Designing Peace & Peace Technology
Mark Nelson & Margarita QuihuisChance Discovery 15th Anniversary Symposium
University of Tokyo
August 2, 2014
AN OVERVIEW
3
Mark NelsonFOUNDER, CO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LAB
Former relief-worker, investment banker, and social entrepreneur, Mark Nelson founded and co-directs Stanford Peace Innovation Lab, where he researches mass collaboration and mass interpersonal persuasion. Mark focuses on designing, catalyzing, incentivizing, and generating resources to scale up collective positive human behavior change. He has described a functional, quantitative definition of peace, in terms of engagement quantity and quality across social difference lines; he has identified innovative, automated ways to measure peace, both at the neighborhood and global level; and he has developed a formal structural description for Peace Data. He leads the Social Energy Map project, and designs technology interventions to measurably increase positive, mutually beneficial engagement across conflict boundaries. Mark’s mission is to create an entire new, profitable industry, where positive peace is delivered as a service. Other projects include EPIC Global Challenge and Peace Markets. Mark is also a researcher and practitioner at Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab, and a member of Stanford’s Kozmetsky Global Collaboratory.
4
Margarita QuihuisCO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LAB
RESEARCHER, STANFORD BEHAVIOR DESIGN LAB
A social entrepreneur and mentor capitalist, Margarita Quihuis’s career has focused on innovation, technology incubation, access to capital and entrepreneurship. Her accomplishments include being the first director of Astia (formerly known as the Women’s Technology Cluster), a business incubator where her portfolio companies raised $67 million in venture funding, venture capitalist, Reuters Fellow at Stanford, and Director of RI Labs for Ricoh Innovations. She is currently a member of the research team at Stanford Design Lab, and directs the Stanford Peace Innovation Lab where she conducts research on innovation, mass collaboration, persuasive technology & the potential of social networks to change society for the better. Her projects have included the study of collaboration and citizen engagement to foster government innovation – Manor Labs, the application of mass interpersonal persuasion to foster social movements – Social-M, bottoms-up post-disaster response and recovery –Relief 2.0 and citizen psy-op efforts such as the the Israel Loves Iran and Romancing the Border social media campaigns.
She is a recognized thought leader in the areas of innovation, emergent social behavior and technology and has been part of Deloitte’s On Social Roundtable and Aspen Institute’s Dialogue on Open Innovation and Dialogue on Diplomacy and Technology.
As Director of R I Labs for Ricoh Innovations she created a consumer focused innovation lab that focused on new market opportunities from generational behavior (Millennials), cloud and mobile computing, emerging social technologies, crowdsourcing and open innovation.
Overview of today’s talk
1. What is Peace Innovation?
2. Conflicting Theories of violence (and their associated technologies)
3. Peace Tech Overview
4. Examples from the wild
What is Peace Innovation?
“At Stanford Peace Innovation Lab, we develop quantitative, predictive, computational methods and systems to sense engagement levels and interaction quality across group boundaries. We then provide design frameworks, principles, and methodologies for Behavior Design and Persuasive Technology interventions, to measurably increase positive engagement, at scale.
This approach to global risk management is primarily preventive, positive, and generative, rather than remedial or punitive. In addition it can be rapidly scalad and optimized. Most important, it is fundamentally profitable to both sides of potential conflicts, which, in combination with it’s quantitative nature, enables global capital markets to reallocate assets towards the solutions we develop.”
Is there a relationship between Peace and Innovation?
PEACE…
enables larger scale positive engagement,
transforming differences and conflict
into collaboration, which improves…
INNOVATION…
in turn creates new value, which (in the form of mutual benefit) can generate
more…
Why Peace Technology? The problem:
FIVE DEEP HUMAN TRENDS. THE FUTURE WILL BE:
1. Urban…
2. Dense…
3. Coastal…
4. Networked.
Result?
5. Most human conflict will be with irregular, non-state actors, in these urban environments (Kilcullen, 2012)
8
Urgent Learning Needs
In the next three decades
Between 3 and 5 billion more of us must learn to
get along with each other much better
in these environments.
9
Why Peace Technology? The Chance Discovery of solutions that weren’t previously possible
For the first time in human history we are recording inter-personal (and inter-group) very high resolution, in real-time.
Social software and mobile devices passively record social behavior every day.
Now that we can measure social behavior, we can design technology to increase and augment the we want.
10
Our Research Question:
11
HOW GOOD CAN HUMANS BE TO EACH OTHER?
Two Theories of Violence
1. ACTOR THEORY
PROBLEM = BAD ACTOR VS.
2. BEHAVIOR THEORY
PROBLEM = BAD BEHAVIOR
Traditional “Actor” Theory of Violence
1. PROBLEM: BAD ACTOR
HYPOTHESIS--ACTOR MUST EITHER BE:
• DRIVEN AWAY
• KNOCKED DOWN
• LOCKED UP
• TAKEN OUT
2. SOLUTION: AUGMENTING TECH
RESULTING TECHNOLOGIES ARE
• PUNITIVE
• VIOLENT
• DESTRUCTIVE
• INTIMIDATING
• COSTLY TO BOTH SIDES
IMPLICITLY, BOTH THE THEORY AND THE
TECHNOLOGY ASSUME THE ACTOR MUST
REMOVED
Behavior Theory of Violence
1. PROBLEM: DESTRUCTIVE
BEHAVIOR
HYPOTHESIS--ACTIONS MUST BE:
• POSITIVE
• VALUE-CREATING
• MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL
• PERHAPS EVEN FUN?
2. SOLUTION: AUGMENTING TECH
RESULTING TECHNOLOGIES ARE
• ENGAGING
• TRANSFORMATIVE
• MUTUALLY REWARDING
• BENEFICIAL
• VALUE-CREATING
IMPLICITLY, THE ACTION MUST BE IMPROVED
WE CALL THESE POSITIVE PAYLOAD
THEY ARE WEAPONS AGAINST VIOLENCE, PEOPLE
Example: “Counter Actor” vs “Counter Behavior” Technology
System Components Tech from Actor-basedtheory:(Assault rifle)
Positive Payload System (Israel loves Iran FB campaign)
Environmental Sensor Soldier’s 5 senses Citizen’s 5 senses
Tracker Soldier’s Situational Awareness Citizens’ Situational Awareness
Threat Detector Soldier’s brain, knowledge, experience
Citizens’ brains plus social data analytics
Targeter Eyes plus rifle sights Facebook groups
Deployment Mechanism Finger + trigger + bullet Facebook views, likes,
Payload Bullet delivers threat,injury, or death
Positive engagement: attention/awareness/regard/re
Impact Analyzer/Evaluator Soldier’s brain. Is perceived enemy/actor down or not?
Facebook Insights
Optimizer Weapons R&D Realtime A/B split testing,
Peace Technology Deployment Control Loop
Social Environment
Sensor
Opportunity or Conflict Detector
Targeter
Deployment SystemPayload
Impact Measurement &
Analytics System
Optimizer
Engagement model of Peace Innovation
17
SEE WHITEBOARD DIAGRAM
Peace Data in the context of Big Data
Peace Data
Social Behavior Data
Behavior Data
Human Data
Machine-to-machine
Collective Intelligence
Collaboration
Cooperation
Coordination
Communication
Attention
Awareness0 HIGH
Qual
ity
of Eng
agem
ent
Positive but Unstable Peace
SustainablePeace
CorrespondingAugmenting Technology
Layers
-
Engagement Framework
Negative Peace
?+
X
Quantity of Engagement
3. Designing Peace Tech
M E A S U R A B L Y I N C R E A S I N G P O S I T I V E E N G A G E M E N T
Peace Innovation Design Loop
Choose target communities
Observe/choose tech they use
Pick a Positive Engagement
Behavior
Create Fast Prototype
Interventions
Measure Impact
Optimize (or Pivot) & Repeat
Peace Innovation Design Example
Communities: Copts & Salafis in Cairo
Tech they use: Facebook
Positive Behavior: Take photos
together to show they can get along
Fast Prototype Intervention: FB
Page and campaign
Measure Impact: How many photos
posted in one hour?
Optimize (or pivot) & Repeat
23
Behavior Design vs Persuasive Technology
• Observable measurable action
• Move people to do something (not about changing attitudes or beliefs)
• One time or repeated behaviors
• Ability through simplicity
• Triggers
• Habits
Web, mobile, social technologies & devices:
• Give/increase ability
• Act as Triggers
• Are Sensors
• Measure if behavior occurred
• Deliver instant rewards to reinforce positive behavior
BEHAVIOR DESIGNPROCESS
PERSUASIVE TECHNOLOGYDELIVERY MECHANISM
Technology-mediated Behavior Change Can Be Measured
Powerful analytics engines have been democratized
5. Examples from the wild
( A N D E C O N O M I C I M P A C T )
27
Four quick examples of peace technologies, and their economic impact
Increasing positive engagement across difference boundaries:
City Level: Citizen Engagement
City Level: Citizen Engagement
Neighborhood level: Civility Engagement
National Level: Citizen Diplomacy
Design for Civil Engagement
Manor Labs – Experiment in Citizen Engagement
Can a town use persuasive technology frameworks and applications to increase positive behaviors in communities?
Can we increase positive engagement between citizens and government?
Can we create new behaviors for citizen participation?
29
Manor Labs - Impact
The City of Manor received input from over 800citizens, out of a population of 5,325, on their
their ideation platform, evaluated 80 ideas and implemented 5.
Recognized by the White House, Manor Labs
Labs was one of the first municipal innovation labs in the Gov 2.0 Movement.
Manor Lab’s QR Codes design has been adapted to 5 other projects across the US.
Ideation Platform has been used in 8 other
other projects, including those done by New York City, Bogota, Columbia, and the Cabinet Office in the UK.
31
Behavior Design for Civility: UberMeta behavior: Collaborative Consumption
Targeted Behavior: Get People to Share Rides
Secondary Behavior: Driver & Passenger are Considerate
Behavior Goal:How do we get people to make Ride Sharing a Pleasant Experience?
Possible Motivations:Save /Make Money
Behavior Trigger:Rating Screen
Persuasive Technologies:• Mobile App
32
Social & Economic Impact of Uber
As of May 2014 the Uber platform generates:
20,000 new driver jobs every month
$90,766 median small business annual income in New York City and $74,191 in San Francisco
$2.8 billion per year for the US economy (and growing)
Average pickup time of less than 10 minutes for 137,451,768 Americans (43% of the US covered in less than 4 years)
Reducing drunk driving i.e. more than 10% reduction in DUI arrests since launching in Seattle
Current Valuation in June 2014:$17.4 billion dollars. The world’s most valuable startup
Design for Citizen Diplomacy
33
34
Social & Economic Impact of AirBnB
87 percent of Airbnb hosts rent out the home they live in and the typical host earns $7,530 per year.
62 percent of Airbnb hosts say Airbnb helped them stay in their homes and more than 50 percent of hosts are non-traditional workers (freelancers, part-time workers, students, etc.).
Airbnb visitors stay on average 6.4 nights (compared to 3.9 for hotel guests) and spend $880 at NYC
businesses (compared to $690 for average New York visitors).
82 percent of Airbnb listings in New York are outside of the main tourist hotel area of midtown Manhattan and the average Airbnb guest spends $740 in the neighborhood where she stays.
In one year, Airbnb generated $104 million in economic activity outside of Manhattan.
Contact & Resources
MARK NELSON
CO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LAB
MARGARITA QUIHUIS
CO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LAB
RESOURCESPersuasive Technology: http://captology.stanford.edu
Fogg Behavior Model: http://www.behaviormodel.org
Behavior Grid: http://www.behaviorgrid.org, Behavior Grid Paper
Peace Innovation: Http://peaceinnovation.stanford.edu
Twitter: @peacedot
Facebook PeaceDot Page: http://www.facebook.com/peacedot
Facebook Peace Innovation Page: http://www.facebook.com/peaceinnovation