Community Mobilization

Forecast for the Next 25 Years

The World Future Society tends to put out exceptional long range trends. The most recent list is interesting in so many was as it looks into a mix of positive and negative trends. The ecological impact of our ways are apparent in the trends; a mass extinction, floods, and peak water. The continued scientific advancements appear in terms of textiles, computer enhanced decision making, and a healthier population. Read on and go to the World Future Society site to see some analysis.

Forecast #1: The world will have a billion millionaires by 2025.

Forecast #2: Fashion will go wired as technologies and tastes converge to revolutionize the textile industry.

Forecast #3: The threat of another cold war with China, Russia, or both could replace terrorism as the chief foreign-policy concern of the United States.

Forecast #4: Counterfeiting of currency will proliferate, driving the move toward a cashless society.

Forecast #5: The earth is on the verge of a significant extinction event

Forecast #6: Water will be in the twenty-first century what oil was in the twentieth century.

Forecast #7: World population by 2050 may grow larger than previously expected, due in part to healthier, longer-living people.

Forecast #8: The number of Africans imperiled by floods will grow 70-fold by 2080.

Forecast #9: Rising prices for natural resources could lead to a full-scale rush to develop the Arctic.

Forecast #10: More decisions will be made by nonhuman entities.

Social Networks and Fundraising

Non Profit organizations are being drawn towards large social networking sites at a rapid pace, due in large part to the density of potential volunteers. One of the organizations looking to recruit new donors is the International Humanitarian Foundation. The group recently launched the $10/1000 campaign focusing on attracting 1000 new donors at $10. "Social networking has the power to effect change in our world. We can reach the people we know will be interested in our work in a viral manner," said IHF President Amish Parashar.

Part of the allure continues to be massive scope and size of these spaces, but no one has really tried to quantify the quality for specific actions. There have been no research studies that I have seen that help fund raisers better understand conversion rates in social networks, and ROI for each fund raised dollar. IHF suspects tha the overwhelming majority of new donors will be 1 to 3 degrees away from existing IHF volunteer, which speaks to the assumption that the web technology allows for stronger reach across weaker ties but we still do not know how strong or how far that reach can go.

Growing Up Online

I have been watching, piece by piece, a really solid series from PBS called 'Growing up Online'. It is an amazing set of well produced videos that take a look at so many of the social, academic, and communication aspects of the new digital reality.

The series did a admirable job look at the sociological implications on how we as generations communicate with each other and the boundaries that we face in communicating. The amazing points come in in section three where the conversation focuses in on the creation of identity. Social spaces are more than places to create connections, they are spaces to create whole new selves that exist exclusively in digital.

From a civic engagement perspective the question is how important to 'you' is it to be engaged? How central to your sense of self, to your identity is volunteering for a charity, supporting the troops, expressing your affinity for cause? I wounder what is more central to online identify; who you associate with, the material objects (brands) you associate with, or the your beliefs (civic engagement / volunterism)?  Is online identity really so much more juvenlie or is it in line with the realities of age appropriate self expression? As we as a society over schedule kids and force them to grow up faster are internet spaces not a marginally safe outlet for them to buck the trend?

Even the French are Futuring

I just read that the French government is launching a foresight initiative called "France 2025".
The objective of the initiative (I am roughly translating) is to produce a strategic diagnostic for the next 15 years, describing the different possible futures for France, defining the means to seize the best business opportunities and limit risks of more threatening scenarios.

During several months, parliamentarians, social partners, senior servants, experts and civil representatives will work on 8 major issues for the future of France: globalisation and its consequences; organization of the productive workforce; developing France's innovative and creative capabilities; protection against new risks; social cohesion; limited resource management; impact of technology on daily life; and the future of the State and public services.

Social Multitaskers and Social Value

Forester just released a report linking social value to social multitasking. The report poses an interesting idea and I am going to take a stab at concocting my own argument to support it, and then propose why it is all rubbish.

Social multitaskers I would define as people involved in a number of social spaces, either in real life or on virtual and electronic communities. I'll even add in that the social spaces need not be mutually exclusive.The fact that they are involved in unique named and purposed groups is good enough for me.

So the argument that Social Multitaskers have higher social value is true in a broad sense. Involved in numerous circles they have the a potentially greater reach than the average person. They touch entirely separate groups giving them a high potential to motive and mobilize a greater volume of people for a cause or action. In terms of resources they also hold an advantage in that they posses a larger pool to poll when seeking assistance.

But reach in of its self is simply a lousy metric. I think reach tells nothing about impact. Regardless of the number of folks you can reach if you have no relationships to leverage individuals to action. This is where I have a hard time with this theory. There are a number of people who are dedicated to a single community. They are involved and have strong ties to leverage people into action. I would be curious which set up has the most actual power, not potential power.

Community Generated Points of Interest Maps

Simpatigo is a unique map API that allows individuals to post points of interest with descriptions. The system encourages users to include and post their personal favorite points of interest with meta tags. Unlike the Yellow Arrow project Simpatigo does not have a real world land mark component yet.

Aside from simply being interesting both examples are indicative of the next phase in new media and consumer created experiences. At a point the technology empowers all of us to create our own interactions by picking and choosing not just what the travel book recommends, but what people more like us recommend. Individually our interests are so diverse that there is inherent value in collecting  everything and then letting users filter the information as they see fit.

Poverty and Internet Access

A Cornell University and University of Toronto study address the lack of internet connectivity and the citizens in the lower socio economic classes. An interesting conclusion from the research was that Americans with low income and education levels are less likely to have Internet access than their wealthier, better-educated counterparts, but they spend more time online when they do have access.

Low-income families use the Internet for researching products they may purchase, gathering health information, and reading the news. However they spend more time communicating (e-mail, chat) and gaming. There is a macro economic case to be made here that if everyone had access to the vault of information that is the internet society would benefit.

If everyone had access to information about health and wellness we could lessen the strain on our health care system. If we all had information about products we could expedite recalls and prevent purchases of dangerous or overpriced products. If we all had equal access to art, music, human rights information society as a whole could benefit.