Designing Peace & Peace Technology

Mark Nelson & Margarita Quihuis April 21, 2015

Stanford Peace Innovation Lab Bogotá launch talk

A N O V E R V I E W

3

Margarita QuihuisCO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LABRESEARCHER, 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.

4

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.

Overview

1. What is Peace Innovation?

2. Peace Tech Overview

3. Peace for Profit

4. Designing Peace Technology

5. Examples from the Wild

Part 1. What is Peace Innovation? The Academic view“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 scaled and optimized. Most important, it is fundamentally profitable to both sides of potential conflicts, enabling global capital markets to reallocate assets towards the solutions we develop.”

Put more simply? Peace Innovation is…

“Designing technology that increases people’s ability to be good to each other.”

So what is peace technology?

“Mediating technology that measurably augments people’s ability to positively engage with each other.”

Is there a relationship between Peace and Innovation? Yes.

PEACE

enables better collaboration, improving…

INNOVATION

creates new value and

mutual benefit, generating

more…

Because specialization (and therefore diversity) are vital inputs into innovation…

So…why Peace Technology? The big 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)

10

Implications: 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 dense environments.

11

Why Peace Technology? Solutions that weren’t previously possible

For the first time in human history we are measuring and recording inter-personal (and inter-group) engagement, at very high resolution, in real-time.

Social software and mobile devices passively record more social behavior every day.

Now that we can measure social behavior, we can begin to design technology to increase and augment the behaviors we want.

12

Our Research Question:

13

HOW GOOD CAN HUMANS BE TO EACH OTHER?

The Quanta of Peace Individual episodes of human engagement

1. Episodes we can observe and record (for the first time in history!)

2. Episodes we can’t see--the known unknown

3. Episodes we don’t even know we don’t know—Bastiat and the paradox of unseen value vs. visible cost.

Engagement Episode Model of Peace(see whiteboard diagrams)

1. OLD ENGAGEMENT CHARACTERISTICS

• PHYSICALLY PRESENT• FULLY EMBODIED• ALL FIVE SENSES (ONLY)• LIMITED IN TIME• LIMITED IN SPACE• LIMITED RECORD & MEMORY• LIMITED COMPUTATION• BASIC GROUP ID VISIBILITY

2. NEW ENGAGEMENT CHARACTERISTICS

• TECHNOLOGY MEDIATED• MAY BE FAR APART• AUGMENTED—EITHER:• Improved ability, or• Previously impossible

• DETAILED RECORD• INCREASING SENSOR ACUITY• COMPUTABLE• REACH ACROSS TIME AND SPACE• DEEP GROUP ID KNOWLEDGE

Collective Intelligence

Collaboration

Cooperation

Coordination

Communication

Attention

Awareness0 HIGH

Qua

lity

of E

ngag

emen

t

Positive but Unstable

Peace

Sustainable Peace

CorrespondingAugmenting Technology

Layers

-

Engagement Framework

Negative Peace

?+

X

Quantity of Engagement

Positive but Unstable

Peace

Peace Data in the context of Big Data

Peace Data

Social Behavior Data

Behavior Data

Human Data

Machine-to-machine

3. Peace for Profit? Why?

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

A C R O S S D I F F E R E N C E B O U N D A R I E S

The Deep Structural Problem of Resourcing PeaceOur two traditional approaches: Policy & Diplomacy, or Philanthropy & Charity

1. First Problem: scale of resources to problem

2. Second Problem: where are the resources? Global capital markets

3. Third Problem: no effective resource bridge to either traditional path› Why? No price signal

4. Result? Fourth Problem: perverse investments

5. Solution? A for-profit peace service industry that creates a price/value signal for positive pro-social behavior

4. 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

Drag picture to placeholder or click icon to add

Peace Innovation Design: the Rapid Prototyping 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: the Rapid Prototyping Loop

What target communities?

What tech (do they use)?

What Behavior?

What will we build to test?

How many behaviors?

Optimize (or Pivot) & Repeat

Peace Innovation Design: Rapid Prototyping 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

half an hour?

Optimize (or pivot) & Repeat

24

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 )

28 Four quick examples of peace technologies, and their economic impactIncreasing 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?

30

Manor Labs - ImpactThe City of Manor received input from over 800 citizens, out of a population of 5,325, on their ideation platform, evaluated 80 ideas and implemented 5.

Recognized by the White House, Manor 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 projects, including those done by New York City, Bogota, Columbia, and the Cabinet Office in the UK.

32

Behavior Design for Civility: Uber Meta 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

33

Social & Economic Impact of UberAs 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

34

35

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 & ResourcesMARK NELSONCO-DIRECTOR, STANFORD PEACE INNOVATION LABNELSONMM@STANFORD.EDU

RESOURCESPeace Innovation Lab: peaceinnovation.stanford.eduBackground & Overview: bit.ly/PeaceInnovationReading Stanford Economic Impact: bit.ly/stanfordinnoimpact

Persuasive Technology: captology.stanford.eduFogg Behavior Model: behaviormodel.orgBehavior Grid: behaviorgrid.org