I know what you're thinking!
Wok Star?!
That girl is never getting a job in government!
And you know what?
You're probably right!
Why is that?
Well, it turns out that my playful tone just doesn't properly match
the sober affection best suited for the world's most wicked problems!
Now, you may not have heard of wicked problems and that's ok,
but it's how we talk about challenges and policy.
There are social challenges that are extremely difficult to solve
and resistent to resolution.
Where solving one aspect of the problem inherently unravels others.
In this way, they are also not very cool problems,
like, "Oh, my god, that problem is so wicked!"
or, "Hey society, where did you get that wicked problem?!"
So, we've got problems.
More than 99 of them, and lots of them are wicked.
From poverty to health care, the environment, nuclear weapons,
education and Rob Ford.
(Laughter)
(Applause)
And you've got me!
With vacillating levels of seriousness and over there, government!
Which frankly, takes itself a bit too seriously.
And yet, policy making is a sort of game.
It's one where we try to make society better and get things done.
In fact, it's a four player pursuit refereed by the media,
where the public service, NGOs,
experts and the private sector
jostle for power and influence.
Just like this, and they jossle so intensely
that they overlook the public who watches from the sidelines.
That's right, public policy keeps forgetting about the public.
By the way, that's you.
And if you want to be a player in the process by all means,
but your moves are few.
You could protest, write a letter make a deputation, attend a consultation
or tweet passive aggressively.
(Laughter)
The process forces you to be reactive not proactive.
So, where do we look for some policy-style inspiration?
Imagine that the city of Toronto asked you to help allocate the municipal budget.
A city in Brazil, Porto Alegre, has been doing just that since 1989.
Or what if the political party you support crowdsource their election platform
asking you to shape and inform their priorities?
Hold the phone!
Is there a place for such tomfoolery in something as serious,
as rigorous and as important as public policy?
There can't be.
And what you need to know is this:
Get your notebooks out you're going to want to write this down.
Somebody zoom in on me.
(Laughter)
There are two Ps in 'public policy'.
There's a 'p' in 'public' and there's a 'p' in 'policy'.
But that's not what I mean!
I want to explain that there are actually two kinds of policy:
there's big 'P' policy and there's small 'p' policy.
Big 'p' is the articulation of a course of action that's intended to influence.
It's more formal, typically regulated.
Big 'P' is bills and laws and acts and is, by no means, a child's play
but that doesn't mean we can't play around with it.
Last year, Iceland rolled the dice and they crowdsourced their constitution.
Small 'p'.
Small 'p' is the articulation of a standard.
It's less formal, typically unregulated, and lots of small 'p' innovations
happens thanks to the ingenuity of ordinary people.
Think of something like the Rocket Radar app,
a privately developed application that lets you know
when the next street car or bus is coming, down to the minute.
That was made possible by the government practice of open data.
Another cool example is how some walk-in clinics or doctors
will now text you when it's finally your turn, sparing you
that mind-numbing wait.
These are user-led improvements to public processes
that make things better for everyone.
And that's exactly the same vision that drives big 'P' policy change.
This guy, small 'p', is a sandbox for the public good
and it's where we can start to get in the ring with these wicked problems.
What else is going on in the ring?
Last year, this random computer gamer solved an AIDS research problem
that has been stumping scientists for 15 years,
using an online game called "Fold it!"
It took the gamers 3 weeks.
This is an example of how the public has a place
when those experts are spinning their wheels.
In 2007 Americans played the alternate reality game
"World Without Oil".
The simulation helped players imagine what a peak oil crisis might be like
which in turn, helped players engineer solutions.
What I like about this example is that it wasn't mandated by government,
the public made their place
and the result has obvious benefits for the state.
I said there were two p's in public policy and I want a third: 'play'!
And should we proactively just play around with problems?
Games aren't new, I know that.
But what is new, is the notion that there is a link
between the elements of games and widespread productive participation
in policy making.
In Canada, we are ignoring the merits of gamification, crowdsourcing
and mass collaboration.
And what I am endorsing is a brave new policy world
that's more inclusive, experimental and daring.
And more small 'p' can be the catalyst we need for big 'P' to stand up
and take note of new, hot ways for getting shit done.
Policy makers, I haven't forgotten about you!
Don't think I worte my talk thinking you wouldn't be here or watching online
and can we give it up for people watching online from work?
(Applause)
You guys, I 'Triple Dog' dare you to come out and play!
But first I need you to recognize
that's there is a serious place for play in policy.
As for the rest of you, policy spectators,
you can be an extraordinary source of surprising solutions
that our most pressing and yes, even wicked problems!
But there is only one way to find out.
Ladies and gentlemen, your move!
It's the end!
(Applause)
Thank you!
(Applause)