sharing across government and the social sector, so would also mention the Ash Center at Harvard University: https://ash.harvard.edu/

'the Lab' is embedded within municipal government in Washington, DC and does really interesting work around your question: https://thelab.dc.gov/

Hope these help and good luck!

Governments work with Political Think Tanks which are intimately involved with the political leadership and they produce ideas which are desirable and feasible for the political direction in which the party seeks to go in.

EID and NVC are not in the interests of party politicians nor of representative assemblies since genuine democracy is not in their political vocabulary and would undermine their tyrannical and despotic dictatorship based in modern business corruption and supra national institutions intervening in national policy.

Money supply and international banking has become the lever which obliges governments to obey oligarchs and multibillionaire Globalists and so political policy and law.

Thanks a lot, Mehmet for mentioning the article of 2017.

@Dan:

Dear Dan,

I am actually familiar with the Ash Center (with Archon Fung we have initiated and launched participedia.net), but not of the lab in Washington DC.

Thanks a lot and best wishes, Patrizia

Hi,

This might be useful...

--> https://oecd-opsi.org/bi-projects/

Governments don't act in the interests of people, nor of innovation labs, collaboratively nor in any other human sense. They follow their manifestos which are composed and influenced by foreigners and foreign business aims, and almost never with home business aims nor anything which could remotely be associated with humanity.