1. Civic Engagement
1.1. Business
1.1.1. Triple bottom line
1.1.1.1. an accounting framework with three parts: social, environmental (or ecological) and financial
1.1.1.1.1. The people concept for example can be viewed in three dimensions – organisational needs, individual needs, and community issues.
1.1.1.1.2. Profit is a function of both a healthy sales stream, which needs a high focus on customer service, coupled with the adoption of a strategy to develop new customers to replace those that die away.
1.1.1.1.3. Planet can be divided into a multitude of subdivisions, although reduce, reuse and recycle is a succinct way of steering through this division.
1.1.1.2. corporate social responsibility
1.1.1.2.1. Top-level involvement (CEO, Board of Directors)
1.1.1.2.2. Policy Investments
1.1.1.2.3. Programs
1.1.1.2.4. Signatories to voluntary standards
1.1.1.2.5. Principles (UN Global Compact-Ceres Principles)
1.1.1.2.6. Reporting (Global Reporting Initiative)
1.1.1.2.7. A more common approach to CSR is corporate philanthropy. This includes monetary donations and aid given to nonprofit organizations and communities. Donations are made in areas such as the arts, education, housing, health, social welfare and the environment, among others, but excluding political contributions and commercial event sponsorship.[35]
1.1.1.2.8. Types of corporate social initiatives
1.1.1.3. Stakeholders engagement
1.1.1.4. Examples of stakeholders include employees, customers, suppliers, local residents, government agencies, and creditors
1.1.1.5. the business entity should be used as a vehicle for coordinating stakeholder interests, instead of maximizing shareholder (owner) profit
1.1.2. Circles of Sustainability
1.1.2.1. Economics
1.1.2.1.1. The economic domain is defined as the practices and meanings associated with the production, use, and management of resources, where the concept of ‘resources’ is used in the broadest sense of that word.
1.1.2.1.2. Production and resourcing
1.1.2.1.3. Exchange and transfer
1.1.2.1.4. Accounting and regulation
1.1.2.1.5. Consumption and use
1.1.2.1.6. Labour and welfare
1.1.2.1.7. Technology and infrastructure
1.1.2.1.8. Wealth and distribution
1.1.2.2. Ecology
1.1.2.2.1. The ecological domain is defined as the practices and meanings that occur across the intersection between the social and the natural realms, focusing on the important dimension of human engagement with and within nature, but also including the built-environment.
1.1.2.2.2. Materials and energy
1.1.2.2.3. Water and air
1.1.2.2.4. Flora and fauna
1.1.2.2.5. Habitat and settlements
1.1.2.2.6. Built-form and transport
1.1.2.2.7. Embodiment and sustenance
1.1.2.2.8. Emission and waste
1.1.2.3. Politics
1.1.2.3.1. The political is defined as the practices and meanings associated with basic issues of social power, such as organization, authorization, legitimation and regulation. The parameters of this area extend beyond the conventional sense of politics to include not only issues of public and private governance but more broadly social relations in general.
1.1.2.3.2. Organization and governance
1.1.2.3.3. Law and justice
1.1.2.3.4. Communication and critique
1.1.2.3.5. Representation and negotiation
1.1.2.3.6. Security and accord
1.1.2.3.7. Dialogue and reconciliation
1.1.2.3.8. Ethics and accountability
1.1.2.4. Culture
1.1.2.4.1. The cultural domain is defined as the practices, discourses, and material expressions, which, over time, express continuities and discontinuities of social meaning.
1.1.2.4.2. Identity and engagement
1.1.2.4.3. Creativity and recreation
1.1.2.4.4. Memory and projection
1.1.2.4.5. Belief and ideas
1.1.2.4.6. Gender and generations
1.1.2.4.7. Enquiry and learning
1.1.2.4.8. Wellbeing and health
1.1.2.5. United Nations Global Compact
1.1.2.5.1. United Nations initiative to encourage businesses worldwide to adopt sustainable and socially responsible policies, and to report on their implementation.
1.1.2.5.2. Sustainable Stock Exchanges (SSE)
1.1.2.5.3. Human Rights
1.1.2.5.4. Labour Standards
1.1.2.5.5. Environment
1.1.2.5.6. Anti-Corruption
1.1.2.5.7. UN Global Compact – Cities Programme
1.2. Citizens
1.2.1. Feedback
1.2.2. Requirements
1.2.3. City development ideas and direction
1.2.4. Impact
1.2.5. For example, the city of Milton Keynes runs a scheme for promoting citizen-led sustainability issues in the city. The scheme provides funds and support to engage citizens and help turn their ideas around sustainability into a reality. Citizens are skilled to operate effectively in a smart city. There is an online platform called Urban Data School to teach students about data skills as well as informing citizens about what a smart city is. In the process, their feedback and information about their requirements are also collected through various channels like social media, mobile app platforms, volunteered information and solicited information.
1.2.6. Local communities
1.2.6.1. Traditional knowledge
1.2.6.1.1. based on accumulations of empirical observation and on interaction with the environment.
1.2.7. Public participation
1.2.7.1. Stakeholders engagement
1.2.7.1.1. the process by which an organisation involves people who may be affected by the decisions it makes, or can influence the implementation of its decisions
1.2.7.1.2. seeks and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision.
1.2.7.1.3. Stakeholders should have a say in decisions about actions that could affect their lives or essential environment for life.
1.2.7.1.4. Stakeholder participation includes the promise that stakeholders's contribution will influence the decision
1.2.7.1.5. Stakeholder participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate.[2]
1.2.7.1.6. The practitioners in stakeholder engagement are often businesses, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), labor organizations, trade and industry organizations, governments, and financial institutions.
1.2.7.1.7. Partnerships, in the context of corporate social responsibility interactions, are people and organizations from some combination of public, business and civil constituencies who engage in common societal aims through combining their resources and competencies, sharing both risks and benefits.
1.2.7.1.8. Buy-in is essential for success in stakeholder engagement. Every party must have a stake in the process and have participating members have decision-making power. Every party must be committed to the process by ensuring action based on the decisions made through the engagement
1.2.7.1.9. No decisions should be already made before commencing stakeholder engagement on the issue. It is integral that the dialogue has legitimacy in influencing the decision.
1.2.7.1.10. provides opportunities to further align business practices with societal needs and expectations, helping to drive long-term sustainability and shareholder value.
1.2.7.1.11. is intended to help the practitioners fully realise the benefits of stakeholder engagement in their organization, to compete in an increasingly complex and ever-changing business environment, while at the same time bringing about systemic change towards sustainable development
1.2.7.1.12. Stakeholder Circle® Methodology
1.2.7.2. Empowerment
1.2.7.3. Democratic governance
1.2.7.4. Knowledge management
1.2.7.4.1. Participatory process
1.2.7.4.2. Collective intelligence
1.2.7.5. People first / human centered
1.2.7.6. Participatory budgeting
1.2.7.6.1. Identification of spending priorities by community members, election of budget delegates to represent different communities, facilitation and technical assistance by public employees, local and higher level assemblies to deliberate and vote on spending priorities, and the implementation of local direct-impact community projects.
1.2.7.6.2. Porto Alegre, Brazil since 1989
1.2.7.7. Public policy
1.2.7.7.1. public should be involved more fully in the policy process in that authorities seek public views and participation, instead of treating the public as simply passive recipients of policy decisions.
1.2.7.7.2. public participation increase public trust in authorities, improving citizen political efficacy, enhancing democratic ideals and even improving the quality of policy decisions.
1.2.7.8. Public trust
1.2.7.9. Accountability and transparency
1.2.7.9.1. public participation can be a means for the participating communities to hold public authorities accountable for implementation.
1.2.7.10. Participatory development
1.2.7.10.1. The desire to increase public participation in humanitarian aid and development has led to the establishment of a numerous context-specific, formal methodologies, matrices, pedagogies and ad hoc approaches. These include conscientization and praxis; Participatory action research (PAR), rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and participatory rural appraisal (PRA); appreciation influence control analysis (AIC); “open space” approaches; Objectives Oriented Project Planning (ZOPP); vulnerability analysis and capacity analysis.[3]
1.2.7.10.2. Process of democratic deliberation and decision-making, in which ordinary city residents decide how to allocate part of a municipal or public budget.
1.2.7.11. Environment and sustainable development
1.2.7.11.1. Allows governments to adopt policies and enact laws that are relevant to communities and take into account their needs.
1.2.7.11.2. Sustainable Development Goals
1.2.7.12. International Association for Public Participation
1.2.7.13. Participatory culture
1.2.7.13.1. opposing concept to consumer culture
1.2.7.13.2. private individuals (the public) not acting as consumers only, but also as contributors or producers (prosumers).
1.2.7.13.3. published media
1.2.7.13.4. Web 2.0
1.2.7.13.5. young people creatively respond to a plethora of electronic signals and cultural commodities in ways that surprise their makers, finding meanings and identities never meant to be there and defying simple nostrums that bewail the manipulation or passivity of "consumers".
1.2.7.13.6. The potential of participatory culture for civic engagement and creative expression has been investigated by media scholar Henry Jenkins
1.2.7.13.7. The implications of the gradual shift from production to produsage are profound, and will affect the very core of culture, economy, society, and democracy
1.2.7.13.8. collaborative problem solving
1.2.7.13.9. smartphone
1.2.7.13.10. implicit participation
1.2.7.14. Public participation is viewed as a tool, intended to inform planning, organising or funding of activities. Public participation may also be used to measure attainable objectives, evaluate impact, and identify lessons for future practice.
1.2.7.15. Environmental Principles and Policies
1.2.7.16. Rio Declaration
1.2.7.16.1. Principle 10 states that "environmental issues are best handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level”
1.2.7.16.2. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.
1.2.7.17. Environmental governance
1.2.7.17.1. public participation is a crucial element in environmental governance that contributes to better decision making.
1.2.7.17.2. By involving the public, who are at the root of both causes and solutions of environmental problems, in environmental discussions, transparency and accountability are more likely to be achieved, thus secures the democratic legitimacy of decision-making that good environmental governance depends on.
1.2.7.17.3. strong public participation in environmental governance could increase the commitment among stockholders, which strengthens the compliance and enforcement of environmental laws.
1.2.7.17.4. GIS valuable tool
1.2.7.17.5. Through joint effort of the government and scientists in collaboration with the public, better governance of environment is expected to be achieved by making the most appropriate decision possible.
1.2.7.17.6. Critics argue that public participation tends to focus on reaching a consensus between actors who share the same values and seek the same outcomes.
1.2.7.17.7. Who should be involved at what points in the process of environmental decision-making and what is the goal of this kind of participation become central to the debates on public participation as a key issue in environmental governance.
1.2.7.18. Right to know, access of information and freedom of information
1.2.7.19. Counter-mapping
1.2.7.19.1. Public Participation Geographical Information Systems
1.2.7.19.2. Mapping against dominant power structures, to further seemingly progressive goals
1.2.7.19.3. ethnocartography, alternative cartography, mapping-back, counter-hegemonic mapping, and public participatory mapping
1.2.7.19.4. critical cartography, subversive cartography, bioregional mapping, and remapping
1.2.7.19.5. The power of counter-maps to advocate policy change in a bottom-up manner led commentators to affirm that counter-mapping should be viewed as a tool of governance.[6]
1.2.7.19.6. There is a tendency for counter-mapping efforts to overlook the knowledge of women, minorities, and other vulnerable, disenfranchised groups.[7] From this perspective, counter-mapping is only empowering for a small subset of society, whilst others become further marginalised.
1.2.7.19.7. making a parish map is about creating a community expression of values, and about beginning to assert ideas for involvement. It is about taking the place in your own hands
1.2.7.19.8. Consequently, rather than being passive recipients of top-down map distribution, people now have the opportunity to claim sovereignty over the mapping process.
1.2.7.19.9. insurrection of subjugated knowledges
1.2.7.19.10. The fact that civilians are using technologies which were once elitist led Brosius et al.[28] to assert that counter-mapping involves "stealing the master's tools"
1.2.7.19.11. against Foucault's subjugated knowledge
1.2.7.19.12. Jessop's notion of "governance without government".
1.2.7.19.13. Community mapping
1.2.7.20. Incentives for Public Participation
1.2.7.20.1. Design a process that can have meaningful impact on government, but to articulate for the public their potential for impact, while making it easy for them to do so
1.2.7.20.2. make the rationale for participation explicit and “sell” the reasons to participate through both good design and clear explanation
1.2.8. Citizen Science
1.2.8.1. the participation of non-scientists in scientific research.
1.2.8.2. democratization of policy research
1.2.9. Civic Tech
1.2.9.1. The four different ways include upgrading and providing e-services, making information more transparent, allowing e-democracy, and a service they call co-production
1.3. Smart Cities
1.3.1. Awesome City
1.3.1.1. + Verde
1.3.1.2. + Inteligente
1.3.1.3. + Conectada
1.3.1.4. + Identidad
1.3.1.5. + Variedad
1.3.1.6. Affordable housing
1.3.1.7. Quality education
1.3.1.8. Economic perspective
1.3.1.9. Better job opportunities
1.3.1.10. Cultural space
1.3.1.11. Entertainment
1.3.1.12. Clean and safe environment
1.3.2. traffic management
1.3.2.1. regular information to the daily commuters about public buses, timings, seat availability, current location of the bus, time taken to reach a particular destination, next location of the bus and the density of passengers inside the bus for their ease.
1.3.3. parking
1.3.4. health management
1.3.5. waste management
1.3.6. mobility
1.3.7. governance
1.3.7.1. the political processes that exist in between formal institutions
1.3.7.2. Participatory governance focuses on deepening democratic engagement through the participation of citizens in the processes of governance with the state
1.3.8. how we can do more with less resources / utilize the available resources optimally
1.3.9. utilize the available resources optimally
1.3.10. smarter governance and management
1.3.11. better lives and happier citizens
1.3.12. co-create citizen centric smart cities, working together with iOT and moving away from centralised systems to bringing together both bottom-up and top down data.
1.3.13. Smart Communities
1.3.13.1. Smart Community Planning
1.3.13.1.1. supporting citizen involvement in the delivery of “Smart Services” — thus for example citizens in urban slums in Less Developed Countries helping with the collective mapping of existing public toilets and then working with planners to identify the most appropriate locations for additional or alternative public toilets (or public water supplies)
1.3.13.2. Smart Community Governance
1.3.13.2.1. providing a means for public scrutiny of municipal budgets including providing the funding for the training and support required for those with little education to review budgets and ensure that they are being spent appropriately and equitably among citizens
1.3.13.3. Smart Community Health
1.3.13.3.1. supporting decentralized health support workers and facilities including public health facilities in low income areas–including information and training, a tiered system of diagnostics to ensure and efficient use of scarce public health resources
1.3.13.4. Smart Community Citizenship
1.3.13.4.1. ensuring support ro location based electronic interaction among citizens around issues of local interest with information (government data) being structured (geo-tagged) in such a way that the information could be directly accessed and locally aggregated to support participation/intervention in municipal planning and programme design processes
1.3.13.5. Smart Community Infrastructure
1.3.13.5.1. incident reporting facilities structured so that citizens can report on issues concerning public infrastructure in an aggregated way based on location and where these electronic facilities are transparent to the user allowing for inter-individual and collective collaboration as required to ensure an active response
1.3.13.6. Smart Community Resources
1.3.13.6.1. digital support for administrative decentralization so that administration is structured in such a way as to be responsive to local circumstances and requirements and including structured processes for citizen participation in localized decision making including resource prioritization and allocation. A “smart” electrical grid for example should be able to ensure that some degree of control over how scarce electricity or water might be allocated in a municipal region–giving priority to hospitals and schools and less priority to individual users particularly high volume individual users
1.3.13.7. Smart Community Dwellings
1.3.13.7.1. digitally enabling public land use and dwelling records including rentals, renter complaints, work orders, etc. made accessible (and usable) in local communities including through providing training and support in how to use these to protect individual and communal land rights and to use compiled information to support the rights of renters and those with informal dwellings
1.4. Geographic Information Systems
1.4.1. Location data
1.4.2. Singapore One platform. It is a GIS-based platform that has all the information about the city and enables citizens to look for solutions like information on land availability, parking availability, local transport system information
1.4.3. Publica domain
1.5. Internet of things
1.6. Benefits
1.6.1. Attaining successful outcomes on toxic issues, which helps elected officials avoid choosing between equally unappealing solutions.
1.6.2. Developing better and more creative ideas and solutions.
1.6.3. Implementing ideas, programs, and policies faster and more easily.
1.6.4. Creating involved citizens instead of demanding customers.
1.6.5. Making your job easier and more satisfying.
1.6.6. Engendering trust between citizens and government, which improves public behavior at council meetings.
1.6.7. Achieving greater buy-in to decisions with fewer backlashes such as lawsuits, special elections, or a council recall.
1.6.8. Building community within a city.
1.7. Community engagement
1.7.1. Online engagement gives citizens the opportunity to be involved in their local government that they would not have otherwise, by allowing them to voice themselves from the comfort of their own home. Online Engagement involves things such as online voting and public discussion forums that give citizens the opportunity to voice their opinions on topics and offer solutions as well as find others with common interests and creating the possibility of forming advocacy groups pertaining to particular interests. The use of the internet has allowed for people to have access to information easily and has resulted in a better informed public as well as creating a new sense of community for citizens.[13]
1.7.2. could be found at: Food pantries, community clean-up programs and the like can bolster efforts to create a strong community bond.
1.7.3. Determine the goals of the plan
1.7.4. Plan out who to engage
1.7.5. Develop engagement strategies for those individuals you already know
1.7.6. Develop engagement strategies of those individuals you do not already know
1.7.7. Prioritize those activities
1.7.8. Create an implementation plan
1.7.9. Monitor your progress
1.7.10. Maintain those relationships
1.7.11. Friendraising
1.7.12. Community impact planning
1.7.13. Community-driven governance
1.7.14. Asset-based resource development
1.7.15. Vision-based community impact planning
1.7.16. Organizational wellness planning
1.7.17. Building programs on shared resources
1.7.18. Community sleuthing
1.7.19. Community-based program development
1.7.20. Civic engagement refers to political activity, membership and volunteering in civil society organizations. Social engagement refers to participation in collective activities. Community engagement refers to the process by which community benefit organizations and individuals build ongoing, permanent relationships for the purpose of applying a collective vision for the benefit of a community.